Rajasthan Court May 1992 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.
Rajasthan State Electricity Board and anr. Vs. Rajesh Kumar
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-08-1992
Reported in: 1992(3)WLC58; 1992WLN(UC)342
K.C. Agrawal, C.J.1. This appeal has been preferred by the Rajasthan State Electricity Board (for short 'Board') against the judgment of a learned Single Judge allowing the writ petition directing the Board to constitute an appropriate committee for absorption of the respondent in the regular service of the Board. The Board had further been directed to be given all consequential benefits with retrospective effect.2. The respondent-Rajesh Kumar was employed as an Orderly with effect from 18.1.1979 on a consolidated salary of Rs. 240/- p.m. at the residence of Shri J.N. Purohit, who was then the Chief Engineer working with the Board. The respondent continued in the employment of Shri J.N. Purohit and had been obtaining Rs. 240/- p.m. as salary. Shri J.N. Purohit retired from service on 28th Feb. 1989 on attaining the age of superannuation. Thereafter, the respondent submitted an application on 3.4.1989 to the Board for his absorption in regular service of the Board. Alongwith this applic...
Mahendra Kumar Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-08-1992
Reported in: 1992(2)WLN8
M.B. Sharma, J.1. The learned Addl. Sessions Judge under its judgment dated 20th April 1991 convicted the accused appellant Under Section 302 I.P.C. and sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/- or in default of payment of fine to further undergo simple imprisonment for six months. The accused appellant was further convicted Under Section 4/25 of the Indian Arms Act and was sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for six- months. The substantive sentences on both the counts were ordered to run concurrently.2. There is no dispute that the accused Vijay Kumar died an un-natural death. It is the case of the prosecution that on 8th September 1988 at about 10.20 p.m. in the city of Ajmer near Handpump at Nawab Ka Bedam the deceased Vijay Kumar and the accused appellant Mahendra Kumar were talking with each other and there was some ex-change of abused in between them and the accused-appellant is said to have taken a knife from his pocket and stabbed in th...
Munir Vs. Municipal Board
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-08-1992
Reported in: 1992(1)WLN353
Rajesh Balia, J.1. The petition raises a very short question. The undisputed fact is this that petitioner was employed by respondent No. 1 on daily wages from 11.2.88 to 31.12.88 in the first instance and thereafter from 1.2.89 to 31st July, 1989, excepting for the period between 1st May 1989 to 5th May 1 989. On 31st July 1989 the petitioners services were terminated without complying with the provisions of Section 25F of the Industrial Dispute Act and the petitioner filed this petition on 11.8.89 challenging the validity of termination order, interalia, on the ground that petitioner having already completed more than. 240 days of service during 12 months immediately preceding the date on which termination of services have taken place and one month's notice under Section 25F or salary in lieu of one month's notice alongwith the retrenchment compensation has not been paid before valid retrenchment could take place.2. The only plea raised in defence is that the petitioner's services wer...
Lokender Singh Vs. R.S.E.B.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-08-1992
Reported in: 1992(1)WLN386
Rajesh Balia, J.1. Petitioner was first employed as casual labour on 1.5.1979. On completion of 240 days, the petitioner was taken on work-charge establishment vide Annx. 1 dated 5.1.1980. He went on three days casual leave with effect from 27.11.1984 which, according to the petitioner's representation dated 14th January, 1988, filed as Annx.4, and, according to the reply of the respondents; was extended upto 28th December, 1984. Thereafter, according to the petitioner, he reported back on duty on 13th and 14th September, 1986. According to the petitioner, he was sick and he had made applications for extension of leave. The petitioner was not taken on duty on 13.9.1986 but was told that his case has been referred to the higher authorities for consideration whether he can be taken on duty or not This fact of the petitioner's having been reported on duty on 13.9.1986 and that he was offered any such information is denied by the respondents. According to the respondents, since his absence...
Sahab Singh and Jagdish Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-07-1992
Reported in: 1992WLN(UC)101
M.B. Sharma, J.1. The learned Special Judge, Dacoity Affected Area, Bharatpur, has convicted each of the accused appellants, namely, Sahab Singh and Jagdish-father and son; respectively, under Section 302/34 IPC and 302 IPC; respectively. Each of them has been sentenced to suffer life Imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/- (In default, further to undergo one month's rigorous imprisonment). Accused appellant, Jagdish, had also been charged under Section 3/25 of the Arms Act, but the learned Special Judge acquitted him of the said offence. Alongwith the two accused appellants; two more accused, namely, Charan Singh and Vijai Singh were tried by the learned Special Judge, but both of them were acquitted. There was fifth accused also, namely, Balblr. He was a child arid, therefore, he was tried by the children court and he too was acquitted by the children's court after his trial.2. In village-Didwari, Police Station-Kumher, Distt. Bharatpur, there was an enclosure regionally called a...
Naveen Kumar Vs. the State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-07-1992
Reported in: 1992(1)WLN344
Rajesh Balia, J.1. The petitioner was appointed on daily wages 28.9.1983. The petitioner continued thereafter. The petitioner continued to be so discharging his duties on daily wages until vide order 19th August, 1985, he was again appointed against a regular post in class IV cadre which was lying vacant, at the Government Hospital, Banner on daily wages and the petitioner continued as such, until 5.5.1987 through various orders. On 5.5.1987, the petitioner's services were terminated but he was again appointed vide order dated 7.9.1987 and allowed to continue until 31st July, 1988 when the petitioner's services were again terminated. The termination of the petitioner's services on 5.5.1987 as well as on 31.7.1988 were both without complying with the provisions of Section 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act of 1947'), though petitioner had fulfilled all the conditions necessary for getting the protective umbrella of the said provisions.2. The ab...
New India Assurance Co. Ltd. and ors. Vs. Ramanand and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-06-1992
Reported in: 1994ACJ571; 1992(2)WLC344
R.S. Kejriwal, J. 1. These three appeals arise out of a common judgment dated 17.1.1992 given in Appeal No. 318 of 1988 (Ramanand v. Lalita Sharma), S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No. 341 of 1988 (Lalita Sharma v. Ramanand) and S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No. 368 of 1988 (K.C. Agrawal v. Lalita Sharma).2. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that respondent Nos. 2 to 7 filed a claim petition before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Jaipur, against the appellants, National Insurance Co. Ltd., New India Assurance Co. Ltd., Jaipur and Ramanand, Sita Ram, Kailash Chand and Sagar Singh in relation to the death of Gopal Lal which was caused on 9.9.1982. Gopal Lal was working in the Sheep and Wool Department. He was going on a bicycle at a normal speed on the correct side of the road. When he reached near Lal Kothi, Tonk Road, bus No. RRL 1924, owned by Kailash Chand Agrawal, which was being driven rashly and negligently by Sagar Singh, hit the deceased cyclist from behind. As a result of the im...
Bhoor Singh Vs. the State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-06-1992
Reported in: 1992WLN(UC)94
Rajesh Balia, J.1. The petition raises short issue.2. The petitioner who was in fact due to retire on completion of 55 years of age, on 1.11.1981, due to over-sight or by mistake, was allowed to continue in service upto 25th July, 1983 and was superannuated with elect from that date. The petitioner was also paid the regular emoluments by treating him as continuing in service in the regular pay scale at the state at which he was drawing his emoluments at the relevant time. After the petitioner was retired from services his pensionary benefits were not fixed for long and the petitioner approached this Court through Writ Petition No. 3246 of 1984 making a complaint against non-fixation of his pension and retrial benefits. This Court vide its order dated 2.1.1986, directed to determine the pension of the petitioner within a period of 3 months and to pay the petitioner pension and other post retiral benefits. The order was not complied with in time and the petitioner had to file another Wri...
Onkar Lal Vs. State and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-06-1992
Reported in: 1992(1)WLN346
B.R. Arora, J.1. The petitioner who was working as Nayab Tehsildar in the Revenue Department of the State of Rajasthan, applied for the correction of his date of birth entered in the service record. According to the petitioner, the date of birth of the petitioner was 16th Feb.1933 which has been entered in the record of the education department and has been shown in the certificate of the Middle Class the year 1950 issued by the Registrar, Shiksha Vibhagi Prikshya Rajasthan Sarkar of the Education Department of State of Rajasthan (Annexure-2) as well as from the Board of Secondary Education, Rajasthan, High School Examination, 1961 .The representation of the petitioner was dismissed by the Board of Revenue vide order dated 14th October 1981 keeping in view Rule 8[2)(a) of the Rajasthan Service Rule. The present case is fully covered by the judgment of this Court in S.R.CW.No.1248/81 & 4 other writ petition (Samarath Lal Joshi v. State of Rajasthan and Ors.) reported in R.L.R. 1985 page...
Ram Kishan Vs. Chandra Kanta
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-05-1992
Reported in: II(1992)DMC198
T.S. Israni, J.1. This Appeal under Section 19 of the Family Courts Act, 1984 read with Section 28 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for brevity, 'the Act, 1955') has been filed against the judgment dated December 20, 1986, passed by the learned Judge, Family Court, Jaipur, in case No. 125/86.2. Briefly stated, the marriage of the parties was solemnized on or about May 17, 1973, in accordance with the Hindu, rites, and customs, at Sawaimadhopur. After the function of 'Muklava', held in the year, 1976, respondent resided with the appellant at his village Kherlawas, Tehsil Bassi, District Jaipur. It is alleged that the respondent, in the year, 1977, while the appellant was studying in Government College, Dausa, without reasonable cause, suddenly left the house of the appellant and went to her father, without consent and permission of the appellant and has not returned since August 8, 1977. The respondent filed proceedings under Section 125, Cr.P.C., for grant of maintenance and was awarde...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »