Gujarat Court June 2001 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Harish M. Mankodi Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jun-14-2001
Reported in: (2002)3GLR50
Kundan Singh, J.1. This petition has been filed for declaration that the impugned order dated 19-7-1993 compulsorily retiring the petitioner from service is illegal, unjust and arbitrary and for a direction to the respondent to treat the petitioner in continuous service of the respondent for all purposes as if the impugned order was not passed against the petitioner.2. The petitioner was selected through the Gujarat Public Service Commission (G.P.S.C.) in the year 1963 as an Assistant Section Officer, and thereafter, he was promoted as Section Officer, Class-II post and he worked on the said post in the Irrigation Department known as Narmada Water Resources Department, till 15-10-1955. Thereafter, vide transfer order transferred and shifted to the Health and Family Welfare Department as Assistant Section Officer with effect from 16-10-1986. Later on, he was promoted as Section Officer and continued to work in that department. It is also stated that the petitioner has rendered continuou...
Rajikant R. Upadhyay Vs. Gujarat Government and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jun-14-2001
Reported in: [2002(93)FLR930]; (2001)3GLR2628
Kundan Singh, J.1. This petition has been filed for a direction to the respondents to pay the petitioner interest as found just and reasonable from the date of retirement till the actual day of payment by this Court on the amount of pension and gratuity etc., forthwith.2. The petitioner on reaching the age of 58 years retired from the post of Principal of the respondent No. 3 School on 31-10-1986. As per the Rules and Regulations of the department concerned, the responsibility of preparing, verifying and sending the pension papers of the Assistant Teacher to the District Education Officer concerned lies on the Principal of the School. But in case of the Principal of the School, such responsibility lies on the management of the School. Thus, the respondent No. 3 was required to prepare, verify and send to the District Education Officer, District Sabarkantha at Himmatnagar for further necessary action. But the respondents did not send the pension papers of the petitioner to the aforesaid...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Rishikesh Apartments Co-operative Housi ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jun-14-2001
Reported in: [2002]253ITR310(Guj)
A.R. Dave, J. 1. At the instance of the Revenue, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench 'A', has referred to this court the following question for its opinion under the provisions of Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act').'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the tax paid by the contractor in its own case by way of advance tax and self-assessment tax should be deducted from the gross tax that the defaulter assessee should have deducted under Section 194C in computing interest chargeable under Section 201(1A) of the Act ?'2. Mr. Akil Qureshi, the learned advocate has appeared for the applicant, whereas Mr. Bhargav Karia has appeared for the respondent-assessee. The facts giving rise to the present reference in a nutshell are as under :The assessee is a co-operative society who had entered into two contracts with Ravi Builder for construction of its building. From t...
Radheshyam Tilochand Agarwal Saraogi Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jun-14-2001
Reported in: [2002]257ITR249(Guj)
ORDER4. S. O. (E) In exercise of the powers conferred by Sub-section (1) of Section 97 of the Finance (No. 2) Act, 1998, the Central Government hereby makes the following order, namely : --1. (1) This order may be called the Kar Vivad Samadhan Scheme (Removal of Difficulties) Order, 1998. (2) It shall be deemed to have come into force on the 1st day of September, 1998. 5.. Where a declaration to the designated authority has been made in respect of tax arrear in relation to indirect tax enactment for the amount of duties (including drawback of duty, credit of duty or any amount representing duty), cesses, interest, fine or penalty which constitutes the subject-matter of a demand notice or a show-cause notice issued on or before the 31st day of March, 1998, by remaining unpaid and pending determination on the date ofmaking a declaration and, where, in respect of the same matter stated in the said declaration, a show-cause notice has also been issued to any other person and is pending adj...
Lalan Kumar Dubey Vs. Rajkumar Synthetics Mills Ltd.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jun-14-2001
Reported in: (2002)IILLJ644Guj
ORDERRavi R. Tripathi, J.1. The present petition is filed challenging (i) the order dated September 25, 1995 in T, Application No. 292 of 1993 and other applications (T. Applications No. 557/1991, 558/1991, 559/1991, 353/1992, 261/1992, 198/1993, 199/1993, 775/1993 and 534/1993: (ii) order dated December 31, 1998 passed in Revision Application No. 12 of 1996 passed by the Industrial Court, Surat; and (iii) order dated September 13, 1999 passed in T. Application No. 261/1992, 353/1992, 198/1993 and 199/1993 by the Labour Court, Surat.2. The facts giving rise to the present petition are that the petitioner herein had filed application for reinstatement and back wages before the Labour Court, Surat being T. Application No. 292 of 1993. It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner was a workman in the respondent company and the services of the petitioner were terminated on April 12, 1993 without any justification. The Labour Court, Surat passed an order dated September 25, 1995 sta...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Sidhpur Isabgul Processing Co. Ltd.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jun-13-2001
Reported in: (2001)171CTR(Guj)106; [2001]252ITR777(Guj)
A.R. Dvave, J.1. At the instance of the Revenue, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench, 'A', has referred to this court for its opinion the following questions of law arising out of an order passed by the Tribunal in ITA No. 997/Ahd. of 1984 under the provisions of Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act').'(1) Whether, the deductions claimed under Sections 80HH and 80J of the Income-tax Act, 1961, by the assessee were allowable in full as claimed? (2) Whether, the Appellate Tribunal has been right in law in confirming the view taken by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), in directing the Income-tax Officer to allow both the deductions under Sections 80) and 80HH of the Income-tax Act, 1961, in full without reducing from the deduction under Section 80J of the Act the amount of deduction under Section 80HH of the Act ?'2. The circumstances in which the questions have been referred to this court, in a nutshell, are as under :The ...
Gujarat State Branch of Indian Medical Association Vs. State of Gujara ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jun-12-2001
Reported in: (2001)3GLR2647
D.M. Dharmadhikari, C.J.1. This is a petition by Gujarat State Branch of Indian Medical Association whereby Notification dated 25th April, 1979 issued by Health and Family Welfare Department, Government of Gujarat, has been challenged. Prayer is made for its quashing.2. By the impugned Notification dated 25-4-1979, the State of Gujarat, in exercise of powers conferred by Sub-section (1) of Section 28 of the Gujarat Medical Council Act, 1967, amended the Schedule appended to the said Act to add medical course prescribed as 'Diploma in Nature Cure and Hygiene conferred by Faculty of Nature Cure and Hygiene, Gujarat State' for the purpose of registering students of D. N. C. H. (Diploma in Nature Cure and Hygiene) course to enable them to practise medicine in Nature Cure as also in Allopathy.3. By this petition, contention advanced is that the impugned amendment, by the Notification, to the said provisions of the Schedule is contrary to the Medical Council of India Act and would be detrime...
Textile Labour Association Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jun-12-2001
Reported in: [2001(90)FLR1084]; (2001)IILLJ838Guj
Ravi R. Tripathi, J.1. The present petition is filed by the Textile Labour Association, Ahmedabad for the reliefs that insertion of the conditions regarding closure of the textile unit in the policy entitled Textile Workers Rehabilitation Fund Scheme bearing No. 1(9)/91-CSS/41 dated May 1, 1991, be declared as discriminatory, arbitrary and offending Articles 14 and 16(1) of the Constitution of India. Said condition reads as under:'II Eligibility i) Textile units: This scheme applies to such textile unit which is either licensed under Industries (Development and Regulations) Act, 1951 or registered with the Textile Commissioner as medium scale unit. Secondly such unit should have been completely closed (meaning that its production would have come to a complete grinding halt) after June 5, 1985. Thirdly, in addition such a unit should have been declared as closed unit under Section 25-O of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 or alternatively, an Official Liquidator was appointed under Comp...
T.K. Rabari Vs. Guj Sheep and Wool Development Corpn. Ltd.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jun-12-2001
Reported in: [2002(94)FLR176]
P.B. Majmudar, J.1. The petitioner is challenging an order passed by the Managing Director of the Gujarat Sheep and Wool Development Corporation Limited dated 15.12.1986 by which the petitioner is removed from the services of the Corporation.2. The petitioner was initially appointed as Field Assistant on 22.12.1978. By the impugned order at Annexure-A/L services of the petitioner were terminated. The petitioner was informed by the Department by letter dated 15.4.1985 that his request for medical leave is turned down and immediately he is recalled for duty at Chuda Center of the Corporation after handing over his charge to the Field Officer at Ranpur. It is specifically mentioned in the said letter that if the petitioner fails to hand over the charge of the center, he will be subjected to the departmental proceedings and intervening period will be treated as leave without pay. The medical certificate which was sent by the petitioner was also rejected and the petitioner was asked to subm...
Prantij Nagar Panchayat Vs. Kantilal Gandabhai Prajapati
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jun-12-2001
Reported in: [2002(95)FLR189]
Ravi R. Tripathi, J. 1. Mr. Ashish Shah, learned advocate for the petitioner states that though rule is served on the respondent, Kantilal Gandabhai Prajapati, he has not caused his appearance before this Court. Mr. Shah further informed that in fact, Mr. Kantilal G. Prajapati was Sarpanch of village Nandol, Taluka Dehgam, district Ahmedabad. Therefore, as per his information he is not interested in implementation of the award, which is under challenge before this Court in the present petition.2. Taking into consideration the fact that the respondent was working in Octroi Department and that as per the reply at exh.15 filed by the present petitioner, the Octroi Department, Prantij Nagar Panchayat, is closed. The work of collecting octroi was given on contract basis. Mr. Shah, learned advocate also submitted that now in the changed circumstances when the octroi is already abolished, there is no question of complying with the award in question, by which the respondent is ordered to be re...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next ›