Gujarat Court January 2003 Judgments
Asha D. Bhatt Vs. Director of Primary Education and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-31-2003
Reported in: AIR2003Guj197; (2003)4GLR431
ORDERR.M. Doshit, J.1. Heard the learned advocates.2. Pursuant to the advertisement published in the month of July, 1994, the petitioner had applied for admission to Primary Teachers Training College in the State of Gujarat. The admissions were processed by the Centralized Recruitment process. The results thereof was published in the newspaper on 9th December, 1994. The admissions to the female candidates of unreserved category stopped at 75.42%. Admittedly, the petitioner had not secured such high marks. She, therefore, could not secure admission to the Primary Teachers Training College. Feeling aggrieved, she has preferred the present petition.3. The contention is two fold. Mr. Shah has submitted that as disclosed in the results published on 9th December. 1994, certain seats were reserved for Economically Backward Class candidates. Mr. Shah has submitted that the advertisement [Annexure-A to the petition] did not refer to any reservation for Economically Backward Class candidates. Ha...
Tag this Judgment!O.L. of Mayo Hospital Ltd. Vs. Dwipa Yogesh Mankodi
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-31-2003
Reported in: [2005]123CompCas253(Guj); [2005]64SCL184(Guj)
A.R. Dave, J.1. Case against the accused is that though they were directors of Mayo Hospital Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as 'the company'), without reasonable excuse, they made default in complying with the provisions of sec. 454 of the Companies Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') by not filing statement of affairs and, therefore, the Official Liquidator has submitted in this application that they should be punished as per the provisions of sec. 454(5) of the Act.2. Learned advocate Shri A.L. Shah appearing for accused No. 8 has submitted that accused No. 8 be discharged as he was not a director of the company at the time when the provisional liquidator was appointed by this court.3. So as to substantiate his argument, he has submitted that 16.2.1999 is the 'relevant date' on which the Official Liquidator attached to this court was appointed as a provisional liquidator of the company. It has been submitted by him that in fact on 29.10.1997 accused No. 8 had submitted hi...
Tag this Judgment!Kalpesh Dineshchandra Jariwala Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-30-2003
Reported in: 2003CriLJ2401; (2003)1GLR706
H.K. Rathod, J.1. Heard learned Senior Advocate Mr. N.D. Nanavati for Mr. Tushar Mehta, learned Advocate on behalf of the petitioner and learned Public Prosecutor Mr. A.D. Oza with learned A.P.P. Mr. N.D. Gohil appearing on behalf of the respondent-State. The Investigating Officer Mr. Ajay Gakhar is also personally present before this Court as well as present General Manager of Shree Vikas Co-op. Bank Limited Mr. A.N. Thakkar has also remained personally present before this Court.2. Rule. Learned Public Prosecutor Mr. A.D. Oza waives service of Rule on behalf of the respondent-State in all these nine matters.3. At the outset, this Court would like to refer and quote certain following relevant observations of the Apex Court concerning the issue involved in this group of this petition as under :'8. The Code is cryptic on this topic and the Court prefers to be tacit, be the order custodial or not. And yet, the issue is one of liberty, justice, public safety and burden on the public treasu...
Tag this Judgment!Mansa Nagrik Sahakari Bank Ltd. and ors. Vs. Regional Provident Fund C ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-30-2003
Reported in: (2003)2GLR1624; (2003)IIILLJ525Guj
Ravi R. Tripathi, J.1. The present petition is filed seeking a declaration that the provisions of the Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') are not applicable to the petitioner-Bank. It is also prayed that a writ of certiorari or a writ of mandamus or a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari or mandamus or any other writ, order or direction of a like nature be issued quashing and setting aside the impugned action of the respondent authority in making applicable the provisions of the Act to the petitioner. Besides this, the other reliefs sought for are that the action of the respondent directing the Bank to open Provident Fund Account being No. 28204 and direction to deposit contribution every month in it be quashed and set aside, that a direction be issued against the authorities to refund the amount so far deposited by the petitioner-Bank in P.P. Account No. 28204 with interest at the rate of 12% per annu...
Tag this Judgment!Rameshbhai Dalaji Godad Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-30-2003
Reported in: 2003CriLJ2445; II(2003)DMC746; (2003)3GLR2390
B. J. Shethna, J. 1. The appellant-accused Rameshbhai Dalaji Godad has challenged in this Appeal the impugned judgment and order of conviction and sentence passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Sabarkantha at Himatnagar on 14-10-1991 in Sessions Case No. 38 of 1991 whereby the learned trial Judge held the appellant-accused guilty for the offences punishable under Sections. 498A and 306 I. P. Code and sentenced him to suffer 2 years S.I. and to pay fine of Rs. 200/- in default 10 days imprisonment for the offence under Section 306 I. P. Code and one year S.I. and to pay fine of Rs. 100/- in default to undergo 5 days imprisonment for the offence under Section 498A I. P. Code. However, both the substantive sentences were ordered to run concurrently,2. The appellant-accused belongs to Scheduled Tribe of Adivasi. He was young man of hardly 22 years old and doing the labour work when the incident took place on 15-4-1991. Prior to the date of incident i.e. 15-4-1991 he got married with ...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Ahmedabad Electricity Co. Ltd.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-29-2003
Reported in: [2003]262ITR97(Guj)
R.K. Abichandani, J. 1. The Income-tax Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench 'A', has referred under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the following one question in Reference Application No. 746 of 1988 pertaining to the assessment year 1983-84 and two questions in Reference Application No. 751 of 1988 in respect of the assessment year 1984-85 at the instance of the Revenue arising from the appeals of the assessee Ahmedabad Electricity Co. Ltd. allowed by it.'Reference Application No. 746/Ahd of 1988 assessment year 1983-84 : (1) Whether, the Appellate Tribunal is right in law and on facts in accepting the assessee's claim for allowance of bad debts amounting to Rs. 47,79,259 Reference Application No. 751/Ahd of 1988 assessment year 1984-85 :(1) Whether, the Appellate Tribunal is right in law and on facts in accepting the assessee's claim for allowance of bad debts amounting to Rs. 58,70,063 ?(2) Whether, the Appellate Tribunal is right in law and on facts in deleting an amount of Rs. 4...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Ahmedabad Electricity Co. Ltd.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-29-2003
Reported in: (2003)181CTR(Guj)222
R.K. Abichandani, J.1. The Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench 'A', has referred under Section 256(1) of the IT Act, 1961, the following one question in Ref. Appln. No. 746 of 1988 pertaining to the asst. yr. 1983-84 and two questions in Ref. Appln. No. 751 of 1988 in Respect of the asst. yr. 1984-85 at the instance of the Revenue arising from the appeals of the assessee Ahmedabad Electricity Co. Ltd. allowed by it.'Ref. Appln. No. 746/Ahd/1988; Asst. yr. 1983-84 (1) Whether, the Tribunal is right in law and on facts in accepting the assessee's claim for allowance of bad debts amounting to Rs. 47,79,259 Ref. Appln. No. 751/Ahd/1988; Asst. yi. 1984-85(1) Whether, the Tribunal is right in law and on facts in accepting the assessee's claim for allowance of bad debts amounting to Rs. 58,70,063 ?(2) Whether, the Tribunal is right in law and on facts in deleting an amount of Rs. 4,43,76,082 being the addition made by the ITO ?' 2. The assessee--electricity company is engaged in the business of generat...
Tag this Judgment!Fatesinh Jesinh Parmar Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-28-2003
Reported in: (2003)2GLR1438
M.S. Shah, J.1. Criminal Appeal No. 23 of 1998 is filed by Fatesinh Jesinh Parmar, original accused No. 1, against the judgment and order dated 13-11-1997 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Sabarkantha at Himmatnagar in Sessions Case No. 53 of 1995, convicting the appellant-accused No. 1 for the offence punishable under Section 302 I.P.C. and sentencing him to suffer imprisonment for life and also to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/- in default rigorous imprisonment for one month.2. Criminal Appeal No. 52 of 1998 is filed by the State of Gujarat for challenging the same judgment and order by which the learned Sessions Judge, Sabarkantha acquitted the other accused of the offence punishable under Section 302 I.P.C. read with Section 149 I.P.C. By the said judgment, the learned Sessions Judge convicted accused Nos. 2, 6 and 13 for the offence punishable under Section 325 I.P.C. and sentenced the said accused to suffer rigorous imprisonment for two years and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/- in defau...
Tag this Judgment!Gujarat Maritime Board Vs. S.S. JaIn and Co. (Bombay)
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-28-2003
Reported in: (2003)4GLR392
J.N. Bhatt, J. 1. In this group of Letters Patent Appeals, by invocation of Clause 15 of the Letters Patent, common questions arise out of a common interlocutory order of the learned Single Judge in a group of writ petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and therefore they are being disposed of simultaneously by a common order after having heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellants.2. In this group of Letters Patent Appeals, the central challenge in the focus has been the Circular dated 4.10.2002, issued by the Gujarat Maritime Board ('GMB' for short hereinafter) in respect of the allotment like exchange and amalgamation of the plots for the purpose of ship-breaking at Alang, the centre for ship-breaking which has acquired a global significance for variety of reasons and issued under Regulation 4(c) of (Gujarat Maritime Board Conditions & Procedures for Granting Permission for Utilising Ship-Breaking Plots) Regulation, 1994 (hereinafter be referred to as 'R...
Tag this Judgment!Yazdi Darabsha Icchaporia Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-27-2003
Reported in: 2003CriLJ2604
H.K. Rathod, J.1. At the outset, this Court would like to refer relevant obseervations made by the Apex Court in case of POKAR RAM V. STATE OF RAJASTHAN reported in 1985 SC 969 which reads as under :'... Let it be made distinctly clear that status in life, affluence or otherwise, are hardly relevant considerations while examining the request for granting anticipatory bail. Anticipatory bail to some extent intrudes in the sphere of investigation of crime and the Court must be cautious and circumspect in exercising such power of a discretionary nature. This case amply illustrates that the power was exercised sub silentio as to reasons or on considerations irrelevant or not germane to the determination.'2. Heard Mr.H.B.Shethna on behalf of the petitioner and learned APP Mr.N.D.Gohil appearing on behalf of the respondent - State.Rule. Learned APP Mr.N.D.Gohil waives service of Rule on behalf of the respondent - State.3. In the present petition, the petitioner has challenged the order passe...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »