Gujarat Court April 2002 Judgments
Girishbhai Alias Piyushbhai Umedbhai Patel Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Apr-06-2002
Reported in: (2002)4GLR3213
D.P. Buch, J. 1. The present petitioners have preferred this petition under section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (for short, 'the Code') for quashing and setting aside the FIR filed by respondent no.2, herein, before the Dharnidhar Derasar Vasana Police Station, Ahmedabad which has been registered as CR.I.No.169/2000 against the two petitioners herein for offences punishable under sections 420, 465, 466, 467, 468, 471 and 114 of IPC. The contesting respondent has alleged in the said FIR filed on 23.10.2000 that the two petitioners herein have fabricated and forged certain documents and records under the forged signature of the mother of the contesting respondent and false and forged statements were also created and fabricated with a view to show the interest of the petitioner in the properties which are the subject matter of those documents. It is further alleged that wrong and false rubber stamps were prepared and they were used. By the use of those rubber stamps, false an...
Tag this Judgment!Chauhan Dhulsinh Chatursinh Vs. District Superintendent of Police and ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Apr-05-2002
Reported in: (2002)3GLR778
Akshay H. Mehta, J. 1. The petitioner has approached this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of writ of mandamus for quashing and setting aside the impugned order dated 16-6-1992, whereby the petitioner has been dismissed from the service. He has also sought relief of reinstatement in service with immediate effect with full back wages, continuity of service and all other incidental benefits. 2. The petitioner was recruited in the Police Department in the year 1971 on the post of Police Constable (Unarmed). While in service on 2-12-1988 petitioner proceeded on leave for a period of 60 days with due permission of the superior officers. He was required to report back on duty on 2-1-1989. However, he reported on the duty only on 22-10-1989. During the period he had remained absent without leave the department had served with three notices calling upon him to report on duty immediately. However, the petitioner did not respond to these notices and repor...
Tag this Judgment!Hinaben R. Chauhan Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Apr-05-2002
Reported in: AIR2003Guj134; (2002)4GLR3421
ORDERM.S. Shah, J.1. Rule. In the facts and the circumstances of this case, the petition is taken up for final disposal today and the learned advocates for the parties have been heard at length.2. This petition by a former president of the Nadiad Municipality challenges the order dated 27th November, 2001 (Annexure A) passed by the Director of Municipalities under Section 70(1) of the Gujarat Municipalities Act, 1963 ('the Act' for brevity) requiring the petitioner to pay the municipality a sum of Rs. 1,00,989/-.3. The petitioner was elected as a councillor of Nadiad Municipality for the period between 1994 to 1999. The petitioner was elected as the President of the Municipality for the period between 10-1-1998 and 10-1-1999. By the notice dated 27-7-1999, the Director of Municipalities, Gujarat State ('the Director' for brevity) called upon the petitioner to show cause why the petitioner should not be required to pay an amount of Rs. 1,00,989/- to the Municipality on the ground that t...
Tag this Judgment!Bhailal Kalidas Barot Vs. Factory Manager, Jehangir Textile Mills Ltd. ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Apr-05-2002
Reported in: (2003)1GLR629; (2003)IILLJ355Guj; [2003]46SCL56(Guj)
D.H. Waghela, J.1. By this petition styled as a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner-workman, an ex-employee of the respondent No. 1 has challenged the order of the Appellate Authority under the Payment of Gratuity Act, by which original order of the Controlling Authority awarding an amount of Rs. 87,385-50 with interest was reversed only on the ground that the petitioner was occupying the quarter even after discontinuance of his service. The interesting observation and conclusion of the Appellate Authority in its order dated 19th October, 2001 may be quoted as under :-'Respondent is still occupying the quarter even after discontinuance of service. If law is there tor making the payment of gratuity after retirement, there is law to vacate the quarter also belonging to employer after retirement. Law is meant for both. Now appellant employer has already deposited money with authority. Respondent should vacate quarter and come with clean hand and can get...
Tag this Judgment!Babubhai Valdas Vs. G.S.R.T.C.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Apr-05-2002
Reported in: [2002(94)FLR922]; (2002)IIILLJ364Guj
H.K. Rathod, J. 1. Heard learned advocate Mr. Akil Qureshi for the petitioner and Mr. Y.S. Lakhani for the respondent Corporation. The petitioner workman has challenged the award made by the Labour Court concerned in Reference No. 165 of 1987 new number 820 of 1990 dated February 17, 1993 wherein the Labour Court has set aside the order of dismissal dated June 16, 1986 and granted reinstatement with continuity of service, but without back wages for the intervening period. The petitioner has challenged the award of Labour Court in so far as it relates to denial of back wages for the intervening period.2. Learned advocate Mr. Qureshi appearing for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner was working for more than twenty years as a driver and he remained absent and, therefore, he was served with a charge sheet and after completion of the departmental inquiry, he was dismissed from service on June 16, 1986. He has submitted that for remaining absent for a period of four days cannot...
Tag this Judgment!Executive Engineer, Gujarat Water Supply and Sewerage Board Vs. Makwan ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Apr-05-2002
Reported in: (2002)4GLR3093
H.K. Rathod, J.1. Heard learned Advocate Mr. R.C. Jani for thepetitioner and Mr. C.B. Dastoor for the respondent-workman. By way of this petition, the petitioner has challenged the award made by the Labour Court, Junagadh in Reference (L.C.J.) No. 241 of 1993 dated 22nd October, 1999 wherein the Labour Court has granted reinstatement in favour of the workman concerned while setting aside the Order of termination and has granted full back wages for the intervening period with effect from 1st January, 1993. This petition was admitted by this Court by issuing rule thereon on 26th July, 2000 and interim relief has been granted against the implementation of the award in question.2. During the course of hearing, learned Advocate Mr. Jani has raised a contention that the petitioner is not an 'industry' as defined Under Section 2(j) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. He has also submitted that the respondent has not completed 240 days' continuous service within 12 months preceding the date ...
Tag this Judgment!Vohra Abdul Razak Fazalbhai Vs. State of Gujarat and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Apr-04-2002
Reported in: (2002)3GLR920
B.J. Shethna, J. 1. Rule. Mr. R. C. Kodekar, learned A.P.P. waives service of rule for respondent-State. Mr. Vijay Patel, learned Advocate waives service of rule for respondent Nos. 2 to 11. 2. The petitioner-Vohra Abdul Razak Fazalbhai is the original complainant. He has lodged complaint on 16-9-2001 at 7-15 p.m. before the Police for the incident in question which took place on 15-9-2001 between 12-00 noon to 12-15 hours which was registered as Crime Register No. 23 of 2001 for the offences punishable under Sections 395, 436, 452 I.P.C. and Section 135 of Bombay Police Act naming in all 11 accused persons with about 200 to 250 persons in the crowd. As per his F.I.R., the crowd entered Decora Profiles Pipes Pvt. Ltd. and ransacked the same and set at fire and thereby caused loss of Rs. 43,13,400/- and robbed them by looting valuables worth Rs. 22,86,000/- from the premises of the Company. Thus, they have caused in all loss of Rs. 65,99,400/-,3. Dr. Subhashchandra Haribhai Dave who is ...
Tag this Judgment!Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation Vs. D.L. Patel
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Apr-04-2002
Reported in: (2003)1GLR348
H.K. Rathod, J. 1. Heard Mr. H.H. Joshi, learned Advocate with Mr. V. H. Desai, learned Advocate on behalf of the petitioner-Corporation and Mr. J.S. Brahmbhatt, learned Advocate for respondent-workman, as also, Mr. H. D. Dave, learned A.G.P. for State Authority in Special Civil Application No. 446 of 1995. In Special Civil Application No. 13370 of 1994, Rule has been issued by this Court on 19th December, 1994 and also granted ad-interim relief in terms of Para 9(B). Another group matter Spl.C.A. No. 446 of 1995 has been admitted by this Court on 6th April, 1995 and ordered to be heard with Spl.C.A. No. 13370 of 1994. So far as, Special Civil Application No. 13370 of 1994 is concerned, petitioner-Corporation has challenged the order passed by the Conciliation Officer, Valsad in Approval Application No. 55 of 1993 dated 27th April, 1994, whereby the Conciliation Officer has rejected the approval application filed by the petitioner-Corporation under Section 33(2)(b) of the Industrial Di...
Tag this Judgment!Atma Natural Fibres Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Official Liquidator of Mahendra Mill ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Apr-03-2002
Reported in: (2003)1GLR74; [2005]58SCL412(Guj)
D.A. Mehta, J.1. The applicant, a limited company, has in support of this application by the Judge's Summons prayed for the following reliefs :'[a] To require the opponent to return to the applicant four D. G. sets let out by the applicant to Mahendra Mills Ltd. (in liquidation) forthwith;[b] To pay over to the applicant outstanding lease rentals for lease of the said D. G. sets till the date of their return;[c] any other and further relief deemed just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case be granted.'2. In support of the Judge's Summons an affidavit dated 14-3-2001 has been sworn by one Shri Jigar Chinubhai Sanghvi in the capacity as Director of the applicant-Company. It is stated that at the request of the Mahendra Mills Limited (now in liquidation) (hereinafter referred to 'as Company'), the applicant initially acquired 3 Diesel Generating Sets from one Jackson Engineers Ltd., under invoices dated 3-6-1997, 6-6-1997 and 7-6-1997 and gave said three D. G. Sets on leas...
Tag this Judgment!Pradhyaumanbhai Mohanlal Patel Vs. State of Gujarat and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Apr-03-2002
Reported in: (2003)1GLR454
Jayant Patel, J. 1. With the consent of the parties, the matters are taken up for final hearing. 2. The present petitions are preferred against the orders dated 16-4-1998 and 9-12-1999 passed by the Chief Controlling, Revenue Authority, State of Gujarat, Ahmedabad. 3. Heard Ms. K.J. Brahmbhatt, for the petitioner and Mr. Kothak, learned A.G.P., for the respondents. Ms. Brahmbhatt for the petitioners submitted that the orders passed by the Appellate Authority are stereotype order and no reasons whatsoever has been recorded while deciding with the appeal. Ms. Brahmbhatt submitted that the petitioners had purchased the properties with tenant, and therefore, the said part for taking defence that the property will not fetch 100% market value is at all not considered. Mr. Kothak, A.G.P., supported the order of the Appellate Authority. 4. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the view that, when the Appellate Authority viz. Chief Revenue and Controlling Authority is exe...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »