Rajasthan Court July 1993 Judgments
Ratan Lal Soni Vs. the State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-29-1993
Reported in: 1994(1)WLC679; 1993WLN(UC)194
K.C. Agrawal, C.J.1. This writ petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, has been filed by Ratanlal Soni, who claims himself to be a Journalist and Editor of 'JUNG KE KHILAF JUNG', a Hindi weekly published from Jaipur, In paragraph 2 of the writ petition, he narrated the purpose of filing the writ petition and the same.The present writ petition is being submitted as a public interest litigation to show as to how public authorities are making gross and wholesale violation of law.2. In paragraph 10(a) of the writ petition, the petitioner alleged that the Hindi daily Rajasthan Patrika in its issue dated 21.8.1989 published a news item that the Jaipur Development Authority (hereinafter to be refereed to as 'the J.D.A.') approved schemes of three Housing Cooperative Societies ignoring all the relevant rules and regulations in that behalf. Relying on the Rajasthan Patrika of the aforesaid date, the petitioner claimed that the approved plan of these Housing Cooperatives involv...
Tag this Judgment!Uttam Singh Vs. the State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-28-1993
Reported in: 1993WLN(UC)329
B.R. Arora, J.1. The petitioner was working as a Patwari in the Revenue Department. His services were terminated. The petitioner challenged the order terminating his services before this Court by way of filing S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1032 of 1979. The writ petition, filed by the petitioner, was allowed by a Single Bench of this Court on 6.12.1985. While deciding the writ petition, the High Court directed the respondents to reinstate the petitioner in service and pay him the arrears of salary from 23.1.1963 to 1.6.1978, till he was reinstated in service. After the decision of the writ petition, the petitioner approached the respondents for payment of the arrears of salary and made representations but the payment was not made to thin and therefore, the petitioner preferred this writ petition before this Court with the prayer that the respondents may be directed to make payment of the arrears of salary with interest @ 18% per annum, compensation of Rs. 10,000/- and the cost of Rs. 50...
Tag this Judgment!Parivahan Karamchari Yatayat Sahakari Samiti Ltd. Vs. Regional Transpo ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-27-1993
Reported in: AIR1994Raj124
ORDERA.K. Mathur, J.1. The petitioner by this writ petition has prayed that the order of the State Transport Appellate Tribunal dated 1-3-1993 setting aside the Resolution of the Regional Transport Authority, Bikaner dated 9-2-1987 granting two non-temporary stage carriage permits in favour of the petitioner on theroute Hanumangarh Mogha and in place of that granting one non-temporary stage carriage permit in favour of the Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation on the route Hanumangarh to Mogha curtailed from Hanumangarh to Rajpura may be quashed.2. The petitioner is a registered Cooperative Society registered under the Rajasthan Co-operative Societies Act, 1965. The total number of its members are in all 15 out of which 13 are licensed drivers. A draft agreement duly entered between the State of Rajasthan and State of Punjab has been published in the Rajasthan Rajpatra dated 29-8-1975 in which both the States propose to open an inter-state route Hanumangarh to Mogha via Abhore. In...
Tag this Judgment!Veena Danial Vs. Sunil Danial
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-26-1993
Reported in: I(1994)DMC375
K.C. Agrawal, C.J.1. This reference has been made by the Distt. Judge. Bharatpur for confirming the decree nisi passed in favour of the appellant against the respondent. The respondent and the appellant were married in accordance with the Christian Rites in June, 1984. Shortly, after the marriage the respondent in order to satisfy his lust asked the appellant to have intercourse with him by indulging in sodomy. She resisted but the respondent succeeded in committing sodomy with the appellant. Thereafter, appellant left the place of her husband and come to her mother's house in Bharatpur in December, 1984. The respondent thereafter came to Bharatpur to take her. The mother of the appellant intervened and wanted to settle the matter in between them. But she could not succeed as a result whereof the appellant and the respondent could not have marital relations. The appellant, thereafter, filed an application before the Distt, Judge Bharat-our for passing of a decree for dissolution of mar...
Tag this Judgment!Ramdeo Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-22-1993
Reported in: 1993WLN(UC)338
N.K. Jain, J.1. This special appeal Under Section 18 of the Rajasthan High Court Ordinance is directed against the order of the learned Single Judge dt. 26.5.92 whereby he has dismissed he writ petition filed by the appellant holding that the disputed questions of fact are involved in it.2. Mr. Mridul, learned Counsel for the appellant has submitted that the learned Single Judge has erred in dismissing the writ petition on the ground that it involves disputed questions of fact as the pleas raised by the petitioner appellant are supported by the documents rather the court should have summoned the record. He has also submitted that the court is not precluded to decide the disputed questions of fact particularly when none of the documents produced by the petitioner has been denied but the learned Single Judge has not considered them. He has relied on Smt. Gunwant Kaur and Ors. v. Municipal Committee, Bhatinda and Ors. : AIR1970SC802 , Madan Mohan Maharaj v. State of Raj. and Ors. 1978 Vol...
Tag this Judgment!Mohabbat Singh and ors. Vs. the State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-21-1993
Reported in: 1993WLN(UC)327
B.R. Arora, J.1. The petitioners, by this petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. have prayed that a direction may be issued to the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bali, not to use the statements of the prosecution witnesses recorded under Section 161 Cr, P.C. as a substantive piece of evidence in putting questions to the accused under Section 313 Cr.P.C.2. It is contended by the learned Counsel for the petitioners that in this case while putting questions to the accused persons under Section 313 Cr. P.C, the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bali has utilized the statement of the witnesses recorded by the police under Section 161 Cr.P.C. Learned Counsel for the petitioners, alongwith the petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has appended Schedule-I, which according to the learned Counsel for the petitioners, reveal that the contents of the question in relation to the statement of PW 2 Nana, PW 3 Ashiya, PW 6 Kalu, PW 8 Soma, PW 9 Bagga, PW 11 Ugam Kanwar and PW 24 Dhanna Ram, do not find ...
Tag this Judgment!Miss. Pranita Vs. Board of Secondary Education
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-15-1993
Reported in: AIR1993Raj222; 1994(1)WLC65
ORDERRajendra Saxena, J. 1. The petitioner appeared as a regular student in the Secondary Examination of 1992 held by the Board of Secondary Education, Rajasthan with Roll No. 593324 at Examination Centre 0905 as a student of St. Mary's Convent Higher Secondary School, Udaipur and was awarded 380 marks out of 550 marks i.e. in aggregate 69% marks as per mark-sheet dated 24-7-1992 (Annexure 2). She applied for re-totalling of marks, but the result of the re-totatling also remained unchanged vide letter dated 8-8-1992 (Annexure 3) issued by the respondent; The case of the petitioner is that she has been an out-standing and highly meritorious student and always secured more than 85% marks right from Class VIth to Xth Standard. She was also selected in the National Telent Search Examination conducted by N.C.E.R.T., Delhi. She expected to secure at least 85% marks in the Secondary Examination, but due to some foul play ormala fide in the examination of her answer-books, she has been awarded...
Tag this Judgment!Badamilal Vs. Harshvardhan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-15-1993
Reported in: AIR1994Raj9
Rajesh Balia, J.1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.2. This revision is directed against the order dt. 8-7-91 passed by District Judge, Udaipur rejecting the petitioner's application under Order 9, Rule 13, C.P.C. for setting aside ex parte decree against the petitioner.3. In suit for pre-emption against the petitioner and his vendor Kurilal, in the first instance, summons were issued on 26-4-82 for 6-7-92. Summonses were not served on the petitioner as he was out of station when the process server went to his house. Thereafter the Court directed to issue summons afresh and in addition to that the Court also directed that summons be also sent through registered post in terms of Order 5, Rule 19A, C.P.C. The next date fixed was 6-9-82. The registry containing summons of Badamilal petitioner was returned with an endorsement of refusal and this was held to be sufficient in terms of Order 5, Rule 19A (2). Since the petitioner had not appeared on that date, and service on him has been ...
Tag this Judgment!Shanker Singh Vs. the State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-14-1993
Reported in: 1993WLN(UC)318
B.R. Arora, J.1. The petitioner, by this writ petition, has challenged the order Annexure. 5 dated 21-12-92, passed by the Chief Engineer, C.A.D., Indira Gandhi Nahar Pariyojna, Bikaner, by which the appeal filed by the petitioner-appellant was dismissed and he was ordered to be retired with immediate effect and his date of birth dated 5.12.1931, entered in the Service Book, was taken as a correct one. The petitioner has, also, challenged the consequential order Annexure. 3 dated 26.12.92, passed by the Assistant Engineer, Mechanical Division, C.A.D., Suratgarh, by which the petitioner was relieved from the government service with effect from 30.12.92. These orders have been challenged by the petitioner on various grounds including that the order passed by the Chief Engineer, rejecting the appeal filed by the petitioner-appellant, is not a speaking order.2. The petitioner joined the service of the respondents as a Driver on work-charge basis on 6.3.1958. He continued in the service wit...
Tag this Judgment!Agriculture Market Committee Vs. Prescribed Authority Under Rajasthan ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-09-1993
Reported in: (1994)IILLJ10Raj; 1994(1)WLC97
M.B. Sharma, J.1. This Special Appeal is directed against the order dated December 3, 1991 of the learned Single Judge of this Court Under the aforesaid order the learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petition filed by the appellant herein, Agriculture Market Committee, Alwar (for short the Agriculture Market Committee) against the order dated August 16, 1991 made on the application under Section 28-A(2) of the Rajas than Shops & Commercial Establishments Act, 1958 (for short, the Act). The said application was filed before the Prescribed Authority under the Act (for short, the Prescribed Authority) by Kishorilal (respondent No. 2 herein).2. Kishorilal, respondent No. 2 herein, filed an application under Section 28-A(2) of the Act before the Prescribed Authority in which a case was set up that he was appointed on the post of Class IV in the office of the appellant herein and he continued Jo work on that post upto February 22, 1989 and without any notice his services were terminated o...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »