Rajasthan Court January 1975 Judgments
Jagdish Singh Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-31-1975
Reported in: 1975(8)WLN843
Kan Singh, J.1. This is writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution by one Jagdish Singh who challenges an order of be Railway Authorities regarding fixation of his relative seniority vis-a-vis respondents Nos. 5 to 14.2. The petitioner was in the set vice of the Northern Railway and posted at Railway workshop at Jodhpur The petitioner entered she service of the Railway as an unpaid Apprentice Mechanic in the year 1950 and had his training. On completion of 5 years training as Apprentice Mechanic he was appointed as a Journeyman in the grade of Rs. 100 185 wish effect from 15.05.55. He came to be promoted as a Chargaman in the grade of Rs. 150 225 on 27.6.57 He was confirmed as Chargeman in the grade of Rs. 150 225 with effect from 14-7-57, Respondents Harbans Singh was confirmed as Chargeman from 26.7.57 Kundan Lal was confirmed on 27.7.57, Shri Vallabh on 28.7.57, Pritam Chand on 9-10-57 and S.K. Chatterji on 21-6-59. Respondents Om Prakash, R.D. Avasthi, Shri Gopal Sahi, Kan...
Tag this Judgment!Dr. L.K. Joshi Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-30-1975
Reported in: 1975(8)WLN166
Kan Singh, J.1. This is writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution challenging a decision of the Rajasthan Public Service Commission whereby toe petitioner's candidature for direct recruitment for the post of Junior Specialist in authority rejected. The petition raises a regarding the inter pretation of Rule 11 of the Rajasthan Medical and Health, Service Rules, 1963, hereinafter to be referred as 'the Rule' read with the schedule appended there to.2. The petitioner Dr. Joshi obtained his MBBS in the year 1951 He entered Government service as Civil Assistant Surgaon on 6-9-57. He obtained the post graduate Diploma in Ophthalmology from the Aligarh Muslim University in the year 1967. He obtained his M.S. in Ophthalmology in May, 1970 On 7-9-70 the petitioner was appointed as a Junior Specialist in the specialty of Ophthalmology for a period of six months. This appointment was continued by subsequent extensions from time to time. On 22-3-70 he was appointed as a Junior Specialis...
Tag this Judgment!Sitaram Ramavtar Vs. Lohiya Murlidhar Meghraj
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-28-1975
Reported in: AIR1975Raj121; 1975()WLN201
J.P. Jain, J. 1. This is a miscellaneous appeal under Order 43, Rule 1 (d), Code of Civil Procedure and is directed against the order dated 14-9-74 of the Additional District Judge No. 2, Jodhpur, by which he refused to set aside the ex parte decree passed against the appellant.2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the respondent firm, M/s. Lohiya Murlidhar Meghraj sued M/s. Sitaram Ramavtar for recovery of Rs.17,000 for some alleged breach of contract. The appellant firm M/s. Sitaram Ramavtar is a partnership firm and has been working as commission agents in Hyderabad (Andhra Pradesh). The respondent's suit had been registered on 14-10-70 by the District Judge, Jodhpur but it was transferred for trial to the Court of Additional District Judge No. 2, Jodhpur. On 19-10-70 summonses were ordered to be issued for service in ordinary course on the defendant firm. In addition to that process, summonses were also ordered to be sent by registered post. The notices which were sent i...
Tag this Judgment!Gulam Mohammad and anr. Vs. Kishan Lal and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-22-1975
Reported in: AIR1975Raj163; 1975()WLN207
C.M. Lodha, J. 1. This is a defendants-tenants' second appeal arising out of a suit for ejectment in respect of a plot of land situated in Nehru Bazar in the town of Udaipur leased out to the appellant No. 1 Gulam Mohd. by Kishanlal original plaintiff on 1st February, 1962 on a monthly rent of Rs. 50/-. Kishan Lal died during the pendency of the suit and is now represented by his sons and daughters, who are respondents in this appeal. The suit was based on two grounds namely. (1) personal necessity of the landlord for the plot in question and (2) sub-letting. Since the auestion of personal necessity has been decided against the landlord by both the Courts below and has not been pressed before me, I do not think it necessary to give the details of personal necessity alleged by the plaintiff. As regards the allegations about sub-letting, the plaintiff alleged in para. No. 5 of the plaint that he had come to know on 1st June, 1968 that the defendant No. 1 Gulam Mohd. had sub-let the Plot ...
Tag this Judgment!Gulam Abbas Vs. Shri Kalyan Finance Co., Ajmer and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-21-1975
Reported in: AIR1975Raj150; 1975()WLN33
Kan Singh, J.1. The case is before me for the disposal of an application moved by learned counsel for the appellant on 13-12-1974 under Section 149 of the C. P. C. read with Section 5 of the Rajasthan Court-fees Act for allowing time to the appellant for making up deficiency of court-fee. The application came to be made under the following circumstances:2. The appellant filed the appeal on 2-1-1971 against the judgment and decree of the Senior Civil Judge, Ajmer dated 27-7-1970. The Office found that the appeal was filed within time, but it noticed that the certified copies of the judgment and decree did not bear court-fee stamp; the court-fee stamp required being of Re. 1/- & Rs. 1.50 paise respectively. The case was ordered to be put up on 18-2-1971, but as the deficiency of court-fee was not made good the case was ordered to be put up on 10-3-1971. On 10-3-1971, Shri Dalpat Raj, one of the counsel for the appellant, was present, but as the defects had not been removed the case was o...
Tag this Judgment!Lalita Prasad Vs. Mst. Bhanwari Devi
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-20-1975
Reported in: 1976WLN(UC)51
S.N. Modi, J.1. This is an appeal against the judgment and decree of the learned District Judge, Jaipur City, dated 26-3-75 whereby he dismissed the appellant's application under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.2. The case of the appellant in the lower court was that the respondent Mst, Bhanwari Devi had without soy reasonable excuse withdrawn from the society of the appellant.3. The marriage between the parties took place on 20-2-52 and six children were born out of this wedlook. The eldest child was a daughter and she was married in the year 1970. It is not in dispute that the parties lived together upto 14-7-72 when the respondent along with her two minor children Kishori and Gopal left the appellant's house and began to live with the father of the appellant, namely, Gangasahai. It is also not in dispute that prior to 14-7-72 two sons of the appellant, namely, Ramnarain and Krishna Kumar had earlier left the appellants house & began living with their grandfather Gjrga Saha...
Tag this Judgment!Miss Bedlani Vs. A. Hoogewerfe and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-17-1975
Reported in: AIR1975Raj153
C.M. Lodha, J.1. This is a defendant-tenant's second appeal arising out of a suit for ejectment with respect to a portion of plaintiff-respondents' house, situated in the city of Ajmer. The plaintiff-respondents No. 1 Howngewerfe is brother, and plaintiffs-respondents Nos. 2 and 3 are sisters. Plaintiff No. 1 as well as plaintiff No. 3 are married. Plaintiff No. 1 has five children, and plaintiff No. 3 has one daughter. They are joint owners of the property in dispute. The plaintiff's case is that the. respondent-plaintiff No. 3 used to live at Mahu with her husband when the latter was posted there as a Railway Engine Driver, and since he had retired from service, the premises in question were required by the plaintiffs for residence of respondent No, 3, and her family.2. The defendant denied the suit, and pleaded that there was enough accommodation already available with the plaintiffs, and the suit had been instituted with a motive to increase the rent.3. After recording the evidence...
Tag this Judgment!Hasan Lal Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-17-1975
Reported in: 1975(8)WLN8
D.P. Gupta, J.1. This is a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution praying that a writ of certiorari may be issued quashing the show-cause notice dated December 18, 1966 and the order dated February 16, 1966, passed by the Board of Revenue, Rajasthan, Ajmer, dismissing the petitioner from Government service and subsequent orders of the State Government dated April 15, 1967 and June 29, 1970 dismissing the petitioner's appeal and review application respectively.2. In the year 1963, the petitioner was employed as a Nazir cum Accounts Clerk in Tehsil Jahajpur, District Bhilwara. On July 9, 1963, the Sector, Bhilwara, who was admittedly the Disciplinary Authority so far as the petitioner is concerned, issued a charge sheet to the petitioner along with a statement of allegations, wherein the petitioner was alleged to have made double payments/bogus payments and improper and illegal payments in respect of pre-April 1950 revenue deposits to certain Jagirdars and Mafidars of Tehsil...
Tag this Judgment!Shivcharan Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-17-1975
Reported in: 1975WLN(UC)53
M.L. Joshi, J.1. The petitioner is ex Jagirdar of Bhensoradgarh in District Chittorgarh. His 'jagir' was resumed under the provisions of the Rajasthan Land Reforms and Resumption of jagir Act, 1962. hereinafter called the Act, on 23rd of Aug at, 1954. Under Section 23 of the Act, the fruit bearing trees excepting the 'keth' tree belonging to the petitioner were declared to be his private property by the Jagir Commissioner by his order dated 27th June, 1959, The order of the Jagir Commissioner is Annexure 1. The exclusion of the 'keth' tree from the list of the persona) property gave a cause of grievance to the petitioner who went in appeal before the Beard of Revenue. The Board by its judgment dated 14th April, 1960, allowed the appeal and held that the 'keth' tree is also a fruit bearing tree and should be included in the private property of the petitioner.2. In the year 1961, the Sarpancb Gram Pancahyat Barcdia in whose local limits Charcot came to be included wanted to auction fruit...
Tag this Judgment!Dr. Umrao Mal Mathur Vs. the State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-16-1975
Reported in: 1975(8)WLN383
ORDERIn supersession to this department order of even No. dated 10.9.71, the re-employment of Dr. Umrao Mal Mathur as Professor of Skin & V.D. at Medical College, Jodhpur is hereby terminated w.e.f. 10.9.71. He shall be paid one month's pay in lieu of one month notice.By OrderSd/-(Gopesh Bhatt)Dy. Secretary to Government.2. The earned Counsel for the petitioner submits that after having retired from service he was re-employed for a fixed term of one year by the orders of the State Government dated July 8, 1971 with effect from March 1,1971 and, therefore he had a right of hold the post of Professor of Skin and Veneral Diseases upto February 29, 1371 and that the order of termination of his services with effect from September 10,1971 amounted to his removal from service by way or punishment and was in contravention of the provisions of Article 311 of the Constitution.3. The reply of the learned Additional Government Advocate is that the petitioner was re-employed by the order dated July...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »