Mumbai Court November 2013 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.
Chandrakant Tukaram Chandlekar Dist. Raigad Vs. Union of India, Throug ...
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-25-2013
A.J. Rohee, Member (J) 1. This is the second round of litigation before this Tribunal by the applicant, challenging termination of his service as Sweeper and seeking direction against Respondents for his re-employment, grant of temporary status, and his regularisation against the post, with back wages. 2. The applicant's case in short is that on 03.10.2000 he was appointed as Sweeper by the Respondent No.5 to work in the office of Respondents in Mahad Division. Initially, the applicant was getting Rs. 65/-(Rupees Sixty Five Only) per day towards wages. On his representation to the Respondent No.3 the same was subsequently enhanced to Rs. 112/-(Rupees One Hundred and Twelve Only) with effect from 14.01.2002. 3. The Respondent No.5 on 10.05.2005, orally terminated the service of the applicant, which he challenged before this Tribunal by filing OA No. 593/2009. The same was disposed of on 18.12.2009 with a direction to him to first file a representation against his termination, and for co...
K.S.K. Roy, Alias Kulanand Sushilkumar Roy Vs. Union of India, Through ...
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-25-2013
Oral: Mrs. Chameli Majumdar, Member (J): 1. The instant application was filed by the applicant inter alia challenging the competence of the punishing authority imposing the punishment of compulsory retirement dated 14.10.2013. On 25.10.2013, this Tribunal stayed the operation of the said punishment order dated 14.10.2013. 2. Shri V.D.Vadhavkar, the learned Senior Standing counsel for the Central Railway accepted the notice for the official respondents. He has come up today with the Reply containing the instruction of the Competent Authority. The relevant part of the Reply of the respondents regarding competence of the punishing authority in the instant case is set out herein below: (1) Respondents state and submit respectfully that the case has been examined and it is found that the applicant has been issued with Notice for imposition of penalty dated 14/10/2013 for Compulsory Retirement with full pensionary benefits by Assistant Commercial Manager (Jr. Scale) which is not in his (ACM)...
M/S. Sultanabad Villa Cooperative Housing Society Ltd. and Others Vs. ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-22-2013
Oral Judgment: 1 At the outset the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioners seeks deletion of the Respondent Nos.4 to 6 and Respondent Nos. 9 to 12 who according to him, are formal parties as they are not contesting parties before the Trial Court. The said Respondents are accordingly deleted at the risk of the Petitioners. 2 Rule, made returnable forthwith with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties and heard. 3 The above Writ Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India takes exception to the order dated 3/10/2013 passed by the learned Judge, City Civil Court, Bombay by which order the Application for amendment of the plaint being Chamber Summons No.1479 of 2013 in B.C.C.C. Suit No.4496 of 2010 came to be rejected. 4 In so far as the Respondent No.7 is concerned, by order dated 20/11/2013 the learned counsel for the Petitioners was directed to issue notice to the Respondent No.7BMC in view of the fact that though the matter was substantially ...
Pradip Gajanan Koli and Others Vs. State of Maharashtra and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-22-2013
A.S. Oka, J. 1. The following question arises for consideration in these Petitions: Whether the employment of a person appointed against a post reserved for Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, Denotified Tribes (Vimukta Jatis), Nomadic Tribes, Other Backward Classes and Special Backward Category (for short reserved category) on the basis of a caste certificate can be protected after his/her caste certificate is invalidated by the Competent Caste Scrutiny Committee duly constituted under the Maharashtra Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, Denotified Tribes (Vimukta Jatis), Nomadic Tribes, Other Backward Classes and Special Backward Category (Regulation of Issuance and Verification of ) Caste Certificates Act, 2000 ( for short the said Act)? FACTS OF THE INDIVIDUAL CASES 2. Before we advert to the legal submissions made across the bar, it will be necessary to make a reference to the factual controversy in each Petition. The Petitioner in Writ Petition No.8014 of 2012 was appointed on a p...
Nivruti Dnyanoba Davale (Patil) and Others Vs. the Additional Collecto ...
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Nov-22-2013
Oral Judgment: 1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. By consent heard finally. 2. The relevant facts, leading to file present petition as disclosed in this writ petition are as under: The petitioners herein are the members of the village panchayat, Kabansangvi, Ta. Chakur, District Latur. Respondent No. 3 herein is the member of Panchayat and earlier was elected as Sarpanch of the village Gram Panchayat, Kabansangvi. It is the case of the petitioners that 'No Confidence Motion' was passed by 2/3 majority, in the special meeting dated 29.01.2013. It is further case of the petitioners that election of village Panchyat Kabansanvi was held in the month of June 2010. Total strength of members of the village Panchyat, Kabansanvi are nine. In the month of July 2003 respondent No. 3 was elected as Sarpanch of the village Panchayat. It is further case of the petitioners that while functioning as Sarpanch of the village Panchayat, various illegalities and irregularities are committed by respo...
Mrs. Jayshree Vs. the State of Maharashtra and Others
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Nov-22-2013
Oral Judgment: 1. Rule. By consent, Rule made returnable forthwith. By consent, heard finally. 2. The petitioner is the original complainant in Regular Criminal Case No. 248 of 2010, pending before the 4th Judicial Magistrate (First Class), at Osmanabad. The complaint was filed against five persons mentioned as accused therein, including the respondent nos.2, 3 and 4, who are mentioned as the accused nos.3, 4 and 5, respectively, in the said complaint. The allegation in the complaint was in respect of offences punishable under Sections 120-B of the Indian Penal Code [For short, "IPC"], 465 of the IPC, 468 of the IPC, 471 of the IPC, 323 of the IPC, 506 of the IPC, read with Section 34 of the IPC. The other two accused mentioned, as such, in the complaint are one, Sunita Dattatraya Jamale, who was Sarpanch of village Tadwala at the material time, and one, Ashok A. Mhetre, who was the Gram Sevak of the said Grampanchayat at the material time. 3. The learned Magistrate, after examining th...
National Power Tools Vs. the National Insurance Co. Ltd.
Court: Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-22-2013
Narendra Kawde, Member: 1. Complainant is a company dealing in distribution, sales and service of electrical power tools. The complainant has been subscribing to the insurance policy for extending insurance cover to the goods stored in the Godown. Initially, sum insured was Rs.30 Lakhs which was subsequently reduced to Rs.15 Lakhs and as there was change of business premises, change was intimated with reduction in sum insured. The opponent/National Insurance Company (in short Insurance Company) acted upon the request of the complainant/company and reduced the sum insured to Rs.15 Lakhs. Such a change of address was intimated by communication dated 13/01/1996. The complainant continued to remind and issued fresh communication on 24/03/1996 requesting for refund of excess premium paid on account of reduced sum insured. However, there was no response from the Insurance Company. Said Insurance Policy was further renewed for a period from 10/11/1996 to 09/11/1997 with increased sum insured ...
Dr. Sudhir Kumar Mishra, Sr. Technical Officer, Vinayak Nagar Vs. Unio ...
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-22-2013
Mrs. Chameli Majumdar, Member (J). 1. The applicant, presently working as Senior Technical Officer, Centre for Development of Advance Computing (hereinafter referred to as 'C-DAC'), Pune University Campus, Pune, has filed this Original Application challenging the order of suspension dated 14.05.2013. The order of suspension is set out herein below : ORDER OF SUSPENSION [Reference: Rule 10(1), CCS(CCA) Rules, 1965] Whereas a disciplinary proceeding against Dr. Sudhir Kumar Mishra (Emp. ID: 102018), Senior Technical Officer, Applied A1 Group, C-DAC, Pune is contemplated. Now, therefore, the undersigned (the Appointing Authority), the authority empowered, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-rule (1) of Rule 10 of the Central Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1965, hereby places the said Dr. Sudhir Kumar Mishra under suspension with immediate effect. It is further ordered that during the period that this order shall remain in force the headquarters of Dr. Su...
Sanjay Suganchand Kasliwal Vs. Jugalkishor Chhaganlal Tapadia and Othe ...
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Nov-21-2013
1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. With consent of learned counsel for both the sides, heard finally. 2. Aggrieved by the order dated 15/3/2013 passed by the Joint Civil Judge Senior Division, Aurangabad in Special Civil Suit no. 257 of 2012, rejecting the application of the present petitioner/original defendant no.1 for referring the parties to arbitration under section 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1986 (for short "the Act"), the present Civil Revision Application is filed. 3. For the sake of convenience, the petitioner herein would be termed as defendant no.1, respondent no.1 would be termed as plaintiff while respondent nos.2 to 4 would be termed as defendant nos.2 to 4 as arrayed in the trial court. 4. Admittedly the composition of the three partnership firms involved in the present dispute is as under:PARTNERSHIP FIRMEXISTING PARTNERSSTATUS IN SUITSHARESM/s Kasliwal Bhagyoday1] Jugalkishor Chaganlal Tapadia2] Sanjay Suganchand KasliwalPlaintiffDefendant No.140%...
Rani Laxman Wagh Vs. the Electoral Registration Officer and Others
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Nov-21-2013
RavindraV. Ghuge, J. 1. Rule. By consent, Rule is made returnable forthwith and the petition is heard finally. 2. The petition pertains to the petitioner's claim for inclusion of her name in the voters list for the purpose of Elections of Ahmednagar Municipal Corporation. 3. Present writ petition and few more petitions espousing similar cause were heard on 13.11.2013 till 6.00 p.m. and the judgment was reserved. 4. The petitioner claims that :-. a] She is a resident of Ahmednagar. She got married on 29.12.2012 and her name changed to Rani Dipak Dangat. She has filed this petition under her maiden name. [b] She has applied for inclusion of her name in the voters list in the year 2012 (date not supplied). [c] As per the programme regulating elections declared by the State Election Commission for the purpose of preparation of voters list, the respondent No.1 was duty bound to include her name in the voters' list on 13.11.2013 under Section 7A of the Maharashtra Municipal Corporation Act (...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- Next ›
- Last »