Rajasthan Court March 1974 Judgments
Dr. B.L. Asawa Vs. State of Rajasthan and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-29-1974
Reported in: 1974WLN405
Kan Singh, J. 1. This is a writ petition by one Dr. B.L. Asawa against the State of Rajasthan and the Rajasthan Public Service Commission asking an appropriate writ, direction or order. On a requisition made by the State Government the Rajasthan Public Service Commission, Ajmer, respondent No. 2, issued an advertisement on 3.3.72 inviting applications for the recruitment of two Lecturers in Forensic Medicine for Medical Colleges. The relevant portion of the advertisement was as follows:Recruitment of Two Lecturers in Forensic Medicine for Medical Colleges, Medical & Public Health Department in accordance with the Rajasthan Medical Service (Collegiate Branch) Rules. One post reserved for Scheduled Castes of Rajasthan, if available otherwise treated unreserved.Posts permanent.Prescribed Fee : Rs. 20/- (Rs. 2/- for Scheduled Castes/Tribes of Rajasthan).2. The petitioner was an applicant for one of the two posts. He filed his application paying the prescribed fee. According to the petition...
Tag this Judgment!Firm Kundanmal Bastimal Vs. State of Rajasthan and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-29-1974
Reported in: 1974WLN450
Kan Singh, J.1. The three writ petitions being of identical nature were heard together and can conveniently be disposed of by a common judgment.2. The petitioners are dealers at Pali carrying on business inter alia in cotton seeds. They pray for a writ in the nature of certiorari, mandamus or prohibition or any other suitable writ for striking down the item 'cotton seeds' from the list of commodities applicable to the Krishi Upaj Mandi, Pali and further the respondents be restrained from calling upon the petitioner to take a licence for carrying on trade in this commodity or to recover fees from the petitioners by taking any coercive action against them. It will be convenient to take the facts from writ petition No. 1981 of 1971.3. The petitioner avers that he deals in cotton seeds and not in any other commodity. He buys cotton seeds in the State of Gujarat and then brings them to Pali in Rajasthan and sells them at Pali where the commodity is used as a cattle feed. The petitioner furt...
Tag this Judgment!Chhitar and ors. Vs. Chhoga and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-26-1974
Reported in: 1974CriLJ1230; 1974(7)WLN255
ORDERB.P. Beri, C.J.1. Against the order of the learned Sessions Judge, Ajmer, dated December 2, 1970 Chhitar and four others have come up in revision before me in a proceeding under Section 133, Code of Criminal Procedure.2. The applicants before me had filed an application against the opposite parties Chhoga and some others under Sectiop 133 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, in the Court of the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Ajmer. Their grievance was that there is a Budh Sagar Tank bearing No. 118 which is a Government tank in village Bagsuri which served to irrigate nearly 2000 Bighas of land in villages Bagsuri, Laxmipura and Budhpura. The tank accumulated the rain water from the hillocks of Banevara through a natural water course CBala'). The opposite parties of village Banevara raised a mud wall and also constructed a 'pucca' wall in the bed of the 'Bala' with a view to appropriate the rain water. The applicants contended that the said obstruction starved the Budh Sagar Tank which ...
Tag this Judgment!Rameshwari Vs. Kirpashanker
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-23-1974
Reported in: AIR1975Raj28; 1974(7)WLN308
C.M. Lodha, J. 1. This appeal is directed against the order of the District Judge, Ganganagar, dated March 7. 1973, whereby the learned Judge allowed the respondent's petition for divorce under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act. 1955 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') and dissolved the marriage of the respondent with the appellant by a decree of divorce on the ground that there has been no restitution of conjugal rights between the parties for a period of more than two years after the passing of the decree for restitution of conjoigal rights. 2. The respondent was married to the appellant some time in the year 1964 A. D. according to the Hindu rites. The appellant lived with the respondent for about two years and duly discharged her marital obligations towards him. During this period she also gave birth to a son. However, subsequently, she withdrew from the society of the respondent, who filed an application for restitution of conjugal rights under Section 9 of the Act. The appl...
Tag this Judgment!Kewal Ram Vs. Mangu Mal
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-20-1974
Reported in: AIR1974Raj201; 1974(7)WLN241
C.M. Lodha, J.1. This is a defendant-tenant's second appeal arising out of a suit for ejectment and arrears of rent,2. The facts of the case are rather uncommon, and an interesting question has been raised as to the rights of a sub-tenant. One Nandkumar leased out a ''Gokha' (a sort of covered raised platform outside the house) to the plaintiff Mangumal in 1950 A. D. at a monthly rent of Rs. 15/-. Subsequently Mansu Mal took on lease an open piece of land situate near the 'Gokha' from the MunicipalCouncil, Jaipur on a rent of -/12/- per month in the year 1954. On 19-2-1961 Mangu Mal sub-let the 'Gokha' as well as the open land on which a cabin had been fixed to the appellant Kewalram on a rent of Rs. 60/- per month. But in order to conceal the sub-lease made by him, Mangu Mal got executed a deed of partnership between him and the said Kewalram. This was obviously done in order to save themselves from ejectment under the Rajasthan Premises (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act, 1950 on the...
Tag this Judgment!Chander Singh Vs. the Collector, Sikar and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-19-1974
Reported in: AIR1975Raj200; 1974(7)WLN282
ORDERC.M. Lodha, J. 1. By this writ application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner, who was Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat, Bibipur Chhota, District Sikar, has challenged the motion of no-confidence passed against him on 27-9-1972. The validity of no-confidence motion is being challenged on the following grounds:-- (1) It has not been passed by 1/4th of the total number of members of the Panchayat including Sarpanch as provided by Section 19(2) of the Rajasthan Panchayat Act, 1953 (which will hereinafter for the sake of brevity be referred to as 'the Act.') (2) That the notice of no-confidence motion dated 12-9-1972 marked Ex. 1A is bad because,-- (a) it does not set out the proposed motion of no-confidence in extenso as required by Rule 14 (2) of the Rajasthan Panchayat and Nyaya Panchayat (General) Rules, 1961 (which will hereinafter be called 'the Rules'); (b) the notice is not addressed to the Deputy District Development Officer as required by Rule 14 (1)...
Tag this Judgment!Nandlal Vs. Mahavir Kumar and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-18-1974
Reported in: AIR1974Raj189; 1974(7)WLN165
Tyagi, J.1. This is judgment-debtor's execution first appeal against the order of the Additional District Judge No. 1, Jaipur City, and it arises out of the following circumstances :2. A decree in a mortgage suit was awarded in Civil Suit No. 9 of 1967 in favour of the decree-holders. The decree-holders took out execution proceedings and the executing Court ordered for the sale of the mortgaged property. The sale proclamation was settled, but before the property could actually be put to auction, one of the decree-holders, namely, Surendra Kumar Sethi died on 30th of October, 1973. An application was moved by the heirs of deceased Surendra Kumar Sethi to bring them on record. The judgment-debtor objected to this application, inter alia, on the ground that the execution cannot continue unless a succession certificate was obtained by the legal representatives of the deceased decree-holder under Section 214 of the Indian Succession Act. The surviving decree-holders, however, applied on 5th...
Tag this Judgment!Divisional Personnel Officer Vs. Mahavir Prasad
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-15-1974
Reported in: 1974WLN206
M.L. Joshi, J.1. This revision application is directed against the judgment of the learned Additional District Judge, Ganganager dated 14 8-1971 whereby he affirmed the direction given by the S.D.M. Karanpur (the Authority under the Payment of Wages Act) on 3-7-1967.2. The non-applicant Mahavir Prasad an employee of Northern Railway was serving as head booking clerk at the relevant time. He came to be removed by the then D.T.S. Delhi with effect from 1.8 1949. He felt aggrieved by the order of removal and consequently filed a suit in the court of Sub-Judge Gurgaon seeking the declaration that the order of removal was illegal and void and also for Rs. 300/- only in respect of wages. This suit was decreed by the Sub Judge Gurgaon on 24.3.1958. The Railway Administration went in appeal but the Additional District Judge Ganganager rejected the same on 21.7.1959. The non-applicant made several representations to the concerning authorities for payment of his wages from 1-8-1949 to 7-11-1959....
Tag this Judgment!Gulab Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-13-1974
Reported in: 1975CriLJ695; 1974(7)WLN168
V.P. Tyagi, J.1. Appellant Gulab Singh along with five other persons was tried by the Additional Sessions Judge No. 2, Jodhpur, for the murder of Lai Singh, but the learned Judge acquitted all other accused persons except Gulab Singh who has been convicted under Section 302, Indian Penal Code and sentenced to imprisonment for life. It is against this judgment of the learned Additional Sessions Judge dated 5th March, 1973, that the present appeal has been preferred by the appellant.2. The prosecution story, as revealed by the eye-witnesses Omprakash ...
Tag this Judgment!Ramsharan Sharma Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-12-1974
Reported in: 1974WLN245
Kan Singh, J.1. Shri Ramsharan Sharma, who is member of the Rajas-than Agriculture Service in Group C, seeks an appropriate writ, direction or order against the State of Rajasthan and the Director of Agriculture commanding them to promote the petitioner with effect from March, 1962 when respondent No 6 Shri M.M. Jain was promoted as Deputy Director of Agriculture and, if necessary, the State Government be further required to create a supernumerary post for the petitioner as Deputy Director and further he be declared senior to respondent No. 3 to 11 in Group B of the Schedule appended to the Rajasthan Agriculture Service Rules, 1960, hereinafter to be referred as the 'Rules'.2. The petitioner is an Agriculture Graduate from the Agra University He joined the service under the former Matsya Union and on the integration of that Union with the United State of Rajasthan he came to be appointed in the service of the new State. Like him, Shri M.M. Jain, respondent No 6 was also at pointed in t...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »