Gujarat Court November 1988 Judgments
Agricultural Produce Market Committee Vs. State of Gujarat and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Nov-30-1988
Reported in: (1989)1GLR617
A.P. Ravani, J.1. The Petitioner-Market Committee (The Agricultural Produce Market Committee, Bhavnagar) prays that the respondent authorities be directed to hold the election of the Committee and be restrained from nominating the members of the Agricultural Produce Market Committee till pendency and final disposal of the petition. The petition is filed on October 14, 1988. This Court (Coram: S.B. Majmudar, J.) on October 18, 1988 permited the petitioner to join petitioners of Special Civil Application No. 5907 of 1986 as party respondents and directed to issue notice to respondents returnable on November 15, 1988. By way of ad-interim relief the respondents have been directed to maintain status quo regarding constitution of the existing body as on the date of the order. On November 17, 1988 the matter came up for hearing before the Court. It appears that the newly added parties have not been joined as respondents. The matter was adjourned twice or thrice solely with a view to accommod...
Tag this Judgment!M.S. Desai and Co. Vs. Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Nov-24-1988
Reported in: (1989)2GLR1014
R.A. Mehta, J.1. The petitioner-Film was an authorised dealer of petroleum products of respondent-corporation since 1964. The last of such dealarship agreement is of 2-8-1976. During the working of the dealership, a sample of petrol sold at the petitioner's petrol pump was taken on 22-7-1981 and was subjected to the laboratory test. The test report received en 30-10-1981 showed that the petrol sold at the petitioner's petrol pump was adulterated. By the letter dated 10-11-1981, an explanation was called for and the supplies of the petroleum, products were suspended. On 1-7-1982, a notice was issued to the petitioner to show cause as to why the dealership of the petitioner should not be terminated. The petitioner filed his reply on 7-7-1982.He also filed the present petition on 28-9-1980 praying that the respondent Corporation be directed to resume the supplies of the petroleum products and restrain the Corporation from terminating the arrangemeni with the petitioner-Firm. The responden...
Tag this Judgment!Saurashtra Cement and Chemicals Industries Ltd. and ors. Vs. Esma Indu ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Nov-19-1988
Reported in: [1990]69CompCas372(Guj); (1989)2GLR541
Majmudar J. 1. In this company application, the applicants have sought dismissal of the main Company Petition No. 62 of 1986 in view certain preliminary objections about the ,maintainability of the petition that they seek to raise by way of this application. 2. In order to appreciate the nature of the controversy posed for my consideration in this application, it is necessary to note a few introductory facts. The respondent, Esma industries P. Ltd., has filed the main Company Petition No, 62 of 198 in this court. The said petition is filed under sections 397 and 398 of the Companies Act, 1956('the Act', for short). It seeks to challenge certain alleged acts of Amazon/commission said to have been committed by original respondents Nos. 2 and 3 in the company petition who are in charge of the management of the company. It is alleged that they are conducting the affairs of the company in a manner oppressive to its shareholders and also in manner prejudicial to the interest of the company. ...
Tag this Judgment!Chhatrodia Jasuben Lakhman and anr. Vs. State of Gujarat and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Nov-18-1988
Reported in: (1989)2GLR1295
A.P. Ravani, J.1. The petitioners are voters for the election of Umberi Gram Panchayat held on November 6, 1988. The election programme was notified on September 12, 1988 by the appropriate election authority. The voters list for the election in question was published on September 22, 1988. Thereafter the Assistant Collector, Veraval passed an order dated October 18, 1988 which is produced at Annexure 'D' to the petition. As disclosed in this order, he found that certain names of voters were falsely included in the voters list and complaint was lodged by Mamlatdar against these voters. He directed that these voters should not be permitted to vote at the election. The Assistant Collector instructed the Mamlatdar, Veraval to see that the Polling Officers concerned are given these instructions and the instructions given by him in the order were required to be strictly complied with. Feeling aggrieved by the aforesaid order, the petitioners approached this Court and challenged the legality...
Tag this Judgment!Darshana Abhinav Shukla Vs. Regional Manager, Allahabad Bank, Bombay a ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Nov-17-1988
Reported in: (1989)1GLR536
1. Rule Mr. K. S. Nanavati waives service of rules on behalf of respondent Nos. 1 and 2. Mr. K. G. Vakharia waives service of rule on behalf of respondent No. 3. At the request of and with the consent of the parties the matter is ordered to be heard today. 2. Petitioner and respondent No. 3 are serving with respondent No. 1-Bank. They are serving as clerks. The dispute pertains to the posting for the post of Special Assistant. Both, the petitioner as well as respondent No. 3, are serving at Ahmedabad in different branches of respondent No. 1-Bank. As per the agreement arrived at between the employees' union of respondent No. 1-Bank and respondent No. 1-Bank, posting to the post of Special Assistant is to be made according to para 15 of the agreement, which reads as follows : 'Para 15 : It was agreed that after holding interview for the post of Special Assistants option for the place of posting from the employees declared successful will be called for. Actual posting shall, however, be...
Tag this Judgment!Central Engineering Works Vs. Competent Authority and Additional Colle ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Nov-17-1988
Reported in: (1989)1GLR650
M.B. Shah, J.1. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied by the judgment and order dated 20-10-1987 passed by the Urban Land Tribunal in Appeal No. Rajkot 553 of 1984, the petitioner - a registered partnership firm has filed this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.2. The petitioner-partnership firm filled in form under the provisions of Section 6 of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). After considering the objections raised by the petitioner, the Competent Authority by its order dated 23-2-1984 declared that the petitioner-firm was holding 3624 sq. mts. of land as excess vacant land. The Competent Authority arrived at the conclusion that the petitioner was a registered partnership firm and was holding the land in excess of the ceiling limit. It negatived the contention of the petitioner that for deciding the ceiling limit, the land owned by the partnership firm should be considered to be of co-ownership of the partners ...
Tag this Judgment!M.i. Isani, Executive Engineer, Sunderanagar District Panchayat Vs. Su ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Nov-15-1988
Reported in: (1989)1GLR380
R.A. Mehta, J.1. This petition is directed against an award of the Labour Court, Rajkot whereby the workmen who have completed five years of service as on 1-1-1983 as per the seniority list Ex. 26 are ordered to be made permanent with effect from 1-1-1983 and those who have completed five years of service after 1-1-1983 are ordered to be made permanent with effect from the respective dates when they completed five years of service. The employer, being aggrieved by granting of this demand of permanency, has challenged this award.2. The learned Counsel for the Petitioner-Management has submitted that the Labour Court has relied on the Government Resolutions Ex. 16 and 17 for making these workmen permanent. However, according to the Petitioner-Management, those Circulars have been thoroughly misread and misapplied by the Labour Court. According to the Petitioner-Management, under those Circulars, the daily wagers who are working on nominal muster roll are to be brought on work charge esta...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- Next ›