Gujarat Court April 2015 Judgments
State of Gujarat Vs. Jayantibhai Somabhai Khant
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Apr-30-2015
Oral Judgment: Akil Kureshi, J. 1. These appeals arise out of the judgment of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Vadodara, in Sessions Case No.151/2010. The accused was charged with offences punishable under sections 376 and 506(2) of the IPC. He was convicted for the said offences. For offence under section 376, he was sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for ten years. For offence under section 506(2), he was sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for six months. Fine was also imposed. Accused has challenged his conviction in Criminal Appeal No.863/2012. The State seeking enhancement of sentence has filed Criminal Appeal No.224/2012. 2. Briefly stated, the prosecution version was that Radha, daughter of the accused and the victim studied in the same school. In the month of February 2009, the victim had gone to the house of her friend Radha for studying. The accused sent his daughter away for some errand and when he and the victim were alone, after closing the front door of the house, r...
Tag this Judgment!The Executive Director/Basin Manager Oil and Natural Gas Corporation L ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Apr-29-2015
1. As all the appeals arise from the common judgment and order passed by the learned Single Judge, they are being considered simultaneously. 2. We may also record that for the sake of convenience, hereinafter, the employee union shall be referred to as the union/employees and the employer ONGC Ltd. shall be referred to as ONGC/employer. 3. The short facts of the case appear to be that ONGC had sanctioned post of about more than 800 in numbers, however, for the mode of recruitment, it appears that ONGC called for the names from the Employment Exchange instead public advertisement in the newspaper. When the names were called for from the Employment Exchange for the posts in question, it was provided for a term of four years. It appears that thereafter, the interview call letters were issued and after conducting the interviews, the Appointment Orders were issued as per the inter se merit of the available candidates. It appears that the terms and conditions at the time of appointment to th...
Tag this Judgment!Devubhai T. Patel Vs. Saurashtra Paints Limited
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Apr-24-2015
Cav Judgment: 1. Rule. Mr. Varun Patel, Ld. Advocate waives service of rule for the respondent. 2. The applicant being original respondent in the main petition, has prayed for an order to direct the opponent company to pay wages under section 17-B of the Industrial Disputes Act [for short the Act'] from the date of the award impugned in the main petition till the final disposal of the petition. 3. On perusal of the entire record, the factual details transpired are as under : 3.1 The applicant herein was dismissed from services on 1/9/2001 after holding departmental inquiry because of his unauthorized absence from the work place so as to carry out his personal business and other acts of insubordination. 3.2 The Reference [LCA] No. 1456/2001 was filed for reinstatement with full back wages. On 25/6/2007 such Reference was allowed directing reinstatement with 75% back wages. 3.3 On 25/9/2007 main petition was filed wherein on 13/12/2007 notice was issued and ad-interim stay of the award w...
Tag this Judgment!Bhavsar Urmiben Kanaiyalal Vs. State of Gujarat - Through The director ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Apr-23-2015
Cav Judgment: Paresh Upadhyay, J. 1. The point for consideration before this specially constituted Bench is as to whether the Gujarat State Social Welfare Board is a Statewithin the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution of India. Reference is made to this Bench by the Division Bench of this Court vide order dated 18.07.2014. 2. Since it is the question noted above, which only needs to be answered by this Bench, the merits of the petition, which is dismissed by the learned Single Judge on the ground of that being not maintainable, need not be gone into and therefore whether to grant any relief to the petitioners would be left to the Division Bench which is seized of the Letters Patent Appeal, however, for the limited purpose, as to under what circumstances the reference is made, the following aspects are noted. 3.1 The petitioners, who are working with the Gujarat State Social Welfare Board, asked for uniform implementation of the Government Resolution dated 13.03.1995, for all the ...
Tag this Judgment!E-Infochips Ltd. Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle-4
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Apr-07-2015
M.R. Shah, J. 1. By way of this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner - assessee has prayed for appropriate writ, order and/or direction to quash and set aside the impugned notice issued under section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 dated 27/3/2014 for the A.Y. 2007-2008. Thus, the petitioner has challenged reopening proceedings of the assessment for A.Y. 2007-2008 initiated in exercise of powers under section 147 of the Income Tax Act. 2. Facts leading to the present Special Civil Application in nutshell are as under :- 2.1That the petitioner is a Company engaged in I.T. Enabled Services and Software Development. The petitioner filed its return of income for A.Y. 2007-2008 on 21/10/2007 declaring total income at Rs.5,52,52,210/-. 2.2 That the case was selected for scrutiny and notices under section 142(1) and under section 143(2) of the Income Tax Act were issued and served upon the petitioner - assessee. It appears that in the notice dated 12/11/2010...
Tag this Judgment!Bhavikaben Rajabhai Dhrangi and Others Vs. State Gujarat and Others
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Apr-07-2015
Cav Judgment: Ravi R. Tripathi, J. 1. With the consent of the learned Advocates for the parties, the matter is heard for final disposal. 2. The matter is placed before this Court pursuant to an order passed by the Hon'ble the Acting Chief Justice on office submission on 01.12.2014. The office made submission inviting attention of the Hon'ble the Acting Chief Justice to an order passed by the Division Bench consisting of Hon'ble the Acting Chief Justice Mr.V.M.Sahai and Hon'ble Mr.Justice R.P.Dholaria. The Court passed order on 01.12.2014, relevant part of which is quoted in the office submission, which reads as under:- As per the first proviso to sub-Rule (2) of Rule 7(B), the petitioners have not applied for admission to the Admission Committee. In our opinion, if the Rule is not complied with by the students, first proviso to sub-Rule (2) of Rule 7(B) of the Gujarat Diploma in General and Midwifery (Regulation of Admission and Fixation of Fees) (Amendment) Rules, 2012 debars the stud...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- Next ›