Rajasthan Court February 1992 Judgments
Commissioner of Wealth-tax Vs. R.K. Golecha (Huf)
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-28-1992
Reported in: [1992]197ITR174(Raj)
1. This is an application under Section 27(3) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957, praying that this court should call for a reference framing a question of law as to whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal was justified in deleting the penalty under Section 18(1)(a) on account of technical default on the part of the Wealth-tax Officer and in not deciding the issue on the merits of the case.2. During the assessment year 1974-75, in the course of assessment proceedings, the Wealth-tax Officer initiated proceedings under Section 18(1)(a) for the default of late filing of return by 29 months. A show-cause notice was issued to which a reply was submitted by the assessee-respondent. The assessee had prayed that the order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal in the main proceedings may be summoned before deciding the question of imposition of penalty. Before the order could arrive and the matter can be heard, the Wealth-tax Officer who issued notice had be...
Tag this Judgment!Kailash Chand Agarwal Vs. the State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-27-1992
Reported in: AIR1992Raj129; 1992(2)WLC458
ORDERN.C. Kochhar, J. 1. The petitioner was granted mining lease for extraction of soapstone and quartz over an area of 258.15 hectares near village Amloda Tehsil Bairath District Jaipur for a period of 20 years w.e.f. 16-8-1976, vide Annexures Nos. 1 and 2 dated 3-6-1976 and 19-2-1977 respectively. Out of the above said area, the petitioner surrendered an area of 61.248 hectares and the surrender was accepted by the State Government vide order dated 14-7-1978 (Annxure-3) w.e.f. 2-2-1978. Vide letter dated 9-6-1987 (Annexure-4), the petitioner wrote to the State Government that he had conducted the mining operation in the area under his lease and had found that the minerals extracted therefrom were of inferior quality and the mining operation therein was not financially beneficial to him and stating that he wanted to surrender the lease of the area in question with immediate effect and requested that the surrender of the lease be so accepted. Vide letter dated 9-2-1988 (An-nexure-6), t...
Tag this Judgment!Kesrilal Lalchand and anr. Vs. Authority U/Shops Act and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-27-1992
Reported in: 1993(3)WLC441; 1992WLN(UC)15
N.C. Kochhar, J.1. The facts giving rise to this writ petition filed by the petitioners under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India and the application under Order 22 Rule 4 of the Code of Civil Procedure (the Code), moved during the pendency of this writ petition, are as under:2. Late Shri Khem Singh (hereinafter to be referred as the 'employee') had been working with the petitioners at their Bharatpur branch at a monthly salary of Rs. 250/-. He was in the employment of the petitioners since 1947. The employee filed an application under Section 28-A of the Rajasthan Shops & Commercial Establishments Act, 1958 (the Act) stating that the petitioners had terminated his services on 17-3-1980 without any cause and without giving him any notice or compensation and in violation of legal provisions. The application was contested by the petitioners on the ground that the employee himself had tendered his resignation and that his services had not been terminated by them. In order to s...
Tag this Judgment!Kishore Sharan and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-25-1992
Reported in: 1992WLN(UC)491
G.S. Singhvi, J.1. Both these writ petitions contain more or less similar prayers. They are based on facts which are closely connected with each other. It is, therefore, proper to decide these two writ petitions by common order.2. Writ Petition No. 1199/92 has been filed by the petitioner with a prayer to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction restraining the respondents from proceeding further in the matter of detention of the petitioner under the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 and for restraining the respondents from creating false evidence to implicate the petitioner for detaining him under the COFEPOSA Act, 1974.3. Briefly stated, the case of the petitioner is that he belongs to a family of Silver Smiths. He runs a shop under the name and style of M/s. Jamnalal Sarraf & Co. in Ramganj Bazar, Jaipur. Presently he is dealing with silver antique ornaments and he is not involved in any smuggling or a...
Tag this Judgment!Chandra NaraIn Verma Vs. State of Raj. and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-25-1992
Reported in: 1992(1)WLN281
Rajesh Balia, J.1. Petition comes-up for hearing in the following circumstances:2. Father of the petitioner was working on the post of Sub. Inspector, Police when he died on 20.1.91. After his death, an application was moved by the petitioner for seeking appointment on the post of Sub. Inspector, Police under the provisions of the Rajasthan Recruitment of the Dependents of Govt. Servants Dying While in Service Rules, 1975, hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules of 1975'. It is averred by the petitioner that before the death of his father, he had already appeared in the examination, held by the Rajasthan Public Service Commission for the post of Sub. Inspector, Police in the year 1987 under the relevant rules and he had cleared the examination. However, appointment as a result of clearing the examination had not been offered to him because his number was low in the merit list. Petitioner's application under the rules of 1975 was rejected on the ground that he has become over-age for the ...
Tag this Judgment!Madan Singh Parihar Vs. State of Raj. and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-25-1992
Reported in: 1992(1)WLN295
Rajesh Balia, J.1. Father of the petitioner Shri Rawat Singh Parihar died on 5.4.1962 while he was employed as Forester in the Forest Department of State of Rajasthan. The petitioner who has studied upto Higher Secondary and has passed his Higher Secondary Examination, 1 979 from the Board of Secondary Education, Rajasthan, Ajmer, applied for a suitable appointment in the Forest Department under the Rajasthan (Recruitment of the Dependents of Govt. Servants Dying while in Service) Rules, 1975. Vide letter dated 1.5.1991, petitioner was informed that it is not possible to give him appointment under the rules of ,1975 presumably under the impression that the rules of 1975 are not applicable to the dependents of a Govt. Servant who died before 1.9.1 972 in view of the provisions of Rule 2(e) of the rules of 1975. Another Communication dated 6.4.91 was sent to the petitioner stating that appointment is not possible to be given to him because presently no post of Forestor is vacant under th...
Tag this Judgment!Shanti Gopal Purohit Vs. State of Raj. and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-25-1992
Reported in: 1992(1)WLN360
Rajesh Balia, J.1. Petitioner through the above petition claims relief under the Rajasthan Recruitment of the Dependents of Govt. Servants Dying while in Service Rules, 1975, hereinafter referred to as the Rules of 1975.'2. According to petitioner, his father Shri Kishan Gopal Purohit died on 20th June, 1960 while he was employed as L.D.C. in the office of the Director of Archives, Govt. of Rajasthan, Bikaner. He left behind petitioner, petitioner's two brothers and widowed mother. At the time of death of petitioner's father, the rules of 1975 had not come into force. The rules were promulgated for the first time in 1975 and while they were brought into force with effect from the date of their publication in the Rajasthan Rajpatra, the same were made applicable to the dependents of those deceased Govt. servants who died while in service on or after the second day of September, 1972. However, a Division Bench of this Court in D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2194/84 Shashi Kant v. State of ...
Tag this Judgment!A.C.T.O. Ward-iv Vs. L. Rs. of Deceased Chhogalal Akodia
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-24-1992
Reported in: 1992(2)WLC510; 1992WLN(UC)31
N.K. Jain, J.1. This revision Under Section 15(2) of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act against the judgment of learned Sales Tax Tribunal, Ajmer dated 4.7.1986 in Sales tax special appeal No. 85/82.2. Brief facts of the case are that the non-petitioner M/s. Chhogalal Akodia is a registered dealer leading in 'mica' cutting who is now being represented by his L.Rs. The assessee for the assessment year 1972-73 for the period 1.1.72 to 31.12.72 filed return. The assessee had purchased certain 'mica' for the purpose of resale on the strength of declaration in form ST-17. Some 'mica' was sold after cutting its edges and dressing the 'mica' blocks. The assessing authority treating this process as a process of manufacture of 'mica' and charged tax @ 1% on 'mica' purchased by the assessee. The assessee filed an appeal before the Dy. Commissioner (Appeals) which was partly allowed on 1.3.1977. Being aggrieved by the order of Dy. Commissioner (Appeals), the assessee has moved an appeal before the Board...
Tag this Judgment!Prabhatilal Vs. State
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-24-1992
Reported in: 1992WLN(UC)331
N.L. Tibrewal, J.1. The present case depicts not only a sorry state of affairs in the investigation which has been carried in a casual and perfunctory manner, but also leaves serious doubts in its fairness and impartiality.2. For an incident which took place on November 9, 1991, two cross reports were made at police station Bandikui. From the side of the complainant, the report was lodged by one Kallash Chand Mali and crime No. 352/91 was registered under Section 147, 149, 448, 307 and 323 I.P.C. On the report lodged from the said of the accused party, crime No. 353/91 was registered against the members of the complainant party for the offences under Sections 147, 148, 149, 452 and 323 I.P.C.3. From the side of the complainant party, one Ram Narain had sustained five injuries, including a lacerate wound on the parietal region. This injury proved to be fatal which resulted in his death on November 10, 1991. Other injuries sustained by Ram Narain were not of serious nature. Some other pe...
Tag this Judgment!Pannalal Kumawat Vs. State
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-20-1992
Reported in: 1992WLN(UC)38
R. Balia, J.1. The petitioner was appointed as Draftsman with the Municipal Board, Chittorgarh Vide order dated 3.2.1955 and was promoted as Overseer Grade-II vide order dated 20.6.1969. After obtaining diploma in Civil Engineering in 1970, the petitioner was promoted as Overseer Grade-I. It is contended by learned Counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner having put in 15 years' services as Overseer Grade-I on 1.4.1989 became eligible for promotion to the post of Assistant Engineer (Civil) in the year 1989-90. The petitioner contends that in all there are 39 posts of Assistant Engineer for various Municipal Boards in Rajasthan, there existed 15 vacancies of Assistant Engineers under Rajasthan Municipal Service, 5 being those which fall under the quota of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes to which category the petitioner belongs. The petitioner contends that in spite of his case having recommended for promotion against the quota, he has not been accorded promotion on the post ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »