Mumbai Court November 1998 Judgments

Vijay Arun Bhambhurkar Vs. State of Maharashtra and Others

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2000(1)BomCR70

ORDERPer S.H. Kapadia, J.1. By this writ petition, the petitioner seeks a direction against the respondents, requiring the respondents to give due weightage to the petitioner's service rendered by her as a teacher in the school managed by Zilla Parishad for the purposes of the fixation of pay, seniority and pensionary benefits.2. The facts giving rise to this writ petition, briefly, are as follows:3. Petitioner is a duly trained and qualified primary teacher. She joined as a full time primary teacher with Pune Zilla Parishad in June, 1963. In January 1973, she applied for the post of primary teacher in Pune Municipal School through proper channel. Her resignation was accepted by the Zilla Parishad, Pune on 22nd February, 1973 and accordingly, she joined Municipal School No. 26 at Pune. Her pay was fixed at Rs. 120/- per month. According to the petitioner, her salary should have been fixed at Rs. 140/- per month. This was on the basis that the petitioner sought to place reliance on Rule...

Saral Manufacturing Co. and Others Vs. State of Maharashtra and Others

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2000(1)BomCR192; 1999(2)MhLj465

ORDERP.S. PATANKAR, J.1. All these petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India can be disposed of by this common judgment as they involve the common question.2. All these petitioners are the holders of D.S.P.I. licenses issued under the Maharashtra Denatured Spirituous Preparations Rules, 1963 (hereafter referred to as the Rules of 1963) effected under the provisions of the Bombay Prohibition Act, 1949 (hereafter referred to as the Prohibition Act). They were granted sometime in 1963 for the purpose of manufacture and sale of French Polish and Thinners.3. The grievance of these petitioners is that for the period from November, 1979 to September, 1980, the quota of Ordinary Denatured Spirit (hereafter referred to as OSD) granted to them for enabling them to manufacture French Polish and Thinners came to be drastically reduced illegally.4. For example, in Misc. Petition No. 2372 of 1979, M/s. Fraser and Co. and others the allotted quota per month for the period 1-10-1978 to ...

The Sangli Bank Ltd. Vs. Kanishka Investments Pvt. Ltd. and Others

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 1999(1)ALLMR556; 1999(1)BomCR660

ORDERD.G. Deshpande, J.1. This is a Bank suit for recovering a sum of Rs. 59, 33, 000/- and odd from the defendants. It is the case of the plaintiff that the defendant No. 1 was a company registered under the Indian Companies Act 1956 and defendant Nos. 2 and 3 were the directors of defendant No. 1 and they are the guarantors in their personal capacity. Four different facilities were granted by the plaintiff-Bank to the defendants. First was a secured term loan facility against hypothecation of the vehicle with a limit of Rs. 3, 41, 000/-; second was a term loan facility against mortgage of land and building with a limit of Rs. 18, 42, 000/-; third was again a term loan facility against hypothecation of machinery with a limit of Rs. 4, 42, 000/- and fourth facility was secured term loan facility against hypothecation of machinery with a limit of Rs. 4, 30, 000/-. According to the Bank, the defendants had executed all the necessary documents in favour of the plaintiffs-Bank in respect o...

Ramesh Haribhau Deotale Vs. Court of Examiners of Homoeopathic and Bio ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: AIR1999Bom324; 1999(2)ALLMR364; 1999(2)MhLj487

N.J. Pandya, J.1. Twofold questions areinvolved, firstly about non-declaration of theresult of the First Year Diploma Course in Homoeopathy and also the validity of the petitioner's admission in that course. 2. The petitioner was admitted to the said course and at the end of the academic year, was allowed to appear in the First Year Examination but his result was said to have been cancelled as his admission was itself in doubt. That is how, his result came to be published on 6-11-85 as per Annex. XIX, page 66 and at Sr.. No. 7, page 67, this is disclosed as Examination cancelled, Roll No. 162.3. In the Return filed by the respondent No. 1 the result has also been detailed out at page 37 showing that the petitioner has failed in all subjects.4. He may or may not have failed. The question as to his eligibility to be admitted to the course in question was crucial and has been dealt with at length by the respondent No. 1 in para 7 onwards at page 34 going up to 36. The respondent No. 1 is ...

Kamta Prasad Son of Sriram Vs. Kalyan Municipal Corporation and ors.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: (1999)101BOMLR294

S.H. Kapadia, J.1. By this Writ Petition, the petitioner seeks to challenge the Order of dismissal dated 12th/13th October, 1995. He also seeks reinstatement with back wages from 1st October, 1995 with continuity of service, benefit of seniority and all other benefit.2. The facts giving rise to this Writ Petition, briefly, are as follows:3. Petitioner was appointed as an Assistant Teacher from 6th November, 1987. He was confirmed on May 8, 1990. He applied for leave in February, 1994 for twenty days on health grounds. However, on resumption, he was not allowed to sign the Muster Roll.4. On June 3, 1994, petitioner was charge-sheeted, inter alia, on the grounds of unauthorised absence, insubordination and rude behaviour with superiors and on the ground that the petitioner had made mistakes in assessing answer papers of the students. In the course of enquiry, the petitioner requested the Management to supply copies of the necessary documents on which the Management sought to place relian...

David Dhawan Vs. Assistant Commissioner of

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

1. This appeal by the assessee is directed against block assessment relevant to the period of 1-4-1986 to 18-12-1996 under section 158BC of the Income-tax Act computing undisclosed income at Rs. 64,53,285.2. The premises of the assessee, a known director of Hindi feature films, were subjected to search under section 132 of the Income-tax Act on 18-12-1996. In response to statutory notice, the assessee filed return for the above-mentioned block period. The Assessing Officer computed undisclosed income having regard to the material available on record. The position of returned and assessed income is as under :-------------------------------------------------------------------------Assessment Total income returned/ Total incomeDifference Year assessed including undis- closing income computed u/s 158BB------------------------------------------------------------------------1987-88 Rs. 51,594 Rs. 87,5941988-89 Rs. 48,962 Rs. 80,9621989-90 Rs. 75,563 Rs. 1,16,5631990-91 Rs. 80,461 Rs. 1,23,4...

Kirit Somaiya and Others Vs. Security and Exchange Board of India and ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 1999(1)ALLMR20; 1999(1)BomCR420

ORDERM.B. Shah, C.J.1. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties.2. The present petition has been filed, in public interest, seeking protection of the interest of several thousands of depositors and investors who have invested their funds in Collective Investment Schemes and other Schemes floated by Plantation Companies promising unreasonably high returns on their investments. One of the prayers which is sought in the petition is that the State Government be directed to forthwith promulgate an Investor Protection Act as was done by the State Governments of Tamil Nadu and Goa.3. It is the contention of the petitioners that there are approximately3,599 plantation companies which have succeeded in attracting depositsand/or funds to the extent of approximately 25,000 crores. The petitionershave furnished instances of at least 5 plantation companies which, afterpromising unconscionably high returns, and after collecting large amount offunds from the depositors, are either not holding plots ...

Mr. Nusli N. Wadia and Others Vs. the State of Maharashtra and Others

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 1999(1)ALLMR29; 1999(1)BomCR442; 1999(1)MhLj159

ORDERS.S. Parkar, J.1. The petitioners, whose lands were sought to be acquired by the Central Government for respondent No. 5 seek to challenge by this petition the acquisition of their lands bearing Survey No. 504, situated at Malad.2. The petitioners are the trustees of F.E. Dinshaw Trust, which is a public charitable trust registered with the Charity Commissioner. The Trust is the owner of the land bearing Survey No. 504 (part), which is the subject matter of acquisition by respondent No. 3 in Case No. L AQ/329. The said lands were sought to be acquired for the public purpose namely for construction of staff quarters for the employees of Post and Telegraph Department being a purpose of Union of India. Since the said land was subsequently being acquired for the employees of Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Ltd. (M.T.N.L.) for construction of the staff quarters, the General Manager, M.T.N.L. has been, by amendment of the petition, added as respondent No. 5 to this petition. For the purpose o...

Bombay Environmental Action Group and Another Vs. the State of Maharas ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 1999(2)BomCR243; 1999(2)MhLj747

ORDERM.B. Shah, C.J.1. Heard the learned Counsel for all the parties exhaustively.2. The petitioners in this public interest petition contend that there is large-scale illegal construction activity and deforestation in the Mahabaleshwar-Panchgani region, resulting in widespread environmental and ecological damage to these two hill stations and the area around them. It is the case of the petitioners that the provisions of the Regional Plan for Mahabaleshwar-Panchgani (1984-2001) are being violated and that construction is being carried on in breach of the provisions of the Building Bye Laws and Development Control Rules. The petitioners further contend that agricultural land is being extensively used for non-agricultural purposes such as hotels, holiday homes, luxurious private bungalows. The petitioners also contend that the forests of the Mahabaleshwar-Panchgani region are being depleted at an alarming rate and that there are continuing non-forest activities being carried on in forest...

Madhusudan Kashirao Deshpande Vs. Ankushrao Nanasaheb Kadam and Others

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 1999(3)BomCR28; [1999(81)FLR356]

ORDERR.J. Kochar, J. 1. Heard Shri S.K. Kulkarni, the learned Advocate for the petitioner and Shri Khandare, the learned Advocate for the respondents Nos. 1 and 2. Shri Deshmukh, the learned A.G.P. appeared for the respondent No. 3, the State of Maharashtra. 2. Perused the contempt petition and the affidavits and rejoinder filed by the parties. The case of the petitioner in brief is that the University and College Tribunal, Aurangabad, had directed the respondents Nos. 1 and 2 to continue the services of the petitioner till the regularly selected candidate would be appointed and pay him the honorarium carried by his post of Associate Professor in the Psychiatry Department. This order was passed by the Tribunal as an equitable relief as invited by him to be an ad hoc arrangement during the interval. It may be mentioned that the petitioner was appointed initially from 13-12-1993 only as an ad hoc arrangement as a qualified candidate for the post of Professor in the said Department was no...