Court : Chennai
Reported in : (2004)IIILLJ100Mad
ORDERK.P. Sivasubramaniam, J. 1. The petitioners being the employees of Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited, have sought for the issue of a writ of mandamus to direct respondents 1 and 2, to absorb eight workmen as permanent workmen with effect from the date of completion of 480 days within a period of 24 calendar months and to pay all arrears of wages and attendant benefits.2. The first petitioner is the Regional Secretary of the petitioner/Union. Of the eight workers whose names have been given, the first five persons are employed for House-keeping under the sixth respondent. The seventh person working under the 1st respondent is also doing House-keeping work at Chennai Regional Office. The sixth person joined in the year 1985 as casual-worker and he was asked to do the work on contract basis with effect from 1994. He was discharging the work of toilet cleaning and sweeping. The other person Irudayaraj was working from 1987 in ASF at Meenambakkam Regional Office of Hindustan Petr...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Reported in : (2004)2MLJ107
ORDERV. Kanagaraj, J. 1. This Civil Revision Petition is directed against the judgement and decree dated 7.10.1999 rendered in R.C.A. No. 3 of 1994 by the Court of the Principal Subordinate Judge, Trichy thereby setting aside the fair and decreral order dated 30.11.1993 rendered in R.C.O.P.No. 168 of 1986 by the Court of the Rent Controller (II Additional District Judge), Trichy.2. Tracing the history of the above civil revision petition having come to be filed, it comes to be known that the petitioners/landlords herein have filed R.C.O.P.No. 168 of 1986 before the Court Rent Controller (II Additional District Judge),Trichy for eviction on the ground of wilful default in payment of rent and also for owner's occupation and the above RCOP was allowed, further granting two months time was for eviction. Aggrieved by the said order of eviction, the respondent-tenant preferred an appeal in R.C.A. No. 3 of 1994 on the file of the Court of Principal Subordinate Judge, Trichy praying to set asi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Reported in : 2004(2)CTC183; (2004)2MLJ111
ORDERM. Karpagavinayagam, J.1. The petitioners filed I.A.No. 978 of 2003 to implead them as defendants 21 and 22 in O.S.No. 293 of 2001 and also filed I.A.No. 979 of 2003 to implead them as respondents 21 and 22 in the injunction application in I.A.No. 336 of 2001 in O.S.No. 293 of 2001. These applications were dismissed by the trial Court. Hence, these two civil revision petitions.2. The facts in brief are as follows:(a) Aralvaimozhi (Kurusadi) Devasahayam Mount Oor and Thuya Viagula Annai Church, represented by the Trustee filed O.S.No. 293 of 2001 against the Bishop of Kottar, Kottar Diocese and others for a permanent injunction restraining the defendants from interfering with the management and administration of the Aralvaimozhi (Kurusadi) Devasahayam Mount and the properties of Thyua Vaigula Annai Church by the plaintiffs or from disturbing their possession in any manner. The plaintiffs filed I.A.No. 336 of 2001 in O.S.No. 293 of 2001 seeking for interim injunction. In the meantim...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Reported in : 2004(93)ECC544
ORDERP.K. Misra, J.1. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties. The present petitioner had filed Appeal No. 1737/99 before the first respondent. The petitioner had also filed an application for condonation of delay in presentation of such appeal and by the impugned order dated 14.3.2001 such application for condonation of delay has been rejected. It was the stand of the petitioner that the order which was challenged in the appeal had not been served on the petitioner and subsequently on receipt of intimation relating to recovery of the amount, the appeal was filed alongwith the petition for condonation of delay. The department relied on the despatch register to show that copy had been served. However, when the petitioner had taken a specific stand that copy had not been served, it was the duty of the department to produce material in support of the assertion that in fact copy had been served or the petitioner had received the copy, It cannot be said that the petitioner was l...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Reported in : (2004)IILLJ139Mad
ORDERP.K. Misra, J.1. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties. The petitioner was serving as Assistant Executive Engineer under the Tamil Nadu Water Supply and Drainage Board (hereinafter called the Board). Disciplinary proceedings was initiated against him in 1994. Subsequently the petitioner on attaining the age of superannuation, without prejudice to the pending prosecution against him in a Court of law, was permitted to retire from service on December 31, 1996. Thereafter, even though the petitioner was not specifically retained in service as required under Fundamental Rules 56(c), an order was passed directing deduction of a sum of Rs. 1,000/- per month from the pension of the petitioner for a period of three years. Such order passed by the Board is being impugned in the present writ petition. Even though the learned counsel for the petitioner has raised several contentions relating to the illegality in the action of the respondents, it is unnecessary to deal with all ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Reported in : 2004(1)CTC161
ORDERD. Murugesan, J.1. Since the issues raised in all these writ petitions are one and the same, they are taken up together for hearing and disposal by this common order.2. In order to alleviate the traffic problems as well as the unmanageable situation prevailed in the then existing bus terminals in Esplanade, Basin Bridge, Broadway and MUC grounds, the Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority (hereinafter referred to as the 'CMDA'), was permitted to construct the Chennai Mofussial Bus Termimus (hereinafter referred to as the 'CMBT') at the periphery of the city along Jawaharlal Nehur Salai (Inner Ring Road) at Koyambedu. The funds for construction were raised by CMDA from HUDCO and TUFIDCO. The Member Secretary, CMDA, applied to the Government on 13.4.2002 for approval of a scheme for construction of a bus stand at Koyambedu under Rule 245 of the Tamil Nadu Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Rules'). The shecme for construction of the public stand at T.S.N...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Reported in : 2004(1)CTC442
ORDERM. Karpagavinayagam, J.1. Patel Sureshbhai and Patel Kanubhai have filed these habeas corpus petitions, praying for production of their daughters, namely Patel Bhavika and Patel Pinal respectively, before this Court and to entrust their custody to them.2. The other Division Bench of this Court, while directing the learned Additional Public Prosecutor to take notice in these habeas corpus petitions, by order dated 24.12.2003, directed that the girls be retained in Chennai and need not be removed outside the State and that the girls be produced before this Court on 30.12.2003.3. Accordingly, both the girls, namely Patel Bhavika and Patel Pinal have been produced before this Court. Both their fathers, namely Patel Sureshbhai and Patel Kanubhai, the petitioners herein, were also present and filed separate affidavits today, requesting for custody of their daughters.4. According to Patel Sureshbhai, the petitioner in H.C.P.No. 1825 of 2003, his daughter, minor Patel Bhavika, aged 16 yea...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Reported in : [2005]123CompCas345(Mad); (2004)1MLJ543
R. Jayasimha Babu, J. 1 We are rather surprised at the order under appeal by which the Institute of Chartered Accountants has been prevented from taking disciplinary proceedings against auditors whose alleged failure to perform their duties had resulted in loss of several millions of rupees to the Transport Corporation owned by the State.2. A complaint in that regard was made by the Joint Secretary to the State Government which owns all the shares in the Corporation. That complaint names all the persons who were responsible for the misconduct. The persons so named were internal auditor, as also the statutory auditors. It sets out the nature of the omissions committed by them namely their failure to verify the cash, their failure to verify the records, etc. as a result of which the defalcation that had occurred was not brought to light. Had the internal auditors and statutory auditors been diligent, such defalcation would not have occurred and as a result of their proper scrutiny had th...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Reported in : [2004]135TAXMAN483(Mad)
R. Jayasimha Babu, J.We are rather surprised at the order under appeal by which the Institute of Chartered Accountants has been prevented from taking disciplinary proceedings against auditors whose alleged failure to perform their duties had resulted in loss of several millions of rupees to the Transport Corporation owned by the state.2. A complaint in that regard was made by the Joint Secretary to the State Government which owns all the shares in the Corporation. That complaint names all the persons who were responsible for the misconduct. The persons so named were internal auditor, as also the statutory auditors. It sets out the nature of the omissions committed by them namely their failure to verify the cash, their failure to verify the records, etc. as a result of which the defalcation that had occurred was not brought to light. Had the internal auditors and statutory auditors been diligent, such defalcation would not have occurred and as a result of their proper scrutiny had they ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Reported in : 2006ACJ700; 2004(1)CTC401; (2004)2MLJ296
ORDERK. Govindarajan, J.1. The Insurance Company has filed the above Appeals questioning the common award passed in M.C.O.P.Nos. 100, 101, 102, 239 and 301 of 2001, on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Dharmapuri at Krishnagiri on the ground that the Insurance Company is not liable to pay the compensation.2. To decide the said issue we need not traverse all the facts in detail. But the relevant facts are given below:Admittedly, the accident took place on 15.6.1998 at about 5.30 a.m., involving the car bearing Regn.No. TMG 2770 owned by the 2nd respondent herein and insured with the appellant-Insurance company, and an insurance policy was issued to the said vehicle from 15.6.1998, 10.00 a.m. to the midnight of 14.6.1999.3. On the basis of the above said fact, learned counsel for the appellant-Insurance Company submitted that since the insurance policy covers only for the period from 15.6.1998, 10.00 a.m. and the accident took place at about 5.30 a.m. on 15.6.1998, they ar...
Tag this Judgment!