Gujarat Court November 1997 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.
Dipakkumar Bhanuprasad Upadhyay Vs. State of Gujarat and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Nov-28-1997
Reported in: 1998CriLJ1933; (1998)1GLR1
R.K. Abichandani, J.1. The petitioner who is undergoing the sentence of imprisonment for life for the offence under Section 302 of the I.P.C., for which he was convicted and sentenced on 5th April, 1996 in Sessions Case No. 49 of 1985 by the learned Sessions Judge, Panchmahal at Godhra, has presented this petition, seeking benefit of the order of His Excellency the Governor of Gujarat dated 14th August, 1997, under which remission to the extent indicated therein, was granted to the prisoners convicted for life imprisonment under Section 302, I.P.C., falling in the categories mentioned in the said order.2. When this petition came up for hearing before one of us (Mr. Justice M. S. Parikh), as it appeared that the question, whether the periods of furlough and parole enjoyed by a prisoner can be counted for working out the period of 10 years' imprisonment specified in the said remission order, was of public importance affecting a seizable number of prisoners, the matter was directed to be ...
Rich Paints Ltd. Vs. Vadodara Stock Exchange Ltd. and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Nov-25-1997
Reported in: [1998]92CompCas282(Guj)
ORDER19. In the result, the petition is hereby dismissed. Notice is discharged with costs. The amounts of costs are quantified at Rs. 5,000 (rupees five thousand only) for respondent No. 3 and another sum of Rs. 5,000 (rupees five thousand only) for respondents Nos. 4 to 6 in one set. The costs shall be paid within one month from today. After the judgment is pronounced, Mr. Soparkar, learned counsel for the petitioner, prays for stay of this judgment. All that this court has done is to dismiss this petition against the order of the appellate authority under section 22 of the Securities Contracts (Regulation) Act, 1956. During the pendency of the petition, there was no ad interim or interim stay against operation of the said order of the appellate authority nor was there any other interim or ad-interim relief granted in favour of the petitioner. In this view of the matter, the request is rejected....
Dr. Vijaysinh B. Dodia Vs. Saurashtra University
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Nov-25-1997
Reported in: (1998)2GLR1297
M.S. Shah, J.1. This petition raises an important and interesting question of interpretation of the provisions of the Saurashtra University Act, 1965 particularly the provisions of Section 25(2) thereof, viz., whether the Dean of a Faculty, who has held the office for two successive terms of 3 years each becomes ineligible for reelection for the third term. Section 25 reads as under:25. (1) There shall be a Dean of each Faculty who shall be elected by the Faculty from amongst its members, provided that he is a member of the Senate and also a teacher or a Principal.(2) The Dean shall hold office for a term of three years and shall be eligible for reelection/or a further term of three years.2. The petitioner was elected as the Dean of Medical Faculty of Saurashtra University with effect from May 23, 1991. The said first term came to an end on May 22, 1994. The petitioner was elected as the Dean of Medical Faculty for a further term of three years from May 23, 1994 to May 22, 1997. The pe...
Bharat Co-operative Bank Ltd. and anr. Vs. K.L. Baria, Judge, Labour C ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Nov-20-1997
Reported in: (1998)1GLR850
H.L. Gokhale, J.1. These two writ petitions are filed to invoke the writ jurisdiction of this Court under Arts. 226 and 227 of Constitution to challenge orders passed by the Industrial Court at Vadodara. These petitions raise the following question :- When an employer chooses to dismiss or discharge his employees without giving them an opportunity of being heard and when the employees challenge that order by raising a dispute in the Labour Court, whether during the pendency of that proceeding, the employees would be entitled to receive an amount equivalent to the subsistence allowance. 2. The facts leading to these two petitions are as follows :- The first petitioner in both these petitions is a Co-operative Bank operating in the local area of Vadodra city. The second and petitioner is its Manager. The relationship between the first petitioner Bank and its employees is governed under the Bombay Industrial Relations Act, 1946 (hereinafter referred to as 'B.I.R. Act, 1946'). 3. The respo...
Maitrinagar Employees' (Karmachari) Co-op. Housing Society Ltd. Vs. St ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Nov-20-1997
Reported in: (1999)2GLR995
H.L. Gokhale, J.1. This petition filed by the petitioner-Housing Society under Article 226 of the Constitution of India raises the question as to whether the decisions of the respondent No. 1 - State of Gujarat and respondent No. 2 (Additional Collector, Rajkot) to allot certain urban vacant lands in Rajkot to respondent Nos. 3 to 5 Housing Societies ignoring the claim of the petitioner-society, are unfair, unjust and illegal and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India and consequently whether the said decisions should be interfered with and if so what directions are required.2. The petitioner is a registered Co-operative Housing Society of Government employees having 50 members. It applied for allotment of land bearing Survey No. 440 in the City of Rajkot in the year 1990 under Section 23 of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976. That request was not entertained since the particular survey number was under litigation. The petitioner-society thereafter made ano...
Aditi Surendra Modi Vs. B.J. Medical College and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Nov-19-1997
Reported in: AIR1998Guj104; (1998)2GLR973
S.D. Pandit, J.1. Aditi Surendra Modi has filed the present petition mainly for a direction directing the respondents to give admission to the petitioner in the Second Term of First year MBBS course at respondent No. 1 medical college and other consequential reliefs. The petitioner had appeared for Higher Secondary Certificate Examination (HSC Examination) held in the month of March/April, 1996. When the result of the said examination was declared it was found that she secured 471 out of 650 marks and she had secured 404 out of 450 marks in science and mathematics. She had applied for verification of her marks. By the time admission for MBBS course were also going on. She applied for admission in the MBBS course before the authority. The authority took a decision that those students who had secured 405 and above marks in science and mathematical subjects were to be given admission in B. J. Medical College, Ahmedabad and those students who have secured less than that were to be admitted...
Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. Vs. Parmar Jadavji Dhanjibhai and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Nov-19-1997
Reported in: (1998)2GLR1009
S.D. Pandit, J. 1. These two appeals are preferred against the judgment of the learned single Judge in S.C.A. No. 1921 of 1996 decided on 8-8-1996. As the respondent in both these appeals is one and the same and as the respondent-petitioner has sought relief jointly against both the appellants before This Court and as both the appeals are preferred against one and the same judgment, we are disposing of both these appeals by this common judgment. The respondent Parmar Jadavji Dhanaji (hereinafter referred to as respondent-Parmar) is an unemployed citizen of India and is holding a diploma in Mechanical Engineering and T.V. Engineering. He applied for retail dealership in petroleum products of the Indian Oil Corporation ('I.O.C.' for short) the appellant in L.P.A. No. 1056 of 1996 in pursuance of its advertisement dated 24-8-1976. The appellant I.O.C. on 15-11-1976 selected the petitioner for putting up a retail outlet by its letter dated 15-11-1976 for putting up a retail outlet at Kotha...
Neela J. Shah Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Nov-18-1997
Reported in: 1998CriLJ2228; (1998)2GLR720
ORDERN.N. Mathur, J.1. For the reasons to be recorded later on, this application is partly allowed with a view to enable the petitioner to approach the appropriate Court for anticipatory bail or regular bail in the State of Maharashtra. It is directed that the petitioner shall not be arrested for a period of 15 days from today i.e. upto 2nd December, 1997.2. Rule made absolute to the aforesaid extent. Direct Service is permitted....
Suryakant C. Shah Vs. State of Gujarat and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Nov-17-1997
Reported in: (1998)3GLR2680
S.K. Keshote, J. 1. The petitioner, a retired Assistant Controller, Civil Supplies Department, filed this petition and challenged the order of the respondent State dated 21-7-1988 (Annexure-A) under which in exercise of powers conferred under Rule 161 of the Bombay Civil Services Rules, 1959, the petitioner was ordered to be prematurely retired from the Government service with effect from the date of delivery of the said order. 2. The petitioner filed an application being Civil Application No. 7055 of 1997 for amending the Special Civil Application. The said Civil Application has been decided by the Court on 8-8-1997 and the petitioner has been permitted to amend this Special Civil Application. However, amendment in the Special Civil Application has not been carried out. Still, the facts which are sought to be pleaded by the amendment in the Special Civil Application are taken into consideration. 3. The learned Counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioner has unblemished an...
Kisanbhai Chindubhai Sonar Vs. K.C. Sagar and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Nov-17-1997
Reported in: AIR1998Guj105
ORDER1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.2. The facts which are not in dispute are as under:(i) The plot in question admeasuring 16 x 50 ft. was allotted by the Government to one Shri Tanaji Tikaram and the petitioner had purchased the said plot from the said person for consideration of Rs. 850/-. (ii) The District Collector, Dang, vide its order dated 23rd May 1979, was pleased to regularise the land in dispute in favour of the petitioner. The land was granted for three years subject to the clause of renewal application to be submitted before six months of the date of expiry of the period of lease. (iii) The grant was further under condition of not raising construction on the land without prior permission of the Collector of the District. (v) The petitioner is a non-Dangi and the land under the scheme framed by the Government was to be allotted only to Dangis. (v) The application for renewal of lease was not submitted within prescribed time. (vi) The petitioner raised constructio...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »