Gujarat Court April 2005 Judgments
Regional Manager, Bank of Baroda Vs. Gitaben Haribhai Darji Deceased T ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Apr-29-2005
Reported in: (2006)ILLJ404Guj
R.S. Garg, J.1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.2. Bank of Baroda, the appellant, being aggrieved by the order dated 8/5/1998 passed in Special Civil Application No. 8182 of 1997 upholding the order dated 4/4/1997 passed by the concerned Tribunal in Central Recovery Application No. 1/1989, exercising jurisdiction under Section 33(C)(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, is before this Court. It appears that the workman since deceased, was an employee as a part-time daily wager with effect from 11/11/1976 for the purposes of fetching water, sweeping the floors, etc. She was removed from services on 8/7/1997 and after some conciliation, she was reinstated on 11/7/1997. She made an application under Section 33(C)(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, submitting, inter alia, that as she was working as a full time daily wager, she was entitled to the grade and pay-scale of a Class-IV employee. The appellant contested the issue tooth and nail and submitted that she was not in the regular rol...
Tag this Judgment!J.M. Industries Vs. Commissioner of Customs
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Apr-29-2005
Reported in: 2005(187)ELT291(Guj)
D.A. Mehta, J.1. Heard Mr.A.D.Maru, learned advocate for the appellant. None appears when the matter is taken up for hearing. Taking into consideration the nature of the controversy between the parties the appeal is taken up for final hearing and disposal today. 2. The appellant being aggrieved by the order dated 13th October, 2003 made by Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi (the Tribunal) has preferred this appeal proposing the following seven questions: '(1) Whether Applicant is entitled to benefit of exemption Notification No.22/99-Cus. dtd.28.2.1999, Sr.No.5, read with para 121 of the Budget 1998-99 speech applying the ratio of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court's judgment in the case of Commissioner of Sales Tax, Bombay v. Delhi Iron & Steel Co. Pvt. Ltd. reported in 1995(98) STC 202 (Bom.) or otherwise? (2) If the said exemption Notification were not entitled to the Appellant, whether it tantamounts to double taxation or otherwise as Ship Breakers are paying...
Tag this Judgment!S.R. Bharai Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Apr-29-2005
Reported in: [2006(109)FLR184]
Bhawani Singh, C.J. 1. This Special Civil Application arises out of the judgment and orders of Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT), Ahmedabad Bench, dated 12-03-1998/25-06-1998, in Original Application No. 120 of 1992/Review Application No. 21 of 1998, holding that petitioner is not entitled to Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the Judgment? protection under the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (for short `the I.D.Act'), particularly Section 25F.2. Petitioner submits that he was selected after following the due procedure and given appointment against vacant post of Telephone Operator, vide order dated 21-11-1983. However, his services were terminated orally from 31-12-1989, although he had been working continuously as Telephone Operator. Aggrieved by the termination, he preferred Original Application No. 120 of 1992 before the CAT, but vide order dated 12-03-1998, the Application was rejected. Review Application No. 21 of 1998 was also rejected on...
Tag this Judgment!Madhu Textiles Ahmedabad Ltd. Vs. Official Liquidator
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Apr-27-2005
Reported in: I(2006)BC98
K.A. Puj, J.1. The petitioner, namely, Madhu Textiles Ahmedabad Limited has filed this petition under Sections 391 to 394 of the Companies Act, 1956 praying for the compromise and arrangement as per the Scheme proposed by the Company produced at Annexure B to the petition for sanction of this Court so as to make it binding on its Members and Secured Creditors with Banks and Financial Institutions.2. The Court has admitted the petition on 03.02.2003 and notice was issued to the Central Government. The Court has also passed necessary order with regard to the advertisement to be published in 'Indian Express' and 'Sandesh' - both Ahmedabad Edition. Subsequently, the Secured Creditors were joined as parties vide order dated 30.09.2004 and accordingly, IDBI, ICICI, IFCI, IRBI, SBI and SBS as well as Majoor Mahajan Sangh, Kadi and the Official Liquidator were joined as parties - respondents. Subsequently, since ICICI Bank has assigned its rights in respect of its debts in favour of Kotak Mahi...
Tag this Judgment!Suo-motu Vs. P.C. Pandya
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Apr-27-2005
Reported in: 2005CriLJ3567; (2005)3GLR2485
R.S. Garg, J.1. Heard learned counsel for the noticee. The noticee/contemner is also in attendance.2. It is to be recorded that on 21.3.2005, when Division Bench of this Court was hearing the arguments of the parties in Special Civil Application No. 3928 of 2005, a mobile phone started ringing in the Court. On inquiries, the holder of the mobile phone informed that he is Mr. Pravinkumar C. Pandya, Chief Engineer, Gujarat Electricity Board. The Court, taking a serious view of the matter and as the proceedings were disturbed, recorded its shock and surprise after watching the conduct of the said Chief Engineer. Telephone set was immediately seized and notice was directed to be issued to Mr. Pravinkumar C. Pandya as to why he should not be awarded appropriate punishment for causing disturbance in the Court proceedings. 3. The noticee has submitted his reply. According to him, he has the highest regard for the Court and would never commit any intentional act to disturb the Court proceeding...
Tag this Judgment!Telecom District Manager Valsad Dist. Vs. Namlabhai Ranchhodbhai Patel
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Apr-27-2005
Reported in: (2006)1GLR162
Sharad D. Dave, J.1. As all these petitions are based on common question of facts and law, they are disposed of by this common judgment.2. Special Civil Application No. 10425 of 2002 is filed under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India praying for quashing and setting aside the judgment and award dated 20.07.2002 passed in Reference No. ITC/2/96 by the Industrial Tribunal, Surat, directing the petitioner to reinstate the respondent in his original post and to pay all consequential benefits available to him pursuant to the reinstatement and to pay salary at the rate of Rs.800/per month from the date of termination from 05.04.1992 till reinstatement and to pay Rs.1000/by way of cost.3. Special Civil Application No. 10497 of 2002 is filed under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India praying for quashing and setting aside the judgment and award dated 20.07.2002 passed in Reference No. ITC/1/96 by the Industrial Tribunal, Surat, directing the petitioner to reinstate the...
Tag this Judgment!Saurasthra Solvent Extraction Co. Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Regional Provident Fun ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Apr-25-2005
Reported in: [2006(109)FLR179]; (2006)IILLJ962Guj
Sharad D. Dave, J.1. In this petition, the petitioners have challenged the order dtd.26/2/1998 passed by the respondent for levying damages of Rs.3,56,713.00 under Section 14-B of the Employees Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1959. 2. Ms.Thakor on behalf of Mr.Mihir Joshi, learned counsel for the petitioners has argued that the first petitioner No.1 is a Company registered under the provisions of the Companies Act and is carrying on business of solvant extraction and is regularly paying Fund Commissioner the contribution payable by it under the Act since last 35 years and during all these period, no default is committed by the petitioner company. She has further argued that a notice dtd.25/7/1996 was issued by Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner seeking reconcile of deficit of Rs.84,071-00 in the payment of contribution for the year March, 1994 to February 1995 but since the account of the petitioner company did not indicate any deficit payment of provident fund cont...
Tag this Judgment!Narmada Aluminium Industries Ltd. Vs. Appellate Authority for Industri ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Apr-25-2005
Reported in: (2005)3GLR2296
K.A. Puj, J.1. Special Civil Application No. 1527 of 2001 is filed by the Company, namely, Narmada Aluminium Industries Limited challenging the order passed by the Board for Industrial and Financial Reconstruction (for short 'BIFR') on 01.09.2000 in Reference Case No. 15 of 1991 and the order passed by the Appellate Authority for Industrial and Financial Reconstruction (for short 'AAIFR') on 02.01.2001 in Appeal No. 327 of 2000.2. This Court has passed an order on 02.11.2001 admitting the said petition and interim relief in terms of para 21 (c) was granted till the final disposal of the petition. By virtue of the said interim relief, the operation and implementation of the order passed by BIFR dated 01.09.2000 was stayed.3. Civil Application No. 5466 of 2004 is filed by the applicant, namely, Industrial Development Bank of India, the original respondent No. 4 in S.C.A. No. 1527 of 2001 for vacating the interim relief granted by this Court by an order dated 02.11.2001 in S.C.A. No. 1527...
Tag this Judgment!Subhashbhai R. Shah Vs. District Collector
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Apr-25-2005
Reported in: AIR2005Guj365; (2005)3GLR2275
Jayant Patel, J.1. Rule. Mr. Prachchhak, learned A.G.P. waives service of rule for respondent Nos. 1 and 3 and Mr.Dhaval Vyas for respondent No. 2. With the consent of the learned Advocates appearing for both the sides, the matter is taken up for final hearing on today. 2. The short facts of the case are that the Respondent Municipality revised the taxation rates and such rates of taxation were also made as subject matter of the proceedings under Section 258 of the Gujarat Municipality Act (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'). Vide municipal case No. 20/2004, it was held by the Collector under Section 258 of the Act that the elected body of the Municipality or the Administrator as the case may be has the power to decide the rates of taxation and ultimately as per the order dtd.31st May, 2004 the resolutions of the Municipality were approved. It appears that there is no dispute on the point that on the basis of the said resolutions which were confirmed by the Collector under Section 2...
Tag this Judgment!Jitendra Shantilal Shukla Vs. Bank of Baroda and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Apr-25-2005
Reported in: (2005)IIILLJ305Guj
ORDERG.S. Singhvi, J.1. Whether resignation from service is akin to voluntary retirement is the only question which arises for determination in this appeal filed by the appellant against the order of the learned single Judge who declined to entertain his prayer for directing the Respondents to give him pensionary benefits in accordance with the Bank of Baroda (Employees') Pension Regulations, 1995 (for short, 'the Regulations').2. The Appellant joined the service of the Respondent-Bank on December 12, 1978. He tendered resignation, which was accepted with effect from September 12, 1993. After almost six years, he applied for grant of pension in accordance with the Regulations. His application was rejected vide order dated July 1, 1999. After three years, he filed Special Civil Application No. 12431 of 2001 for issuance of a mandamus to the Respondent-Bank to pay pensionary benefits.3. The learned single Judge held that an employee, who had resigned from service is not entitled to pensi...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »