Rajasthan Court October 1991 Judgments
Dayanand Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-31-1991
Reported in: 1991(2)WLN503
I.S. Israni, J.1. In this petition, it has been prayed that order Anx. 4 dated June 27, 90 be quashed or in the alternative the last date of submitting the application form for the post of Ayurved Chikitsak be further extended upto the date when the petitioner completed his enternship.2. It is submitted by Mr. Choudhary, learned Counsel that petitioner completed his 6 years course in Bachelor of Ayurved Medicine and Surgery (B.A.M.S.) on 23.1.90. He had to undergo enternship for 6 months in Shri Bhanwar Lal Dugal Ayurved Vishva Bharti Gandhi Vidhya Mandir, Sardar Shahar. He started this enternship on 12.2.90 as per order dated 29.1.90. However, he was shifted to Ajmer from 12.2.90 to 2.3.90 and thereafter continued at Sardar Shahar since 3.3.90. Anx. 1 to 3 are the marks-sheets. An advertisement was issued on 27,6.90, which was published in Rajasthani Patrika dated 4.7.90 for temporary appointments of Ayurved Hospitals in Rajasthan where 216 vacant posts had to be filled up. The applic...
Tag this Judgment!Union of India (Uoi) and ors. Vs. Ram Das Goko Mal and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-30-1991
Reported in: AIR1992Raj168; 1991(2)WLN344
Kapur, J.1. The question which arises in this appeal is whether a contract for supply of milk to Military Units can be entered into by negotiation without inviting open tenders. For the supply of milk to five Military 'Centres in Rajasthan, a negotiated contract was entered into between the appellant and the respondent No. 4, Rajasthan Co-operative Dairy Federation. This was done by entering into negotiations and no tender was invited. The respondent No. 1 is the writ petitioner and registered Military Contractor and he filed a writ petition to seek the relief that the contract granted to respondent No. 4 for supply of milk for the period 1-10-1990 to 31-3-1991, should be set aside and the other respondents should be directed to invite open tenders for grant of contract for supply of liquid milk and only thereafter a contract should be entered into.2. The learned single Judge considered the contentions raised on behalf of both the sides and held that granting contract to respondent No....
Tag this Judgment!Rajasthan Textile Industries Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-30-1991
Reported in: [1992]196ITR598(Raj)
G.S. Singhvi, J. 1. This order will dispose of all these applications filed by the petitioner under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter to be referred to as 'the Act'), for directing the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Jaipur Bench, Jaipur, to refer the following question of law :' Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal could impose penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act '2. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Jaipur Bench, Jaipur, has rejected the reference applications filed by the petitioner under Section 256(1) of the Act by a common order dated' August 23, 1988. The dispute between the parties relates to the assessment years 1967-68 and 1971-72 to 1975-76.3. In order to decide the questions raised in these applications, it would be proper to refer to the facts given in Reference Application No. 1 of 1990.4. The assessee-firm consisted of three partners, namely, Shri Devendra Kumar, Shri Mool Chand and Smt...
Tag this Judgment!Sukh Ram Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-30-1991
Reported in: 1992CriLJ2483; 1992(1)WLC203; 1991WLN(UC)205
Rajendra Saxena, J. 1. This appeal filed under Section 374(2), Cr. P.C. has been directed against the judgment dated 12-10-1984 of the Sessions Judge, Balotra Camp Barmer, whereby he convicted the appellant for the offences punishable Under Sections 302 & 379, I.P.C. and sentenced him to life imprisonment for the first count and two years rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 2,000/- in default to further undergo 6 months' rigorous imprisonment and also directed that the substantive sentences shall run concurrently.2. Succinctly stated the prosecution case is that in the intervening night of 5th & 6th June, 1984 Smt. Gavari widow of Bhinya Ram was sleeping in her house along with her younger daughter P.W. 19 Kumari Kamla aged 9 years and maternal grand son P.W. 18 Jagdish aged 12 years. In the same Bakhal appellant Sukh Ram's house is also situated. It is alleged that at about 11-12 O'clock appellant armed with an axe entered the house of Smt. Gavari and inflicted an axe blow on her ...
Tag this Judgment!Tara Chand Gupta Vs. the University of Ajmer
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-30-1991
Reported in: 1992(1)WLC16; 1991(2)WLN59
S.N. Bhargava, J.1. As per the facts mentioned in the writ petition, the petitioner appeared in B.A. Second Year TDC examination in the Year 1987 as a private student and cleared all the papers except the one paper of Economics. He got supplementary in that paper. He appeared in the supplementary examination which was held somewhere in September-October, 1987. Meanwhile the petitioner filled in the form for IIIrd Year B.A. Examination on 21-11-1987 from Agrawal College, Jaipur, which was affiliated to the University of Ajmer. He also deposited the examination fee of Rs. 165/- with the aforesaid form which included Rs. 50/- for the B.A. Second Year TDC Ist paper Economics and Rs. 110/- for IIIrd Year Examination and Rs. 5/- for other charges. The examination fee tendered by the petitioner was accepted by the respondent and he was given admission card both for appearing in the IIIrd Year Examination, 1988 and for the due paper of Economics Paper-I of Second Year TDC. He was also given ro...
Tag this Judgment!Chote Lal JaIn Vs. the State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-29-1991
Reported in: 1992CriLJ2620; 1991WLN(UC)415
ORDERN.L. Tibrewal, J. 1. In all the above three Criminal Misc. Petitions, the petitioner has prayed to quash criminal proceedings pending in the court of Special Judge (Anti-corruption Cases) Jaipur on the ground of delay. As there is a common ground in all the petitions, they may be disposed of conveniently by a common order.2. The old saying 'justice delayed is justice denied' has now been given shape in the investigation and trial of criminal cases. After dynamic interpretation to Article 21 of the Constitution of India in Menaka Gandhi's case, AIR 1978 SC 597, the judgment of the apex court of the country in Hussainara Khatoon's case, AIR 1979 SC 1369 : 1979 Cri LJ 1045 has further expanded Article 21 in dispensation of criminal justice recognizing the right to speedy trial as a part and parcel of the fundamental right. The constitutional position is now well settled : the right to a speedy trial is one of the dimensions of the fundamental right to life and liberty guaranteed by A...
Tag this Judgment!Harish Kumar Nagar Vs. the State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-29-1991
Reported in: 1991(2)WLN369
S.N. Bhargava, J.1. As per the facts stated in the memo of writ petition, the petitioner appeared in 3rd Year Electrical Engineering Examination held in the month of November, 1989. He was alleged to have used unfair means in the examination held on 10.5.1990. A notice dated 21.7.90 was served on the petitioner to submit his explanation. The petitioner submitted the reply on 21.7.1990 itself. In, the reply, he had given detailed explanation denying the charges levelled against him. He requested that he should be supplied copies of the Invigilator's report, Examiner's report, copy of admission letter and copy of his answer book. He further made request for affording personal hearing but no documents, as requested by him, were supplied to him and the respondent No. 2 vide order dated 30.11.1990 cancelled the petitioner's examination of 3rd Year Electrical Engineering, held in the month of November, 1989. He was further debarred from appearing in the examination to be held till May, 1990 ...
Tag this Judgment!Badri Narayan and anr. Vs. Ram Gopal and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-28-1991
Reported in: AIR1992Raj136; 1992(1)WLC476; 1991WLN(UC)253
ORDERR.S. Kejriwal, J.1. This revision has been directed against the order dated 11-1-1991, passed by M.J.M. Srimadhopur, by which the said court allowed the application for amendment of plaint submitted on 8-8-1990 by the plaintiff non-petitioner No. 1.2. The brief relevant facts of this revision are that the plaintiff non-petitioner No. 1, filed a suit for permanent injunction against Jhuntha deceased, brother of the petitioners and the non-petitioner No. 2 with the allegations that the chowk outside the house of the defendants belongs jointly to the plaintiff and the defendants and that the defendants had already dug the foundation and wanted to raise a wall. This suit was filed in the year 1974. On 8-8-1990, at the stage of arguments, the plaintiff moved an application for amendment of plaint with the allegations that after two or three days till the order of status quo was passed by the trial court on 11-2-1974, the defendants constructed a wall measuring 15' x 4.5' at a distance ...
Tag this Judgment!Suresh Kumar Sharma Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-28-1991
Reported in: I(1992)DMC457; 1992(1)WLC91; 1991WLN(UC)499
N.C. Sharma, J.1. This is a petition by Suresh Kumar Sharma under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for release of his son Gopu, who is said to be under illegal detention of his maternal grand-father Nawal Kishore Sharma.2. The Petitioner's marriage was solemnised on 21st February, 1985 with Usha Sharma, daughter of respondent No. 2 by Hindu rites. By this wedlock, a son Gopu was born on 19th November, 1985. It was on 7th July, 1987 that Smt. Usha Sharma died while she was at the residence of the petitioner. According to the petitioner, Smt. Usha Sharma had committed suicide. The petitioner states that in the year 1987, the respondent No. 2 took Gopu from him under an excuse that he and his maternal grand-mother will take care of the boy. Gopu is in custody of his maternal grand-father respondent No. 2, since then. The petitioner states that he had purchased National Saving Certificateslin the name of his wife and his own name of the amount of Rs. 25,000/-and he also purchased o...
Tag this Judgment!State Vs. Prem Raj
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Oct-28-1991
Reported in: 1992(1)WLC516; 1991WLN(UC)259
N.K. Jain, J.1. These second appeals are pending since 11.3.1974 against the judgment and decree dated 18.10.73 passed by learned Addl. Dist. Judge, Sirohi in C.A.D. No. 45/71 and C.A.D. No. 44/71 which arise from the judgment and decree dt. 1.6.71 of learned Civil Judge, Sirohi passed in civil suit No. 90/70. Both these appeals were decided by the first Appellate court by a common judgment dt. 18.10.73. Hence, they are being disposed of by this common judgments.2. During the pending appeal Prem Raj respondent has expried, when the came up for consideration on 25.7.85, learned Counsel for the respondents submitted that Prem Raj died long back hence appeal has abated. On this learned Counsel for the appellant sought time to ascertain the fact and to seek instructions to take proper steps Mr. K.C. Samariya, has been appointed as Guardian Ad-litem for minors Dharamendra Kumar Chandra Prakesh, puneet Kumar and Bhupesh Kumar, legal representatives of Nand Kishore and Gulab chand.3. Mr. R.C....
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »