Jammu and Kashmir Court June 1982 Judgments

Arun Tandon Vs. Insurance Co. Ltd. and ors.

Court: Jammu and Kashmir

Reported in: 1983CriLJ459

ORDERI.K. Kotwal, J.1. The petitioner, Arun Kumar Tandon. was on the clerical staff of the National Insurance Company Limited, respondent No. 1 herein, when on April 29, 1976, the Central Government floated a scheme known as General Insurance (Rationalisation of Pay Scales and other Conditions of Service of Development Staff) Scheme, 1976, providing for conversion of the clerical staff into Development staff. This scheme laid down the procedure for categorisation of Development Staff and their emoluments and other perquisites besides leave. Provident Fund and Gratuity, Para 11 of the scheme provided that every person employed with the Development, Staff shall maintain his cost ratio within the limits stipulated in Sub-clause (b) of Clause (17) of Para. 3. According to Clause (17) an Inspector operating in a city other than Bombay, Calcutta, Madras, or other A-Class or B-1 and B-2 Class cities was bound to maintain cost ratio up to the maximum limit of 12'/2%,2. Pursuant to this scheme ...

Astral Traders Vs. Haji Mohammad Shaban Dar and ors.

Court: Jammu and Kashmir

Kotwal, J. 1. This revision petition which should have been normally heard by a single Judge is before the Full Bench on a reference made to it by one of us, namely, Hon'ble the Acting Chief Justice. Necessity to make the reference arose because of the cleavage in judicial opinion on the point as to whether an ex parte ad interim injunction order issued under Rule 1 or Rule 2 of Order 39 of the Code of Civil Procedure is appealable under Order 43, Rule 1 (r) of the Code. 2. The petitioner brought a suit for declaration to the effect that it alone was entitled to use for vehicular traffic the road leading to Compartments Nos. 28 (b) and 29 (c) Boniar, with a consequential relief of permanent injunction restraining the respondents from using that road for vehicular traffic. Alongside, an application was made under Rules 1 and 2 of Order 39 for an ad interim injunction restraining the respondents from plying their vehicles on this road. Sub-Judge, Baramulla, in whose court the suit was fi...

Mohd. Ramzan Bhat Vs. Custodian General and ors.

Court: Jammu and Kashmir

Reported in: AIR1983J& K55

ORDER1. The sole point urged in support of this appeal was that the learned single Judge was in error in holding that the authorities below viz., the Custodian and Custodian General were right in holding that the appellant's application under Section 8 of the Jammu and Kashmir, State Evacuees' (Administration of Property) Act, 2006,(shortly 'the Act) was barred by limitation. In order to appreciate the argument, it will be necessary to state a few facts. The appellant is in occupation of an evacuee house situated in the city of Srinagar, The house was declared as evacuee house and a notification was issued accordingly on 1-5-1956. The appellant filed an application for restoration of the house under Section 8 of the Act on 5-8-1969. The Custodian inter alia rejected the application on the ground that it was barred by time. The Custodian General upheld this finding in revision filed on behalf of the appellant. The appellant filed a writ petition challenging the order rejecting his appli...

M.L. Mahajan Vs. Chief Engineer, Ravi Tawi Irrigation Complex and ors.

Court: Jammu and Kashmir

Reported in: AIR1983J& K14

ORDERI.K. Kotwal, J. 1. Controversy in this writ petition lies in a narrow compass.2. The firm Messrs Mahajan and Co. of which the petitioner is a partner, is an A Class Contractor, duly registered under Section 4 of the Jammu & Kashmir Registration of Contractors Act, 1956, hereinafter to be referred to as the Act. Tenders for construction of 4 Kms. of Ravi Canal from RD-11, 418 to RD-15, 436 having been floated by the Executive Engineer, Ravi Canal Upper Division No. 1, Kathua, on 11-7-1981, he also applied for issuance of tender documents against cash payment on 15-12-1981, but no such documents were issued to him nor was any reason assigned for it On the contrary, out of the A Class Contractors who under the Act and the Rules made thereunder had a right to compete, tender documents were Issued in favour of four only, who figure as respondents 4 to 7 in the writ petition. He has challenged the aforesaid refusal of respondents 1 to 3 as being violative of Articles 14 and 19 of the Co...

Collector Vs. Virrinder Kumar and ors.

Court: Jammu and Kashmir

Kotwal, J. 1. This judgment will govern the disposal of Civil First Miscellaneous Appeal No. 26 of 1981 and the related Cross-objection Petition No. 42 of 1981, as they both arise from the same judgment of District Judge, Rajouri, given in a reference made to him under Section 18 of the State Land Acquisition Act, 1990, hereinafter to be referred -to as the Act.2. Land measuring 13 kanals and 4 marlas, comprising Khasra Nos. 563 (5 kanals) and 564-min (8 kanals 4 marlas) situate at village Rampur, Rajouri, was acquired by Land Acquisition Collector, Rajouri, for the public purpose of constructing a building for the office of Executive Engineer, Rural Electrification Division, Rajouri. Notification under Section 6 was issued by the Government on 20-7-1974. On the material collected by him, he awarded a sum of Rs. 30,360/- i. e. Rs. 26,400/- by way of compensation and Rs. 3,960/- on account of Jabirana in favour of the respondents by his award dated 21-1-1975. He worked out the compensat...