Gujarat Court July 1999 Judgments
Union of India (Uoi) Vs. Pal Singh
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-30-1999
Reported in: (2000)GLR61
1. Being aggrieved by the judgment and order passed by the learned Single Judge in SCA 3650 of 1998 on July 23, 1998, the present appeal is filed by the Union of India and others.2. Respondent was the original petitioner. He preferred Special Civil Application No. 3650 of 1998 for appropriate writ, order or direction in terms of para 11 which reads as under:'11. A. Be pleased to allow this petition and be pleased to quash and set aside the orders dated 22.12.1994 and 8.7.1995 declaring the same illegal and void. B. Be pleased to direct the respondent to pass the order of promotion prior to the date of promotion of junior to the post of A.S.I. and to pay all consequential benefits with arrears in accordance of law and be pleased to allow the seniority notionally, pending admission and final disposal of this petition. C . Be pleased to direct the respondent not to withhold the next due promotion of S.I. which is under consideration before No.2 and be pleased to direct respondent No.2 to ...
Tag this Judgment!Raimal Budharam Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-30-1999
Reported in: 2000CriLJ2707
A.L. Dave, J.1. Heard Mr.Parmar, learned advocate for the petitioner, Mr.J.M.Panchal for respondents No.2 & 3 and Mr.Maulin Rawal for respondent No.1 & 5.2. Mr.Parmar's case is that respondent No.2 has falsely implicated the petitioner in a complaint lodged by the respondent No.2 before the learned JMFC, Ankleshwar vide Pre-Inquiry Case No:90/98 under Section 406, 417 and 420 of IPC alleging that the petitioner cheated the complainant by inducing him by parting with the Jeep car No : RJ-21/C 4227, Engine No : D.W.110936. In fact, the petitioner is the owner of the vehicle. He has purchased this vehicle by paying cash to the agent of the complaint. The registration is also stand in his name. The complaint is false and frivolous. The ingredients for the allegations levelled are not made out. It is civil transactions and therefore complaint may be quashed. Mr.Parmar has also produced on record one affidavit sworn in by the petitioner on 29th June, 1999 before a Notary at Merta City (Nagau...
Tag this Judgment!High Court of Gujarat Vs. K.K. Parmar
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-29-1999
Reported in: (1999)3GLR496
J.M. Panchal, J.1. All these appeals filed under Clause-15 of the Letters Patent are directed against common judgment rendered by the learned Single Judge in Special Civil Application No. 351/98 and Special Civil Application No. 1298/98, by which order of promotion dated January 31, 1998 in favour of respondents no. 30 to 43 in Letters Patent Appeal No. 1426/98 is set aside and the High Court of Gujarat is directed to evolve fresh process of selection for the post of section officers in conformity with Rule-47 of the High Court of Gujarat (Recruitment and Conditions of Service of Staff) Rules, 1992, giving due weight age to all the three components of determination of merits as indicated in the judgment. 2. Letters Patent Appeal No. 1426/98 is filed by the High Court of Gujarat against judgment rendered in Special Civil Application No. 351/98, which was filed by those Assistants who had cleared written test, but were not called for oral interview; whereas Letters Patent Appeal No. 1427...
Tag this Judgment!Ricoh India Ltd. Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-28-1999
Reported in: 1999(66)ECC534; 2000(125)ELT469(Guj)
C.K. Thakker, J.1. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that this petition will be treated as petition in Stay Order No. 391 of 1999. He further states that the petitioner will file one page separate petition in respect of Stay Order No. 392 of 1999 on or before 2nd August, 1999. 2. Rule. Mr. Jayant Patel, learned counsel appears and waives service of Rule for respondents. In the facts and circumstances of the case, the matter is taken up for final hearing today. 3. This petition is filed for an appropriate writ, direction or order quashing and setting aside Stay Order No. 391 of 1999 (and Stay Order No. 392 of 1999) both dated 18th March, 1999. 4. The case of the petitioner was that it was a public limited company engaged in the business of manufacturing plain paper copiers. It has factory at Gandhinagar. A show cause notice was issued to the petitioner to pay excise duty contrary to law and though he was entitled to certain benefits on the basis of the law laid down by various H...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. M. Sivakami Vs. Bharat Ginning and Oil Mill Factory
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-28-1999
Reported in: 2000CriLJ1043
A.L. Dave, J.1. Rule. Mr. Mehul Shah, the learned advocate for respondent No. 1, Mr. Maulin Rawal, learned APP and Mr. S. P. Dave, learned APP for respondent No. 2 waive service of rule. This group of petitions arises out of the order that came to be passed by the learned JMFC, Wankaner in respect of the application given by the present petitioner to quash the proceeding's and discharge the petitioner who is one of the accused persons in the respective complaints, which came to be filed by respondent No. 1herein, viz., Bharat Ginning and Oil Mill Factory and Jalaram Industries in the respective petitions under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. The said application was rejected and hence the petition.2. The quashing of the complaint is sought in exercise of powers under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code by the original accused No. 5--the present petitioner on the ground that she is only a director of the accused-company and not involved in the day-to-day affa...
Tag this Judgment!H.R. Mishra Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-28-1999
Reported in: (2000)4GLR580
1. Both these petitions arise out of the removal order of the petitioner. Hence, both these petitions are being disposed of by this common judgment.2. In Special Civil Application No. 1104/90 the petitioner has prayed for quashing the order of removal dated 9-2-1990 and for a direction to the respondents to reinstate the petitioner in the service with back wages and all other consequential benefits. While other petition being Special Civil Application No.1188 of 1986 was filed by the petitioner for quashing the order of removal dated 27-6-1986 and for restraining the respondents from removing the petitioner from service pursuant to the aforesaid order.3. The petitioner was working as a Section Officer in the Home Department as Gazetted Class-II Officer. He was placed under suspension by the resolution dated 26-5-1986 and a regular departmental inquiry was directed to be held against the petitioner on the allegations that an application dated 5-3-81 was made by Smt. Rajendra Kaur wife o...
Tag this Judgment!Pruthvish B. Dave Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-27-1999
Reported in: 2000CriLJ122
A.L. Dave, J.1. This petition challenges the complaint lodged before the JMFC, Anand under Section 138 of the Negotiable instrument Act registered vide No : 6597/97 lodged by the respondent No.2 herein.2. The short say of the complainant is that the present petitioner had issued a cheque No : 516341 for Rs.30,000/- dated 12th march, 19997 drawn on Sardarganj Mercantile Co-Op Bank, Anand bearing in favour of Shree Laxmi Credit Co-Op Society Ltd. The said cheque was presented for encashment through Charotar Nagrik Charotar Nagrik Co-Op Bank, Anand and the same was dishonoured for want of balance in the account. A notice was therefore issued by the complainant to the petitioner which was duly served. Even despite that notice, there was no response from the petitioner. Thereafter, the cheque was again presented on 5-6-1997 for encashment and the same was again dishonoured with an endorsement of insufficient balance in the account. The intimation was given to the complainant on 6-6-1997 and...
Tag this Judgment!Nandu K. Patel and ors. Vs. State of Gujarat and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-26-1999
Reported in: (2000)GLR234
ORDER1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties. 2. The petitioners in all 5 in number, clerks in Lower Division of the Subordinate Secretariat Service of the State of Gujarat filed this Special Civil Application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and prayed for declaration to be made that they are entitled to the seniority in the Secretariat services as clerk on the basis of their initial appointment on their selection by the Gujarat Public Service Commission on the same basis as the Typists were given. Further prayer has been made to direct the respondent No. 1 to give them deemed date of promotion as Assistants from the date on which their juniors were promoted as Assistants. The last prayer is made for direction to the respondents to revise the seniority of the petitioners and other clerks viz-a-viz typists on the basis of the date of their appointments and the common seniority list be prepare on the said basis. As usual, the prayer has also been made for the grant of int...
Tag this Judgment!Bikhumiya Sarfumiya Malek Vs. Ddo Mehsana
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-26-1999
Reported in: (1999)3GLR811
1. Petitioner herein was an elected Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat Jethlaj, Taluka Kalol, District - Mehsana from 23.2.92 to 22.2.97. He contested the election for the office of the Sarpanch for the second time and was again elected for a period of 5 years for the term commencing on 2.3.97. The petitioner has come with the case that one Ajit Mana Parmar had contested the said election against the petitioner for the office of the Sarpanch in 1997 but he lost against the petitioner. It is also the case of the petitioner that said Ajit Mana Parmar was also a member of the Panchayat in the earlier term and on the complaint filed by the petitioner he had been placed under suspension in the earlier term on the allegations of misappropriation and irregularities. It is further alleged that brother of complainant Ajit Mana Parmar was also Secretary of the Dudh Utpadak Mandal wherein the petitioner was also a member of the said Committee.There also he had brought out the irregularities of the said S...
Tag this Judgment!Ramabhai Popatbhai Bhangi Vs. State of Gujarat and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-26-1999
Reported in: (2000)1GLR437
S.K. Keshote, J.1. The petitioners, confirmed (Retd.) employees of the respondent No.2-Municipality praying for issuance of the directions to the respondent to grant them pensionary benefits.2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the petitioners had put in more than 30 years of services in the office of the respondent No.2 as sweeper (safai kamdar). The petitioners were about to reach the age of superannuation, but before reaching of the said age as they were not physically fit to carry on work of safai kamdar and had in fact became weak to do such work they have submitted their resignation from services. They made representations to all the concerned officers from time to time for giving them the pension benefits. They filed special civil application No.4362/92 before this court, which came to be decided on 29/12/93 in terms directing the respondents to consider the case of the petitioners sympathetically with regard to their claim of pensionary benefits. Under the order dtd...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »