Delhi Court February 2008 Judgments

Social Jurist, a Civil Rights Group Vs. Gnct and ors.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 147(2008)DLT729; 2008(101)DRJ484

T.S. Thakur, J.1. This petition filed in public interest brings to the fore, issues of considerable public importance concerning establishment and running of unauthorized and unrecognized schools in the city of Delhi. According to the petitioner, there are nearly 10000 schools in different parts of Delhi which are unregistered and unrecognized, run by private individuals, institutions and NGOs in which about 600000 children between the age group of 2 to 18 years are studying in different classes between LKG to 12th standard. All these schools have been established and are being run without the permission of the Government and without the recognition of appropriate authority under the Delhi School Education Act, 1973. The petitioner inter alias alleges that most of the schools are ill-equipped and are established in unsafe buildings. They do not have adequate accommodation for running the institution nor are the teachers employed for imparting instructions qualified. They are usually un...

Ashok Kumar Vs. State (Delhi Admn.)

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 2008(101)DRJ322

S. Muralidhar, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 14th September, 1992 passed by the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge (ASJ), Delhi in S.C. 1139 of 1991 convicting the appellant in FIR No. 78/90 under Section 21 of the Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 ('NDPS Act'), sentencing him to ten years rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 1,00,000 failing which to undergo for a simple imprisonment for a further period of one year.2. This appeal has had an unfortunate history of long pendency for reasons not attributable to the appellant but which undoubtedly has caused him irreversible hardship. Notice was first issued in this appeal on 12th November 1992. Thereafter on more than one occasion the appellant kept applying for interim bail and for suspension of sentence, both of which were declined. The appeal was however directed to be expedited by an order dated 21st July 1995.3. Thereafter when the appeal was still not taken up ...

Deepak Resorts and Hotels Pvt. Ltd. and anr. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) ...

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 149(2008)DLT582; 2008(104)DRJ641

T.S. Thakur, J.1. More than 15 years have rolled by since the Supreme Court first expressed its serious concern about the quality of environment in the National Capital Region of Delhi. Such was the failure on the part of the Delhi Development Authority, the MCD, the Central Pollution Control Board as also the Delhi Pollution Control Committee in the discharge of their duties that the court castigated them for their inaction in the matter in M.C. Mehta v. Union of India : [1992]3SCR357 . Referring to a World Health Organization study, the court observed that utter disregard to environment has placed Delhi in an unenviable position of being the world's third grubbiest and most polluted and unhealthy city. The court observed:We are conscious that environmental changes are the inevitable consequence of industrial development in our country, but at the same time the quality of environment cannot be permitted to be damaged by polluting the Air, Water and Land to such an extent that it becom...

Shakun Moolchandani Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and anr.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 2009(238)ELT37(Del)

S. Muralidhar, J.1. These petitions under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 ('CrPC') challenges an order dated 17th December 2003 passed by the learned the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, New Delhi ('ACMM') in a Criminal Complaint titled Shri D.V. Parashar, Intelligence Officer v. Baron International Limited and Ors. under Sections 132 and 135(1)(a) of the Customs Act, 1962 ('Act'). The petitions also challenge a subsequent order dated 6th July 2004 passed by the learned MM directing service of summons by publication. The prayer for quashing of the criminal complaint has not been pressed during the arguments. 2. M/s. Baron International Limited ('BIL'), a company registered in Mumbai, was at the relevant time marketing Akai Brand Colour Television sets. BIL entered into a contract with M/s. Akai Limited, Japan and Akai Electronic Corporation, Japan whereby the rebate would be paid to BIL based on the sales volume for the specific period. According to the com...

P.K. Sharma Vs. Mcd

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 2008(102)DRJ740

Mukundakam Sharma, C.J.1. This appeal is directed against the order dated 30th November, 2007 dismissing the writ petition filed by the appellant. The writ petition was filed by the appellant impugning the award dated 11th October, 2006 passed by the Presiding Officer, Industrial Tribunal No. 1, Karkardooma Courts in ID case No. 40/2006. 2. The appellant was appointed as a Data Entry Operator on ad hoc basis by the respondent under order dated 26th March, 2001. The counsel for the appellant has drawn our attention to the said appointment order. He states that although the appellant was appointed on ad hoc basis, he continued to work till 2004 and on one fine morning he was told that his services stand terminated without issuing any written orders.3. Since according to the appellant the aforesaid action of the respondent amounted to unjustified and illegal termination, thereforee, he sought for a reference, which was accepted by the appropriate Government and on the basis of his request...

Naresh Chand Vs. the Presiding Officer, Cgit

Court: Delhi

Reported in: (2008)IIILLJ331Del

Mukundakam Sharma, C.J.1. These appeals raise similar and identical issues. The appeals were heard together and they are also being disposed of by this common judgment and order.2. The appellants herein challenged the legality of the judgment and order passed by the learned Single Judge dismissing the writ petitions by judgment and order dated 21st July, 2006 and also against the award dated 21st November, 1996 passed by the Industrial Tribunal, New Delhi holding the reference against the workmen in respect of their termination of service. The appellants herein were engaged for different posts by the respondent on 23.04.1990/23.07.1990. In the offer of appointment the engagement of the appellants was for a fixed period, i.e., up to 29th January, 1991 and the terms and conditions for the post for which they were engaged were also given in the offer of appointment. The appellants accepted the aforesaid offer pursuant to which the appointment letters were also issued to them on specific t...

institute of Chartered Financial Vs. Cce

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2008)10STR376

1. This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) dated 09.10.2007 dismissing the appeal of the appellant for non-compliance of the order dated 30.08.2007. By the said order dated 30.08.2007 the appellant was directed to pre-deposit a sum of Rs. 22,96,593/- in terms of Section 35-F of the Central Excise Act as condition for admission of the appeal and as the appellant failed to deposit the said amount, the appeal was dismissed by the impugned order. It is clear that the impugned order was the consequence of non-compliance of the earlier order dated 30.08.2007, which had not been challenged by the appellant. The basic order not having being challenged and the impugned order being mere consequence of that order, the appeal could be dismissed on this short ground alone. However, we do not want to take a short cut to non-suit the appellant and, therefore, propose to pass a brief order touching upon the controversy involved in the case.2. We are con...

Cc Vs. Etco Telecom Ltd.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

1. This appeal by the Department is directed against part of the order-in-appeal of the Commissioner (Appeals), Central Excise, Jalandhar dated 23.10.2006 allowing DEPB (Duty Entitlement Pass Book) benefit with respect to Cot Cards. The case of the Department is that the impugned part of the appellate order is beyond the scope of the remand order of this Tribunal and therefore, fit to be set aside.2. Before referring to the order of this Tribunal it would be appropriate to notice briefly the facts of the case. Briefly stated, the respondent exported various items describing them as 'Telecommunication Equipments' under Shipping Bill No. 22/2001 dated 31.3.2001 on a white Shipping Bill. Later, on 20.4.2001, it requested the Commissioner of Customs for conversion of the Shipping Bill under the DEPB Scheme. The Commissioner granted permission subject to fulfilment of conditions of the Exim Policy 1997-2002. The respondent then applied to the Joint Director-General Foreign Trade (DGFT) see...

Agarwal Catering Caterers Vs. Cce

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2008)10STR479

1. In terms of the impugned order, the appellant has been directed to pay Service Tax of Rs. 56,281/- besides penalties. By this stay application, the appellant seeks exemption from deposit of Service Tax etc., which is a condition precedent for maintaining the appeal.2. The dispute relates to Service Tax and the case of the appellant is that as the services rendered by it do not come within the purview of 'outdoor catering services', it is not liable to pay Service Tax. The subject matter of dispute is catering service provided by the appellant at Bhilai Hotel. The premises in question admittedly does not belong to the appellant. In terms of the definition of the term 'outdoor caterer' in Section 65(25) of the Finance Act, 1994, "a caterer engaged in providing the services in connection with catering at a place other than his own" comes within the definition of 'outdoor caterer'. That being so, we are, prima facie, of the view that the appellant has correctly been saddled with the li...

A.S.i. Hasrat Ali Khan S/O Ch. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) Through

Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi

1. Hassrat Ali Khan, an Assistant Sub Inspector of Delhi Police, the applicant herein faced joint departmental enquiry with SI Vijay Tygai, Head Constable Ram Kumar, Constable Shambhu Dayal and Constable Subhash Chand. Whereas the charge framed against SI Vijay Tygai, even though pertaining to the same incident was different, the charge framed against the applicant and Ors. named above, reads as follows: It is alleged against ASI (Ex) Hasrat Ali9 Khan No. 2668/D (PIS No. 28740918), HC Ram Kumar No. 631/SD (No. 28824010), Const. Shambhu Dayal No. 733/SD (PIS No. 28931834) and Const. Subhash Chand No. 1393/SD (PIS No. 28890519) that on 12/9/2004 while posted at PS near New Friend Colony they visited the shop of Mohd Tasleem who was running a stove repairing shop at his jhuggi No. 37, Taimur Nagar, Pahari No. 2, Delhi. On reaching there they started misbehaving and beating up Mohd Tasleem . Mohd Tasleem was hit on his head with a stove and lathi. Mrs. Khatija Beghum wife of Mohd. Tasleem...