Rajasthan Court April 1981 Judgments
Parmeshwar Lal Vs. the State of Rajasthan and 14 ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-29-1981
Reported in: 1981WLN178
G.M. Lodha, J.1. These 23 writ petitions have been filed by the employees of the State of Rajasthan against the order of their termination. All these employees were appointed on temporary basis. Their services have been terminated on account of a Circular of the State Government dated 13th May, 1980 that no employee should be appointed without his registration before the employment exchange. In case any such appointment shall be made between 10-12-79 to 13-5-80, their services should be terminated.2. It is not in dispute that on 10th December, 1979, the State Government issued the following order:jktLFkku ljdkjJe ,oa fu;kstu foHkkxDzekad Ik- 7@5@J@fu@79 t;iqj fnukad 10&12&1979 vkns'k fo'k; %&& fu;kstu dk;Zky;ks }kjk laizsf'kr vk'kkrh;ks dh lwph es ls gh fu;qfDr dh vfuok;Zrk dh lekfIr A ftu jktdh; dk;Zy;ks jkT; ds lkoZtfud {ks= o v)Z 'kkluh; laLFkkvks es fu;qfDr djus gsrq fu;sktu dk;Zky;ks }kjk lEizsf'kr 'kkfFkZ;sk dh lwph ls gh djuk vfuok;Z gks ds lEcU/k es jkT; ljdkj ds fu;ekuqlkj izf...
Tag this Judgment!State of Rajasthan and anr. Vs. Chirag Enterprises and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-28-1981
Reported in: AIR1982Raj169; 1981()WLN112
Jain, J.1. This is an appeal under Section 18 of the Rajasthan High Court Ordinance against the order of the learned single Judge dated Feb. 12, 1981, whereby the petitioner-respondent's writ petition was allowed and the appellants were directed to immediately convene a meeting of the Central Stores Purchase Committee (hereinafter referred to as 'the CSPC') and decide the matter afresh on the basis of the tenders received for the year 1980-81 within a period of three weeks from the date of the order,2. The facts of the case lie within a narrow compass. They may be recalled as hereunder :The Deputy Secretary (Administration) and the Stores Purchase Officer (Administration), Secretariat, Jaipur, issued a tender notice No. 2/80 on behalf of the CSPO of the Government of Rajasthan inviting tenders for the supply inter alia of hose pipes (PVC and Rubber). The said tender notice was published in the Rajasthan Patrika. By this tender a rate contract for purchase of PVC hose pipes was to be en...
Tag this Judgment!Bambloo Dugdh Utpadak Sahkari Samiti Limited Vs. the State of Rajastha ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-28-1981
Reported in: 1981WLN(UC)188
S.N. Deedwania, J.1. Petitioner Bambloo Dugdh Utapadak Sahkari Samiti Limited, Bambloo has filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution for quashing the order dated September 22, 1977 (Ex. 1) passed by the Minister of Cooperatives, Rajasthan, Jaipur.2. Briefly stated the facts are these. The petitioner is a Cooperative Society registered under the Rajasthan Co-operative Societies Act, 1965 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). The object of the society is to collect milk from farmers and supply to the Uttari Rajasthan Sahkari Dugdh Utpadak Sangh Limited, Urmul Dairy, Ganganagar Road, Bikaner. The field of operation of the society is village Bambloo. Some of the persons of this village moved an application to the Minister of Co-operatives, Rajasthan, Jaipur. On 22.9.1977, the Minister passed an order that the Sahkari Samiti of Faujdaran Bas be closed and a new Sahkari Samiti of Kocharan Bas be created. The order of the Minister was transmitted to the Registrar, Coope...
Tag this Judgment!The State of Rajasthan and ors. Vs. Gordhan Prasad and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-27-1981
Reported in: 1981WLN(UC)265
S.C. Agarwal, J.1. This writ petition is directed against the order dated 26th March, 1979, passed by the Rajas than Civil Services Appellate Tribunal, Rajasthan, Jaipur, (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal') in Appeal No. 26/1979.2. The appeal aforesaid was filed by Gordhan Prasad, respondent No. 1, against the orders dated 12th October, 1978 and 20th December, 1978, passed by the Registrar of the Board of Revenue. By order dated 12th October, 1978, respondent No. I, Gordhan Prasad was reverted from the post of Tehsil Revenue Accountant to the post of Patwari, and by order dated 2Cth December, 1978, 82 persons, including Shri Shiv Prasad Dadich, petitioner No. 4, were confirmed on the posts of Tehsil Revenue Accountant on the basis of screening under Proviso (c) to Rule 6 of the Rajasthan Revenue Accounts Subordinate Services Rules, 1975 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules'). The Tribunal held that under proviso (c) to Rule 6 of the Rules, only a person who has been appointed...
Tag this Judgment!Radhey Shyam Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-24-1981
Reported in: 1981WLN(UC)279
N.M. Kasliwal, J.1. The petitioner has moved an application under Section 482 CrPC for modifying the order of the learned Sessions Judge, Tonk dated 9th April, 1981 to the extent that the condition put by the learned Sessions Judge, that the police can arrest the accused petitioner for making recovery under Section 27 of the Act may be set aside.2. The petitioner moved an application Under Section 438 CrPC which has been allowed by the learned Sessions Judge but in the order granting anticipatory bail he has put a condition that in case the Police had sufficient grounds for making discovery Under Section 27 of the Evidence Act then it can arrest the petitioner and release him on bail immediately after making such recovery The learned Sessions Judge in this regard has placed reliance on certain observations made by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in Guru Bux Singh v. Stare of Punjab 1980 Cr.L.R. 477.3. It is contended by the learned Counsel for the petitioner that it was not the ratio of the ...
Tag this Judgment!Moharsingh Vs. Mohanlal and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-23-1981
Reported in: AIR1981Raj227; 1981()WLN142
ORDERM.C. Jain, J.1. The petitioner and the respondents Nos. 1 to 4 contested the election of Sardar Shahar Assembly Constituency No. 19 of the Rajasthan Legislative Assembly. The polling took place on 28-5-1980 and the result was declared on 1-6-1980 in which respondent No. 1 Mohanlal was declared elected. The petitioner secured 21,428 votes and the respondent No. 1 secured 21,662 votes. Respondents Nos. 2, 3 and 4 secured 18,951, 888 and 1,180 votes, respectively. The petitioner has challenged the election of respondent No, 1 on number of grounds and prayed for scrutiny and recount of the entire ballot papers on the grounds stated in the election petition and further prayed for declaring the election of respondent No. 1 as void and for declaring himself as elected.2. Reply to the election petition has been submitted by respondents Nos. 1, 3 and 4.3. On the pleadings of the parties issues were framed. Issues Nos. 18 and 20 were heard as preliminary issues, which are as under :--'(18) ...
Tag this Judgment!Ram Murti Vs. Kashi Ram and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-23-1981
Reported in: AIR1981Raj258; 1981()WLN163
ORDERKalyan Dutta, C.J. 1. This is a writ petition filed by Ram Murti under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, direction or order for quashing the judgment marked Ex. 16 dated October 30, 1980, which was passed by non-petitioner No. 2 and whereby the election petition filed by non-petitioner No. 1 was accepted,2. The writ petition arises under the following facts and circumstances:--Election to the office of Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat 83 LNP, Tehsil Padampur, District Sri Ganganagar, was held on February 5, 1978. The petitioner and Kashi Ram, non-petitioner No. 1, contested the election for the office of Sarpanch. The petitioner received 868 valid votes and Kashi Ram, non-petitioner No. 1, secured 809 valid votes. As many as 43 votes were declared invalid. Consequently, the petitioner was declared elected to the office of Sarpanch by a clear majority of 59 votes. Kashi Ram, non-petitioner No. 1, thereupo...
Tag this Judgment!Kailash Chandra Vs. Parasmal and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-22-1981
Reported in: 1981WLN506
S.N. Deedwania, J.1. This revision, which is directed to be treated as a petition under Section 482, CrPG is against the order dated August 22, 1980 of learned Munsif and Judicial Magistrate, Bilara directing the interim custody of tractor No. BHR 8146 to complainant Parsamal.2. Briefly stated the relevant facts are these. On 16.3.79. Parasmal lodged a report at police station, Bilara alleging that he had purchased tractor No. BHR 8146 in the month of September, 1977 from Jeevrajsingh and registration was duly transferred id his favour. On 30-6-77, Kailash Chandra accused took the tractor from him on hire and executed a rent-deed. Kailashchandra thereafter through his father Heeralal sold the tractor to Jassaram and thereby committed offence of criminal branch of trust punishable under Section 406, IPC During the course of investigation, the tractor was recovered from a 'bara'. After the investigation, now the police has submitted a final report. The case of Kailashchandra is that he p...
Tag this Judgment!Lumbaram Vs. Vardaram and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-21-1981
Reported in: AIR1982Raj105
ORDERS.K. Mal Lodha, J. 1. Plaintiff-non-petitioner No. 1 instituted a suit for specific performance of the contract on the basis of a document dated August 6, 1974 alleged to have been executed by the defendant-petitioner against the defendants (petitioner and non-petitioner No. 2) inthe Court of Civil Judge, Pali. The document dated August 6, 1974 was written on a stamp of Rs. 3/- only and it is unregistered. The objection material for the present purpose taken in the written statement was that the document dated Aug. 6, 1974 is not an agreement to sell but it is completed sale and as it is insufficiently stamped and unregistered, it is not admissible in evidence. The learned Civil Judge, Pali framed issue No. 9 covering this objection. By his order dated Sept. 20, 1980, the learned Civil Judge held that the document in question is an agreement to sell and, therefore, it is admissible in evidence. He, accordingly, decided issue No. 9 against the defendants. By this very order, he als...
Tag this Judgment!inder Dev Arya Vs. University of Rajasthan and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-16-1981
Reported in: AIR1981Raj269; 1981()WLN354
ORDERS.C. Agrawal, J. 1. In this writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner, Shri Inder Dev Arya, has prayed for an appropriate writ, order or direction against the non-petitioners, namely, the University of Rajasthan (hereinafter referred to as the University) and the State of Rajasthan, directing them to give admission to the petitioner in the M.B.B.S. course of 1980-81,2. This writ petition has been filed in the following circumstances:--3. In the State of Rajasthan, there are five medical colleges at Jaipur, Bikaner Udaipur, Jodhpur and Ajmer. All the five medical colleges are run by the State Government. Admissions to the aforesaid Medical Colleges are made after making a joint selection through a Selection Committee (Admission Board). For the guidance of the Selection Committee in the matter of admissions to the said colleges, the State Government has issued instructions which have been described as Rules for Admission to Medical Colleges i...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »