Gujarat Court April 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.
Aniruddha A. Dave Vs. State of Gujarat and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Apr-05-1988
Reported in: AIR1988Guj257; (1988)2GLR37; (1989)ILLJ66Guj
ORDER1. This petition is filed by Mr. A. A. Dave, a Retired Judge of this Court seeking certain reliefs enumerated at Para 8(A) and 8(B).2. The facts giving rise to this petition may be briefly stated as follows : - The petitioner was a sitting Judge of this Court in the year 1974. He was appointed as Tribunal under the provisions of the Secondary Education Act. 1972. vide Resolution dt. 30-4-1974. On attaining the age of 62 the petitioner retired on 1-9-1974. But thereafter also he continued to be the Secondary Education Tribunal until 31-81977. The petitioner was then appointed as Tribunal under the Gujarat Affiliated Colleges Services Tribunal Act, 1982. vide Government Order dt. 1-5-1982 and he worked as Tribunal under the said Act from 29-5-1982 to 28-5-1984. Copy of the order dt. 30-4-1974 appointing the petitioner as Tribunal is produced by the petitioner with a list of documents. The relevant portion of the said order is as follows: - '(i) he shall draw his present salary of Rs...
Dharoi Jalashya Matsya Udyog Sahakari Mandali Ltd. and anr. Vs. Gujara ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Apr-05-1988
Reported in: AIR1988Guj193; (1988)2GLR843
A.P. Ravani, J.1. Here there is a dispute between different co-operative bodies as to the meaning of term 'dispute.' Instead of co-operation, there is dispute as regards their business. Even so, in genuine spirit of co-operation they have assisted the Court (through their Counsels) in giving correct meaning to the expression 'dispute' occurring in Section 96 of the Gujarat Co-operative Societies Act, 1961. While disposing of the case, may I ask, will they not resolve their dispute in genuine spirit of co-operation instead of dragging their feet to Court every now and then?Now the question be examined.2. The petitioners are original-defendants who succeeded before the trial Court in resisting application Exh. 5 for injunction restraining them from catching fish from Dharoi Reservoir. The respondent-plaintiff filed suit and prayed that the aforesaid petitioners be restrained from catching fish from Dharoi Reservoir. Considering the pleadings, relevant documents placed on record and after...
State of Gujarat Vs. Lalji Popat and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Apr-02-1988
Reported in: (1988)2GLR1073
M.B. Shah, J.1. This group of applications are filed for cancellation of bail granted by Mr. I.H. Parikh, Additional Sessions Judge, Junagadh.2. I has been pointed out in this group of applications that Mr. Shah, Additional Sessions Judge, has either ignored the order passed by his colleague i.e. another Additional Sessions Judge rejecting the bail application by giving some irrelevant reasons. In one case he has ignored the order passed by this High Court rejecting the bail applica-tion. He has narrated the criteria laid down by this Court as well as by the Hon'ble Supreme Court but he has not applied the same to the facts of the case or ignored the facts of the case.3. The particulars of the cases decided by this judgment wherein all the accused are involved in offences punishable under Section 302 and/or other sections and who are released on bail by Mr. I.H. Shah, Additional Sessions Judge, Junagadh, are tabularized as under: ________________________________________________________...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- Next ›