Rajasthan Court August 1977 Judgments
K.D. Gupta Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-31-1977
Reported in: 1977WLN(UC)478
D.P. Gupta, J.1. The petitioner entered the fen ice of the Government of Rajasthan in the Public Works Department (Health) as a Junior Engineer on June 13, 1956. He was thereafter appointed as Assistant Engineer (Mechanical) in a temporary capacity on October 21, 1957 and was confirmed on that post by the order of the State Government dated July 4, 1961 with effect from December 23, 1959. The petitioner was promoted as officiating Executive Engineer (Mechanical) by the order of the State Government dated 3rd April, 1963 against a temporary post, initially for a period of six months but later on his officiating promotion was extended freer time to time. The case of the petitioner is that a Departmental Promotion Committee met on 5th, 9th and 11th November, 1963 for corseting the matter of promotion to various posts in the Public Works Dependent of the State of Rajasthan. The aforesaid Committee mare its recurrent rations in respect of promotions for substantive vacancies as ales' for pr...
Tag this Judgment!Ghanshyam Vs. Smt. Parvati
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-31-1977
Reported in: 1977WLN598
M.L. Joshi, J.1. The lands covered by Khasra No. 191, 590, 591, 593, 594, 596, 597, 598, 599, 600, 602 & 603 situate in village Bhamod, Tehsil Bairath, were in the Khatedari of deceased Shiv Prasad under Khata No. 149. Deceased Shiv Prasad is said to be grand father of deceased Jagdish, the husband of Smt. Parvati. Smt. Parvati made an application under Section 146 Cr. P.C. in the court of Sub Divisional Magistrate, Kotputli, inter alia alleging that deceased Shiv Prasad and deceased Jagdish husband of Smt. Parvati resided together and both were cultivating the afore said lards. It was alleged in the application that Shiv Prasad being an old man, the lands in question were being looked after by the deceased husband of Smt. Parvati. It has been further alleged in the application that even after the death of deceased Jagdish Prasad deceased Shiv Prasad used to reside with Smt. Parvati and after the death of deceased Shiv Prasad the aforesaid lands in question have been in continuous poss...
Tag this Judgment!Om Prakash and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-30-1977
Reported in: AIR1978Raj52; 1977()WLN604
ORDERM.L. Joshi, J. 1. This is a petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India seeking to quash the notifications dated 5th November, 1976 (Annexure 4), dated 16th February, 1977 (Annexure 5), and notice dated 25th March, 1977, (Annexure 6) and further for restoration o the possession of the disputed land, if the petitioners are dispossessed during the pendency of the writ petition.2. A joint writ petition was filed, by Om Prakash, Rajendra Kumar, Suresh Kumar, Smt Sushila, Smt. Pushpa Devi and Suchitra Devi in respect of Khasras Nos. 419, 420, 421, 422 and 423 (old) corresponding to new Khasras Nos. 516, 517, 518, 519 and 520 respectively, admeasuring 3 Bighas 4 Biswas, 5 Biswas, 1 Bigha 7 Biswas, 5 Brwas, and 2 Bighas 8 Biswas respectively. This writ petition when came up for hearing an objection was taken on behalf of the non-petitioners that the joint writ petition was not competent as the petitioners have no common and joint interest in all the Khasras mentioned above. Lear...
Tag this Judgment!Narayan Hari Shanker Vs. State of Rajasthan and 5 ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-26-1977
Reported in: 1977WLN430
A.P. Sen, J.1. These six writ petitions raise common questions and therefore they are disposed of by this common order.2. The petitioners, who are commission agents and grain merchants, challenge the validity of the levy of the market fee and the requirement of licensing of dealers by the Krishi Upaj Mandi Samiti, Chhabra, under Sections 14 and 17 of the Rajasthan Agricultural Produce Markets Act, 1971.3. The writ petitions fell into three groups. Writ petition Nos. 956, 959 and 960 of 1976 are directed against an order of the Krishi Upaj Mandi Samiti, Chhabra, dated April 28, 1975 requiring the licensing of dealers engaged in the business of purchase and sale of agricultural produce in the market area and making a demand for payment of market fees i.e. before the establishment of the principal market yard at Chhabra or a sub yard at Chhipabarod. Writ petitions Nos. 136 and 137 of 1977 challenge the validity of Notification No. F. 10 (24)/Agr. Cr. 2/75 dated October 14, 1976, issued by...
Tag this Judgment!Pana Chand Vs. the State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-26-1977
Reported in: 1977WLN541
V.P. Tyagi, C.J.1. This revision of Panachand is directed against the judgment of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bundi whereby he upheld the conviction passed by the Additional Munsiff Magistrate No. 2, Bundi for an offence under Section 409 I.P.C.. The petitioner was convicted for the said offence and sentenced to two years rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 200/-. But on appeal looking to the circumstances of the case, the learned Sessions Judge reduced the sentence to 3 months rigorous imprisonment but increased the punishment of fine to Rs. 1,000/ from Rs. 200/-.2. The prosecution case was that on 6th of June, 1969 the petitioner was entrusted with an amount 0f Rs. 397.67 for the purpose of disbursement as the pay of the three constables, namely, Devaram. Hamir Lal and Mohan La) who had gone to Bundi. It is alleged that the petitioner went to Bundi with the said amount but he returned to Nenva without disbursing the amount and made an entry in the Roznamcha that he had...
Tag this Judgment!Laxmi NaraIn Vs. the State of Rajasthan and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-26-1977
Reported in: 1977WLN558
V.P. Tyagi, C.J.1. This is a revision application filed by Laxmi Narain against the judgment of Shri G.K Sharma, Additional Sessions No. 3, Jaipur City upholding the conviction of the petitioner under Section 7 read with Section 16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act. The petitioner was sentenced to six months' rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 1,000/-, or in default of payment of fine to further undergo three months' rigorous imprisonment, Besides this, the petitioner was also convicted for contravening Rule 50 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Rules and he was awarded imprisonment till the rising of the court and a fine of Rs. 100/-, or in default further rigorous imprisonment for 15 days.2. On 16th January, 1971 a sample of cow milk was taken from the container when was being carried on by the petitioner when he was asked to show licence to sell the milk, he could not do so. The milk on examination was found to be adulterated.3. learned Counsel for the petitioner u...
Tag this Judgment!Mrs. Sumitra Kaur Vs. Authorised Officer (Sub-divisional Officer) and ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-25-1977
Reported in: 1977WLN505
D.P. Gupta, J.1. The petitioner seeks to challenge the order of the Board of Revenue for Rajasthan dated January 5, 1977, which was passed on an appeal under Section 23 of the Rajasthan Imposition of Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings Act, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act').2. The undisputed facts are that the petitioner received a large chunk of agricultural land from her father and out of the aforesaid land she transferred parcels of land to various persons including her husband, her three sons and her daughter by means of registered sale deeds executed on different dates. Proceedings under Section 11 of the Act were started against the petitioner and here husband by the Authorised Officer (Ceiling), Sri Ganganagar and both of them on receiving notices under sub-Section (1) of Section 11 filed their returns. After an enquiry the Authorised Officer came to the conclusion that the youngest son of the petitioner, Gurusharan Singh, was a minor and the transfer of land in favour of...
Tag this Judgment!Bhagwat Swaroop Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-25-1977
Reported in: 1977WLN496
Dwarka Prasad Gupta, J.1. The petitioner is a member of the Rajasthan Administrative Service. In the year 1967 he was posted as Magistrate First Class at Sri Ganganagar. On July 4, 1967 one Lalkhan submitted an application under section 80 of the Code of Criminal Procedure before the petitioner alleging that his wife Smt. Mima had been taken away by her father in his absence and without his consent and that his wife was kept in illegal confinement by her father. The petitioner recorded the statement of Lalkhan and issued a search warrant under Section 100 of the Code directing that Smt. Mima, wife of Lalkhan, should be recovered and should be produced before the petitioner in his court on July 13, 1967 1c appears that Smt. Mima was recovered by the police and was produced before the petitioner on July 8, 1967 although it was a holiday, being the second Saturday of the month and on that account his court was closed But the petitioner is alleged to have recorded the statement of Smt. Mim...
Tag this Judgment!Lakshman Prasad Vs. the Divisional Personnel Officer, Northen Railway, ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-24-1977
Reported in: 1977WLN(UC)327
D.P. Gupta, J.1. The petition or in this case was appointed as a clerk in the office of the Chief Mechanical Engineer, Jodhpur Railway on December 2, 1946. However, in the view of his earlier million, service rendered in World War II, the service of the petitioner was counted with effect from April 26, 1942 for the purposes of seniority and allied matters. The petitioner was promoted as a Senior Clerk in the grade of Rs. 130-300 (AS) with effect from April 1, 1956. The petitioner's case is that he was eligible for promotion to the next higher post of Head Clerk in the grade of Rs. 210-380 (AS), but by the order dated April 15, 1972 his claim for promotion was ignored, although he was senior most Senior Clerk due for promotion and the respondent No. 4 was promoted instead of the petitioner. The grievance of the petitioner is that although he was found fit for promotion earlier and his record of service was excellent and there were no adverse remarks against the petitioner, yet he was de...
Tag this Judgment!Dineshwarlal Vs. the State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-24-1977
Reported in: 1977WLN412
K.D. Sharma, J.1. Dineshwar Lal has invoked inherent jurisdiction of this Court by way of an application under Section 482, Cr. Pc. for quashing an order of the Additional Sessions Judge No. 2, Jodhpur, dated 30th April, 1977 by which his defence evidence in Sessions Case No. 8 of 1976 was closed.2. The applicant is being prosecuted for an offence punishable under Section 409, I.P.C. in the court of the Additional Sessions Judge No. 2, Jodhpur The applicant entered upon his defence in this case on 26-2-1977. He expressed his desire before the Court to adduce evidence in his defence. Hence, the case was fixed for recording defence evidence on 28th March, 1977 and it was further directed that if the applicant wanted the assistance of the Court in compelling the attendance of his witnesses, he would file process-fees within three days. On 28th March, 1977, the Additional Sessions Judge directed the applicant to deposit a sum of Rs. 200/-, as travelling expenses and allowance payable to hi...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »