Gujarat Court April 2000 Judgments
R.J. Parikh Vs. State of Gujarat and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Apr-28-2000
Reported in: (2000)4GLR223
ORDER1. By this petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has sought order of this Court directing the respondent authorities to determine the pension of the petitioner on the basis of the length of service of the petitioner according to the pension rules made by the respondent No. 1 and further to direct them to regularly pay the same including the arrears from 1st March, 1980, inter alia, contending that he is entitled to pension and his lawful claim is not accepted by the respondents. 2. The petitioner joined the services with the Government of Saurashtra on 1st July, 1951 as Welfare Organiser. Upon reorganisation of the State of Saurashtra, he was allocated to the Government of Bombay and upon bifurcation of Bilingual of Bombay State, the petitioner was again allocated to the State of Gujarat. That is how, he claims to be a Government servant as Welfare Organiser till 31st March, 1964. 3. Upon creation of Gujarat Labour Welfare Board, the petitioner came ...
Tag this Judgment!Lodha Mansing Harpal Vs. State of Gujarat and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Apr-28-2000
Reported in: AIR2001Guj15
ORDERR.R. Tripathi, J.1. The present petition is filed by the petitioner against an order dated 27-4-1987 passed by the Secretary (Appeal), Revenue Department, Government of Gujarat (Annexure 'D'). It is the contention of Mr. Amin, the learned Advocate for the petitioner that the said order is passed on the basis that the petitioner had not mentioned the purpose for which 'Non-Agricultural' (NA) permission was sought for. On that short ground, the NA permission granted by the subordinate authorities came to be cancelled by the impugned order dated 27-4-1987.2. Mr. Amin could point out to this Court that in response to the show cause notice dated 9-12-1986, Annexure 'B' to this petition, the petitioner had filed a reply in February 1987, Annexure 'C' to this petition. In that reply, the petitioner had set out all the details. This particular point regarding the purpose for which NA permission was prayed for is also mentioned. Mr. D.F. Amin, the learned Advocate for the petitioner has po...
Tag this Judgment!Bismillahkhan S. Pathan Vs. Dhaniben Suklal Kharva
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Apr-28-2000
Reported in: 2000CriLJ3677
D.H. Waghela, J.1. This application arises from taking of cognizance of the offences under Sections 302 and 307 of the Indian Penal Code and dismissal of the Criminal Revision Application No. 92 of 1986 of the petitioner as a result of which the order to take cognizance of the offences and he order to issue non-bailable warrant for arrest of the petitioner, a Police Sub Inspector, is confirmed.2. On 6.4.1985, a complaint of one Smt. Dhaniben S. Kharva is filed against the present petitioner and unnamed policemen. According to the complaint, on 24.3.1985, while the husband and the elder son of the complainant were out of station, in wee hours of the night at around 1.30, the doors of her house were heavily knocked and shouts and words of abuse were heard. Her daughter, aged 14, opened the door and asked the younger on to remain in the bed. The complainant followed the daughter and saw that a tall fair-skinned person in police dress was standing out along with other people. He was told b...
Tag this Judgment!Bhavi Gaurang Vaishnav Vs. Govt. of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Apr-28-2000
Reported in: (2001)4GLR3326
M.R. Calla, J.1. This Special Civil Application has been filed on behalf of a minor girl named Bhavi Gaurang Vaishnav, aged 3 years residing at 195, Kribhconagar, Surat through her adoptive parents Gaurang Kirtirai Vaishnav and Ms. Darshana Gaurang Vaishnav. While the girl Bhavi has been named as petitioner No.1 her adoptive parents are petitioners Nos.2 and 3.2. The case with which the petitioners have come before this court is that petitioner No.1 was born to a woman who was a widow. The said widow handed over the custody of the petitioner No.1 to a social organisation named Shri Kasturba Stree Vikas Gruh, Jamnagar and it is this Vikas Gruh which gave her the name of 'Foram'. This female child named 'Foram' by the Vikas Gruh was kept in custody of Kokilaben Amratlal Dangi, Social Administrator of said Vikas Gruh and said Social Administrator was the guardian of the said child named 'Foram'.3. While the said child named 'Foram' (petitioner No.1) was being brought up at the said Vikas ...
Tag this Judgment!Aradhanaben Jayantilal Mehta Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Apr-28-2000
Reported in: (2000)4GLR554
R.R. Tripathi, J.1. Ms.M.R.Vyas, learned advocate for the petitioner. M/s. Patel Advocates for the respondent. Mr. Digant Joshi, learned A.G.P. for M/s. Patel Advocates.2. The present petition is filed by the petitioner seeking the appointment to the post of Dental Technician in the Medical College at Rajkot or any other college. The few facts are important to be noted.3 The petitioner received her qualification of Dental Mechanic in the year 1994 from the Government Dental College & Hospital, Ahmedabad. The petitioner was under an obligation to submit a bond to the effect that the petitioner shall serve in Government institution for three years anywhere in the State. The petitioner in the year 1995 made an application for giving her an appointment in the medical college, Rajkot, Jamnagar or Bhavnagar. The said application came to be replied by the Joint Director of the Health & Medical Services, Gandhinagar by letter dated 24.8.1995 saying that there is ban on direct recruitment and t...
Tag this Judgment!Devendra Karunesh Shukla Vs. Janta Construction Co. and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Apr-27-2000
Reported in: AIR2001Guj115
D.P. Buch, J.1. This is a revision under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, filed by the petitioner against the judgment and order recorded by the learned Judge of the Small Causes Court at Ahmedabad on 31st August, 1999. below application Exh. 153 submitted by the present respondents directing the petitioner to pay an amount of Rs. 14,630/- towards the stamp duty and penalty on the document produced at Mark 142/1 and further directing that the said document shall not be exhibited for want of its registration under the provisions of Indian Registration Act.2. It appears that the aforesaid document which is placed on the record of this Court at Annexure 'A' is a deed of assignment. The trial court found that the document has been duly proved but the trial court also found that since the document required compulsory registration and since it has not been registered, the said document cannot be exhibited, therefore, the aforesaid order came to be passed by the learned Judge...
Tag this Judgment!State of Gujarat and ors. Vs. Navinchandra L. Mandavia and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Apr-27-2000
Reported in: (2001)IIILLJ14Guj
H.K. Rathod, J.1. Learned A.G.P. Shri Gharania appearing on behalf of the petitioner and learned advocate Ms. D.T. Shah appearing on behalf of the respondent. In the present petition rule made returnable by August 26, 1996 and meanwhile the operation of the impugned order shall remain stayed subject to the provision of Section 17-B of the Industrial Disputes Act by order dated August 2, 1996. The respondent has filed a reply-affidavit against the petition and alongwith the reply, the evidence of respondent-workman and witness of petitioner and statement of workman has been produced on record. In the present petition, the award passed by the Labour Court, Bhavnagar in reference No. 183 of 1993 old No. 209 of 1990 dated February 27, 1996 is challenged wherein, the Labour Court, Bhavnagar has granted reinstatement of respondent-workman with continuity of service with 70% back wages of interim period.2. The brief facts of the present petition is that respondent was working as a driver with...
Tag this Judgment!Preety Navinchandra Shah Vs. Project Director
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Apr-27-2000
Reported in: (2000)4GLR342
R.R. Tripathi, J.1. Rule. M/s Patel Advocates waive service of the rule.2. The petition is filed for the relief to the effect that the order of termination dated 9/10.3.2000, at Annexure 'G' be quashed and set aside, whereby the services of the petitioner are terminated with immediate effect. It is also mentioned in the said order that the petitioner is paid a cheque amounting to Rs.15,000/- in lieu of one month's notice as provided under Rule 3 of the agreement made with her at the time of her appointment.3. It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner came to be appointed as Deputy Director under an agreement entered into between the petitioner and respondent no.1, a copy of which is annexed at Annexure 'E' to the petition. Clause 3 of the said agreement reads as under :'In case of unsatisfactory performance by and of an employee, the service/ appointment of the employee shall be terminated, during the tenure of service, by giving one month's notice by the Society/ second par...
Tag this Judgment!Fareni Vividh Karyakari Sahkari Seva Mandali Ltd. Vs. A.V. Vadher
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Apr-26-2000
Reported in: (2001)GLR204
J.N. Bhatt, J.1. Rule. Service of rule is waived by the learned advocates appearing for respective various respondents. Upon request and in view of the urgency in the matter and since the polling of election of the Managing Committee of Shri Rajkot District Co-operative Bank Limited (`Bank' for short), is scheduled to be held tomorrow i.e. on 27.4.2000 and common questions are raised, they are being disposed of by this common judgement as requested.SCA NO. 2450 OF 20002. This petition is filed by a Co-operative Society - Bank registered under the Gujarat Co-operative Societies Act, 1961 (`Act of 1961' for short) against the returning officer for election of the Managing Committee of the Bank and 62 other respondents who are affiliated Co-operative Societies to the specified Co-operative Society - Bank whose names are included in the final voters' list for the said election, who were in the preliminary list of the voters, were shown as disqualified being defaulters in payment of dues of...
Tag this Judgment!Appollo Tyres Limited Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Apr-26-2000
Reported in: 2002(82)ECC511; (2000)3GLR146
R.K. Abichandani, J.1. The petitioners seek a writ of mandamus on the respondent to refund the amount of Rs. 30 lakhs to them, together with interest thereon at the rate of 24% per annum from the date of payment by the petitioners, until such refund is given, on the ground that the said amount was furnished by way of cash security in respect of the provisional release of goods and that the said amount not having been adjusted in the determination made under the Kar Vivad Samadhan Scheme, was required to be refunded to the petitioners.2. A demand notice was issued on 6th August, 1996, on the petitioner No. 1 company, which culminated in the order dated 12th August, 1998, issued by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Adjudication) Mumbai, by which duty amounting to Rs. 12,68,52,778/- demanded as per paragraph 15(i) of the Show Cause Notice dated 6th August, 1996 was confirmed under Section 11A of the Central Excise Act, 1944, and amount of Rs. 1,15,00,000/already paid by the petitioner c...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »