Rajasthan Court July 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.
Gyan Chand Vs. the State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-27-1992
Reported in: 1993CriLJ422
ORDERB.R. Arora, J.1. Petitioner Cyan Chand was convicted and sentenced by the learned Sessions Judge, Jaisalmer, for the offence under Section 18 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short, 'the Act'). Aggrieved with the judgment, the petitioner preferred an appeal and, also, submitted an application for suspension of the sentence. This application for suspension of sentence was opposed by the learned Public Prosecutor on the ground that Section 32A of the Act completely takes away the power of the High Court to suspend the sentence and as such the sentence awarded by the learned trial Court cannot be suspended during the pendency of the appeal.2. The controversy involved in the present case is : whether the powers of the High Court under Section 389, Cr. P.C. for suspension of sentence during the pendency of the appeal, have been taken away by Section 32A of the Act or they have been preserved by Section 36B of the Act? Section 32A and Section 36B of the A...
Saremal and ors. Vs. the State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-27-1992
Reported in: 1992WLN(UC)134
Rajesh Balia, J.1. By this petition, the petitioners have challenged the order Annexure-7 dated December 26, 1988 by which a penalty of Rs. 58, 951.20 has been imposed and demanded from the petitioners on the ground that in pursuance of the Government Circular date July 23, 1987 such penalty is chargeable in respect of the land purchased after August 20, 1981. Annexure-8 is the Circular dated July 23, 1987 issuing direction that if any person or housing society has acquired agriculture land after August 20, 1981 and any construction has been raised thereon unauthorisedly, penalty will be leviable @ 100% and in case no construction is made, penalty would be levied @ 75% of the conversion charges. The petitioners allege that the agricultural land measuring 5 Bighas 16 Biswas in Khasra No. 225 in Airunpura Panwar area, TehsilSheoganij, District Sirohi was purchased under registered sale deed on November 4, 1985. After the land was mutated in their name, they applied for the conversion of ...
Dhara Gram Sewa Sehkari Samiti Limited Vs. Indian Farmers Fertilizers ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-24-1992
Reported in: 1992WLN(UC)442
Navin Chandra Sharma, J.1. This judgment would decide DB Civil Special Appeals Nos. 53 & 136 of 1992, as in both of them, the same point of law in involved.2. DB Civil Special Appeal No. 53 of 1992 arises from an order dated 15th Jan., 1992, passed by a learned Singl Judge of this Court, in SB Civil Writ Petition No. 5945 of 1991, filed by appellant Dahra Gram Seva Sahkari Samiti Ltd., Dahra, Tehsil Kumar, in District-Bharatpur. The other DB Civil Special Appeal No. 136 of 1992 arises from order dated 20th Feb., 1992, passed by another learned Single Judge of this Court in SB Civil Writ Petition No. 6969 of 1991, filed by appellant Tara Singh & Ram Avtar. Respondent No. 1 in both these writ petitions was The Indian Farmers Fertilizers Cooperative Limited (for short, hereinafter, 'the IFFCO'). While in SB Civil Writ Petition No. 5945 of 1991, respondents Nos. 2 & 3 were Election Officers, in SB Civil Writ Petition No. 6969 of 1991, respondent No. 2 was the Returning Officer of the IFFCO...
Bhim Singh and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-24-1992
Reported in: 1992(3)WLC109; 1992(2)WLN353
R.S. Verma, J.1. These three writ petitions raise interconnected disputed and hence have been heard together by consent of all concerned and are being disposed of by a common order.2. The controverties raised in the three writ petitions have been borrowed down considerable during the course of arguments and hence I need not give in details the various averments and contentions raised in the pleadings of the parties. I shall, therefore, confine myself to such salient features of the three cases, as are necessary for decision of the controversies raised before me.3. Bhim Singh is a substantive Nakedar belonging to the cadre of Municipal Board Khudala Falna. Lal Singh is an Assistant Revenue Inspector belonging to the cadre of Municipal Board, Takhatgarh. In Municipal Board Falna, there is only one sanctioned post of Assistant Revenue Inspector. Bhim Singh was promoted to this post provisionally on a temporary basis for a period of one year by the competent appointing authority. An order ...
Rajendra Bahadur Bhandari Vs. Rajasthan State Agriculture Marketing Bo ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-23-1992
Reported in: 1992WLN(UC)131
Farroq Hasan, J.1. This is a petition seeking review of dismissal of the writ petition by re-calling the judgment dated 9th July, 1992 and for fresh hearing, on the ground that since the Registry failed to attach rejoinder filed by the petitioner on 15.5.1992 with the file of the writ petition, the contents made in pares 4 & 5 of the rejoinder could not Have been brought to the notice of the court there by the court could not have considered significant aspect as it the past practice of the respondent-Board giving benefit of service rendered by a person before acquiring the requisite academic qualification during service tnaura for the purpose of judging his eligibility and on account of that the decision of the Supreme Court in N. Suresth Nathan v. Union of India : AIR1992SC564 has wrongly been applied.In support of his contention as to the review. Mr. Mridul cited the decisions stated herein below. (1) AIR 1965 SC 1576; (2) : (1969)IILLJ651SC ; (3) : [1964]2SCR145 ; (4) : (1981)ILLJ3...
Gram Panchayat and ors. Vs. the State of Rajasthan and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-23-1992
Reported in: 1992(2)WLN37
A.K. Mathur, J.1. The petitioner by this writ petition has prayed that the notification dated 28th June, 1988 (Annex. 3) may be quashed and in the alternative a direction may be issued to the State Government to exclude the area of Gram Panchayat, Akarabhata from the area of the Municipal Board, Abu Road and allow the petitioner Gram Panchayat, Akarabhata to function as a unit of Local self Government within the frame work of the Rajasthan Panchayat Act, 1953.2. The petitioner No. 1 is a duly constituted Gram Panchayat and has filed this writ petition through its Sarpanch, petitioner No. 2. Petitioner No. 2 and the petitioners No. 3, 4, 5 and 6 are the. Sarpanch and Panchas of the petitioner Gram Panchayat. In the year 1981 a notification was issued by the Government dated 10th August, 1981 which was published in the Rajasthan Gazette dated 20th August, 1981 Part VI Kha. By this notification, the Government expressed its intention to extend the municipal limits of the Municipal Board, ...
The State of Rajasthan Vs. Khem Chand Sharma and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-23-1992
Reported in: 1992(2)WLC618; 1992(2)WLN185
J.R. Chopra, J.1. This special appeal under Section 18 of the Rajasthan High Court Ordinance, 1949 is directed against the judgment dated December 2, 1991 passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court, which was modified on 16.12.1991 in S.B. Civil Review Petition No. 77 of 1991, whereby the learned Single Judge has accepted by writ petition filed by the petitioner respondent No. 1 Shri Khem 'Chand Sharma and following directions were issued to non-petitioner-appellant:(i) to grant an ordinary time scale of Rs. 5100-150-5700-200-6300 to all RHJS Officers w.e.f. 13.8.1987.(ii) to grant a Selection Scale of Rs. 5900-2-6700 to RHJS Officers w.e.f. 01/9.1988.(iii) to grant Supertime Scale of Rs. 7300-7600 to seven officers of the RHJS from amongst those who are already in Selection Scale w.e.f. 1.1.1992 and post them as District Judges at five Divisional Headquarters other than Jaipur and two at Jaipur: one for Jaipur City and another for Jaipur District.According to the non-petitioner-ap...
Prithvi Raj and anr. Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-22-1992
Reported in: 1992(2)WLN35
1. By the Court. The petitioner by this writ petition has challenged the order of the Board of Revenue dt. 13th October, 1980 (Annex. 11), dt. 12th March, 1981 (Annex. 12) order of the Revenue Appellate Authority dt. 1st June, 1978 (Annex. 9) and the order of the Additional Collector, Sri Ganganagar dt. 1st September, 1977 (Annex. 7).2. The petitioner was granted a temporary cultivation lease of a land measuring 23 bighas 10 biswas comprising Murabba No. 12 Chak No. 59 out of the land of Bhera Ram father of Shri Sardara Ram. Shri Bhera Ram proceeded to surrender the aforesaid temporary cultivation lease by a letter dated 15th December, 1975. When the petitioner had come to know of this fact, he proceeded to make an application for allotment of the aforesaid land by way of temporary cultivation lease to them. This application was allowed by the order dt. 15th December, 1975 and the aforesaid land came to be allotted to the petitioner by way of temporary cultivation lease for Smt. year 2...
Surendra Kumar Jaitly Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-22-1992
Reported in: 1992(2)WLN33
1. By the Court. The petitioner by this writ petition has challenged the orders dated 17th September, 1979, 5th December, 1980 and 18th February, 1982 as well as the order of the Rajasthan Civil Services Appellate Tribunal dated 11th January, 1982. The petitioner has prayed that he may be paid salary for the. period from 3rd August, 1976 to 27th April, 1978 with interest at the rate of 15% per annum.2. Petitioner was holding the post of Assistant Drawing Teacher in the Government Girls Higher Secondary School, Sri Ganganagar till he was relieved from there on 2nd August, 1976 by the order passed by District Education Officer (Women Institution), Sri Ganganagar dated 31st July, 1976. In pursuance of this order he reported for duty to the Head Master, Government Higher Secondary School, Kokarwali on 6th August, 1976, but he was not taken on duty by the then Head Master. Thereafter, petitioner moved an application to the Head Master, Govt. Higher Secondary School, Kokarwali on 6th August,...
Mangu Ram and ors. Vs. the State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-21-1992
Reported in: 1993CriLJ1972; 1992WLN(UC)140
ORDERB.R. Arora, J.1. This miscellaneous petition is directed against the order dated June 12, 1990, passed by the Munsif and Judicial Magistrate, Nawa, by which the learned Magistrate took cognizance against the accused petitioners for the offences under Sections 384 and 342, I.P.C.2. On Sept. 25, 1986, an F.I.R. was lodged at Police Station, Maroth, and a case under Sections 384 and 342, I.P.C. was registered against the accused-petitioners. The police, after necessary investigation, presented the Final Report, but the learned Magistrate did not accept the Final Report and took cognizance against the petitioners for the offences under Sections 384 and 342, I.P.C. by its order dated June 12, 1990.3. As the limitation for taking the cognizance under Sections 384 and 342, I.P.C. had already expired, therefore, the complainant filed an application for condoning the delay and the learned Magistrate condoned the delay, and extended the period of limitation under Section 473, Cr.P.C. and to...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »