Chennai Court July 1972 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Kalyan Dass Vs. State of Tamil Nadu and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-05-1972
Reported in: AIR1973Mad264
ORDER1. A question of general importance has arisen in this writ petition. The petitioner is challenging the vires of Rule 4-A of the Rules framed by the Government of Tamil Nadu in exercise of their power under Section 8 of the Tamil Nadu Temple Entry Authorization Act (Act V of 1947) hereinafter called the Temple Entry Act. The petitioner as a Hindu claims that the Hindu temples in the State are maintained in accordance with certain norms as set out in the Agamas and in strict conformity with the ancient customs and practices. He is a permanent resident of Tulasi Babu Mutt at Rameswaram and he is a Matadipati, besides being a regular worshipper of Sri Ramanathaswami temple at Rameshwaram. He is aggrieved by the induction of Rule 4-A by the State Government which was published in the Fort St. George Gazette dated 28-1-1970. Until January, 1970, the Rules did not contemplate non-Hindus to enter or offer worship in a temple or use the waters of any sacred tank, well, spring or any sacre...
Kalyan Dass Vs. State of Tamil Nadu Represented by the Secretary to Go ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-05-1972
Reported in: (1972)2MLJ581
ORDERT. Ramaprasada Rao, J.1. A question of general importance has arisen in this writ petition. The petitioner is challenging the vires of Rule 4-A of the Rules framed by the Government of Tamil Nadu in exercise of their power under Section 8 of the Tamil Nadu Temple Entry Authorisation Act (V of J917)) hereinafter called the Temple Entry Act. The petitioner as a Hindu claims that the Hindu temples in the State are maintained in accordance with certain norms as set out in the Agamas, and in strict conformity with the ancient customs and practices. He is a permanent resident of Tulasi Babu Mutt at Rameswaram and he is a Mathadhipati, besides being a regular worshipper of Sri Ramanathaswami temple at Rameswar m. He is aggrieved by the induction of fule 4-A by the State Government which was published in the Fort St. George Gazette dated 28th January, 1970. Until January, 1970 the Rules did not contemplate non-Hindus to enter or offer worship in a temple or use the waters of any sacred ta...
Manimalai Ganesan Nee Manimalai D Vs. the Deputy Director of Collegiat ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-05-1972
Reported in: (1973)1MLJ9
ORDERT. Ramaprasada Rao, J.1. The petitioner was elected as a temporary Assistant Professor of Geography and was originally posted as Assistant Professor of Geography in Arignar Anna Government Arts College for Men, Namakkal. She was ousted from the said office and was again appointed as temporary Assistant Professor at Government Arts College for Women, Madras-1. Though the order of appointment was issued on 20th October, 1971, she joined duty in the North Madras College only on the 16th of October, 1971. It is not in dispute that when she applied for the post, she described her name as D. Manimalai but signed as K. Manimalai. But for all purposes her name was taken as accepted as D. Manimalai. Soon after she joined service, she began signing the attendance register as well as other office registers in the College as Manimalai Ganesan. Apparently, Mr. Ganesan was her husband whom she married in the year 1962. Even when she was at Namakkal, she applied for permission to sign as Manimal...
N. Kuppana Gounder Vs. the Appellate Assistant Commissioner (C.T.), Sa ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-04-1972
Reported in: [1973]32STC522(Mad)
ORDERRamaprasada Rao, J.1. For the assessment year 1966-67, the Deputy Commercial Tax Officer, Erode (Rural), determined the total and taxable turnovers of the petitioner at Rs. 32,65,157.57 and Rs. 7,79,293.69 respectively. The petitioner took up the matter in appeal before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, Commercial Taxes, Erode, challenging certain additions and effectually complaining against the original order of assessment. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner passed an order on 15th December, 1967, determining the total and taxable turnovers at Rs. 32,06,520.39 and Rs. 7,14,144.43 respectively. The case of the petitioner is that the said taxable turnover, as is seen from the appellate order, includes the purchase turnover of raw hides and skins effected locally amounting to Rs. 2,80,149.12. His case is that during the year in question the raw hides and skins so purchased by him and which was subject to tax in accordance with the provisions of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Ta...
M.M. Rafi and ors. Vs. the State Represented by the District Revenue O ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-03-1972
Reported in: (1972)2MLJ466
ORDERS. Maharajan, J.1. This revision is directed against the order of the Sessions Judge of East Thanjavur, who set aside the order of the Sub-Magistrate, Mayuram, dismissing the complaint of the District Revenue Officer, and directed the case to be taken on file and disposed of in accordance with law.2. Petitioners 1 to 7 are accused in a complaint filed, by the District Revenue Officer, Thanjavur under Rules 36, 85(4), 90 and 93 read with Rule 124 of the Medicinal and Toilet Preparations (Excise Duties) Rules, 1956 and Section 7 of the Medicinal and Toilet Preparation (Excise Duties) Act, 1955. Rule 120 of the Medicinal and Toilet Preparation (Excise Duties) Rules, 1956 provides that no prosecution under the Act shall be instituted except by an Excise Officer not below the rank of a Sub-inspector of Excise. It was contended before the Sub-Magistrate that the District Revenue Officer is not an Excise Officer within the meaning of Rule 120 and therefore, the complaint was not sustaina...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›