Gujarat Court June 1999 Judgments
Dodia Dilipbhai Prabhatsinh Vs. Secretary
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jun-30-1999
Reported in: (2000)1GLR597
S.K. Keshote, J.1. The petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution praying for issuance of direction to the respondent to exhaust the select list and keep it alive which is prepared in pursuance of advertisement dated 28/2/1991 for making appointments on the post of Secretary, Gram Panchayat till the new select list is prepared. It is the case of the petitioner that he was placed by the Selection Committee in the merit list at Sr. No.16, which has been prepared in the year 1992. The petitioner stated that in Bharuch district also the process has been undertaken for making the selection on the post of Secretary, Gram Panchayat / Talati-cum-Mantri etc. For this, advertisement was published in the year 1990. The petitioner gives out for the alleged ground that as the State Government has put ban on appointments, he was not given appointment. It is the grievance of the petitioner that the State Government as well as the Appointing Authority has acted arbitrarily and exhibited a clear ...
Tag this Judgment!Laxmikant Mohanlal Dawda Vs. Servo Drives Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jun-30-1999
Reported in: (2000)IIILLJ1300Guj
D.C. Srivastava, J.1. The prayer of the petitioner in this writpetition is for quashing judgement and award dated12.1.1998 passed by the Labour Court vide Annexure-A tothe writ petition.2. The brief facts giving rise to this petition arethat the petitioner was working as machine shopSupervisor in the Machine Shop Department of therespondent Company since 21.3.1984 and was drawingmonthly salary of Rs. 1750/- inclusive of allallowances. He was appointed on a probation for sixmonths and was thereafter confirmed as regular employeeof the respondent and since March, 1984 he was working asconfirmed machine shop Supervisor. The respondentCompany dismissed the petitioner from service on20.6.1988. The grievance of the petitioner is that hewas dismissed without following due process of law andwithout following the provisions of the IndustrialDisputes Act, 1947 ( for short `Act'). According to himno show cause notice was issued to him and nodepartmental enquiry was conducted. Consequentlyaccordin...
Tag this Judgment!Nirav Khemshanker Vyas Vs. Commissioner of Police for City of Ahmedaba ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jun-28-1999
Reported in: (2001)1GLR422
R.M. Doshit, J.1. Heard the learned Advocates for the respective parties.2. The petitioners in all these three petitions, a Police Sub-Inspector and the contables, are co-accused in an offence registered as C. R. No. 380 of 1998 in Kagdapith Police Station for the offences punishable under Sees. 318, 506(2), 170 and 114 I.P.C. and under Section 25(1) of the Arms Act. Pursuant to the said offence, all the writ petitioners are detained under the orders of preventive detention dated 1st September, 1998 made by the Commissioner of Police, Ahmedabad under the powers conferred upon him under sub-section 1 of Section 3 of the Gujarat Prevention of Anti-Social Activities Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as, 'the Act'). All the three detention orders are based on the same evidence and common questions of law arise in all these three petitions. The petitions are, therefore, disposed of by this common judgment.3. The grounds of detention served upon the respective petitioner along with the orde...
Tag this Judgment!Ambalal S. Kumbhar and anr. Vs. Gujarat Co-operative Marketing Federat ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jun-28-1999
Reported in: (2000)IILLJ204Guj
C.K. Thakker, J. 1. This appeal is filed against the judgment and order passed by the learned single Judge in Special Civil Application No. 3561 of 1992 on February 10, 1998. 2. The appellants were employed by Gujarat Co-operative Marketing Federation Limited, ('Federation' for short). They were transferred. It is, however, an admitted fact that they did not obey orders of transfer passed against them and did not report for duty at the transferred station. They had made representations before the Federation. Though no proceedings were taken by the appellants and no interim relief against transfer was obtained from any competent Court, the appellants flouted the orders of transfer and did not resume duty at the place of transfer. The matter, however, did not end there. It was the allegation of the authority that with a view to create an evidence that they were present at Ahmedabad office, the appellants had made certain unauthorised endorsements and tampered with the record and thereby ...
Tag this Judgment!Parikshatbhai Madhavbhai Patel Vs. Divisional Controller, G.S.R.T.C., ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jun-25-1999
Reported in: (2000)1GLR65; (2000)ILLJ1054Guj
C.K. Thakker, J.1. This appeal is filed against the judgment and order passed by the learned single Judge in Special Civil Application No. 231 of February 10, 1998. The appellant was working as a Conductor bearing Badge No. 3669 with the Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation ('Corporation' for short). It was the case of the Corporation that when the appellant was on duty on Olpad-Punit route under Surat Depot, his bus was checked and it was found that though the appellant had collected amount of fare from certain passengers, he had not issued tickets nor he had closed way bill. He also refused to give statement when asked by the checking squad. A report was made and an inquiry was conducted against him wherein he was found guilty. He was therefore, dismissed from service with effect from November 14, 1995. 2. Being aggrieved by the order of dismissal the appellant approached the Labour Court and in Reference (LCS) No. 190 of 1996, the Labour Court, Surat partly allowed the Reference...
Tag this Judgment!Saiyed Sahejadmiya Sulemanmiya (Dead) Through Heirs Sahedabegum and or ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jun-24-1999
Reported in: AIR1999Guj295; (2000)4GLR818
J.R. Vora, J. 1. The present petitioners had filed a Civil Suit against the present respondents, who are the tenants of the plaintiffs, for the eviction of the premises in question. The suit was decreed by Small Cause Court. Against which the present respondents-defendants filed an appeal being Civil Appeal No. 86/86 before the Appellate Bench of Small Causes Court at Ahmedabad in which an application Exhibit 64 was moved by the appellants i.e. present respondents original defendants to adduce additional evidence under Order 41, Rule 27. 2. The trial Court decreed the suit mainly on the ground of sub-tenancy. As against that, the case of the defendants i.e. present respondents was that in the suit premises, they are carrying on business of partnership and the suit premises was not sublet to any third party. 3. The appellate Bench of the Small Cause Court, vide its order dated 25th April, 1996, allowed Exhibit 64 and the appellants i.e. the present defendants were permitted to lead addi...
Tag this Judgment!Parshottam Ramaji Rathod Vs. Dhirajlal Dharamshi Mistry
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jun-24-1999
Reported in: (1999)3GLR197
Y.B. Bhatt, J.1. This is a petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India wherein the petitioners challenge the order of the Collector rejecting their appeal, and the order of dismissal passed by the Additional Chief Secretary (Appeal) in a Revision arising from the aforesaid appeal.2. The relevant and pertinent facts leading upto the present petition are as under:2.1 The petitioners contend that the agricultural lands in question stood in the name of Ghela Khima who was a predecessor of the present petitioners at least upto the year 1964. Thereafter when the said Ghela Khima died, the lands were entered in the name of first respondent as the heir of the deceased Ghela Khima. The relevant entry whereby the name of the first respondent was entered is entry no.1182. The kachha entry was made on 22nd July 1968, and after following the due procedure, the said entry was certified on 17th September 1968. Thereafter in conformation of the aforesaid entry no.1182, the Deputy Collector...
Tag this Judgment!Manishkumar Maganlal Patel Vs. Municipal Corporation of City of the Su ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jun-23-1999
Reported in: AIR2000Guj42; (1999)3GLR2340
K.G. Balakrishnan, C.J.1. This is a public interest litigation initiated at the instance of a resident of Surat. Town planning scheme No. 4 was finalized by the 1st respondent-Corporation and as per the scheme, Varachha-Kamrej State Highway is to be widened and a portion of Original Plot No. 268, now vesting with the Railway, is required for the widening of the said road. The grievance of the petitioner is that the property required by the Corporation for implementing the Town Planning Scheme is not being handed over by the Railway to the Corporation and, therefore, the Scheme could not be implemented since last 15 years and it is prayed that this Court shall issue a writ of mandamus, directing the 1st respondent to implement the Town Planning scheme and that the 1st respondent shall further be directed to take action under Sections 68 and 69 of the Gujarat Town Planning and Urban Development Act, 1976.2. We heard the petitioner's counsel and the counsel for respondents 3 to 6. The cou...
Tag this Judgment!Bapubhai Somabhai Patel decd. thro' heirs and L.R. Vs. Vithalbhai Soma ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jun-23-1999
Reported in: (2000)2GLR104
J.R. Vora, J.1. The controversy in the matter revolves around whether a probate court can extend its scope of jurisdiction to embody and to encompass the inquiry of the title of the property bequeathed by a will. To decide this pivotal issue few facts in brief, of the matter are narrated as under.2. Vithalbhai Somabhai Patel filed an application in the court of 3rd Joint Civil Judge (S.D.) Kheda at Nadiad, being Civil Misc. Application No.66 of 1990, for obtaining a probate under section 276 of the Indian Succession Act, of a will alleged to have been executed by the deceased Somabhai Dwarkadas Patel. On issuing a notice original opponent Bapubhai Somabhai Patel appeared in the matter and now since he has expired he is represented by legal heirs who are present appellants. Bapubhai Somabhai Patel and Vithalbhai Somabhai Patel are the real brothers and the alleged will has been executed by Somabhai, father of above two brothers. Somabhai died at Nadiad on 28.4.74.3. It was the case of t...
Tag this Judgment!Prof. Hasmukh Harjivandas Patel Vs. State of Gujarat and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jun-23-1999
Reported in: [2000(84)FLR650]
S.K. Keshote, J.1. This writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution is filed by the petitioner, a retired Professor of H.K.Arts College, Ahmedabad. The petitioner retired from the services on attaining the age of superannuation in the year 1991. The College wherefrom he retired is undisputedly receiving grant-in-aid from the State of Gujarat. The Government framed pensionary scheme benefitting teaching and non teaching staff of non Government affiliated colleges and Universities vide Resolution dated 26th September 1989. It is not in dispute that as per the provisions as contained in the aforesaid scheme of pension, the petitioner has not opted for pensionary scheme. This pension scheme framed under the Resolution dated 26th September 1989 came to be amended vide Government Resolution dated 17th September 1991. The learned counsel for the respondents does not dispute that on 24th October 1991, the petitioner opted for pensionary scheme. It is also not in dispute that on 24.2.92...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »