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.
C.P. Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-05-1992
Reported in: 1993CriLJ125; 1992(2)WLC693; 1992(2)WLN613
1. This appeal under Section 19 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 has been preferred by C. P. Singh posted as the Deputy Registrar (Judicial) in the Jaipur Branch of Rajasthan High Court against the order of the learned single Judge dated 21-4-1992 holding him to be guilty of contempt of this Court's order dated 10th March, 1992.2. S. B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1500/81 T. C. Jain v. Rajasthan Housing Board was listed for hearing before Hon'ble Mr. Justice N. C. Kochhar on 10th March, 1992. On that date learned Judge passed the order for listing it along with S. B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1953/81. Both the writ petitions were listed on 23rd March, 1992 before Mr. Justice M. R. Calla, J. but they did not reach hence were not taken up. As per order dated 10th March, 1992 both the writ petitions should have been listed together again on the next date but on 8th April, 1992 W.P. No. 1500/81 was listed before Hon'ble Mr. N. C. Sharma, J. whereas W.P. No. 1953/81 was listed before Hon'ble M...
Radha Raman Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-05-1992
Reported in: 1992(3)WLC481; 1992(2)WLN1
M.B. Sharma, J.1. Accused appellant, Radharaman, stands convicted under Section 302 IPC and under Section 3/25 of the Arms Act. For the first offence, he has been sentenced to under go life imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.100/- (in default, further to undergo one month's Rl). And, under the latter offence, he has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of two years and to pay a fine of Rs.100/- (in default, further to undergo one month's Rl). Both the sentences have been ordered to run concurrently.2. The facts of the case out of which this appeal arises are these: on 26th and 27th of October, 1984, in the town of Deeg (Bharatpur) a procession of Rambarat was being taken and in the night intervening of 26th and 27th October, 1984, at about 1 a.m. in the said Rambarat besides Ranveer Singh (deceased) many others membering about 400-500 persons were going and when it was near Bhudga Darwaja on Deeg-Bharatpur Road, it is alleged, accused appellant Radharaman whil...
Geeta Enterprises and anr. Vs. State of Rajasthan and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-05-1992
Reported in: 1992(1)WLN303
A.K. Mathur, J.1. The petitioner by this writ petition has prayed that by an appropriate writ, order or direction, Annex.4 dated 10.4.1989 may be quashed and set aside and the respondents may be restrained from charging permit fee from the petitioner.2. The brief facts, which are necessary for the convenient disposal of this writ petition are that the petitioner No. 1 is a firm and petitioner No. 2 is its Manager. Recently the petitioner established itself in the year 1988 at Bhiwadi for manufacturing and sale of thinner for which has been given to the petitioner for manufacture and sale of thinner. The State of Rajasthan issued a Notification under Section 28 of the Rajasthan Excise Act, 1950 dated 9.3.1 970, whereby the excise duty at the rate of Rs. 0.65 paise per litre was imposed on denatured spirituous preparation whenever it is exported outside the State of Rajasthan and the same duty has now been enhanced from 0.65 to 1.40 each bulk litre as well as the permit fee has also been...
Smt. Bhuri Bai Vs. the State of Rajasthan and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-05-1992
Reported in: 1992(1)WLN356
A.K. Mathur, J.1. This petition was received by post from one Smt. Bhuri Bai widow of Gamera, Hiran Magri, Sector 5, 2 M 43, Udaipur. This petition, was registered and the notices were issued to the respondents.2. The brief facts, which are necessary for the disposal of this petition, are that the petitioner is widow of one Shri Gamera. Shri Gamera was appointed by the Assistant Engineer (Irrigation) Sub-Division, Girwa, Udaipur on 16.1.1970 as a work charge employee and he was declared semi-permanent with effect from 16.1.1970. Shri Gamera expired on 13.2.1981 while he was semi permanent work charge employee. Late Shri Gamera died before he could be declared permanent. Wife of deceased Gamera applied for pension but the same was denied to her because late Shri Gamera was not declared permanent, therefore, he was not entitled to pension.3. In pursuance of the notice a reply was filed by the Department and the Department has taken the position that since the petitioner's husband Shri Ga...
Satish Kumar Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-05-1992
Reported in: 1992(3)WLC476; 1992(1)WLN305
A.K. Mathur, J.1. The petitioner by this writ petition has prayed that by an appropriate writ, order or direction the non- petitioners may be directed to release the Bank guarantee and solvent security submitted by the petitioner. It is also prayed that in view of the division bench judgment given in the case of D.B. Civil Special Appeal No. 116/79: State of Rajasthan v. Mahalaxmi Paints Industries, Ajmer decided on March 21,1986, whatever security in the nature of Bank guarantee or otherwise submitted by the petitioner may be deemed to have been discharged and a declaration to this effect may be given.2. The petitioner filed the present writ petition praying that the State Legislature has no power to legislate any law controlling and restraining business of Thineer or imposing any excise duty or tax or fee on denatured spirit and denatured spiritious preparations like Thinner. It is submitted that in view of the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Mahalaxmi Pai...
State and ors. Vs. Smt. Ratan Kanwar
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-05-1992
Reported in: 1992(1)WLN358
R. Balia, J.1. This special appeal is directed against the order passed by learned Single Judge in writ petition No. 399 of 1990, filed by Smt. Ratan Kanwar Mehta, dated 12.2.1990. The petitioner's husband was in the services of erstwhile Marwar State, before the formation of State of Rajasthan and then became an employee of the State of Rajasthan. He was a member of Jodhpur Contributory Provident Fund. The husband of the appellant-petitioner died while in service on 3.8.1961, before exercising option for pension under the Rajasthan Service Rules.2. After the decision of a Division Bench of this Court in State of Rajasthan v. Retired Contributory Provident Fund Holders Association, Jodhpur 1987(1) W.L.N. 476, the Government of Rajasthan issued a memorandum giving option to all members of Jodhpur Contributory Provident Fund who had retired from service, without exercising option, to opt for pension, on 17.10.1 987. However, under the said memorandum, option, was not extended to widows o...
Mul Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-04-1992
Reported in: 1992(2)WLN30
Mohini Kapur, J.1. Challan for offence under Sections 8/18 and 8/21 of the NDPS Act was presented by the A.P.P. before M.J.M. Sangod district Kota. On this, the learned Magistrate took cognizance on 6th April, 1992. The petitioner had been arrested on 9th January, 1992.2. The learned Counsel for the petitioner has contanded that offences under the NDPS Act and triable by Special Court to be constituted by the Government and a person who is a Sessions Judge or Addl. Sessions Judge is alone is qualified for appointment. Under Section 36(d) of the NDPS Act, the offences committed under the NDPS Act prior to the constitution of the Special Court are to be tried by court of Sessions Judge. There is no provision under which the Magistrate can take cognizance of the offences or try the accused. Hence, cognizance taken by the Magistrate deserves to be quashed. The petitioner shall be released. However, ho shall give a personal bond for Rs.5000/- undertaking to remain at the address given by hi...
Kishan Singh Vs. State and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-04-1992
Reported in: 1992(1)WLN354
Rajesh Balia, J.1. The petitioner raised a very short issue.The petitioner was dismissed by the Governor of Rajasthan, from the Rajasthan State Police Force services, by way of exercising powers conferred by the second proviso to Article 311(2) of the Constitution of India. Some of the dismissal orders were upheld by Rajasthan High Court, when challenged. In a bunch of civil appeals (Nos.1302, 1291 -1301 and 1303-25A of 1982) Amar Singh and Ors. v. State of Rajasthan Hon'ble Supreme Court disposed off the appeals with following directions:The counsel for the State has agreed that an appellate authority not below the rank of a Deputy Inspector General of Police shall be constituted for with, and at any rate not later than one month from today, to entertain appeals from each of the appellants before us and to factually examine the justification of the orders of dismissal. Such appeals shall if presented within 30 days shall be taken to have been filed within limitation. As particulars of...
Moti Lal Koli Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-01-1992
Reported in: (1993)ILLJ993Raj; 1992(2)WLC547
G.S. Singhvi, J. 1. The petitioner has challenged the orders dt. March 16, 1985 and March 21, 1985, both of which relate to the termination of his service.2. The petitioner has stated that he is a member of Scheduled Castes. He passed 8th Class examination in the year 1969, His date of birth is July 5, 1954. He was appointed as Sub-Nakedar in Municipal Board, Khairthal by an order dated November 10, 1982, issued by the Executive Officer of Municipal Board, Khairhal. Term of the service of the petitioner was extended on the basis of internal correspondence between the functionaries of Municipal Board, Khairthal and the Directorate of Local Bodies. Along with the petitioner, term of appointment of S/Shri Vikaram Singh and Raghuvir Prasad was also extended. The Deputy Secretary of the Government, Local Self Government Department, wrote a letter dated March 16, 1985 in which he noted that appointment of the petitioner as Sub-Nakedar was made without calling his name from the Employment Exc...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›