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.
indira Shiksha Prasar Sansthan Vs. State of Rajasthan and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-21-1992
Reported in: 1992(1)WLC494; 1992(2)WLN52
Rajesh Balia, J.1. This is the third innings of the petitioner to come before this Court for seeking a mandamus for considering his application for affiliation with the University of Ajmer in proper perspective in accordance with law.2. The facts necessary for the present purposes may be stated briefly thus: Before University of Ajmer was established under the University of Ajmer Act, 1987, the. petitioner had moved an application to the University of Rajasthan some where in the month of April, 1986 seeking affiliation of college known as Indira College of Library Science. In the. first instance, University of Rajasthan appointed a committee for undertaking inspection of the College and after perusing the recommendation of the said committee, the University of Rajasthan granted affiliation for one unit i.e. for 40 seals for the Session 1986-87 subject to terms and conditions, staled by it. One of the conditions was that extension of provisional al'liliation for the Session 1987-88 must...
Ramu Ram Choudhary Vs. the State of Raj. and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-21-1992
Reported in: 1993(1)WLC622; 1992(2)WLN513
Jas Raj Chopra, J.1.The case of the petitioner is that he passed his B.A. Examinations in the year 1991 from Ajmer University and thereafter, he appeared in the Pre Teacher Education Test (for short 'the PTET') 1991-92 held by Mohanlal Sukhadiya University, Udaipur. He cleared that examination and has obtained 299 marks. His contention is that as per explanation (7) added to Rule 5 of the Rules for Admission to B.Ed Shiksha Shastri Courses, contained in General Guide Lines of Pre Teacher Education Test, 1991, there is a proviso that three choices for Teacher Education Institution (T.E.I.) of Rajasthan will be given by each candidate in order of preference.2. It was contended by the petitioner that he gave his choice for three places i.e. Jodhpur, Doongarpur, and Udaipur in order of preference. According to him, although in Jodhpur, the persons who have obtained minimum marks of 311 have been given admission but in Doongarpur and Udaipur, persons having secured 296 and 294 marks have be...
Hari Ram Vs. the State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-21-1992
Reported in: 1992(2)WLC715; 1992(2)WLN618
Y.R. Meena, J.1. This revision petition is directed against the judgment of the learned Sessions Judge, Pali dated 18.8.82.2. Mr. A.K. Samdaria, learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that thelearned Sessions Judge has summarily dismissed the appeal without giving any reason, therefore, the order of the learned Sessions Judge is erroenous. For that he relied upon the decision of the Kerla High Court in Prabhakaran Nair and Ors. v. State of Kerala : AIR1960Ker314 .3. On the other hand Mr. C.R. Jakhar, learned Public Prosecutor submitted that there is no provision for Tiling the appeal in the court of Sessions Judge against the impugned order of the Additional Collector-cum-Addl. District Magistrate, Pali, therefore, the appeal filed by the petitioner in the court of Sessions, Judge, Pali is not maintainable.4. I have heard Mr. A.K. Samdaria, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Mr. C.R. Jakhar, learned Public Prosecutor for the State and alsoperused the orderof the learned Sessi...
Anil Kumar Vs. State
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-20-1992
Reported in: 1992WLN(UC)137
R.S. Verma, J.1. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties. The petitioner by this writ petition has prayed that respondent, Rajasthan Public Service Commission be directed to forward the name of the petitioner for appointment being given to the post of Lower Division Clerk in Nagaur District or for that matter anywhere also where the petitioner can be appointed and further direction be made for appointment being given to the petitioner on and from the date Shri Tara Chand was so appointed with all benefits consequential there to such as emoluments, seniority etc.2. The petitioner appeared in 'Kanisth Lipik Sanyukt Pratiyogi Examination 1986 held by the Rajasthan Public Service Commission. His name was included in reserve list for District Nagaur. However, the petitioner's name was not forwarded to the R.P.S.C. to the government because there was some deficiency in his form. The Rajasthan Public Service Commission asked the petitioner to remove deficiency by issuing letter Annex. 1. Th...
Devkinandan Sharma Vs. the State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-20-1992
Reported in: 1993(3)WLC281; 1992WLN(UC)552
B.R. Arora, J.1. This miscellaneous petition is directed against the order dated April 20, 1991, passed by the Additional Sessions Judge No. 2, Udaipur, by which the learned Additional Sessions Judge dismissed the revision petition, filed by the petitioner.2. Accused-petitioner is facing trial for the offences under Sections 457 and 380 I.P.C. in the Court of the Munsif and Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Kherwada since 1981. The challan in this case was presented in the Court of the learned Magistrate in the year 1981 and the process for examining the witnesses were issued in the year 1982, and PW 1 Dinesh Kumar was examined by the Court on 14.8.1985. PW 2 Pritam Singh was examined on 13.7.1987 and PW 3 and PW 4 were examined on 11.11.1987. PW 5, PW 6, PW 7 and PW 8 were examined on 27.5.88. After examining eight witnesses by the prosecution, only the Investigating Officer Shri Mohan Lal Soni remained to be examined, but he did not appear inspite of the bailable warrant issued to se...
T.C. JaIn Vs. State of Rajasthan and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-20-1992
Reported in: 1992(3)WLC474; 1992WLN(UC)539
Inder Sen Israni, J.1. This writ petition has been filed with a prayer that the order dated March 4, 1992 (Annx. 8), by which his application for grant of yearly increments during the period of suspension has been rejected, may be quashed.2. Briefly stated, the petitioner, while he was working as Principal, I.T.I, at Ajmer, disciplinary proceedings were initated against him by the respondents, in contemplation of which, he was suspended vide order dated May 11, 1983 (Annx. 4). The petitioner continued to remain under suspension, till he was re-instated vide order dated August 4, 1987 (Annx. 5), passed by the Governor, during the pendency of the enquiry. While the petitioner was under suspension, he made an application dated January 11, 1984 to the respondents with a prayer to give him annual grade increments, during the period of suspension, which was, however, rejected.3. It is submitted by Mr. Sharma, learned Counsel, that the petitioner, on May 4, 1991 (Annx.6), came to know about t...
Bhanwarlal S/O Mangilal and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-17-1992
Reported in: 1992WLN(UC)139
V.S. Dave, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties and perused the papers available on record.2. It Is contended that the petitioners had removed the bushes and babool trees In pursuance of the contract given by the Panchayat, therefore, if there is any violation, it may be a violation of law by the Panchayat, for which they may be proceeded with but so long Sarpanch and other members of the Panchayat, has not been made accused in the case and the accused petitioners cannot be said to be guilty of the tres-pass into the land as they entered into the land not only with the permission of the Panchayat but after getting contract for Panchayat. All these matters require consideration by this Court. In these circumstances, I am inclined to grant bail to the accused petitioners.3. The S.H.O./Arresting Officer/Investigating Officer, Police Station, Todabhim, in the F.I.R. No. 39/1992, is, therefore, directed that in the event of arrest of the accused petitioners Bhanwarlal, Mohanlal, Ramsw...
Salim Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-17-1992
Reported in: 1992(3)WLC94; 1992WLN(UC)350
N.L. Tibrewal, J.1. This petition is against the order dated 4.3.91 of learned Sessions Judge, Jhunjhunu in Sessions Case No. 56/90.2. The necessary facts for filing this petition may be given:The petitioner and six other co-accused were committed to the court of Sessions Judge, Jhunjhunu for the offence under Section 307 IPC. As informed by the learned Counsel for the petitioner, the learned Sessions Judge has still to frame the charges after hearing the arguments and thereafter, the trial in the case shall commence. The petitioner was an unemployed youngman, and was in search of some job for his livelihood. In the Gulf countries, a large number of youngmen from the State of Rajasthan have gone, where they are provided employment. The District of Jhunjhunu is semi-desert having negligible opportunities of getting employment. In the country, specially in undeveloped districts unemployment is becoming an alarming problem. Thousands of young unemployed persons are in search of jobs and a...
Chhoga Ram Mundoliya Vs. the State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-14-1992
Reported in: 1992(2)WLC752; 1992(2)WLN586
S.N. Bhargava, J.1. As per the facts mentioned in the memo of writ petition petitioner deposited security amount of Rs. 1500/- and also paid quarterly dead-rent amounting to Rs. 1500/- in advance on 20.1.1984. Lease deed was registered in his favour on 16.1.1984 and the annual dead-rent was fixed at Rs. 6,000/-, The petitioner had been granted mining lease for ten years w.e.f. 20.1.1984 for mineral Marble, near Dhani of Village Narmanpur, Distt. Ajmer, for an area measuring 100x100 meters in Khasra No. 786. The site of the aforesaid mining area was shown on the papers but no physical or actual possession was delivered to the petitioner by the department. Sultan Singh and his son Ajeet Singh obstructed as they were cultivators of neighbouring field and therefore, the matter was referred to the concerned authorities of the Department and it was requested to evict those persons from the mining area so that mining operations could be started. The petitioner made his all efforts by contacti...
S.M.B. Secondary School Vs. the State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-14-1992
Reported in: 1992(2)WLC616; 1992(2)WLN548
S.N. Bhargawa, J.1. As per the facts mentioned in the memo of writ petition the petitioner is an aided and recognised institution by the Government of Rajasthan. By this writ petition the petitioner has challenged the order dated 8.6.1992 passed by the Collector, Ajmer, which was forwarded to the petitioner on 18.6.1992, de-acquisitioning the building in which the petitioner school was being run since 1967 except for a brief period between 1.7.1984 to 28.10.1985. The building was acquired by the Collector by order dated 9.8.1985. The impugned order has been challenged on several grounds but it appears from the order itself that it has been passed ex-parte. Neither the petitioner i.e. the Principal of the School nor the Administrator (Distt. Education Officer) was either present nor had any notice of the date of hearing nor they were present on the date of hearing. I had sent for the record also which supports this contention. The order has been challenged on several grounds in this pet...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »