Gujarat Court November 1999 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.
Ramsing Pandor and anr. Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Nov-24-1999
Reported in: (2000)2GLR784
M.R. Calla, J.1. Both the petitioners herein are members of Scheduled Tribe and both of them have filed this petition claiming promotion in the cadre of Class-II Officers of the Gujarat General State Service. The petitioner no.1 has been working as Shirestedar in the Office of the Settlement Commissioner under the Revenue Department since 26th July 1990 (by deemed date) and the petitioner no.2 has also been working as Shirestedar in the Office of the Settlement Commissioner, Revenue Department, since 21st January 1991. The petitioners have come with the case that 70 posts in the cadre of Class-II officers of Gujarat General State Service were sanctioned by the Finance Department for land records on 11th December 1995 and a select list was prepared. The appointments in the cadre of Class-II officers as above were required to be made by promotion on the basis of proved merit and efficiency. It is the common case of the parties that the names of both the petitioners were included in the s...
Sahid @ Said Ahemad S/O Mojkhan Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Nov-24-1999
Reported in: (2000)3GLR295
J.R. Vora, J.1. Learned advocate Mr.Shah on behalf of Mr.H.L.Patel, advocate for the applicant and Learned A.P.P. Mr.K.P.Raval were heard. This revision is filed by the petitioner against the order passed by Judicial Magistrate Fist Class at Navsari in Navsari Rural Police Station, C.R.No.80/99 rejecting the application of present petitioner for the custody of the muddamal truck No.RJ 02/G-4829.2. As per the petition, the facts of the case are that on 9.4.99 Police Sub Inspector L.C.B. Navsari detained one truck bearing Registration No.RJ-02/G-4829. There were three persons found and they were (1) Sahidkhan Ajaruddin (2) Zakirhussain Mojannav and (3) Bahadursing. On detailed investigation the truck was found loaded with Kherwood, which was banned by Indian Forest Act and hence against these persons an offence came to be registered under Sec.379, 468, 471 and 114 of the I.P.C. and under Sec. 26(1)(f) read with Sec. 33 of the Indian Forest Act, being C.R.No.80/99 at Navsari. On the same ...
State of Gujarat Vs. Pravinbhai Bhailalbhai Gor
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Nov-23-1999
Reported in: (2000)3GLR288
J.N. Bhatt, J.1. The short question which has been raised in this Letters Patent Appeal, challenging the judgment and order recorded by the learned single Judge on 1.9.98 in Special Civil Application No.1123 of 1998, whereby the the said petition filed by the respondent herein came to be allowed, is whether the ultimate conclusion recorded by the learned single Judge is in any way unjust, perverse or questionable or not ?2. In order to examine the aforesaid question, a few skeleton projection of facts may be narrated, at first. The appellant is State of Gujarat on behalf of whom a show cause notice dated 29th November, 1997 under rule 108(6) of the Gujarat Land Revenue Rules came to be issued, inter alia, contending that there was breach and infraction of the provisions of sections 43 and 63 of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948. One Mohanbhai had executed a will in favour of the respondent in this appeal on 15.2.86 and the executant of the Will Mohanbhai expired on 1....
Goswami Shri Vithalnathji Vrajbhushanlalji Maharaj Vs. Arunabetiji Pur ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Nov-22-1999
Reported in: (2000)3GLR2153
ORDER1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. This Civil Application is by one Goswamy Shri Vithalnathji Vrajbhushanlalji Maharaj seeking leave to appeal seeking leave to appeal against the order of award made by Second Joint District Judge Junagadh on 24-3-1995 on a reference made by the Special Land Acquisition Officer, Gujarat Housing Board, Ahmedabad in Land Reference Case No. 85 of 1992.2. The Special Land Acquisition Officer being in confused state of mind in determining as to whom the compensation for acquisition of land be awarded in respect of the property of Vishnav Haveli called Shri Madanmohanlalji-ni Haveli @ Moti Haveli, at Junagadh which is admittedly of a public trust. Before making reference the Land Acquisition officer tried to seek guidance from Joint Charity Commissioner to determine the question of person interested to whom compensated to be granted as the property was a trust property. In reference two persons were arrayed as parties (1) Arunabetiji Purshottamlal...
Kishor Naginbhai Parmar Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Nov-22-1999
Reported in: 2000CriLJ3195; (2000)4GLR460
A.L. Dave, J.1. The Commissioner of Police, Vadodara city, Vadodara passed an order on 12th February 1999 in exercise of powers under sub-section [2] of section 3 of the Gujarat Prevention of Anti Social Activities Act, 1985 [for short, `the PASA Act'] detaining the petitioner under the PASA Act. The grounds of detention reveal that the detaining authority took into consideration two of the offences registered against the petitioner. The authority also considered that the petitioner acts in a high-handed manner and has formed a gang for pursuing his illegal activities. The authority verified the statements of two witnesses whose identity has not been disclosed in exercise of powers u/s 9[2] of the PASA Act and recorded a subjective satisfaction that the petitioner is engaged in illegal and antisocial activities endangering the life and property of public and people have fear and apprehension from him, as a result of which, people are not prepared to come forward and lodge a complaint a...
Crompton Greaves Ltd. and anr. Vs. State of Gujarat and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Nov-18-1999
Reported in: [2000]120STC510(Guj)
B.C. Patel, J.1. A common question is raised in all these petitions ; Hence all these petitions are disposed of by this common judgment.2. In these present petitions Crompton Greaves Limited and its Branch Accountant--Mr. Prakash Ramkrishna Shembekar--petitioners are challenging the notice of reassessment, dated July 20, 1996 issued Under Section 44 of the Gujarat Sales Tax Act, 1969 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') on the ground that the deduction with regard to sales made against certificate in form 17A prescribed under Rule 24(2A) of the Gujarat Sales Tax Rules, 1970 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules') read with Section 13(1) of the Act were erroneously allowed in the assessment made Under Section 41. The petitioners contended that the petitioners had disclosed the sales effected against certificate in form 17A. Such sales were subject-matter of investigation by the sales tax authorities who issued show cause notice which was replied by the petitioners. The petitioners di...
Heir of Rupabhai Kuberbhai Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Nov-18-1999
Reported in: (2001)4GLR3695
1. These four appeals arise out of common award made by the court in Land Acquisition Reference No. 5/81 and 10/81 by the District Court of Panchmahal at Godhra by order dated 27-4-1983. First Appeals Nos. 56/84 and 57/84 are preferred by State of Gujarat against the enhancement of compensation by the reference Court, whereas Appeals Nos. 1156/84 and Appeal No. 194/85 are by the respective claimants of two Land Acquisition Reference Cases referred to the extent they were dissatisfied. As the common question of law and facts are involved we propose to decide all the appeals by common judgment.2. The Cross Appeals Nos. 56 and 1156 of 1984 arise out of L.A.R Cases Nos. 5/81 and Appeals No. 57/84 and 194/85 arise out of L.A.R. Case No. 10/81. The notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act was published in Government Gazette dated 9-2-1978 for the acquisition of the lands in question. The lands in question are Survey Number 708 admeasuring 1 Hectare 20 Are and 39 Sq. Mts. and ...
Smt. Sharada Srikantaiah Vs. Gujarat Electricity Board
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Nov-18-1999
Reported in: (2000)2GLR218
S.K. Keshote, J.1. The widow of late Shri Srikantaiah B.V., filed this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and praying for direction to the respondents to pay her the arrears of salary due to her late husband on the basis of confirmation of the selection grade by applying nine-years rule.2. Second prayer has been made to pay her the arrears of salary as if her late husband completed the period of 9 years on the post of Superintendent Engineer between the years 1965 and 1974.3. The facts of the case, which are not in dispute are as under.4. The late husband of the petitioner was promoted as Deputy Superintending Engineer on 16/07/65. Though he was holding specific post of Deputy Superintending Engineer but he was posted against the post of Superintending Engineer and to discharge duties as Superintending Engineer he was given the charge allowance. This period is from 16/5/1965 to 28/02/1971. The late husband of the petitioner was promoted to the post of Superintenden...
Dr. Ambedkar Dalit Parishad and ors. Vs. Ahmedabad Textile Industries ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Nov-18-1999
Reported in: (2000)4GLR558
S.K. Keshote, J.1. The petitioners, by this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, are praying for directions to the respondent No. 1 by a writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the respondent No. 1 to follow the reservation policy by making appointments 15% from candidates belonging to the Schedule Caste and 7.5% from candidates belonging to Schedule Tribe. It has further been prayed that respondent No. 1 may be restrained from making any appointment to the post of any of the categories mentioned in Annexure=C till the quota of 15% for Schedule Caste and 7.5% of Schedule Tribe is not completed in each category. Second prayer has been made for directions to the respondents No. 2 and 3 to stop the financial assistance and grant to the respondent No. 1 as they have failed to comply with the directions issued by the Government of India as per Annexure=A. As usual, prayer has been made for grant of interim relief.2. In para-2 of...
Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Harjivandas Juthabhai Zaveri
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Nov-17-1999
Reported in: (2000)160CTR(Guj)277; [2000]245ITR305(Guj)
B.C. Patel, J.1. Admit. Mr. Mehta appears for respondent and waives service of notice of admission. At the request of learned advocates appearing for parties matter is taken up for final disposal today. 2. This appeal is preferred under s. 260A of the IT Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), against the order made by the Tribunal, Ahmedabad, on 15th December, 1998, confirming the order passed by the CIT(A). 3. It transpires from the record that on 11th June, 1986, a survey operation was carried out by the Revenue under the provisions contained under s. 133A of the Act at the business premises of the assessee and two diaries were seized wherein sales were recorded for a period of seven months. It is on the basis of these diaries the Revenue was of the view that the turnover was of Rs. 65,11,756. It transpired that profit at the rate of 14 per cent was considered, and the assessee declared extra income of Rs. 22 lacs in respect of endorsement mentioned in the order. The Reven...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »