Rajasthan Court January 1990 Judgments

Sushma Khandelwal Vs. University of Rajasthan and anr.

Court: Rajasthan

Reported in: 1990WLN(UC)11

S.S. Byas, J.1. In this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, the petitioner prays for directions to the University of Rajasthan to grant admission to her in the B.Ed. Course, Session 1988-89 in any of the Teachers Training Colleges in District Bharatpur.2. As per averments of the petitioner, she is a resident of Bharatpur District and appeared in the Pre-teachers Education Test (PTET) 1988 for admission to B.Ed. Shiksha Shastri for the year 1988-89. The respondent, University of Rajasthan published 'Cut Out Point Statement for B.Ed. Common Colleges' Annexure-4 in the daily news-papers Rajasthan Patrika in its publication of October 21, 1988. The cut out point for women candidates (general candidates) of Arts in District Bharatpur was 292 vide Annx.-4. The petitioner had secured 345 marks in P.T.E.T. She, therefore, applied to the respondent University for admission in P.T.E.T. by a telegram and an application in writing. No admission was given to her by the respondent Univer...

Mangal Ram Vs. National Motors and Others

Court: Rajasthan State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Jaipur

S.K.M. Lodha, President: (1) The following order was pronounced on 29.1.90 : "Without prejudice to his right to resort to any such remedy, the complaint is dismissed. Parties to bear their respective costs. " (2) It was recorded that order containing reasons will follow later on. (3) Now, we proceed to set out the reasons. (4) The complainants have filed this complaint under Sec. 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 ("the Act" hereinafter) on 25.7.89. (5) It is alleged that the complainants are agriculturists and own agriculture land measuring 44 Bighas in village Nangal Koju. They applied for loan to opposite-party No. 3 for the purchase of a Fergusson Tractor. The application was accepted and opposite- party No. 3 informed opposite-party No. 1 about the sanction of the loan. Opposite party No. 1 assured that the tractor will be supplied soon and so they should deposit margin money. On 28.7.88, the complainants instead of 25% amounting to Rs. 29,750/- deposited Rs. 64,000/-. This w...

Shishupal Vs. Manak Chand

Court: Rajasthan

Reported in: AIR1992Raj57; 1990WLN(UC)491

ORDER1. The learned single Judge by his order dated 13-12-89 has referred the following two questions to be answered by a larger bench: --1- vk;k mHk; i{kdkjku dhmifLFkfr esa vxj okn vne lk{;] vne iSjoh ,oa vne mifLFkfr ds :i esa [kkfjt fd;ktk;s ml okn dks D;k vuqifLFkfr esa [kkfjt okn ekuk tk ldrk gS 2- vk;k izfroknh dks lqus fcuk ,oamldks iqu% uEcj ij ysus ds vkns'k dh lwpuk fn;s fcuk D;k vfxze dk;Zokgh okn esadh tk ldrh gS 2. Before considering the above referred questions, it would be appropriate to notice few relevant facts. The non-petitioner ManakChand instituted a suit for arrears of rent and ejectment against the defendant petitioner Shishupal, On 9th May 1980 in the court of Munsif Beawar. The defendant appeared and filed his written statement on 15-12-80. Thereafter issues were framed. On 2nd January, 1985 the defendant and his counsel were not present so an ex parte order was passed. On 11-9-85, the plaintiff and his counsel were also not present and so the suit was dismis...

Khuda Bux and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan

Court: Rajasthan

Reported in: 1991CriLJ123; 1990(1)WLN233

ORDERSobhagmal Jain, J.1. This petition under Section 482, Cr. P.C. is for quashing the order of the Munsif & Judicial Magistrate, Bhinmal, dated April 17, 1989, taking cognizance of the offences under Sections 447 and 379, I.P.C. against the petitioners, who are eleven in number.2. The case relates to the incident alleged to have taken place during the night of Nov. 18/19, 1987. A report of the occurrence was lodged by Masum Ali at the Police Station, Bhinmal, on Nov. 19, 1987. The case of the complainant, shortly put, was that the was in possession of the fields, bearing Khasra Nos. 1033, 1034, 1035 and 1036, comprising 25 Bighas and 6 Biswas of land. It was alleged that in the morning of November 19, 1987, he found that the stone-slabs (Chhinnas) had been removed from the field bearing Khasra No. 1035, during the night and placed in Khasra No. 1036. On enquiry, he found that 30-40 persons had entered his field. He named 13 persons in the said report. The names of any of the witnesse...

Munish Kumar Sharma and 9 ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.

Court: Rajasthan

Reported in: 1990(1)WLN313

I.S. Israni, J.1. The above mentioned writ petitions involved same question of law, therefore, are disposed of by single order. The petitioners in these writ petitions have prayed that Sub-rule (3) of Rule 24(a) Of the Rajasthan Subordinate offices Ministerial Staff Rules, 1957 (here in after referred to as 'the Rules, 1957') Which was introduced by notification dated May 30, 1985 be quashed lad declared as violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution and the petitioners may be appointed by way of transfer in the secretariat services as Stenographer (Hindi) and their seniority be fixed according to the selection treating their selection in the year 1980 batch with all consequential benefits.2. Briefly it may be stated that in the year 1980 the Rajasthan Public Service Commission (for short 'the RPSC') advertised the post by different advertisements under Rajasthan Secretariat Ministerial Service Rules, 1970 (here in after referred to as 'the Rules, 1970') and as well as separate...

Amb Singh and anr. Vs. State of Rajasthan

Court: Rajasthan

Reported in: 1990(1)WLN147

A.K. Mathur, J.1. This is an appeal directed against the conviction of the accused-appellants by the learned Sessions Judge, Balotra, whereby the learned Sessions Judge has convicted both the accused-appellants Under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC and sentenced them to life imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 200/- each and in default of payment of fine to further undergo three months' rigorous imprisonment each.2. The facts giving rise to this appeal are that on 20th of April, 1983 at about 9.30 PM a First Information Report was fifed by PW 6 Dhokalram at Police Station Barmer stating therein that his father Tajaram Meghwal resident of Barmer was residing at Jogion-ki-Chhatri on the road going from Mahabar on 22nd of April, 1983 at about 7 or 7.30 PM. When he was going to his Dhani and he was near the Petrol Pump situated on the Barmer-Chautan road near the Railway crossing, at that time Ambsingh and Kumpsingh along with three persons Nagsingh, Paharsingh and Ramsingh started to figh...

Gyan Prakash Vs. State of Rajasthan

Court: Rajasthan

Reported in: 1991CriLJ1176; 1990(1)WLN278

ORDERI.S. Israni, J. 1. This 4th bail application has been filed by the petitioner, who is charged to have committed offence Under Section 302 IPC.It is pointed out by Shri Jain, learned counsel for the petitioner that FIR was lodged on 10-7-1987 and the petitioner was arrested on 23-11-1987. His first bail application was dismissed while making observation that the eye-witnesses mentioned in the said order should be examined within a period of three months and that thereafter the petitioner shall be at liberty to approach this Court again.The second bail application was dismissed on 4-5-1988. In this application it was observed by this Court that the trial court has not taken care to see that the witnesses are examined within time as directed by the Court. It was again directed that the eyewitnesses mentioned in the order be examined within three months and the petitioners were given liberty to approach this Court thereafter. The third bail application was filed on 28-10-1988. In this...

Subhash Chandra Saharan Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.

Court: Rajasthan

Reported in: 1990(1)WLN296

N.C. Sharma, J.1. This is a writ petition Under Article 226 of the Constitution of India by Subhash Chandra Saharan for quashing an order dated September 7, 1989, issued by the Superintendent Engineer, Irrigation Department Government of Rajasthan. Jaipur transferring him from the post of Junior Enginner Gang Canal, North Division, Ganga Nagar to Command Area Development (CAD) Indra Gandhi Nahar Pariyojna Organisation. Bikaner as against a vacancy caused by the transfer of Rekharam, respondent N. 3, from the latter place.2. The petitioner joined his services under the Government of Rajasthan in the Irrigation Department as Junior Engineer on April 14, 1970. By an order dated April 26, 1988 (Exhibit-1), the petitioner, while working as Junior Engineer at Gang Canal Link Division Sri Ganganagar (Bikaner litigation Circle), was transferred to Gang Canal, North Division, Sri Ganganagar. The petitioner asserts that he joined at Gang Canal North Division, in compliance of the aforesaid order...

Vijay Kaur Vs. Radheyshyam and ors.

Court: Rajasthan

Reported in: II(1991)DMC245

Sobhag Mal Jain, J.1. In this writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the constitutional validity of Section 13 of the Family Courts Act 1984 there inafter referred to as the 'Act'). This question is not res-integra and has already been dealt with by the Supreme Court in Kanpur Bar Association v. Union of India a (Writ Petition No. 1124/87) decided on January, 4, 1988 wherein the Supreme Court has observed :'The substantive provision in Section 13 prohibits a party to a suit or proceedings before a Family Court from claiming as of right to be represented by a legal practioner. That ones not preclude the family Court from granting permission in the exercise of its discretion to a party to be represented by a legal practioner. There may be cases where the circumstances justify the representation by a legal practioner. It will be for the Family Court to decide whether it should permit such representation. No party can as of right claim to be represented by a legal practioner.' Follow...

Chhagan Kanwar and ors. Vs. Pep Singh and ors.

Court: Rajasthan

Reported in: 1991ACJ162; 1990(2)WLN495

Milap Chandra, J.1. This appeal has been filed by the claimants under Section 110-D, Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (hereinafter to be called as 'the Act') for the enhancement of the amount of compensation against the judgment dated July 23, 1988 passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Jodhpur, awarding Rs. 70,000/- as compensation. The facts of the case giving rise to this appeal may be summarised thus.2. On December 26, 1984 at about 4.30 p.m., the deceased Gangadan was returning on his moped from Diesel Training School, Northern Railway, Bhagat Ki Kothi, Jodhpur. He was going on his correct side of the road. The truck No. GTY 4359 dashed him from his back side. As a result thereof, he sustained serious injuries. His colleagues immediately shifted him to the Railway Hospital, Jodhpur. Due to his serious condition, he was referred to Mahatma Gandhi Hospital, Jodhpur. Despite best efforts of the doctors, he could not be saved and died on December 29,1984. The appellants filed a petiti...