Gujarat Court June 1992 Judgments
Vinodrai N. Ratnotar Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jun-30-1992
Reported in: [1994(68)FLR165]; (1993)2GLR1490; (1995)ILLJ388Guj
Bhatt, J.1. The pertinent facts, in brief, leading to the present petition are as under : 1.1 The petitioner was appointed, on 1st October, 1980 with effect from 11th September, 1980 for a period of three months, as a Work-charge Peon, by an order passed by Deputy Secretary (Department of Industries, Mines & Energy Power). On the expiry of this tenure he was once again appointed by order dated 12th February, 1981 for a period of 29 days. Thereafter he as again appointed by order dated 6th April, 1981 for a period of three months. In a similar manner different orders passed on different dates continued to be issued keeping the petitioner in employment. It is an admitted position that the petitioner was serving as a Work-charge Peon and was required to perform duties of spraying and serving water as a part-time daily wager. 1.2 Again by order dated 3rd August, 1983 he was appointed with effect from 1st August, 1983 till further orders. Similarly, by another order dated 7th September, 198...
Tag this Judgment!Vasram Gagji Vs. State of Gujarat and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jun-29-1992
Reported in: (1993)1GLR404
K.J. Vaidya, J. (Rule. Mr. D. K. Trivedi, the learned P.P. waives service of Rule on behalf of respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 3).1. The petitioner-Vashram Gagji, a prisoner at District Prison, Rajkot, by this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution has brought under challenge the impugned order dated 24-12-1991, passed by the District Magistrate, Rajkot, whereby his parole leave application came to be rejected, inter alia praying for releasing him on parole for 30 days on the ground that he was suffering from 'Hernia' and that he wanted to get it operated by a private surgeon.2. Few Relevant facts : According to the petitioner, he made an application on 16-12-1991 to the District Magistrate, Rajkot, praying for his parole leave for 60 days on the medical ground of his operation of 'Hernia' by a private surgeon outside the Jail alongwith the medical certificate dated 12-12-1991 in the said regard issued by no less a Doctor than the Medical Officer of the District Jail Dispensary a...
Tag this Judgment!The Municipal Corporation of Ahmedabad Vs. Manish Enterprises Ltd.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jun-26-1992
Reported in: AIR1993Guj145; (1992)2GLR1252
ORDERC.K. Thakker, J.1. This Civil Application is filed by the applicant-Municipal Corporation, for condonation of delay in filing the First Appeal. Being aggrieved by the order passed by the Chief Judge of the Small Cause Court at Ahmedabad in Municipal Valuation Appeal No. 13690/1988, decided on January 17, 1991, that appeal is filed by the Corporation in this Court on April 18, 1991. The appeal is filed under the provisions of Section 411 of the Bombay Provincial Municipal Corporation Act, 1949 (hereinafter referred to as the 'BPMC Act'). Under the said provision, an appeal could be filed within a period of 30 days from the date of the order impugned. There is delay of 38 days in filing the appeal on the part of the appellant Corporation. This Civil Application is, therefore, filed by the applicant-appellant for getting the delay condoned. Since no sufficient particulars and material facts have been narrated by the applicant in the application for condonation of delay, further affid...
Tag this Judgment!Chandrakant Tukaram Nikam Vs. Municipal Corporation of Ahmedabad
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jun-26-1992
Reported in: (1993)1GLR684; (1994)ILLJ453Guj
SHAH, J. 1. These Letters Patent Appeals are, directed against the common judgment and order of learned single Judge in six appeals dated September 27, 1990 partially allowing the first appeals and substantially confirming the judgment and decree passed by learned City Civil Judge, Ahmedabad in Civil Suits filed by the appellants-workmen against the respondent-Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation challenging the orders of dismissal/removal from service. The learned single Judge has substantially confirmed the judgment and decree passed by the trial Court holding that its jurisdiction is barred to enter into and decide question raised in the suits filed by the workmen against their employer-Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation. However, the learned single Judge quashed and set aside the judgments and decree passed by the trial Court on limited issue and has remanded the matters to the City Civil Court for considering whether declaration prayed for by each workman in the suit could be granted on t...
Tag this Judgment!Rajendraprasad Shankerlal Rajora Vs. State of Gujarat and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jun-26-1992
Reported in: (1993)1GLR308
S.M. Soni, J.1. This Revision Application is directed against the judgment and order dated 19-6-1990 passed by the learned Fourth Joint Civil Judge and Judicial Magistrate First Class (Ahmedabad Rural) Mirzapur in Misc. Criminal Application No. 2 of 1989 filed by the petitioner (original complainant) in Criminal Case No. 152 of 1987 for setting aside the order dismissing his complaint for default in appearance on 19-8-1990 when the complainant was called out.2. Heard the petitioner who is present in person and the learned A. P. P. Shri M. A. Bukhari for respondent No. 1. Advocates for respondent Nos. 2 and 3 are absent.3. Short question that arises in this petition is whether a Court has jurisdiction to proceed with and to pass an order in the matter when the proceedings of that matter is stayed more particularly by the High Court.4. To appreciate this contention, it is necessary to refer to certain facts of the present case. The petitioner had filed one complaint under Sections 392, 3...
Tag this Judgment!Rabari Bai Jubaben and anr. Vs. Harshadbhai Natverbhai AmIn and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jun-25-1992
Reported in: 1993ACJ984
B.J. Shethna, J.1. This appeal is filed by the appellants-original claimants, who are :he widow and major son of the deceased, against the judgment and award dated 19.4.1979 passed by Mr. D.C. Gheowala (as he then was), learned Member of M.A.C. Tribunal, Nadiad, in M.A.C. Petition No. 384 of 1978, awarding only Rs. 1,000/- instead of Rs, 25,000/- claimed by the claimants.2. In this appeal the claimants had claimed additional sum of Rs. 24,000/-. However, Mr. Shelat, the learned advocate appearing for the appellants, requests to reduce the claim to Rs. 20,500/- from Rs. 24,000/-. Permission is granted to reduce the claim. Accordingly the claim is reduced, to Rs. 20,500/- before effective hearing.3. The learned Tribunal held that the claimants have come out with bogus, false and frivolous claim under professional advice of a puerile character. He further held that sympathy of the Tribunal is towards the bereaved family, but it is sought to be exploited by unscrupulous persons. Therefore,...
Tag this Judgment!Lataben Ambalal Patel Vs. Champakbhai F. Vasava and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jun-24-1992
Reported in: I(1993)ACC315; 1993ACJ118
S.D. Shah, J.1. These Misc. Civil Applications are filed by claimants of various Motor Accident Claim Petitions for transfer of their claim petitions from Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal at Surendra-nagar to Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal at Baroda under Section 24, Civil Procedure Code. The main and principal reason advanced by the claimants for transfer of their claim petitions from Surendranagar to Baroda is that all these petitions relate to the claims arising from one and the same accident which has taken place on 25th May, 1989 between a Matador bearing registration No. GAA 6317 and the truck bearing registration No. GRQ 6429 within the jurisdiction of the Claims Tribunal at Surendranagar. The claimants in these transfer applications were the passengers on the fateful day in the said Matador. In the said accident they have sustained and suffered injuries which has given rise to filing of motor accident claim petitions.2. When these petitions were filed the learned single Judge o...
Tag this Judgment!Champaklal M. Bhavsar Vs. State of Gujarat and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jun-24-1992
Reported in: (1993)2GLR1254
A.P. Ravani, J. 1. If the provision regarding relaxation in upper age limit occuring in Rule 8(5) of Gujarat Civil Services (Classification & Recruitment) General Rules, 1967 is not applicable to the case of the petitioner, then is the provision prescribing upper age limit of 45 years as an eligibility criterion for the post of Civil Judge (J.D.) and Judicial Magistrate, First Class contained in Rule 5(3A)(a) of the Gujarat Judicial Service Recruitment Rules, 1961, unconstitutional? This is the principal question to be decided in this petition.2. The petitioner is serving as clerk in the establishment of High Court of Gujarat. He is M A., LL B. and thus he possessed educational qualifications for being appointed to the post of Civil Judge (J.D.) & Judicial Magistrate, First Class. Considering himself eligible for the post, he applied for the post in response to the advertisement dated November 1, 1989 which was issued by the Gujarat Public Service Commission and published in 'Gnjarat S...
Tag this Judgment!Nyamatkhan Jamiyatkhan Pathan Vs. State of Gujarat and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jun-23-1992
Reported in: AIR1994Guj64; (1993)2GLR1161
Ravani, J.1. The petitioner, who is a voter and resident of Kadi town, has challenged the legality and validity of notification dated December 10, 1991 by which the term of the councillors of the Kadi Municipality has been extended for a period of six months from December 12, 1991 to June 11, 1992 and of the notification dated June 10, 1992 by which the terra is further extended for a period of six months from June 12, 1992 to December 11, 1992 or up to the date of holding the first general meeting of the elected councillors whichever event occurs earlier. The petitioner has prayed for a declaration that the term of the councillors of the Municipality has expired on December 11, 1991 and also prayed that the respondents be directed to act in accordance with the provisions of S. 263A of the Gujarat Municipalities Act, 1963 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act').2. It is an undisputed position that the general election of Kadi Municipality took place on November 16, 1986 and the first me...
Tag this Judgment!Hiraben Jivanbhai Chaudhari Vs. R.C. Raval
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jun-22-1992
Reported in: (1993)1GLR66
S.D. Shah, J.1. These two petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India raise common questions of law based on almost common facts, and therefore, they are decided by this common judgment.2. The relevant facts giving rise to present petitions shortly stated are as under:(i) Both the petitioners applied to District Primary Education Committee, Mehsana District, for appointment to the post of Primary Teacher.(ii) The petitioner in Spl. C. A. No. 8496 of 1991 in her application stated that in the year 1984 she had obtained 711 marks out of 1000 marks in P. T. C. examination. She also stated in such an application that as per the procedure marks obtained in the subjects of Samuh Jivan, Buniyadi Udyog Yearly Work and Sahayak Udyog Yearly Work marks being 56, 66 & 33 respectively were required to be deducted and after such deduction she had obtained 560 marks. Such application was signed by the petitioner herself and is filled in by her in her own hand-writing.(iii) The peti...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »