Himachal Pradesh Court May 2011 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Baldev Raj Sharma Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: May-20-2011
1. Heard and gone through the record. 2. Petitioner was working as JBT in the Primary Education Department of the State of Himachal Pradesh. He joined service on 8th August, 1955 and retired on 31st August, 1987. He was promoted as Head Teacher in May, 1985. Thereafter, three persons, junior to him, namely S/Shri Vishambar Dutt, Dina Nath and Varyam Singh, were promoted as Centre Head Teachers, in April 1987, but the petitioner, who was senior to those three persons, was not so promoted. He made representation and it was then that he was promoted as Centre Head Teacher, on and with effect from 2nd April, 1987. This order of promotion was issued after his retirement. 3. Now, grievance of the petitioner is that his pay as Centre Head Teacher fixed, on the basis of notional order of promotion, effective from 2nd April, 1987, is lower than the pay of the abovenamed three persons, who were junior to him, as per Seniority List Annexure A-1. 4. Respondents’ response is that the persons,...
Rajender Singh Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: May-20-2011
1. This petition has been instituted by the petitioner herein seeking bail. It is undisputed before me that prior to the institution of the present petition, an application was instituted before the learned Sessions Judge, Sirmour District at Nahan, who by his order dated 5.3.2011 rejected the bail application. The facts as alleged are that on 15.12.2010, one Sadeep Kumar son of late Shri Jagat Ram, resident of Jajahan, P.O.Sanora, Tehsil Rajgarh, District Sirmour has got statement under Section 154 Cr.P.C. recorded at Police Station, Rajgarh stating that he is working in Dairy Farm, Kotla and his father used to work as a labourer and doing fishing work. On 6.12.2010, his father had gone to sell fish at Giripul and did not return home. 2. A search was made for him in their relatives etc. but the whereabouts of his father could not be known. Thereafter, First Information Report was lodged at Police Station, Rajgarh. His neighbours Beli Ram and Ram Dutt disclosed him that on 6.12.1010 in...
Shri Onkar Singh Vs. H.R.T.C. and anr.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: May-20-2011
1. The petition has been filed on the following prayers vide para 7 (a), (b) and (c):- “7 (a). The impugned order Annexure PB may be set aside & quashed. (b). The respondents be directed to treat the period of suspension as spent on duty and pay all allowances. (c). The respondents be also directed to treat the applicant to be in continuous service of the corporation with all benefits of service.” 2. In reply on behalf of the respondents, the following stand has been taken vide para 6 (a):- “6(a). The facts mentioned are subject to the strict proof and the charges framed are admitted to be correct. The appeal para of rejection is also admitted but the authority has passed a reasoned order dated 10.11.1996. This para is also partially admitted. The observation regarding the quantum of sentence, the appropriate authority minimize the punishment of removal and the applicant has been taken into service. However, it is pointed out that the applicant has not been paid t...
Lahori Singh Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: May-20-2011
1. Petitioner joined the Indian Army in 1974. He was discharged in 1997.Thereafter, he joined as a Physical Education Teacher in the respondent-department on 30.07.1998 against the General category. Since the petitioner was an Exserviceman, he submitted an application on 12th October, 1998, exercising his option as per the notification dated 23rd May, 1975 to be considered against any of the vacancies, which were likely to become available under the category of Ex-servicemen subsequently. The respondent-department has not taken any decision on the option exercised by the petitioner. However, his salary was fixed as per Annexure A-13 w.e.f. 01.01.2001 instead of 30.07.1998, as prayed by the petitioner. 2. Mr. V.D. Khidta, learned counsel for the petitioner has strenuously argued that action of the respondents of fixing the pay of the petitioner w.e.f. 01.01.2001 instead of 30.07.1998 is wrong, illegal, arbitrary and, thus, violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. Ac...
H.P. State Cooperative Bank Ltd. Vs. M/S. G.D. Khanna and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: May-19-2011
1. This petition is directed against the judgment dated 23.7.2009 passed by the learned Appellate Authority, Fast Track Court, Shimla in Rent Appeal No. 54-S/14 of 2008. 2. Material facts necessary for the adjudication of this petition are that respondents-tenants (hereinafter referred to as ‘tenants’ for convenience sake) moved an application under section 21 of the Himachal Pradesh Urban Rent Control Act, 1987 on 20.6.2006 for depositing of rent with effect from 1.6.1999 to 31.3.2006 before the learned Rent Controller. The application was contested by the petitioner-landlord (hereinafter referred to as ‘landlord’ for convenience sake). The Rent Controller allowed the application on 30.4.2008. Landlord preferred an appeal bearing Rent Appeal No. 54-S/14 of 2008 before the Appellate Authority, Fast Track Court, Shimla. The Appellate Authority dismissed the same on 23.7.2009. Hence, the present petition. 3. Mr. T.S. Chauhan has vehemently argued that the landlord...
Smt. Desh Kumari Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: May-19-2011
1. Heard and gone through the record. 2. Petitioner and respondent No.4 Ms Manesh Kumari were working as JBTs in Chamba District, in the year 1996, when a promotion order, copy Annexure A-4, promoting both of them as Head Teachers, was issued. Petitioner was senior to respondent No.4. She was posted in Government Primary School Ather, while respondent No.4 was posted in Government Primary School Chashak. Both of them did not join at their new places of postings and forewent promotion, because their new places of postings, according to them, were terrorist affected areas of Chamba District. 3. Petitioner’s contention is that respondent No.4 was considered for promotion two years later and was promoted as Head Teacher on 22 nd May, 1998 and thereafter she had been promoted, even as Centre Head Teacher, on 27 th February, 2002, but the petitioner was debarred from promotion, even as Head Teacher, for five years, on account of her having declined promotion that was made in the year 1...
Jatinder Pal Vs. Himachal Road Transport Corporation and anr.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: May-19-2011
1. Heard and gone through the record. 2. Petitioner joined as driver with respondentHimachal Road Transport Corporation, against a post reserved for Ex-servicemen, in the year 1983. In January, 2004, he fell sick and submitted a medical certificate to his employer, seeking leave on medical grounds. He had been seeking extension in leave, because he did not recover from sickness. He was required by the Corporation to appear before a Medical Board. He appeared before the Medical Board and the Medical Board issued certificate dated 27.3.2004, copy Annexure A-5, to the effect that petitioner had become completely and permanently incapacitated for further service of any kind, because of his ailment, related to heart.Petitioner was issued a notice, copy Annexure A-9, per which he was informed that in view of the Medical Board’s certificate, copy Annexure A-5, it was proposed to compulsorily retire him. He submitted reply, copy Annexure A-10, praying for being permitted to remain on med...
Smt.Rameshwari Devi Vs. H.R.T.C. and anr.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: May-19-2011
1. By means of this appeal, the appellant (hereinafter referred to as the claimant) has prayed that the award of the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal awarding compensation of Rs.1,10,000/- to her be enhanced. 2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the appellant suffered injuries in an accident involving Bus No.HP-42-0768 belonging to the HRTC. Since the only question involved is with regard to the compensation, only the evidence relevant in this regard is being referred to. 3. The evidence on record reveals that the claimant met with an accident on 21.10.2006 and she was admitted to the Civil Hospital at Rohru. Since her condition was critical she was discharged on 22.10.2006 and referred to IGMC, Shimla where she remained admitted for 9 days and according to her she had to repeatedly go back to Shimla for treatment. She claims to have spent Rs.3500/- for transportation charges for coming in a taxi from Rohru to Shimla and claims that she spent Rs.25,000/- on her treatm...
M/S Himachal Country Resorts Vs. Mohan Lal Saini and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: May-19-2011
1. This petition is directed against the order dated 18.3.2011 whereby the learned lower Appellate Court has dismissed the application filed under Order 9 Rule 8 CPC filed by the present petitioner for setting aside the order whereby the application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act was dismissed in default. 2. The undisputed facts are that the matter was pending before the learned District Judge, Nahan for long. It appears that there was no Presiding Officer in the Court for some time. Thereafter the matter was listed on 16.5.2006. Presence of the counsel for the applicant was marked on that date. The matter was then adjourned to 30.5.2006 when none appeared for the applicant and the application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act was dismissed in default. The application under Order 9 Rule 8 for recalling the aforesaid order was filed on 7.11.2006. There is delay in filing this application also. 3. The main ground taken in this application is that no notice was issued to ...
B.P. Sharma Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: May-19-2011
1. who is an Advocate by profession, was appointed as Presiding Officer of Sales Tax Tribunal by the Governor of Himachal Pradesh, in accordance with Section 3-A of Himachal Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1968. The Notification said that appointment was to be effective from the date the petitioner took over the charge of the post and terms and conditions were to be those, as notified vide the Notification, dated 7.12.1999, copy Annexure R-1. Petitioner was appointed for a period of 5 years, but his appointment was cut short on completion of two years, by an ordinance. He was granted pension, in accordance with Notification dated 18.6.2001, copy Annexure P-2, by which Rules, Annexure R-1, were amended. Amended Rules provided for payment of pension to the Presiding Officer of the Tribunal. Pension was to be payable only to those Presiding Officer, who had served at least for two years and the quantum of pension was to be worked out by multiplying the amount of `700 per annum by the numbe...