Gujarat Court August 1999 Judgments
Surubhai Govubha Jadeja Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-31-1999
Reported in: (2000)4GLR3110
J.N. Bhatt, J.1. By this L.P.A., the appellant-original petitioner has assailed the judgment dtd.26.7.99, recorded by the Learned Single Judge, in Spl.C.A.No.2212/99, whereby, the petition of the original petitioner under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India challenging the detention order dtd. 6.3.99, came to be dismissed.2. The appellant original petitioner was detained by the order of Preventive Detention passed on 6th March 1999 by the State Government, under Sec. 3 of the Prevention of Black Marketing and Maintenance of Supply of Essential Commodities Act, 1980 ( 'Act' for short).3. The appellant, herein, was a manager in Jay Ambe Petroleum Services, situated, at Kalol, Dist. Mehsana and upon the inspection, the stock of the diesel maintained by the patrol pump was noticed to be adulterated, which upon analysis was found to be adulterated by the Control Kerosene which was supposed to be distributed to the domestic users at the concessional or subsidised price. It was alleged that...
Tag this Judgment!Felisia G. Crasto Vs. Director of Education
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-30-1999
Reported in: (2000)1GLR674
S.K. Keshote, J.1. The petitioner, a non-teaching employee of the respondents No.3 and 4, since retired, filed this petition in this court and praying for the following reliefs:(A) protect the petitioner's service and restrain the respondents No. to 4 from terminating her services with the respondent No.4 institution, pending hearing and final disposal of this petition; (B) direct the respondents No.1 and 2 not to make any recovery from the petitioner, pending hearing and final disposal of this petition; (C) direct the respondents Nos. 1 and 2 to fix the petitioner's date of recognised service as of 12-6-1967 and to calculate all benefits from this date; (D) to direct the respondents No.1 and 2 to calculate and pay the increments due to the petitioner continuously from 1-1-1973; (E) specifically direct the respondent No.2 to allow and pay the increments due to the petitioner since 26-6-1980, pending hearing and final disposal of this petition; (F) direct the respondents Nos. 1 and 2 to...
Tag this Judgment!Haribhai J. Bharvad Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-30-1999
Reported in: (2000)4GLR361
S.K. Keshote, J.1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.2. The petitioner by this petition challenges the order of the respondents dated 8.7.1988 Annexure-E under which his services were terminated on the ground that he failed to pass departmental examination as provided under the Gujarat Non-Secretariat Clerks and Clerk-cum-Typist (Training and Examination) Rules, 1970 (hereinafter referred as the Rules) within permissible attempts i.e. 3 regular plus 2 additional.3. I find from the Rules that candidates who were appointed as Junior Clerks has to pass Departmental examination as provided thereunder within 3 attempts. In the special circumstances 2 additional attempts could have been given and those have also been given, but the petitioner fail to pass examination, hence his services were brought to an end under the impugned order.4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that termination of the services of the petitioner at that point of time may not be illegal, but the petitio...
Tag this Judgment!Amc Vs. Bharatbhai Gordhanbhai Patel
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-25-1999
Reported in: (2000)GLR615
D.C. Srivastava, J.1. These two cases are proposed to be disposed of by common judgment.2. The aforesaid Special Civil Application has been filed by the Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation challenging the award, dated 18.12.1998 passed by the Labour Court, Ahmedabad in Reference (LCA) No.1598/88 vide annexure 'B' to the writ petition, and has prayed that the said award be quashed.3. The brief facts giving rise to this petition are as under:The respondent was an employee of the petitioner as Care Taker of the Rest House owned by the petitioner and situated opposite S.T.Bus stop, Astodia, Ahmedabad. He was working since 9 years. On 30.4.1985 his duty hours were from 8.00 p.m. to 8.00 a.m. One Babubhai C.Maheria, a Junior Clerk was on duty during noon time. The respondent was not on duty in the noon time in the Rest House. He came to the Rest House in a drunken state with a lady named Manekben Kantilal. He reached the Rest House and directed the Junior Clerk Babubhai C.Maheria to open the Roo...
Tag this Judgment!Rajvirsinh K. Rathod and ors. Vs. Principal D.M. Patel, Shree K.N. Sha ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-24-1999
Reported in: AIR2000Guj60
ORDERM.R. Calla, J.1. Rule in this case was issuedon 21 -6-99 after notice to the respondents.Since the matter relates to the admission ofstudents in 11th Standard and the academic session has already started, the matter was taken up for final hearing righttoday. The affidavit in reply dt. 9-7-99 hasbeen filed on behalf of respondents Nos. 2and 3 under the signatures of the DistrictEducation Officer, District Sabarkantha,Himatnagar. Affidavit-in-rejoinder dt. 13-7-99 thereto has been filed. No one has appeared on behalf of respondent No. 1 and noreply has been filed by respondent No. 1 i.e.concerned School.2. The petitioners herein seven in number were studying in Shri K. N. Shah Modasa Village High School at Modasa, DistrictSabarkantha. The said School is a Government aided School. While studying in the aforesaid School they appeared in the public examination of 10th standard held by the Gujarat Secondary Education Board in 1999 and have passed the same Examination. They are desirous ...
Tag this Judgment!Cadbury India Limited Vs. Sm Dyechem Limited
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-24-1999
Reported in: (2000)1GLR680
A.M. Kapadia, J.1. Appellant, Cadbury India Limited, having lost the legal battle against respondent SM Dyechem Limited in the lower Court, has knocked the doors of this Court by filing this Appeal from Order with the aids of the provisions of Order 43 Rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Code ('the Code' for short), whereunder it challenged the order dated 23.3.1999 recorded below Ex.6 - Notice of Motion - in Civil Suit No. 852 of 1999, by learned Chamber Judge, City Civil Court, Ahmedabad, whereby he granted injunction against the appellant in terms of para 21(A) & (B) of the application restraining the appellant from infringing the respondent's trade mark 'PIKNIK' which is registered under the provisions of Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 ('the Act' for short hereinafter) vide trade mark No. 505532 and to pass off the appellant's goods i.e., chocolate, chocolate preparations, wafer biscuits and/or the like goods as and for that of respondents, till the disposal of the suit.2. Present...
Tag this Judgment!Harsukhbhai Gordhanbhai Hadvani Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-23-1999
Reported in: AIR2000Guj188; (2000)1GLR32
ORDERM.R. Calla, J.1. Special Civil Application No. 546/99 and Civil Application No. 7349/99 in Special Civil Application No. 8744/98 were listed today in the board. It was submitted on behalf of the parties that the Civil Application No. 7349/99 has been filed in the main Special Civil Application No. 8744/98, which is already on the board of final hearing at Sr. No. 35 and Rule has already been issued in Special Civil Application No. 5546/ 99 on 29-7-1999 and, therefore, all these matters may be taken up together. I find that in Special Civil Application No. 8744/98 the Court has passed an order on 4-2-99 that the matter may be listed for final hearing on 23-2-99. In the facts and circumstances of this case and on the request of both the sides, these matters are taken up for final hearing right today. Facts relating to Special Civil Application No. 8744/98-The petitioner herein has come with the case that he was elected to the office of the Sarpanch of Timbawadi Gram Panchayat, Timba...
Tag this Judgment!Gujarat Steeel Tube Co. Ltd. Vs. Virchandbhai Bhogilal Shah
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-20-1999
Reported in: (2000)1GLR166
J.R. Vora, J.1.The only controversy emerges in the matter :Whether the arrears of rent due to the landlords would come within the sweep of Sec. 22(1) of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 or not?2. Few facts of the matter are - the present respondents being landlords filed a Civil Suit in the Small Causes Court at Ahmedabad being HRP Suit No. 875 of 1997 for the eviction of rented premises against the present applicant which is a Company incorporated under the Indian Companies Act. In the above suit, the plaintiffs i.e. present opponents filed an Application at Exh. 37 under Sec. 11(4) of the Bombay Rent Act for directing the tenant - present applicant to deposit the amount of the arrears of rent from 1st April, 1997 upto the date it had fallen due, amounting to Rs. 1,01,250/and that directing the tenant to deposit Rs. 6,750/- regularly in each month for use and occupation of the rented premises. This application was vehemently opposed by the present applicant...
Tag this Judgment!Vishnuprasad C. Darji Vs. Registrar
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-20-1999
Reported in: (2000)2GLR1138
M.S. Shah, J.1. In this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, two Private Secretaries (English Stenographer Grade-I) Class II on the establishment of this Court have challenged the communication dated 6.9.1993 (Annexure 'F' colly.) from the Deputy Registrar, on behalf of the High Court of Gujarat to the petitioners rejecting their application for grant of higher grade scale. The communication states that the Deputy Registrar was directed to state that the petitioners cannot be granted higher grade scale with effect from 1.8.1993 as it is not admissible under the Rules and hence the petitioners' applications were not entertained.2. Petitioner No. 1 was appointed as a Section Writer in the Small Causes Court and worked as such between 1.8.1978 and 17.1.1980. Thereafter, he came to be appointed as Stenographer Grade III with effect from 18.1.1980 in the District Court, Baroda where he worked as such till 31.5.1980. Petitioner No. 1 was thereafter appointed as Stenographer Grade ...
Tag this Judgment!Pradeepkumar Chauhan Vs. Registrar
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-20-1999
Reported in: (2000)2GLR159
M.R. Calla, J.'1. Heard. 2. The petitioner prays in the petition that the respondent Universities be directed to give admission to the petitioner in LL.M. Course. A further prayer is made for declaration that the petitioner is eligible for such admission. 3. In the facts and circumstances of the case and having taken into account the submissions of both the sides, it will be in the interest of justice if this Court passes following order: The respondent University is directed to reconsider through its appropriate authority its decision on the equivalence of the examination of LL.B. passed by the petitioner on the basis of which he claims admission to the Post Graduate Course of LL.M. of the Gujarat University. Such decision shall be taken by the appropriate authority of the University as aforesaid within six weeks from the date of receipt of this direction. The concerned authority of the University will intimate its decision to the petitioner immediately. 3. Rule made absolute in the a...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »