Himachal Pradesh Court March 2009 Judgments

H.P. Krishivishva Vidyalaya Vs. Kulbhushan Sood

Court: Himachal Pradesh

Deepak Gupta, J.1. Admit. With the consent of the parties the appeal is taken up for final hearing today itself. This appeal under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (here-in-after referred to as the Act) is directed against the order of the learned Additional District Judge, Kangra at Dharamshala in Arbitration Case No. 3-P/2002 decided on 6.9.2008, whereby he has dismissed the objections filed by the present appellant against the award of the Arbitrator.2. The facts, in brief, are that the appellant Himachal Pradesh Krishvishva Vidyalaya, Palampur, (here-in-after referred to as HPKVV), awarded the work of construction of Women Training Hostel at HPKV, Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the Judgment? Yes.3. Palampur to the respondent (here-in-after referred to as the Contractor). An agreement was entered into between the parties which contained an arbitration clause. Dispute arose between the parties and the contractor laid certain cl...

Yash Paul Goel Vs. H.P.M.C. Ltd.

Court: Himachal Pradesh

Reported in: 2009(1)ShimLC423

Sanjay Karol, J.1. In the present petition, the petitioner has prayed for the following relief:(i) that the impugned order dated 29.7.93 (Annexure P-34) and order dated 3.7.1995 (Annexure P-39) may kindly be quashed and set aside.(ii) That after quashing the impugned orders Annexure P-34 and P-39, the period between the date of his relieving consequent upon the order of removal and now date of his joining i.e. 6.7.1995 and period from 6.1.1990 to 28.8.1991 may kindly be treated as duty period for all service benefits including financial benefits, with interest.(iii) That after quashing annexure P-39, the respondents may kindly be directed to pay all the consequential including financial benefits with interest.(iv) That the respondent may be directed to produce all the relevant record pertaining to the case, of the applicant for the land perusal of this Hon'ble Tribunal.2. While being posted as Senior Accountant, disciplinary action was initiated against the petitioner for his alleged m...

Sunita Kumari Vs. the State of H.P. and ors.

Court: Himachal Pradesh

Reported in: 2009(1)ShimLC410

Rajiv Sharma, J.1. The petitioner was appointed as a clerk from 12.9.1988. She was serving in Indira Memorial High School, Sanshi, District, Hamirpur, H.P. This Institute was upgraded to high standard, vide Notification, dated 12.1.1990. The services of the petitioner were not taken over by the State Government. However, Mr. Shankhyan has drawn the attention of the Court to the pleadings, whereby two persons namely Shri Ramesh Chand Sharma, T.G.T. (Arts) and Shri Karan Singh, Peon-cum-Chowkidar were offered appointment by the State Government after upgradation of the school. The learned Senior Additional Advocate General was directed to seek instructions, why the petitioner's services have not been taken over by the State Government at par with Shri Ramesh Chand Sharma, T.G.T. (Arts) and Shri Karan Singh, Peon-cum-Chowkidar. The respondent State has filed the supplementary affidavit. It is evident from Annexure R. 3 and R. 4 that Shri Ramesh Chand Sharma was offered appointment on tenu...

Shri Radhey Shyam Vs. H.R.T.C. and anr.

Court: Himachal Pradesh

Reported in: 2009(1)ShimLC416

Rajiv Sharma, J.1. The Disciplinary proceedings were initiated against the petitioner. The Inquiry Officer was appointed. He submitted report dated 30.4.1992 to the Disciplinary Authority. The petitioner was served with a memorandum dated 20.4.1993. Thereafter, fresh show cause notice was issued to him in continuation of memorandum dated 20.4.1993 on 18.1.1994. He was required to file reply within three days from the receipt of letter dated 18.1.1994. The Disciplinary Authority imposed the following penalty on 7.5.1994:His pay is reduced by 4 stages from Rs. 1500+30 to Rs. 1320+30 in the time scale of pay of Rs. 950-1800 for a period of 4 years with immediate effect. It is further ordered that Shri Radhey Shyam, Conductor will not earn increments of pay during the period of reduction aforementioned and on the expiry of this period, the reduction will have the effect of postponing his future increments of pay. He will not get anything more for the period of suspension except the subsist...

Arjun Singh Vs. State of H.P. and ors.

Court: Himachal Pradesh

Deepak Gupta, J.1. When this matter was taken up for hearing Shri Ajay Kumar Dhiman, learned Counsel for the petitioner made a request that senior counsel Shri Sultan Singh has not been able to come today and another date may be granted. This request cannot be allowed in view of the past history of the case.2. The orders of this Court reflect that reply was filed by the respondents as far back in the year 2006. Thereafter on 26.12.2006 when the matter was listed, local counsel for the petitioner requested for a date and on his request actual date i.e. 4th April, 2007 was granted. On 4th April, 2007 when the matter was taken up the counsel who was supposed to come from Delhi did not appear and at the request of the local counsel matter was adjourned. When the matter was listed thereafter on 4th May, 2007 the original counsel did not appear and local counsel requested for another date. Request was allowed and the case was fixed for 26th June, 2007 with the stipulation that no further adj...

Onkar Chand and Co. and ors. Vs. Income Tax Department

Court: Himachal Pradesh

Surinder Singh, J.1. Both the petitions titled above preferred under Section 482 of the Cr.PC read with Article 227 of the Constitution of India involve the common questions of law, therefore, taken together for its disposal. The respondent has filed two complaints--one bearing No. 196-III/20G5 against petitioners M/s Onkar Chand and its partners; and another Complaint No. 195-III/2005 against its sister concern M/s Shankar Dass Bal Ram Kumar and its partners under Sections 276C(1), 277 and 278B of the Income Tax Act, 1961, (in short the Act) allegedly for concealing the particulars of income to evade tax, wilfully and intentionally, which otherwise was payable under the Act.2. Finding reasonable grounds to summon the petitioners, the learned trial Court (Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate) issued the process against the petitioner firms and to all its partners, which have been assailed in these petitions.3. Admittedly, the petitioner firms, in both the petitions are business firms dealin...

The Himachal Pradesh Sanskrit Shishak Parishad and anr. Vs. State of H ...

Court: Himachal Pradesh

Reported in: 2009(1)ShimLC412

Rajiv Sharma, J.1. The members of the petitioner's Parishad are working as Shastris in various schools. The precise case of the members of the Parishad is that there are no promotional avenues for their category. The Court had directed the respondent-State on 9.1.2009 to consider whether promotional avenues could be provided to the category of the petitioner or not. The Director has filed the supplementary affidavit. Paragraphs 2 and 3 of the same read thus:2. That regarding the promotion avenues for the Sanskrit Teachers, it is submitted that the category of Sanskrit Teachers who are Acharya, M.A. are eligible for promotion to the post of Pandits in Sanskrit Pathshala and those Sanskrit Shastries, who are B.A. are also eligible for undergoing B.Ed, training and thereafter entitled for appointment as B.Ed, teacher.3. That it is further submitted that the replying respondent has submitted the proposal to the Government for amendment in R&P; Rules for making provisions of 10% quota to th...

Smt. Vishwa Rani Vs. State of H.P. and ors.

Court: Himachal Pradesh

Reported in: 2009(1)ShimLC526

Surjit Singh, J.1. This writ petition, under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, has been filed for judicial review of order dated 13th October, 2004, passed by the then State Administrative Tribunal, whereby Original Application filed by the petitioner for release of extra terminal benefits, in respect of the service of her late husband Makhan Lal Sharma, has been dismissed.2. Relevant facts may be stated thus. Late Makhan Lal Sharma was the husband of the petitioner. He joined Indian Army in the year 1963 and his date of birth was recorded by the Army authorities, in his service-book, as 2nd February, 1946. It appears that he joined the Army after passing matriculation examination. He was discharged from the Army in the year 1970. Thereafter, he was appointed as a Clerk in the Education Department of Himachal Pradesh. He got some promotions, while serving the Education Department. When he was Superintendent Grade-II and posted in Government Senior Secondary School at N...

State of H.P. and ors. Vs. Raj Kumar and ors.

Court: Himachal Pradesh

Reported in: 2009(1)ShimLC401

Kuldip Singh, J.1.The appellants in this appeal have assailed judgment, decree dated 29.8.1997 passed by learned District Judge, Mandi in Civil Appeal No. 11/92, reversing judgment, decree dated 26.12.1991 passed by learned Sub Judge 1st Class, Karsog in Civil Suit No. 68 of 1988. (SNR) 116 of 1991 (KSG).2. The facts, in brief, are that respondents had filed a suit for declaration and injunction that they are owners in possession of land comprised in khewat No. 102, khatouni No. 119, khasra No. 195, Muhal Baroti/70, measuring 4-12-16 bighas, Tehsil Sundernagar which they had purchased from Dlumbi Devi vide registered sale deed dated 30.12.1980 along with land comprised in khewat No. 103, khatouni No. 120, khasra No. 193, situated in the same village which they had purchased from Sunder through registered sale deed dated 14.1.1981. The further case of the respondents is that they are owners in possession of the suit land but Assistant Collector 1st Grade, Sundernagar had issued a show c...

Mani Ram Vs. Himachal Pradesh State Electricity Board and ors.

Court: Himachal Pradesh

Reported in: 2009(1)ShimLC419

Rajiv Sharma, J.1. The petitioner was engaged as a Beldar by the respondent-Board in the year 1968. He was promoted to the post of 'T Mate on work charge basis on 26. 5.1970. He joined his duties on 1.6.1970. He was promoted from the post of 'T' Mate to the post of Assistant Lineman vide order dated 17.9.1979. He was posted at Electrical Sub-Division, Nalagarh under Electrical Circle, Solan. He was transferred from Electrical Division Nalagarh to Electrical Sub Division Subathu under Electrical Division, Arki. He joined his duties on 13.10.1992. He was further promoted to the post of Lineman on the basis of the recommendations made by the Departmental Promotion Committee dated 27.5.1987. He submitted his joining report on 10.6.1987. His pay was fixed in the pay scale of Rs. 480-880 w.e.f. 10.6.1987. The petitioner was informed by respondent No. 3 on 21.5.1993 that he has been assigned seniority, wrongly and accordingly he could not be promoted to the post of Lineman on the basis of rec...