Mumbai Court April 2006 Judgments

Bajaj Auto Limited Vs. Shri Shrikant Vinayak Yogi and ors.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2006(4)ALLMR181; 2006(4)BomCR197; 2006(3)MhLj557

V.C. Daga, J. 1. Rule, returnable forthwith by consent of parties. Heard rival parties. Perused petition and documents annexed thereto. 2. This petition is directed against the interim order dated 23rd December, 2005 passed below Exh.U-2 in Complaint (ULP) No. 431 of 2005 by the Industrial Court, Pune, whereby application for interim relief came to be allowed. The petitioner-employer is directed not to give effect to the transfer orders dated 12th December, 2005 issued to the respondents- workmen till final disposal of the complaint.The Factual Matrix : 3. The factual matrix reveals that the transfer orders issued to the respondents- workmen transferring them to various depots and dealers all over India are the bed-rock of Complaint (ULP) No. 431/2005 alleging unfair labour practices on the part of the petitioner- employer. 4. At this juncture, it is necessary to refer to the background facts leading to the impugned transfer orders and nature thereof. 5. Writ Petition Nos. 110/1998 and...

Union of India (Uoi) Through the Secretary, Ministry of Finance, Depar ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2006(4)BomCR193; 2006(3)MhLj757

V.R. Kingaonkar, J.1. By this petition, Petitioners impugn order dated 23rd August, 2002 in Original Application No. 1120 of 1998 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Mumbai Bench, Mumbai (for short 'the Tribunal'). 2. Some of the facts, which are relevant for the present purpose, may be stated. The Respondent was recruited somewhere in 1975 on the post of Lower Division Clerk ('LDC' for short) and was promoted somewhere in 1979 as Upper Division Clerk ('UDC' for short). Along with some others, he was promoted on adhoc basis on 3rd November, 1983 as Inspector (OG). He was suspended on 10th October, 1984 as a result of registration of crime by the Central Bureau of Investigation. The suspension was revoked on 14th June, 1985 and while doing so, he was reverted to the substantive post as UDC instead of placing him in the post of Inspector (OG) which he was holding as adhoc promotee at the time of suspension. A charge sheet was filed against him for holding departmental enquiry ...

The Principal, K.J. Somaiya College of Arts and Commerce Vs. Mrs. Nali ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2006(4)ALLMR156; 2006(4)BomCR204; 2006(4)MhLj132

S.U. Kamdar, J.1. These two petitions are filed by the petitioners challenging the two orders dt. 6.4.01 and 8.4.02 in appeal No. 39 of 2000. By an order dt. 6.4.01, the Tribunal has granted condonation of delay in filing the appeal whereas by the final order dt. 8.4.02 the appeal of the respondent has been allowed and the order of the College dt. 1.8.97 appointing the respondent as a part time teacher instead of full time lecturer has been quashed and set aside with consequent direction to reinstate the petitioners as a full time teacher with all benefits including back wages. Some of the material facts of the present case are briefly enumerated as under: 2. The respondent No. 1 was appointed on 8.7.91 as a lecturer in subject of Kannada in Petitioner College. Respondent No. 1 holds qualification of B.A. and M.A. with Kannada as principal subject. On 5.10.93 the respondent No. 1's services were terminated due to non availability of required number of students in Kannada as the respond...

Vaishali Vivek Mhaske and ors. Vs. Regional/State Level Chairman and o ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2006(4)ALLMR489; 2006(4)BomCR752; 2006(4)MhLj815

Sinha D.D., J.1. Rule made returnable forthwith by consent of the learned Counsel for the parties.2. Mr. S.A. Gordey, learned Counsel for the petitioner in Writ Petition No. 5899/2005 has submitted that the petitioner has passed graduation from Amravati University with 44.22% aggregate marks. The petitioner belongs to caste 'Kunbi' which is included in 'Other Backward Class' category in the State of Maharashtra. The Director of Education issued advertisement dated 16.3.2005, inter alia, calling applications for B.Ed. entrance examination 2005-06. The relevant conditions for the purpose of appearing in the common entrance test and admission to the B.Ed. course prescribed in the advertisement dated 16.3.2005 are as under:1. The students from Open Category as well as Other Backward and Special Backward Category who have obtained minimum 45 percentage of marks and the candidates from the Backward Category who have obtained minimum 45 percentage of marks in the Degree Course in Arts, Scienc...

Gulabsingh Bachhusingh Thakur Since Dead Through His Lrs. and ors. Vs. ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2006(5)BomCR219; 2006(5)MhLj809

Chavan R.C., J.1. The applicants take exception to the order passed by the learned 2nd Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division, Nagpur, on Exhibit 122 in Miscellaneous Judicial Case No. 173 of 1974, arising out of execution of decree in Partition Suit No. 945 : of 1968 filed by heirs of Bachhusingh, who' died intestate on 24-11-1964. The suit property comprises of a house situated in Sadar ' at Nagpur. The following genealogical tree will I make the relationship of parties clear.Father Bachhusingh Thakur S/o Sardar Singh ________________________________________________|(Sons of Bachhusingh)Vishwn- Sheon- Shiv- Shivba- Gulab Bhola ath Singh ath Si- naray- li Sin- Singh Singh| ngh an Si- gh | |Shiopal singh | ngh | | | ngh | | | | |_____ |Nil | | _____| | | Suresh Daugh -| || | | & one ter Sus-| || | | dau- hma Jit- Jy Chandra Rampal | ghter en- otiPalsingh Singh | dra| WILL1. Giteshwari Probated to2. Ranjita his brother3. Kuldeep Gulabsinghwho is 5th son of Bachusingh(Exh.)2. The suit for pa...

N.K. Harchandani Vs. State of Maharashtra and anr.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2006(5)BomCR256; 2006(5)MhLj817

Chavan R.C., J.1. This petition and the applications for intervention expose how lack of precision in the legal regime governing developmental activities in Nagpur city have enabled people without scruples to take the system for a ride. The petition and the Civil Applications pose some very pertinent questions. The petition is therefore, admitted and taken up for hearing forthwith.2. This judgment disposes of the writ petition, whereby the petitioner has taken exception to the orders passed by Nagpur Municipal Corporation and State of Maharashtra in respect of petitioner's building plans, as also three applications for intervention.3. Apart from Nagpur Municipal Corporation, the local authority, Nagpur has an Improvement Trust as well, which regulates development of the city of Nagpur. A well intentioned measure to have an independent body, the Nagpur Improvement Trust, devoted to development of city, led to duality of authority, and eventually absence of any regulation, due to pretend...

Sunil Vassudev Pednekar Vs. Bicholim Urban Co-operative Bank Ltd.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: III(2007)BC777; 2006CriLJ3114

ORDERN.A. Britto, J.1. Heard Shri Vahidulla, the learned Counsel on behalf of the petitioner/ accused and Shri N. N. Sardessai, the learned Counsel on behalf of the respondent/Complainant.2. The Complainant has prosecuted the accused under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, for bouncing of three cheques in the sum of Rs. 7,20,000/-. The accused has challenged two Order of the learned J.M.F.C. in the said case. The first Order dated 16-01-2001, issuing process against the accused and the other dated 16-12-2004, permitting the Complainant to examine a witness, namely, the Bank Manager, a witness who was not cited by the complainant, earlier. In fact, the Complaint was not accompanied by a list of witnesses as required under Sub-section (2) of Section 204 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, (Code, for short),3. Rule was issued on 10-8-2005 and, therefore, this petition deserves to be disposed of on merits though it is otherwise submitted on behalf of the Complainant...

The Commissioner of Central Vs. Shree Chhatrapati Shahu Co-op.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. The revenue is in appeal aggrieved by the impugned order dated 08/11/2004 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), Central Excise & Customs, Pune-II. The issue involved is whether the pipes and fittings falling under Chapter 39 used for conveying the spent wash (hazardous waste) is eligible as capital goods or not. The adjudicating authority has denied the modvat credit on the said pipes and fittings.2. The department alleged in the show cause notice that the pipes and fittings are exclusively used for exempted final products and this fact was not disclosed, as such, Section 11A(1) of the Central Excise Act 1944 was also invoked. The adjudicating authority held that pipes and fittings are not used within the factory premises and are used outside the factory premises. The pipe and fittings are used for conveying the spent wash from their distilleries to compost yard. It is the case of the respondents that the pipes and fittings are partly laid within the factory premises and partly...

Rashtriya Chemical and Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. The appellants are engaged in the manufacture of chemicals and fertilizers. During the course of manufacture Phosphogypsum and Calcium Carbonate are generated as waste products. These waste products are stored in a pond adjacent to the manufacturing area. These waste products were sold by the appellant by inviting open tenders. The conditions of the same inter-alia, has been "as is where is basis".2. The appellant paid excise duty on the said contract price as was followed by them previously when the excise duty was leviable on ouch waste products. The department thereafter raised objections to such method of determination of assessable value and assessment in the year 2000. The department's contentions was that even though as the sale is on "as is where is" basis and the loading charges of such washer products were borne by the contractor, the cost of such loading charges ought to have been included in the assessable value of the waste products. Accordingly they were asked to pay ...

G.D. Metsteel Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. The appellants are having hot re-rolling mills for manufacture of non-alloy angles and channels of Heading No. 72.16 of the first schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. As per the newly introduced Section 3-A under Finance Act, 1997 their annual capacity of production was to be determined under Rule 3(1) of Hot Re-rolled Steel Mills Annual Capacity Determination Rules, 1997, wherein they were required to declare values of each of the parameters namely "d","n","i", "e" and "w". Out of these parameters 3 parameters namely "d", "n" and "i" were to be determined by physical measurement. The appellants had 4 mills for the purpose of re-rolling but their mill No.3 was dismantled as the same was of no use to them. The intimation of dismantling of Mill No. 3 was given by them to the department vide their letter dated 03-09-1999. The appellant got the value of each of the parameter measured by their chartered engineer and after his verification submitted the same to the Commission...