Skip to content

Mumbai Court January 2008 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.

Jan 17 2008

Jan Seva Mandal and anr. Vs. Shri Sadashiv Hari Patil and ors.

Court: Mumbai

Decided on: Jan-17-2008

Reported in: 2008(2)BomCR554; 2008(4)MhLj282

B.H. Marlapalle, J.1. This petition under Article 227 of the Constitution impugns the Judgment and Order dated 16/9/1995 rendered by the School Tribunal, Nasik Region, Nasik whereby Appeal No. 58 of 1993 came to be allowed and the petitioner-management has been directed to reinstate the respondent no.1-appellant in his original post and to pay the difference of emoluments, including pay and allowances, from the date of termination till he is reinstated. The termination notice dated 30/4/1993 was quashed and set aside. The petition was admitted and stay to the impugned order was granted by this Court and consequently, the respondent-appellant could not be reinstated.2. The appellant before the School Tribunal, while challenging the order of termination dated 30/4/1993, in his appeal under Section 9 of the M.E.P.S. Act, 1977 (the Act for short) had claimed that he was appointed as an Assistant Teacher with effect from 18/12/1987 till the end of the academic year 1987-88. In the next acad...


Jan 17 2008

The State of Maharashtra Through the Special Land Acquisition Officer ...

Court: Mumbai

Decided on: Jan-17-2008

Reported in: 2008(2)ALLMR490; 2008(3)BomCR181; (2008)110BOMLR577; 2008(4)MhLj626

Swatanter Kumar, C.J.1. All the above 49 First Appeals are directed against the common judgment and award dated 23rd September, 2005, made by the IInd Ad-hoc Additional District Judge, Nashik. As identical question of fact and law arise in these appeals, it will be appropriate to dispose of these appeals by a common judgment.2. The relevant facts are that Special Land Acquisition Officer ('SLAO') published a notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') for acquiring lands from different villages including Nandadgaon, Tal. Igatpuri, Dist. Nashik for construction of Mukane Dam Project. It may be noticed that lands from number of other villages had also been acquired by different notifications. The possession of the land under the Award was taken on 1st July, 1994, of course, except mentioning by the State there is no evidence on record, documentary and oral, to show as to how and when the possession was taken. However, we will proc...


Jan 17 2008

The State of Maharashtra Through the Special Land Acquisition Officer ...

Court: Mumbai

Decided on: Jan-17-2008

Reported in: 2008(3)ALLMR177; 2008(2)BomCR630; 2008(3)MhLj231

Swatanter Kumar, C.J.1. First Appeal Nos. 215 to 220 of 1995 have been preferred by the State while First Appeal No. 41 of 1997 has been preferred by the claimants against the same judgment of the Reference Court dated 21st April, 1994. Thus, it will be appropriate to dispose of these appeals by a common judgment since they arise from the same judgment.2. The claimants are residents of villages Ambad and Pathardi of Nashik District. A preliminary notification was issued by the Competent Authority on 29th January, 1971, in furtherance to which notifications under Section 32(2) of the Maharashtra Industrial Development Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the MIDC Act'), were issued on 28th November, 1971, 24th December, 1971 and 29th November, 1971. Further, notifications under Section 32(i) of the said Act of 1961 were issued on 28th September, 1972, 21st February, 1972 and 14th January, 1975. Upon notice to the claimants, the Special Land Acquisition Officer No. 1, Nasik, vide his a...


Jan 17 2008

U.P. State Bridge Corporation Limited Vs. Maharashtra General Kamgar U ...

Court: Mumbai

Decided on: Jan-17-2008

Reported in: 2008(2)ALLMR479; 2008(2)BomCR619; (2008)110BOMLR440; (2008)IIILLJ507Bom; 2008(4)MhLj297

Swatanter Kumar, C.J.1. The legislature with an intention to provide protection to a workman, who by award of the competent forum has been directed to be reinstated, where the employer prefers any proceedings against such an award in the Higher Courts, introduced Section 17B of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'. Of course, this statutory benefit of receiving full wages last drawn by the workman is subject to filing of an affidavit as commanded by the provision. This protection could be denied to the workman by the order of the Court where it is proved to the satisfaction of the Court that the workman had been employed or has been receiving adequate remuneration during the relevant period. This grant or refusal of statutory benefit would primarily depend upon the extent of onus on either party to a case. Admittedly, the provisions of Section 17B of the Act or the Rules framed under the Act do not contemplate or provide any particular format in which...


Jan 17 2008

Sanjeevkumar Dada Thane Vs. Dr. J.J. Magdum Charitable Trust,

Court: Mumbai

Decided on: Jan-17-2008

Reported in: 2008(4)ALLMR404; 2008(2)BomCR628

Swatanter Kumar, C.J.1. Challenge in this appeal is to the order dated August 2, 2007, whereby the learned single Judge stayed the implementation of the judgment and order dated 6th November, 2006, in Appeal No. 52 of 2002. The facts which are necessary for disposal of this appeal are as under.2. The appellant, after obtaining Degree in Engineering (Electrical with Electronics) in second class, applied for the post of Lecturer in response to the advertisement issued by respondent No. 1 in a clear vacancy. He was interviewed and thereafter he was appointed as a Lecturer with effect from 2nd September, 1981. In the advertisement, the required minimum qualification mentioned was B.E. No specific requirement of First Class in B.E. was mentioned. The appellant has been paid consolidated salary rather than the regular scale of Rs. 2200-3700.3. On 26th May, 1992, the State of Maharashtra passed a resolution whereby it was resolved that all the Lecturers who were appointed on or after 20th Sep...


Jan 17 2008

Gulf Oil Corporation Limited (Lubricant Division), a Company Registere ...

Court: Mumbai

Decided on: Jan-17-2008

Reported in: 2008(2)ALLMR671; 2008(3)BomCR193; [2008(117)FLR807]; (2008)IILLJ559Bom; 2008(2)MhLj625

Swatanter Kumar, C.J.1. The Government of India, Ministry of Labour and Employment, New Delhi, referred the disputes specified in the Schedule thereto vide order dated 11th July, 2007. The order reads as under.Government of India/Bharat SarkarMinistry of Labour & employment/Shram Aur RojgarMantralayaNew Delhi, dated 11/7/2007ORDERNo. L30015/9/2007(IR(M): WHEREAS the Central Government is of the opinion that an industrial dispute exists between the employers in relationt o the management of M/s. Gulf Oil Corporation Limited and their workmen in respect of the matters specified in the schedule hereto annexed.AND WHEREAS the Hon'ble High Court of Judicature at Bombay in WP No. 309/2007 has directed the Central Government to take fresh decision on reference of the dispute for adjudication.3. NOW THEREFORE, in exercise of the powers conferred by Clause (d) of Sub-section (1) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947) the Central Government hereby refers the said dispute...


Jan 17 2008

Balkrishna Namdeo Katkade Vs. State of Maharashtra Through the Princip ...

Court: Mumbai

Decided on: Jan-17-2008

Reported in: 2008(3)ALLMR159; 2008(2)MhLj448

Swatanter Kumar, C.J.1. The petitioner joined the services of the Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation in January 1980 and subsequently promoted to the post of Legal Adviser, where he continues to work even presently. According to the petitioner because of his meritorious services and unblemish service record, he was promoted to the post of Legal Adviser. While acting in his official capacity he had recommended removal of one Mr. G.B. Mhaske, as he was involved in criminal case initiated by the Anti Corruption Bureau. He was found guilty in the departmental inquiry. Somewhere in May 2005 one Mr. Uttam Khobragade was appointed as the Vice Chairman and Managing Director of the Corporation and using his influence the said Vice Chairman victimised the petitioner for having recommended removal of Mr. Mhaske. Three chargesheets were served upon the petitioner on different grounds. They related to the finding recorded by the three member committee which was appointed on 26th July 2005...


Jan 17 2008

Babulal Verma Vs. Union of India (Uoi) Through Its General Manager, We ...

Court: Mumbai

Decided on: Jan-17-2008

Reported in: 2008(2)ALLMR556; 2008(3)BomCR696; 2008(3)MhLj484

Swatanter Kumar, C.J.1. The petitioner was appointed and is presently working as Area Officer, Western Railway, Churchgate, Mumbai. The Central Bureau of Investigation ('C.B.I.') conducted a raid at Surat Railway Station when the petitioner was working as Area Officer at Surat Railway Station under respondent No. 1. In furtherance to the raid, the C.B.I. filed a charge-sheet on 23rd January, 2000 bearing No. RC 2 (A) 2000 GNR in the Gandhinagar Court for offences punishable under Sections 120B, 420, 467, 468 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 13(2) read with 13(1) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The C.B.I. Investigation conducted against the petitioner disclosed, inter alia, that the refund was granted on tickets on which journey had already been performed, despite its confirmation full refund was granted deducting only Rs. 10/- as clerical charges, tickets were refunded despite bearing the remarks 'no refund', cancellation slips were prepared on plain paper ...


Jan 17 2008

Century Textiles and Industries Ltd., a Company Incorporated Under the ...

Court: Mumbai

Decided on: Jan-17-2008

Reported in: 2008(3)BomCR175; (2008)110BOMLR293; 2008(124)ECC173; 2008(150)LC173(Bombay); 2009(235)ELT47(Bom)

F.I. Rebello, J.1. Rule. Heard forthwith.2. The petitioner company is in the business of manufacture and export of Rayon Viscose Filament Yarn, hereinafter referred to as the Yarn having its factory at Shahad, District Thane. Chapter 4 of the Export-Import Policy for the period April 1992 to March, 1997, hereinafter referred to as the said Policy, contained the Duty Exemption and Remission inter alia provided for issue of advance licenses for duty free import of the raw materials/inputs against export obligation. The petitioners were issued several advance licences. Against the advance licences granted to the petitioners exports were effected from time to time and export obligations were duly discharged by the petitioners.3. The present petition relates to two advance licences bearing No. 03020800 dated 12th December, 1995 and 03201698 dated 28th March, 1996 which hereinafter shall be referred to as the licences. According to the petitioners at the time of exports the petitioners corre...


Jan 17 2008

Wasp Pump Private Limited a Company Incorporated Under the Companies A ...

Court: Mumbai

Decided on: Jan-17-2008

Reported in: 2008(6)BomCR244; (2008)110BOMLR338; 2008(125)ECC8; 2008(151)LC8(Bombay); 2008(230)ELT405(Bom); 2008(3)MhLj238

F.I. Rebello, J.1. Rule. Heard forthwith.2. The petitioner is a manufacturer of Centrifugal Pumps. The petitioners also manufacture goods which are inputs for the pumps and which are used in the manufacture of the pumps. There is no dispute that the pumps as manufactured are exempt from Central Excise Duty. The Respondent Authorities by order dated 13th September, 2000 in respect of the castings manufactured by the petitioners held that the castings are marketable goods. Further held that they are classifiable under C.H.H. 73.25 and 74.19 (depending on the metal used) and, therefore, the classification was correct. Various other questions were considered and in conclusion proposed quantify the duty and consequently directed the assessee to furnish certain data. Another order was passed to the similar effect on 14th September, 2000.3. Pursuant to the said orders the petitioner furnished the necessary information. By order dated 11th November, 2004 the respondent No.4 demanded duty on th...


  • Last »

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial