Rajasthan Court September 1986 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.
State of Rajasthan and ors. Vs. Shiv Lal and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-29-1986
Reported in: 1986WLN(UC)534
Kanta Bhatnagar, J.1. In this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, petitioners have prayed for quashing of the Award dated December 14, 1984 (Annexure-2) given by the Labour Court, Jodhpur in favour of non petitioner Shivlal.2. Non-petitioner Shivlal had filed a claim petition under Section 33C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act (for short 'the Act') before the Labour Court, Jodhpur for Rs. 26040/- said to be due towards his salary for the post of Civil Mistry. Before the Labour Court the case of the non-petitioner was that he was appointed as Civil Mistry from February 1, 1967 and allowed to continue as such upto October 20, 1967 but thereafter, he was asked to work on a junior post and was paid lesser salary. According to him his reversion and payment of salary less than what he was entitled to was illegal. The initial claim of Rs. 26040/- was subsequently revised as Rs. 21094/-3. Despite service of notice issued by the Labour Court nobody appeared on behalf o...
Hindustan Zinc Ltd. Vs. Jia Lal Kapoor
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-26-1986
Reported in: 1987(1)WLN126
Milap Chand Jain, J.1. This revision is directed against the order dated July 23, 1983 passed by the learned District Judge, Udaipur in Civil Execution Case No. 7 of 1981.2. The respondent-decree-holder Jialal Kapoor had obtained a decree in Civil Suit No. 13 of 1977 on May 24, 1940 and he submitted an application for execution under section XXI, Rule U, CPC. The plaintiff-decree-holder's services were terminated on 6-2-1974. He was holding the post of Chief Mining Engineer/Superintendent of Mines/Chief of Planning and Development (Mines). The plaintiff's suit was decreed in the following terms:(1) The order of termination passed by the defendant No. 2 on 6-2-1974 was illegal and void and as such it was ineffective as against the plaintiff;(2) That the plaintiff will be deemed to have continued in service of the defendant No. 2 and as such he shall be immediately reinstated on the same post on which he was working on 6-2-1974 and he shall be entitled to claim all salaries and other ben...
Magraj Tawad, M.L.A. Vs. Karpur Chand Kulish
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-26-1986
Reported in: 1987(1)WLN606
Inder Sen Israni, J.1. This is an application in respect of alleged contempt of High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan tiled by the petitioner regarding a news item published in daily news paper the Rajasthan Patrika of Jaipur publication, of which the non-petitioner is an Editor.2. The petitioner was sitting member of Rajasthan Legislative Assembly at the time of filing this application and has mentioned in the application that he has filed this application as he is closely associated with public associations and is interested in maintaining and upholding the majesty of law and dignity of judiciary. He has further stated in the application that the Rajasthan Patrika is a popular daily newspaper, published simultaneously from Jaipur, Jodhpur and Udaipur, and has vide circulation in Rajasthan and (hat he is a regular reader of this paper. On 4th March, 1983, the petitioner went to the Railway Station, Jaipur around 5-45 am. to receive some guests when his attention was attracted by the ...
Gordhan Lal Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-26-1986
Reported in: 1987(2)WLN595
Surendra Nath Bhargava, J.1. This is plaintiff's second appeal.2. The plaintiff was working as Male Nurse Grade-III at M.B.S. Hospital Kota. He was served with a memorandum dated 28-7-1970 along with a charge sheet, and enquiry under Rule 16 of the Rajasthan Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1958 (her in after referred to as the 'CCA Rules') was proposed to be held against him. The allegation against the appellant was that on 29-5-1970 he pointed out Shri Murli Manohar Moondra to three person who lateron gave beating to Shri Moondra Enquiry was held under Rule 16 of the CCA Rules, and after the enquiry was over under Rule 16 of the CCA Rules, without any notice to appellant regarding the change of procedure from Rule 16 to Rule 17 of the CCA Rules, a minor penalty of stoppage of two grade increments without future effect was straight away imposed against the appellant, without calling any explanation from him and without furnishing him even copy of the enquiry ...
Lala Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-26-1986
Reported in: 1986WLN(UC)651
Sobhag Mal Jain, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment dated the 29th March, 1976 of the Sessions Judge, Udaipur convicting and sentencing the appellant for the offence under Section 302 IPC to imprisonment for life and a fine of Rs. 200/-, in default of payment of fine to two months' further rigorous imprisonment and under Section 323 IPC to one year's rigorous imprisonment. The substantive sentences are to run concurrently.2. The accused appellant and five others, namely, Dhanna, Lala, Maduwa, Kamji, Waga and Motia were tried for the offence under Section 147, 302 and 302/149 IPC. The incident took place on the night intervening 26th and 27th March, 1975 in village Sakla which resulted in injuries to both the sides. On the side of the prosecution Wala. Hakra and Mst. Mangli received injuries. Out of them Wala died on March 27, 1975 at 8 a.m. On the side of the accused Lala and Dhanna sustained injuries. The prosecution case in brief was that on the night of incident the a...
Kumari Bindu Vs. Chandra Shekhar and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-25-1986
Reported in: 1987(1)WLN318
Guman Mal Lodha, J.1. In this appeal Kumari Bindu was injured in an accident by a pair. Claim for compensation of Rs. 1,20,000/- was filed. But the Tribunal allowed compensation only to the extent of Rs. 20,000/-.2. It may be noticed that the injuries caused to Kumari Bindu are of serious nature and according to the medical evidence the plastic surgery of her leg will have to be repeated by grafting and regrafting three four times.3. Dr. Keswani was consulted. Three doctors were examined including Dr. S.S. Chandalia of S.M.B. Jaipur, AW 2. According to Dr. Chandalia she remained in treatment from 7-8-1981 to 24-1-1981. There was fracture of Feeula 1 x 1 and 1-1/2 was the woon. She was referred for skin grafting. The skin efficiency has been reduced from. 60 percent to 50 percent according to this doctor. According to him operation will have to be preformed even now because complete cure has not taken place. Dr. Chandra Shekhar AW 3 was also examined and he also examined the patient. He...
Mohan Lal Sukhadia University and anr. Vs. Miss Anita Mittal
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-25-1986
Reported in: 1986(2)WLN741
1. This is an appeal against a judgment of a learned Single Judge by which a writ petition has been allowed setting aside the cancellation of the petitioner's candidature at the Pre-Medical Examination held in the year 1986.2. The petitioner's examination had been cancelled on the ground that she was found in possession of objectionable material at the time she was appearing at the Chemistry Examination. Admittedly, the alleged objectionable material was some writing on one of her palms, which by itself was unintelligable in as much as it merely contained the abbreviations of the chemical names of certain metals. This alone was held to be sufficient by the Centre Superintendent to construe possession of objectionable material in order to direct cancellation of the petitioner's candidature at the examination. The petition challenging the action has been allowed. The learned Single Judge has held that the report of the Invigilator and the writing on the palm were wholly insufficient to l...
Mohan Singh and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-25-1986
Reported in: 1987WLN(UC)687
Mahendra Bhushan Sharma, J.1 .The above two writ petitions raise an identical question, the facts are also identical and, therefore they are going to be disposed of by a common order.2. The petitioner Mohan Singh in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2291/86 was appointed vide order dated July 3, 1978 on the post of Cattle Guard on work-charged basis in the Forest Department. Though initially his appointment was on payment of Rs. 5/- per day but later-on the Government revised the wages of the daily rated workers and the petitioner is now getting Rs. 11/-per day. He is working on daily wages since the date of his appointment though he has been transferred from one office to the other office and is presently working in the office of Forest, Sendra Range, District Pali.3. S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1319/84 is filed by Van Vibhag Employees Union, Churu and the case of the Union is that it is a registered Trade Union bearing No. RTU/1981 and represents the majority of the employees of the Fore...
Bindu Vs. Chandra Shekhar and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-25-1986
Reported in: I(1988)ACC435
G.M. Lodha, C.J.In this appeal Kumari Bindu was injured in an accident by a car. Claim for compensation of Rs. 1,80,000/- was filed. But the Tribunal allowed compensation only to the extent of Rs. 20,000/-.2. It may be noticed that the injuries caused to Kumari Bindu are of serious nature and according to the medical evidence the plastic surgery of her leg will have to be repeated by grafting and re-grafting three or four times.3. Dr. Keswani was consulted. Three doctors were examined including Dr. B.S. Chandalia of S M.S. Hospital, Jaipur, as AW 2. According to Dr. Chandalia, she remained under treatment from 7-8-1981 to 24-10-1981. There was fracture of fibula and 1 inch x 1-1/2 inch was the wound. She was referred for skin-grafting. The skin efficiency has been reduced from 50 per cent to 60 per cent according to this doctor. Accqrding to him operation will have to be performed even now because complete cure has not taken place. Dr. Chandra Shekhar AW 3 was also examined and he also...
K.M. Bindu Vs. Chandra Shekhar and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-25-1986
Reported in: II(1987)ACC569
G.M. Lodha, J.1. In this appeal Kumari Bindu was injured in an accident by a car. Claim for compensation of Rs. 1,80,000/- was filed. But the Tribunal allowed compensation only to the extent of 20,000/-.2. It may be noticed that the injuries caused to Kumari Bindu are of serious nature and according to the medical evidence the plastic surgery of her leg will have to be repeated by grafting and re-grafting three or four times.3. Dr. Keswani was consulted. Three doctors were examined including Dr. B.S. Chandalia of S.M.S. Jaipur, A.W. 2. According to Dr. Chandalia she remained in treatment from 7-8-81 to 24-10-1981. There was fracture of Febula 1 x 1 and 1-1/2 was the woon. She was referred for skin grafting. The skin efficiency has been reduced from 50 percent to 60 percent according to this doctor. According to him operation will have to be performed even now because complete cure has not taken place. Dr. Chandra Shekhar AW 3 was also examined and he also examined the patient. He signe...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »