Gujarat Court May 2000 Judgments
Hansaben Khemchand JaIn Vs. Gpsc
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: May-04-2000
Reported in: (2001)4GLR3315
R.R. Tripathi, J. 1. The present petition is filed by the petitioner for the relief that this court shall hold and declare that select list published on 8.9.99 of 57 candidates is erroneous, illegal, contrary to law and Constitution of India and therefore the same be quashed and set aside and in the alternative it is prayed that 10 posts of Assistant Public Prosecutor which are not filled in should be filled in from the lady candidates and the representation to the present petitioner be given in the same.2. The present petition is filed by the petitioner who has passed her 3rd LL.B Exams in the year 1985 and after obtaining 'Sanad' in December, 1985 the petitioner started practising as an advocate on Criminal and Civil Side. The case of the petitioner is that on 1.12.1997 an advertisement was issued by the G.P.S.C. for recruitment of Assistant Public Prosecutor. The advertisement bearing No.103 stated that in all there are 67 vacancies of which 34 posts are unreserved and remaining 5 p...
Tag this Judgment!Alka N. Shah Vs. State of Gujarat and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: May-03-2000
Reported in: (2001)2GLR1023
Y.B. Bhatt, J. 1. Heard learned Counsel for the respective parties. Rule. Mr. N.D. Gohil, learned A.P.P. waives service of rule for respondent No. 1. Mr. Paresh Dave waives service of rule for respondent No. 2. On a jointrequest of learned Counsel for the parties, this application is taken up for final hearing today.2. This is an application under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code at the instance of original accused No. 1, in a complaint filed by the respondent No. 2 in respect of an offence alleged to have been committed under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act read with Section 141 of the said Act.3. The short facts which are relevant for the purpose of present decision are not in dispute. The second respondent herein - original complainant had placed fixed deposit with the company by the name of M/s. Piramal Financial Services Ltd., wherein the present applicant-accused No. 1 was Managing Director. The company had issued four cheques by way of repayment of this f...
Tag this Judgment!Prashant K. Patel Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: May-03-2000
Reported in: AIR2001Guj58; (2000)3GLR2725
M.R. Calla, J. 1. The petitioner has come with the case that the respondent had come out with a Savings Scheme in the year 1987 known as 'National Savings Scheme', which will be hereinafter referred to as 'the NSS'. Under the said scheme, the petitioner's Account was opened on or about 29th October 1987 with the Navrangpura Post Office, Ahmedabad. The said Account was later on transferred to the Ellis Bridge Post Office in June 1988 and the petitioner's NSS Account No. 18 with the Navrangpura Post Office was given NSS Account No. 101129 by the Ellis Bridge Post Office, Ahmedabad. It is stated that the said Account was opened by the father of the petitioner Shri Kalyanji Dharamshi Kunjadia as a holder of the General Power of Attorney dt. 4-2-1987. 2. It is stated by the petitioner that on or about 6th March 2000, the petitioner was shocked to receive a letter dated 4th March 2000 from the respondent in which it was stated that the said Account opened by the holder of Power of Attorney o...
Tag this Judgment!Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation Vs. Dinesh Savjibhai Pipalia
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: May-03-2000
Reported in: [2001(89)FLR667]; (2002)IVLLJ496Guj
H.K. Rathod, J.1. Rule. Mr. M.P. Raval appearing oh behalf of the respondent waives service of rule. With the consent of the advocates for both the sides, the matter has been taken up for final hearing today and the same is finally heard today. In the present petition, the order passed by the Deputy Labour Commissioner and Conciliation Officer in Approval Application No. 195 of 1998 dated November 5, 1999 has been challenged, wherein the approval application filed by the petitioner-Corporation under Section 33(2)(b) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 has been rejected.2. The respondent workman was working as driver with the petitioner Corporation. On September 15, 1993, the respondent was on duty as such on Morbi-Jamnagar route and an accident took place involving his S.T. bus and a truck. A charge-sheet was issued to him on April 25, 1996 and after holding legal and valid departmental inquiry on proved misconduct, the respondent-workman was dismissed from service by order dated Octo...
Tag this Judgment!Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation Vs. Madhavsingh B. Parmar
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: May-03-2000
Reported in: (2000)4GLR314
H.K. Rathod, J.1. Learned Advocate Mr. K.S. Jhaveri appearing on behalf of the petitioner Corporation and Learned Advocate Mr. J.S. Brahmbhatt appearing on behalf the respondent workmen. Rule. Learned Advocate Mr. J.S. Brahmbhatt appearing on behalf of the respondent workmen waives service of rule and with the consent of both the learned advocates, the matter has been taken up for final hearing today and the same is heard finally today.2. In the present petition, the order passed by the Industrial Tribunal in Approval Application No. 159 of 1997 dated 12.7.1999 has been challenged by the petitioner Corporation.3. The brief facts of the present petition is that the respondent workmen was working as a conductor Badge No.5959 in Junagadh Division at Veraval Depot. On 6.1.95 when the respondent workman was working as a conductor in Una-Veraval via Gir Gadhada. At that time his bus was checked by Depot Manager, Keshod with line checking staff at Pichhavi. At that time the allegations agains...
Tag this Judgment!M.N. Panchal Vs. Gujarat Filaments Ltd.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: May-03-2000
Reported in: [2001(91)FLR1158]
H.K. Rathod, J.1. Learned advocate Mr. Mansuri is appearing for the petitioner and learned advocate Mr. Jani is appearing for the respondent Company and learned advocate Mr. H.C.Patel is appearing for M/s. Patel Advocates for respondent No. 4.2. Rule. Service of rule has been waived by Mr. Jani appearing for respondent No. 1 Company and Mr. Patel, learned advocate appearing for M/s. Patel Advocates for respondent 4. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the matter is taken up for final hearing today itself.3. The facts of the present petition, in brief, are that the respondent company has established factory in tribal area of Panchmahals District under various concessions, incentives and subsidies and has employed 128 workmen and other members of staff. According to the petitioner, the company has earned huge profit out of this factory and in turn has diverted the same to the other industries lime cement in Rajasthan after establishing cement division. According to the pet...
Tag this Judgment!Bharat Co-operative Bank Ltd. Vs. Bank of Baroda
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: May-02-2000
Reported in: AIR2000Guj306; (2000)2GLR1500
M.R. Calla, J.1. All these 39 special civil applications filed against the Bank of Baroda (32) and Indian Bank (7) raise the controversy of common nature involving consideration of identical fact situations and common questions of law and, therefore, I propose to decide all these matters by this common judgment and order as under : The petitioners herein are the co-operative societies or the co-operative banks either in Kheda District or Vadodara District. The petitioner societies/banks decided to deposit the excess funds available with them with nationalised banks to raise income of interest on such amount. It is the case of the petitioners that the governing bodies like the board of directors decided to invest the excess amounts with the nationalised banks by way of fixed deposit receipts which were not to be prematurely encashed. In accordance with such decisions/resolutions taken by the petitioner societies/banks, the investments were made with different branches of the Bank of Bar...
Tag this Judgment!Gopishankar S. Vaid Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: May-02-2000
Reported in: 2000CriLJ4320; (2001)1GLR267
Y.B. Bhatt, J. 1. This is an application under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code at the instance of the original accused Nos. 4 to 7 for quashing the proceedings in Criminal Case No. 4498 of 1998, initiated under the complaint of respondent No. 2-original complainant who is the Food Inspector, Western Railway, Ahmedabad. 2. The said complainant filed a complaint in respect of offences punishable under Section 7(ii) read with Section 16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954, in respect of a food item produced by the Limited Company (accused No. 8). 3. The contentions raised in the present application are two-fold, and therefore, it would be simpler to deal with applicant Nos. 1 and 2 (accused Nos. 4 and 5) on the one hand and applicant Nos. 3 and 4 (accused Nos. 6 and 7) on the other. 4. So far as the applicant Nos. 3 and 4 (accused Nos. 6 and 7) are concerned, the complainant refers to them in the complaint as 'partners'. It is well established that the accused No. ...
Tag this Judgment!Gujarat Agricultural University Vs. Laxmiben Chhibabhai Talaviya and a ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: May-02-2000
Reported in: (2001)1GLR182; (2001)IILLJ448Guj
H. K. Rathod, J. 1. Heard the learned Advocates for the respective parties. 2. In all these petitions, the orders passed by the Controlling Authority under the Payment of Gratuity Act duly confirmed by the Appellate Authority under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 are under challenge. 3. The main contention raised by the Gujarat Agriculture University [hereinafter referred to as, 'the University'] is that the University is engaged in the activities of teaching, research and development of agriculture, and therefore, the provisions of Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 [hereinafter referred to as, 'the Act'] are not applicable to it. Learned Advocate for the petitioner-University pointed out that the University is not engaged in any commercial activity, and therefore, it is not covered under the provisions of Section 1(3) of the Act. It is further pointed out that since the University is not a factory or a shop or an establishment, and since it is carrying on activities of teaching, researc...
Tag this Judgment!Sardar Patel University Vs. Minal R. Jogi and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: May-02-2000
Reported in: AIR2002Guj13; (2001)4GLR2942
1. Sardar Patel University, original respondent No. 1 in Special Civil Application No. 5667 of 1999, being aggrieved by the judgment and order passed by the learned Single Judge on 22nd October 1999 in SCA No. 5667/99, has preferred this Letters Patent Appeal.2. Relevant facts, necessary to decide this Letters Patent Appeal, are as under :2.1. Minal R. Jogi, original petitioner/ respondent No. 1 herein, (hereinafter referred to as the petitioner), was a student of B.J. Vanijya Maha Vidyalaya where she was prosecuting her course of Bachelor of Business Administration. She appeared in' the final year examination which commenced on 26th March 1999. On 5-4-1999, the petitioner appeard in the paper of Business Environment (new course). Supervisor, who was present in the Examination Hall, where the petitioner was allotted her seat for appearing at the examination found the petitioner, at about 5.50 pm., with a ruler with some writings/inscriptions thereon. The writings on the ruler pertained...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »