Gujarat Court March 1990 Judgments
Vimlaben Bhupatsinh Barot Vs. District Collector
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-31-1990
Reported in: 1991ACJ342; (1990)2GLR1190
A.P. Ravani, J.1. The petitioner's husband, named Bhupatsinh Barot, was travelling by a rickshaw on June 7,1985 at about 3.00 p.m. He was proceeding from Raipur to Bapunagar area of Ahmedabad city. When his rickshaw passed near the locality of Chhabila Hanuman at Raipur, the rickshaw met with an accident and it turned turtle. Bhupatsinh received injuries on his left and right thighs and lower portion of right leg. He was taken to V.S. Hospital. There he was treated for the injuries received by him. Ultimately on June 15,1985, he succumbed to the injuries, probably on account of the fact that certain complications had arisen, after he received the injuries. However, the fact remains that on account of the injury received by him in an automobile accident he was admitted in hospital and he died due to the injuries received by him. Despite efforts, the rickshaw in which he was travelling could not be traced or found.2. In view of the aforesaid position the petitioner applied to respondent ...
Tag this Judgment!Mahesh Sambhu Prasad Joshi Vs. K.S. Verma and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-29-1990
Reported in: AIR1991Guj72
ORDER1. Rule. Learned advocates appearing on behalf of the respondents waive service.At the request of the learned advocates for the parties, the matter is heard finally.2. The question involved in this petition is whether the Court should permit the Municipal Commissioner to proceed with the election even though he has not complied with the mandatory requirements of preparing municipal election roll as prescribed in the Election Rules provided in Schedule A to the Bombay Provincial Municipal Corporation Act, 1949. At present it is difficult to say whether the Municipal Commissioner is at fault or Standing Committee or the office bearers of the Municipal Corporation are at fault in not preparing the election roll as provided the Election Rules. For deciding the question involved in this petition it is not necessary to decide who is negligent or who is to be blamed for not preparing the election roll as required by the rules.3. This appeal Civil Application is filed by a Municipal Corpo...
Tag this Judgment!Nileshkumar Rameshchandra Dhruv Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-26-1990
Reported in: I(1991)DMC280; (1990)2GLR996
J.U. Mehta, J.1. Rule Mr. S.T. Mehta, Additional Public Prosecutor appears and waives service of rule for the State.2. The petitioner who is the original opponent in Miscellaneous Criminal Application No. 132 of 1988 has approached this Court challenging the order dated 26-9-1988 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Amreli, who issued a warrant against the present petitioner to recover the amount of maintenance of Rs. 7,500/- by attaching the movable property and if the said amount could not be recovered, from that, then he ordered to arrest the present petitioner and to produre him before the Court.3. Notice was issued to respondent No. 1 who is the wife and also to the State. Respondent No. 1 remained present in person before this Court and Mr. S.T. Mehta, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State waived service of notice on behalf of the State. Respondent No. 1 submitted that she has nothing to say in the matter. In view of the said statement made by respondent ...
Tag this Judgment!Prolite Engineering Co. Vs. Union of India
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-23-1990
Reported in: 1991LC528(Gujarat); 1995(75)ELT257(Guj); (1990)2GLR1092
ORDERG.T. Nanavati, J.1. Special Civil Application Nos. 1447/80 and 1083/85 are filed by M/s. Apex Electricals Pvt. Ltd. Other six petitions are filed by different petitions but as the question involved in all these petitions is the same, all these petitions have been heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment. 2. Apex Electricals is a manufacturer of power and distribution transformers. Such transformers are manufactured by assembling High Tension and Low Tension Coils on assembled core made out of laminations. Laminations are prepared on of Cold Rolled Grain Oriented steel sheets. These sheets are not manufactured in India and, therefore, they have to be imported from foreign countries. They come in form of rolls. They first slitted into width of required specifications. After slitting is done, the slitted-rolls, also known as strips, are further required to be cut into small pieces of required dimensions and designs depending upon requirements of the customers....
Tag this Judgment!Apex Electricals Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Union of India
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-23-1990
Reported in: 1993LC308(Gujarat); 1992(61)ELT413(Guj)
G.T. Nanavati, J. 1. Special Civil Applications Nos. 1447/80 and 1083/85 are filed by M/s. Apex Electricals Pvt. Ltd., other six petitions are filed by different petitioners but as the question involved in all these petitions is the same, all these petitions have been heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment. 2. Apex Electrical is a manufacturer of power and distribution transformers. Such transformers are manufactured by assembling high tension and low tension and low tension coils as assembled cores made out of laminations. Laminations are prepared out of cold rolled grain oriented steel sheets. These sheets are not manufactured in India, and therefore, they have to be imported from foreign countries. They come in the form of rolls. They are first slitted into width of required specifications. After sliting is done, the slitted rolls, also known as strips, are further required to be cut into small pieces of required dimensions and designs depending upon requir...
Tag this Judgment!Jashubhai Hiralal Gandhi and ors. Vs. Competent Authority and Deputy C ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-23-1990
Reported in: (1990)2GLR1140
P.R. Gokulakrishnan, C.J.1. This is a typical case where legality and validity of the orders passed by the authorities under the Land Ceiling Act declaring the plots of the lands in excess, are challenged by various proceedings in order to scuttle the acquisition of excess lands for public purposes.2. Both these Letters Patent Appeals arise out of a common order passed in Special Civil Application No. 6068 of 1988 and Special Civil Application No. 6069 of 1988. In both these Letters Patent Appeals Mr. Vin appears for the appellants, Mr. Antani appears for respondents Nos. 1 and 2 and Mr. Pujara appears for respondents Nos. 3, 4 and 5. The learned Counsels appearing for the respondents got notice and say that the matters be heard and decided finally. Mr. Vin is agreeable in taking up these appeals for final hearing today and, therefore, the arguments were heard.3. Letters Patent Appeal No. 111 of 1989 is filed by the alleged irrevocable power of attorney-holder of the original land-hold...
Tag this Judgment!Hiralal Udayram Vs. State of Gujarat and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-23-1990
Reported in: (1990)2GLR1039
A.P. Ravani, J.1. The petitioner is holding licence issued under the provisions of the Gujarat Essential Article (Licensing, Control and Stock Declaration) Order, 1981, as dealer in kerosene. On certain allegations that he had committed breach of conditions of the licence and had contravened the relevant provisions of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955, and the Control Order issued thereunder, proceedings were initiated against him. The original authority ordered to cancel the licence and passed order imposing penalty upon the petitioner. The order passed by the original authority has been confirmed in appeal by the appellate authority. The petitioner preferred revision application before the Government. The same has been rejected without affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner. The petitioner has been informed accordingly by letter dated March 1, 1990. Hence the petition.2. Clause 12 of the Control Order provides for revision to the Government, Clause 12 reads as un...
Tag this Judgment!M.D. Parmar Vs. State of Gujarat and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-21-1990
Reported in: (1991)1GLR580
M.B. Shah, J.1. Rule. Learned Addl. Govt. Pleader Mr. Dave waives service on behalf of the respondents.2. The question at this stage is whether an employee who is dismissed from service on the ground of corruption, serious misconduct or lack of honesty and litegrity should be foisted on the department without setting aside the dismissal order. There is no law that as soon as the matter is admitted, interim relief should be granted in such a manner that without deciding that the impugned order is illegal and void the Court should permit the petitioner to continue in service by granting interim relief and permit him to commit some further misdeeds. Presuming that even if he does not commit further misdeeds, the order imposing penalty cannot be set aside even temporarily till the petition is decided. In the rarest of rare cases the Court may exercise such jurisdiction. Further, if the petition is finally allowed, then the order of reinstatement with full back wages can be passed and the p...
Tag this Judgment!Aher Naran Vijanand Vs. State of Gujarat and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-20-1990
Reported in: (1990)2GLR1161
S.B. Majmudar, J.1. In this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution which is wrongly styled as one under Article 226 thereof, the petitioner has brought in challenge the order passed by the Special Secretary, Revenue Department dismissing the revision application and confirming the order passed by the Mamlatdar, Veraval in encroachment case No. 264/76-77. These proceedings were initiated by the Mamlatdar against the petitioner on the ground that he committed encroachment on a part of Government land being S. No. 545 of village Udafa in Veraval Taluka. The petitioner's contention is that this land was not encroached upon but was given to his father in exchange for part of S. No. 259/1 which belonged to him which was acquired for the purpose of road. Both the Courts below have taken the view that no relevant evidence was pointed out by the petitioner to show that there was any such exchange and consequently, the petitioner was found to have encroached upon the Government land. Hen...
Tag this Judgment!Prasant M. Bhansali Vs. Gujarat University
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-17-1990
Reported in: AIR1992Guj60; (1990)2GLR452
ORDER1. The petitioner is a candidate for post-graduate medical admission for July 1989 batch after one year internship. The petitioner is at Serial No. 171 in the common merit list and his choice was M.D. (Medicine) stipendary or non-stipendary. As such seat was not available at the time of first interview, second interview and reshuffling, he has not taken admission to any other branch or subject and he has not given any choice for any other subject.2. 25% of the post-graduate medical seats are reserved for All India Candidates as per the scheme evolves under the orders of the Supreme Court. It appears that several seats in several States remained vacant in the All India Quota and the Supreme Court seems to have passed an order on 5-12-1989 permitting such seats to be filled in by the local candidates. The Director General of Health Services, Medical Examination Cell, New Delhi, informed all the State authorities that the vacant seats for the year 1989 are released with effect from 4...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »