Gujarat Court March 2002 Judgments
Mahendrasinh H. Jadeja and ors. Vs. State of Gujarat and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-16-2002
Reported in: (2002)2GLR1604
K.M. Mehta, J.1. Mahendrasinh H. Jadeja and others-petitioners havefiled this petition with a prayer for issue of a writ of mandamus directing theState Government through the Secretary, General Administration Departrnent-respundent No. 1 herein and the Gujarat Public Service Commission-respondentNo. 2 to appoint the petitioners to a post in Gujarat Administrative Service('G.A.S.' for short) Class-I in order of their ranking in selection at Annexure-A and go on making appointment till the shortfall of direct recruits is exhausted. The petitioners have further prayed that this Court may direct the StateGovernment to confer upon the petitioners the benefit of deemed date ofappointment to a post of G.A.S. Class-I with effect from the date they wereentitled to appointment in order of their ranking in the Select List and confer upon them all consequential benefits as to seniority, pay fixation, arrears of pay, future promotions etc.2. All these contentions were placed before this Court (Cora...
Tag this Judgment!Bharatkumar Amratlal Shah and ors. Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-16-2002
Reported in: (2002)3GLR816
C.K. Buch, J. 1. This revision application has been preferred by the original accused of Criminal Case No. 498 of 1992 instituted on the strength of a complaint filed by the Drug Inspector Mr. R. K. Prajapati on 15-6-1992 for the offences punishable under Sections 27 and 27A read with Sections 18(a)(i), 18(a)(vi), 18(c) and Sections 28 and 28(a) of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). 2. The criminal complaint by the Drug Inspector for the offences punishable under Sections 18(a)(1), 18(b), 18(a)(vi) and 18(c) as well as Sections 27, 28 and 28(a) of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act came to be filed in respect of searches carried out by the Drug Department at different Medical Stores. The samples collected during the searches carried out on 15-7-1991 and 16-7-1991 of the Drugs were sent for the analysis to Government Analyst, Vadodara. According to the prosecution, the same were found not according to the standard, misbranded, adulterated and spurious, an...
Tag this Judgment!Gujarat Water Supply and Sewerage Board Vs. S.K. Rayjada and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-16-2002
Reported in: (2003)4GLR3381
H.K. Rathod, J.1. Heard learned Advocate Mr. Munshaw for the petitioner. Notice of Rule issued by this Court has been served upon the respondents but the respondents have not remained present before this Court either in person or through any Advocate. Hence, the matter has been taken up for hearing in their absence.2. In this petition, the petitioner has challenged the award dated 2-5-2000 passed by the Labour Court, Amreli in Reference (L.C.A.) No. 16 of 1998 whereunder the workmen herein were ordered to be made permanent with effect from 1-1-1991. However, the Labour Court has clarified that the workmen were not to be given any financial benefits arising out of the permanency granted with effect from 1-1-1991, and thus, it has been ordered that the period from 1-1-1991 till the date of the decision be treated as notional.3. During the course of hearing, learned Advocate Mr. Munshaw appearing for the petitioner has submitted that industrial dispute was raised by the respondents about ...
Tag this Judgment!Lark Laboratories (India) Ltd. Vs. Medico Interpharma Ltd.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-15-2002
Reported in: AIR2002Guj368; (2003)4GLR52
H.H. Mehta, J.1. The original defendants of Civil Suit No. 4857 of 1995 pending on the file of Court No. 13, City Civil Court, Ahmedabad, have by preferring this appeal under Section 104 read with Order 43, Rule 1(r) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, challenged an order dated 22-7-1995 'passed below application Ex. 6 by which the defendant No. 2, its agents and employees etc. have been restrained temporarily till final disposal of the suit from manufacturing, marketing its drugs, medicines, or pharmaceutical preparations under the tread mark 'POLYMOX' and also from advertising the drugs, medicines and pharmaceutical preparations under the impugned trade mark 'POLYMOX', and also from using the impugned trade mark with identical and/or deceptively similar other trade mark.2. The facts leading to this present appeal in a nutshell are as follows :2.1. The plaintiff is a company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 carrying on the business of manufacturing and marketing drugs, med...
Tag this Judgment!Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation Vs. Rameshbhai Mafatlal Makwa ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-15-2002
Reported in: (2002)4GLR2923
H.K. Rathod, J.1. Heard Mr. A.M. Dagali, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Mr. B.A. Vaishnav, learned advocate for respondent workman.2. In the present petition, the petitioner Corporation has challenged the award passed by the Industrial Tribunal, Ahmedabad in Reference No.58/ 1997 dated 1st November, 2000, wherein the Industrial Tribunal has directed the petitioner Corporation to give compassionate appointment to one Shri Rameshbhai Mafatlal Makwana in Class III and / or IV cadre within period of one month from the date of said award. This Court has issued RULE and ad-interim relief in terms of para-8[B] has been granted on 9th July, 2001. Learned advocate Mr. Dagali appearing on behalf of the petitioner Corporation has challenged this award on the ground that there is delay in rasing the industrial dispute by the respondent. Learned advocate Mr. Dagali has also submitted that direction issued by the tribunal is contrary to the administrative circular issued ...
Tag this Judgment!Suresh Kumar Dutt Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-14-2002
Reported in: (2002)3GLR813
J.N. Bhatt, J. 1. The appellant has questioned the legality and validity of the judgment and order of the learned single Judge recorded on 11-9-1997 in a writ petition whereby the petition came to be dismissed, by invoking the aids of the provisions of Clause 15 of the Letters Patent. 2. Appellant is the original petitioner, who was working as a Sepoy - Driver in the Army service since 19-10-1977. He joined Army Service Corps as a Driver (Mechanical Transport) which is a part of the armed forces of Union of India. The writ petition was directed against the order of the respondent-authority dated 22-8-1984. Since, original petitioner had not completed qualifying service, the respondent-authority was moved by the petitioner for condonation of deficiency in qualifying service of 473 days. The petitioner's case has been that since his wife was seriously ill and on refusal of leave, he had remained absent for 473 days. He voluntarily resumed his service and for deserting service without lea...
Tag this Judgment!Gayatri Vidhyamandir Vs. Gujarat Secondary Education Board and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-14-2002
Reported in: AIR2003Guj8; (2002)4GLR156
ORDERA.R. Dave, J.1. Heard learned advocates S/ Shri P.S. Patel, C.L. Soni, Kamlesh Sheth and N.V. Gandhi for the petitioners. Learned advocate Shri Dipak Dave for learned advocate Shri A.D. Oza has appeared on caveat on behalf of the Gujarat Secondary Education Board (hereinafter referred to as 'the board') whereas learned Assistant Government Pleaders Shri K.P. Raval, Ms. Shraddha Trivedi and Shri N.D. Gohil have appeared for the Government authorities.2. As subject-matter in all these petitions is same, at the request of the learned advocates, all these petitions have been heard together. The facts giving rise to the present petitions are as under :3. The question involved in these petitions is with regard to change of stream after completion of Std. XI. As per the scheme of education framed by the Board, for the purpose of giving Higher Secondary Certificate, examinations are conducted in four different streams, which are as under :General StreamScience StreamVocational StreamPost ...
Tag this Judgment!Jal Pestonji Mistry Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-14-2002
Reported in: 2002(82)ECC518
R.K. Abichandani, J.1. The petitioner challenges the orders of the second respondent seeking a direction that the second respondent Tribunal should hear the petitioner's appeal afresh, taking into account the contentions raised by the petitioner in his written submissions which were filed before the respondent No.2.2. In the petitioner's appeal before the Tribunal against the demand of Rs.52,63,999=43, the Tribunal held that the Collector had given detailed reasons for holding that the three units, namely, M/s Kinotone, M/s Cine Lamp and M/s International Talkie Equipment Company Pvt. Ltd. (all owned / controlled by one Adalja family, as stated in the Tribunal's order), were inter-connected and inter-linked and one Bharatbhai Adalja was having a major share of 80% in M/s Kinotone. ?It was observed that the petitioner - Jal Mistry was a paid Technical Director in M/s International Talkie Equipment Company Pvt. Ltd., which had three Adalja brothers as directors. It was noted that, most o...
Tag this Judgment!Abhilapsinh Jalsinh Bhadoria Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-13-2002
Reported in: (2003)4GLR771
Ravi R. Tripathi, J.1. The present appeal arises from the judgement and order passed by the Additional City Sessions Court No.3, Ahmedabad in Sessions Case No.36 of 1995 dated 5.7.1996 for an offence under section 20(B)(2) of the Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). The learned Judge was pleased to award rigorous imprisonment for 10 years and fine of Rs.1 lakh, and in default rigorous imprisonment for one year.2. The facts of the case are that on 21.10.1994 at 8.40 PM, near Oriental building situated on Relief Road in the city of Ahmedabad on a public road, the accused was found to be in possession of 800 grams of Charas and thus, committed an offence under section 20(B)(2) of the Act.3. The case of the prosecution is that when Police Inspector Shri S.J. Mansuri was on duty at Kalupur Police Station on 21.10.1994 at 6.10 PM, SRP First Grade Jamadar, Shri Mangalram Mekram Pal, SRP Group XII-B Company, Gandhinagar with SRP Constable S...
Tag this Judgment!Mustufabhai AbdulhussaIn Vora Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-13-2002
Reported in: (2003)4GLR946
C.K. Buch1. Heard learned counsel Mr. CR Abichandani for the petitioner and Mr. SS Patel learned APP for respondent-State.2. Mr. Abichandani has taken me through the entire record and evidence recorded by the trial court during the course of trial and the relevant documents namely the panchnama of the scene of the incident and Post mortem note. Learned counsel appearing for the parties have taken me through both the judgments i.e. judgment holding the petitioner guilty delivered by the Ld. JMFC and the judgment of learned Addl. Sessions Judge allowing the appeal partly preferred by the present petitioner acquitting him in the main offence punishable under sec. 304A of IPC. While acquitting the accused from the offence punishable under sec. 304A of IPC the ld. Addl. Sessions Judge has confirmed the finding as to the guilt proved against the applicant for the offence punishable under sec. 279 of IPC and also under sec. 177 and 184 of M.V. Act. The Ld. Addl. Sessions Judge has awarded two...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »