Gujarat Court October 2012 Judgments
Gujarat Energy Transmission Corporation and Others Vs. Its Workmen
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Oct-12-2012
1. By way of this petition, challenge is made to the award passed by the Industrial Tribunal, Bhavnagar dated 29.10.2005 in Reference (IT) No. 104 of 2002, whereby the action of the petitioner company (the employer), of correcting the date of birth of the respondent workman, is held to be illegal. 2. Heard Mr. Dipak R. Dave, learned advocate for the petitioner-employer and Shri R.J.Oza, learned senior advocate with Ms. Rutuja Oza, learned advocate for the respondent workman/ employee. 3. The facts in brief are to the effect that Shri Vora- the respondent workman, had joined the service of the Gujarat Electricity Board on 28.11.1969. At the time of his entry in the service, the service book was opened with 18.01.1947 as the date of birth of the respondent. In the year 1997, petitioner employer sought to change the said date of birth from 18.01.1947 to 18.01.1946. It was the action of the employer to change the date of birth and the respondent had not asked for change in the service reco...
Tag this Judgment!Canara Bank Through Authorised Signatory Vs. Palco Recycle Industries ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Oct-11-2012
Cav Judgment: (Bhaskar Bhattacharya, CJ.) 1. At the time of hearing of this Letters Patent Appeal preferred by the respondent No.2 of the Special Civil Application being SCA No. 17441 of 2011 against an order dated 25th June 2012 passed by a learned Single Judge in Civil Application for interim relief being C.A. No. 1534 of 2012, we decided to hear out the writ-application itself, instead of remanding the matter back to the learned Single Judge, as the questions involved are pure questions of law. 2. The facts giving rise to the filing of this Letters Patent Appeal may be summed up thus. 2.1 The writ-petitioner is a Limited Company, registered under the Companies Act. The respondent No.2 in the Special Civil Application, who is the appellant before us, issued a public advertisement dated 21st August 2010 in daily newspapers for sale of assets of M/s. Dairy Den Limited situated at survey No. 418 paiki Plot No. 18 to 25 and Survey No. 435 paiki at Lucky Industrial Estate, Kadi, Mehsana. ...
Tag this Judgment!Rishikesh R Shahi Vs. State of Gujarat Thro Secretary and Others
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Oct-11-2012
J.B. Pardiwala, J. Having regard to the nature of the relief prayed for in the main writ-petition, and also taking into consideration the fact that this Letters Patent Appeal is directed against an interim order, whereby the learned Single Judge has refused to grant interim relief, we decided to hear the main writ-petition itself, and is accordingly, being disposed of by this judgment and order. 2. This appeal is at the instance of a writ-petitioner, in a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, and is directed against an order dated 10th September, 2012, passed by the learned Single Judge, in Special Civil Application No. 12145 of 2012, by which His Lordship admitted the writ-petition, making rule returnable on 8th October, 2012, but having regard to the nature of the dispute and the relief prayed for by the petitioner, interim relief as prayed for the release of the vehicle seized by the authorities under the provisions of the Gujarat Mineral (Prevention of Illegal Mi...
Tag this Judgment!Swaminarayan B.Ed. College thru Trustee Natvarbhai Patel Vs. National ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Oct-11-2012
Bhaskar Bhattacharya, J. 1. This Letters Patent Appeal is at the instance of an unsuccessful writ-petitioner and is directed against an order dated 16th June 2012 passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court by which His Lordship dismissed the Special Civil Application No. 7855 of 2012 filed by the appellant with costs. 2. The facts leading to the filing of the Special Civil Application, out of which the present appeal arises, may be summed up thus: 2.1 The appellant had made an application to National Council for Teachers' Education, Western Region, the respondent No.1, [NCTE] for opening a new B. Ed. College at the address given in the cause title of this appeal, and the same was sent with all relevant documents. 2.2 The consistent practice followed by the respondent No. 1 for grant of recognition is that after a particular Trust submits application, a visiting team constituted by the respondent No. 1 visits the place where the Trust wants to start the College to impart education i...
Tag this Judgment!Vasant Nature Cure Hospital and Pratibha Maternity Hosp. Trust and Oth ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Oct-11-2012
Cav Judgment: 1. This appeal under section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure (the Code for short) is filed by the original plaintiffs with original defendants No.2,5 and 6 against the judgment and decree dated 31.3.1997 passed by the learned Extra Assistant Judge, Ahmedabad (Rural) at Mirzapur in Regular Civil Appeal No. 67 of 1988 whereby the learned appellate Judge allowed the appeal and set aside the judgment and decree passed by the learned Trial Judge in Regular Civil Suit No. 525 of 1979 dated 30th July, 1988. The suit was filed by the appellants No.1 and 2 for recovery of possession of the suit property from the respondent No.1 (Original defendant No.1). For the sake of convenience, the parties shall be referred to as per their original status before the learned trial Judge. 2. The case of the plaintiffs in their suit was that the defendant No.1 was employed as watchman to look after the trust properties including the hospital and nursing home run by plaintiff no.1, that to fac...
Tag this Judgment!induben Ramjibhai Malavia and Others Vs. State of Gujarat and Another
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Oct-09-2012
Oral Judgment: 1. These appeals under section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure are filed by original plaintiffs. They filed suits seeking declaration that they being employees of the erstwhile Junagadh State, they could not be retired at the age of 58 years but would be entitled to continue in service till 60 years of age as they would continue to be governed by the rules of erstwhile Junagadh State even after its merger into Saurashtra State which merged into bilingual State of Bombay and then Gujarat State on bifurcation from Bombay State. 2. The appellant of Second Appeal No. 86 of 1997 had filed Regular Civil Suit No. 700 of 1985 and his case in the suit is that he was initially appointed by the Revenue Commissioner vide order dated 10.2.1948 as writer clerk in the erstwhile Junagadh State, that the Junagadh State merged into Saurashtra State and thereafter in Bombay State and then, the State of Bombay was bifurcated and State of Gujarat came into existence with effect from 1.5.1...
Tag this Judgment!Ramjibhai Haribhai Chaudhari Vs. State of Gujarat and Another
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Oct-04-2012
Oral Judgment: 1.00. Present Revision Application under section 397 read with section 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been preferred by the petitioner - original accused to quash and set aside the impugned Judgement and Order of conviction and sentence passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate (First Class), Mehsana in Criminal Case No. 1098 of 2004 dtd.16/4/2009, by which the petitioner - original accused has been convicted for the offence punishable under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and ordered to undergo Simple Imprisonment for a period of six months with fine of Rs.5,000/- and in default, to undergo further Simple Imprisonment for a period of One Month and further directed the petitioner - original accused to pay Rs.3,50,000/- to the original complainant, towards compensation under section 357(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioner herein original accused has also challenged the impugned Judgement and Order passed by the learned appellate ...
Tag this Judgment!State of Gujarat and Another Vs. Rajesh C. Mulwani
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Oct-04-2012
V.M. Sahai, J. 1. We have heard Mr. Rakesh P. Patel, learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing for the appellants and Mr. Arun D. Oza, learned counsel appearing for the respondent. 2. This Letters Patent Appeal has been filed by the appellants original respondents challenging the interim order dated 23.7.2012 passed by the learned Single Judge in Special Civil Application No.4378 of 2012. By the said order, the learned Single Judge has admitted the writ petition and directed the State Government to act upon the recommendation made by Gujarat Public Service Commission dated 12.1.2012 and to implement the said recommendation of the GPSC within two weeks. 3. The facts in brief are summarised as under :- 3.1 The respondent herein original petitioner is a visually handicapped person who suffers from 100% blindness. He is working as Lecturer since last 15 years in District Institute of Education and Training (D.I.E.T. for short). In the year 2010, the respondent cleared examination co...
Tag this Judgment!Parimal Trivedi and Others Vs. Pradip Prajapati and Others
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Oct-03-2012
1. The petitioners have brought under challenge order dated 13.10.2011 passed by Gujarat University Service Tribunal [hereinafter referred to as the tribunal] in application No.46 of 2011, which was filed by present respondent No.1. The petitioners have, inter alia, prayed for below mentioned relief/direction:- 17 (B) Your Lordships be pleased to issue writ in the nature of certiorari or any other writ, order or direction quashing and setting aside the order dated 13.10.2011 passed in Application No.46 of 2011. (C) Pending, admission hearing and/or final disposal of this Special Civil Application Your Lordships be pleased to stay order dated 13.10.2011 passed in Application No.46 of 2011. 2. Relevant Facts:- So as to support and justify the relief prayed for, the petitioners have stated below mentioned facts:- 2.1 The respondent No.1 is associate professor in the petitioner No.1 University. It appears that on 25.5.2011 certain item/article was published in news papers and some members/...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›