Gujarat Court October 1988 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.
Balvantsing Sursing Dabhi Vs. State of Gujarat and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Oct-13-1988
Reported in: (1990)1GLR141
A.P. Ravani, J.1. Rule. Mr. C.M. Joshi waives service of rule. In the facts of the case, with the consent of the parties, the petition is directed to be heard today.2. The petitioner is serving as Dresser with respondent No. 3, i.e. in the office of the Medical Superintendent, Civil Hospital, Ahmedabad. The petitioner claims that he belongs to Class IV service and he is entitled to continue in service upto the age of 60 years. There is no dispute with regard to the fact that he will be superannuated on this basis on June 30, 1990. The petitioner rests his claim on the basis of definition of Class IV contained in B.C.S.R. The relevant Rule containing the definition is Rule 9(27). It reads as follows:9(27). Class IV Service means service performed by the Government servants included in Appendix III and service remunerated in a time scale of pay the maximum of which does not exceed Rs. 270 in the case of Government servants not so included.It is an admitted position that figure of Rs. 270...
Jumedar Mandal, Shree Sayaji High School Vs. District Education Office ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Oct-12-1988
Reported in: (1989)1GLR613
R.A. Mehta, J.1. This petition by the school-management is directed against an order passed by the 1st respondent-District Education Officer refusing to ratify suspension of respondent No. 2. The learned Counsel for the 2nd respondent has raised a preliminary objection that a dispute under Section 38 of the Gujarat Secondary Education Act can be raised before the Secondary Education Tribunal and it has an alternative and efficacious remedy and therefore this Court should not entertain this petition.2. The Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that there is really speaking no dispute between the management and the teacher (the Principal) and that the challenge is to the order of 1st respondent and therefore it is a dispute between the petitioner-Management and the 1st respondent-Officer and therefore there is no remedy under Section 38 of the Gujarat Secondary Education Act. A parallel is sought to be drawn from the provisions of Section 36 wherein also there is an intervening author...
Ashok Chimanlal Mody Vs. State of Gujarat and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Oct-11-1988
Reported in: (1989)1GLR473
B.S. Kapadia, J.1. The present petition is filed by the petitioner Ashok Chimanlal Mody, who is the brother of detenu Bharat Chimanlal Mody, challenging the detention order passed against the detenu by the Commissioner of Police, Surat, on 8-4-1988 on his being satisfied that with a view to preventing the detenu from acting in any manner prejudicial to the maintenance of public order in the area of Nanpura falling under the jurisdiction of Athwa Line Police Station of Surat City, it was necessary to make an order directing him to be detained.The detenu was served with the detention order as also grounds of detention.2. On perusal of the ground it appears that during the period from 1981 to 1988 there are nearly about 10 cases under the provisions of the Bombay Prohibition Act filed against him the details of which are shown in Annexure 'A' to the grounds. On reading the said Annexure 'A' it appears that the detenu was involved in the offences under Sections 66(1)(b), 65E and 81 of the ...
Mansingh Ramswarup Tomar Vs. State of Gujarat and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Oct-10-1988
Reported in: (1989)1GLR481
B.S. Kapadia, J.1. The petitioner has challenged in this petition the impugned order of detention passed against him by the Commissioner of Police, Ahmedabad City, on 6-4-1988 in exercise of the powers conferred on him by Sub-section (1) of Section 3 of the Gujarat Prevention of Anti-Social Activities Act, 1985. The petitioner was served with the order as also grounds of detention on the same day.2. On perusal of the grounds of detention it appears that there were three cases filed against the petitioner under the provisions of the Bombay Prohibition Act. The statements of four witnesses were also recorded against him. The detaining authority on considering the same as also other alternative less drastic remedies came to the conclusion that it is necessary to detain the petitioner with a view to preventing him from disturbing to maintenance of public order.3. Several grounds have been raised in the petition but Mr. B.J. Shethna, the learned Advocate for the petitioner has pressed befor...
Harendr R. Pandya Vs. Bharuch Municipality and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Oct-07-1988
Reported in: (1989)1GLR557
R.J. Shah, J.1. This Letters Patent Appeal arises under the following circumstances:Appellant-petitioner was serving as a Chief Officer of Bharuch Nagarpalika since 1972. Petitioner vide his letter dated 3-8-1988, Annexure 'D' to the petition, had asked for permission to retire with effect from 5-9-1988 and to proceed on leave for the period from 4-8-1988 to 4-9-1988. The President of the Municipality made an endorsement on the said letter to the effect that in anticipation of the approval of the general body, the application for leave was sanctioned and further directed that the charge in respect of the leave period should be entrusted to one J. C. Dorawala, who was working as the Secretary of the Municipality. Thereafter, the petitioner wrote another letter dated 8-8-1988, Annexure 'F', to the President of the Nagarpalika wherein he had sought to withdraw his aforesaid letter dated 3-8-1988 in which he had prayed for earlier retirement, as stated above. He also gave an intimation tha...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›