Rajasthan Court July 1977 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.
Gheesaram Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-29-1977
Reported in: AIR1979Raj52; 1977()WLN368
ORDERD.P. Gupta, J.1. The case of the petitioner is that he was not afforded a proper opportunity of hearing before the order of supersession of the Panchayat Thepri was passed by the State Government. The second contention of the learned counsel is that in the circumstances of this case the State Government could not have passed an order of supersession of the aforesaid Panchayat within the provisions of Section 73 of the Rajasthan Panchayat Act, 1953 (hereinafter called 'the Act').2. The facts which have given rise to this writ petition may be briefly recounted in order to appreciate the submissions made by the learned counsel.3. There is a Gram Panchayat of Thepri (hereinafter referred to as 'the Panchayat') in the District of Nagaur within the State of Rajasthan. It is admitted by the parties that the whole number of Panchas, including the Sarpanch, as specified by the State Government under Section 4 of the Act in respect of the Panchayat, is 12. It is also not in dispute that the...
Uda Ram and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-29-1977
Reported in: 1977WLN(UC)230
M.L. Jain, J.1. This order will dispose of two writ petitions Nos. 1009/1976. and 1970 of 1976.2. On 20-8-1971, Mining Engineer, Jodhpur issued a public notice that a minor mineral quarry Kali Beri No. 108 of stone had become Khalsa and was available for grant for Rent-cum-Royalty lease, perhaps under Rule 21 of the Rajasthan Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1956. In was also directed that applications for allotment of the said quarry will be received upto 21-9-1971. Hansraj made an application on 21-9-1971 and it is conceded on all hands that the lease was sanctioned by the Mining Engineer in his favour. He was directed by a letter dated 1.1.1972 issued by the said Mining Engineer that he should contact the foreman; have the quarry demarcated and complete other formalities within 15 days and if he failed to do so, his application was likely to be dismissed. The quarry was got demarcated on 3-4-1972. Hansraj alleges that thereafter he attended the office of the Mining Engineer several t...
Moolchand and anr. Vs. State of Rajasthan and Nine ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-28-1977
Reported in: 1977WLN(UC)372
A.P. Sen, J.1. By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, the petitioners Mool Chand, son of Khamma Rain, and Mst. Jawahari, widow of Khamma Ram, seek a writ of Certiorari for quashing the resolution of the Municipal Board, Neemka thana, dated July 21, 1972, the order of the Collector, 226dated December 18, 1972, and the order of the Director, Local Bodies', Rajasthan, Jaipur, Dated April 26, 1973 in so far as it maintains the allotment of certain plots of land out of Khasra Nos. 1014, 1015 & 1016 in favour of the respondents Nos. 5 to 10; & for a writ of Mandamus, for directing the Municipal Board, Neem-Ka-Thana, to make allotment of a plot of land in their favour out of land bearing khasra Nos. 1014, 1015 and 1016, as directed by the Land Acquisition officer by this order dated December 3, 1963. The facts are that predecessor-in title of the petitioners, namely, Khamma Ram, was the Khatedar tenant of Khasra Nos. 1014, 1015 and 1016 situate at Neem-Ka-thana. In 1963, the ...
Sanwanta Ram Vs. Asha Ram and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-28-1977
Reported in: 1977WLN366
K.D. Sharma, J.1. This is an application filed by Sanwata Ram under Section 482, Cr. P.C. for quashing an order of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Nagaur, dated 18th December, 1975, by which he refused to withdraw the attachment of the land in dispute on the ground that after attachment of the subject of dispute in a case of emergency under Sub-section (1) of Section 146, Cr. P.C. he has become functus-officio and is not empowered to take further proceedings in the case under Section 145. Cr. PC. The reason given out by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Nagaur, for holding the above view is that the attachment of the subject of dispute subsists until a competent court determines the rights of the parties thereto with regard to the person entitled to the possession thereof. It appears that in passing the impugned order the Sub-Divisional Magistrate has relied upon an authority of this Court Umarao v. Sheonarayan 1975 RLW 355. Sanwata Ram, against whom proceedings under Section 145 Cr. P.C. ...
Prabha Chand JaIn and anr. Vs. State of Rajasthan and 2 ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-28-1977
Reported in: 1977WLN551
A.P. Sen, J.1. This petition by one Prabha Chand Jain challenges the validity of order No. 1/72/ 19818-36 dated June, 1972, issued by the Director, Ayurved Department, Govt. of Rajasthan Ajmer, placing the petitioner on the retired list of superannuated Vaidyas with effect from February 17, 1973 on the basis that his date of birch was February 17, 1918.2. The grievance of the petitioner is that his date of birth recorded in his service book was altered by the Zila Ayurvedic Adhikari District Sawai Madhopur, after notice to him, to February 1 7, 1919, and that was taken to be his real date of birth in the seniority list of vaidyas, published in the Rajasthan gazette dated October 26, 1972, part II-Ka, wherein the petitioner's name was at serial No. 147, and his date of birth was shown as February 17. 19 9, but, without notice to him or without affording him an opportunity of hearing, the Director, Ayurvedic Department Government of Rajasthan, Ajmer, in the impugned order of retirement, ...
Sheo Karan and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-27-1977
Reported in: AIR1979Raj58; 1977()WLN348
ORDERM.L. Jain, J. 1. This writ petition comes up today for the decision of two preliminary points raised by the respondents :-- (1) That it is a joint petition by 8 petitioners and is not maintainable in view of Rule 375 of the Rajasthan High Court Rules which was inserted on 9-10-1964 and in view of the decision of the Division Bench of this Court in Chandmal Naurat Mal v. State of Rajasthan, AIR 1968 Raj 20; (2) The petitioner has concealed facts and the petitioner having not come with clean hands, the petition should be thrown out. 2. In village Dulmana, Tehsil Suratgarh, District Sri Ganganagar, there is a temple of Thakurji which had a grant of 'Muafi' lands in 6 PBN, Square Nos. 44 and 45, measuring 15 Bighas and 17 Biswas. These lands were in possession of one deceased Bhinya Ram, as a 'Pujari'. The petitioner No. 1 Sheo Karan petitioners Nos. 4, 5, 6 and 7 are his legal representatives. Besides this land, Bhinya Ram also had there 7 Bighas of 'lagani' land. After the resumpti...
Hemraj Vs. Jugal Kishore and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-27-1977
Reported in: AIR1979Raj106; 1977()WLN326
ORDERD.P. Gupta, J.1. This revision application has been filed against the order passed by the Civil Judge, Barmer, under Section 13-A (b) of the Rajasthan Premises (Control of Rent & Eviction) Act, 1950 (hereinafter called 'the Act'). The trial court passed an absolutely perfunctory order in this case directing the defendant-tenant to deposit the provisional rent @ Rs. 40 p. m. and also to make payment of arrears of rent on that basis. This order was not in consonance to the provisions of Section 13-A (b) of the Act, which reads as under.-'13-A (b) in every such proceeding, the court shall, on the application of the tenant made within thirty days from the date of commencement of the amending ordinance, notwithstanding any order to the contrary, determine the amount of rent in arrears up to the date of the order as also the amount of interest thereon at 6% per annum and costs of the suit allowable to the landlord; and direct the tenant to pay the amount so determined within such time, ...
Abdul Hakeem Vs. Jan Mohammed and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-27-1977
Reported in: 1977WLN428
K.D. Sharma, J.1. Abdul Hakeem has invoked the inherent jurisdiction of this Court by way of an application under Section 482, Cr. P.C. for getting quashed an order of the Munsiff-cum Judicial Magistrate, Mandalgarh, District Bhilwara, dated 26.2.1977, by which the final report submitted by the Station House Officer, Mandalgarh was not accepted and the Station House Officer was directed to recover the stolen property, i.e. 'Chakki' (flour mill) within a fortnight and to produce the papers before the Magistrate.2. The relevant facts giving rise to this application under Section 482, Cr. P.C. are as follows: Jan Mohammed, non-petitioner No. 1, filed a complaint against Abdul Hakeem, Abdul Satar, Kadir and Aziz Mohammed under Sections 457, 379 and 380, I.P.C. in the court of the Judicial Magistrate, Mandalgarh, It was alleged in the complaint that on dated 2.2.1976 in the night at any time between 12 p.m. and 2.00 a.m. the accused persons dishonestly removed the flour-mill belonging to th...
inder Singh Kakar Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-26-1977
Reported in: 1977WLN(UC)246
D.P. Gupta, J.1. The petitioner was initially appointed as a Journeyman in the Railway Workshop, Northen Railway, Jodhpur on December 27, 1953. After receiving promotions to the posts of Assistant Chargeman and Chargeman, the petitioner was further promoted as Officiating Senior Chargeman in the grade of Rs. 335-425 and was provisionally confirmed on the said post with effect from July 10, 1966 by the order of the Senior Personnel Officer (M), dated December 10, 1971 The respondent No. 4 Madhukant was similarly confirmed on the post of Senior Chargemen with effect from 12-7-1966, while the respondent No.5 T.R. Batra and No.6 S.P. Sharma were also provisionally confirmed on the said post of Senior Chargeman with effect from March 3, 1969 & May 3, 1969 respectively by the very same order of Senior Personnel Officer (M), Northern Railway, dated December 10, 1971. Meanwile the petitioner was selected for the post of Assistant Foreman in the grade of Rs. 335-425 and was placed on the provis...
Manohar Singh Vs. Karan Singh
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-25-1977
Reported in: 1977WLN(UC)248
S.N. Modi, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and decree of the learned Singht Judge of this Court dated September 16, 1969.2. Briefly stated that relevant facts of the case are that Ranjeet Singh died on April 25y 1954 leaving behind two sons, the plaintiff Manohar Singh and the defendant Karasingh. Manoharsingh filed a suit for partition of joint family property consisting of two houses described in pare. 3 (ka) and 3 (kha) of the plaint and the movables described in Schedule A attached to the plaint. The plaintiff alleged that the property described in pare 3 (ka) was ancestral and the property described in Para 3 (kha) was purchased by Ranjeet Singh for Rs. 3199/- under the sale-deed-dated September 29, 1946. In the sale-deed, the names of two sons Manohar Singh and Karan Singh along with Ranjeet Singh were mendoned as vendees. The plaintiff, further alleged that tie had also paid part of the consideration of the sale price in purchasing the house and as this house w...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »