Rajasthan Court March 1998 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.
Shri Agrawal Shiksha Samiti and anr. Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-03-1998
Reported in: 1998(1)WLN308
N.L. Tibrewal, J.1. A short but important question is raised in both the petitions. The question is: Whether payment of gratuity to the employees of aided educational institutions in pursuance of Rule-82 of the Rajasthan Non-Government Educational Institutions (Recognisation, Grant-in-Aid and Service Conditions Etc.) Rules. 1993 (hereinafter to be referred to as the Rules) is an approved expenditure for the assessment of grant-in-aid? In other words, whether an aided educational institution is entitled to get proportionate grant-in-aid admissible to it under the Rules on the amount paid to its employees towards gratuity?2. The State Government vide its communication dated May 26, 1994. to the General Secretary, Managing Committee, Shri Agrawal College, Jaipur, has taken the view that payment of gratuity to an employee of the institution is not included in approved expenditure, as such, no grant-in-aid is payable on it. The decision on the question is likely to have far reaching consequ...
Dharma Ram and anr. Vs. Pema Ramji and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-02-1998
Reported in: I(1999)ACC540; 2000ACJ593; AIR1999Raj86; 1999(1)WLC721; 1998(1)WLN245
ORDERShiv Kumar Sharma, J. 1. Both these appeals arise from the common judgment, therefore were heard analogously and are being disposed of by a common judgment.2. The claim petition submitted by the claimants Dharma Ram and Smt. Dami related to the accident occurred on November 18, 1992 when Truck RJ 04 G 0061 crushed Kumari Veena a girl of 11 years, who was student of six class. Dharma Ram and Smt. Dami are her parents sought compensation by filing claim petition. The claim petition was contested by the insurance company, who is appellant in Miscellaneous Appeal No. 487/1995 as well as the vehicle owner. The learned Tribunal awarded Rs. 42,250/- as compensation to the claimants. Dissatisfied with the size of the award, claimants preferred Misc. Appeal No. 208 of 1995, whereas the insurance company assailed the said award on the ground that the owner of the vehicle committed breach of the policy, hence the insurance company was not liable for compensation.3. I have given my anxious co...
Suresh Chandra Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-02-1998
Reported in: 1999(1)WLC417; 1997WLC(Raj)UC74; 1998(1)WLN195
P.P. Naolekar, J.1. Brief facts necessary for the disposal of this petition are that the petitioner was Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat, Khichan at the relevant time. After conducting a preliminary-inquiry resulting in adverse findings, a charge-sheet was issued to the petitioner. The petitioner submitted reply to the said charge-sheet-. Thereafter, an inquiry was conducted and a notice was issued calling his explanation as to why the finding be not recorded against him under proviso to Section 1 (4) of the Rajasthan Panchayat Act, 1953 (in short, to be called hereinafter as 'the Act') and order recording the finding against the petitioner was passed on 3.9.1994. The only submission made by learned Counsel for the petitioner is that the impugned order was passed by the State Government on the basis of the finding arrived at in the preliminary-inquiry under Rule 20 of the Rajasthan Panchayat (General) Rules, 1961 (in short, to be called hereinafter 'the Rules of 1961') and not based on consi...
Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation and anr. Vs. Sugna Ram and ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-02-1998
Reported in: 1998(3)WLC207; 1998(1)WLN192
Dr. B.S. Chauhan, J.1. The instant writ petition has been filed by the petitioner Corporation challenging the Award of the Industrial Tribunal Bikaner contained in Annexure, 3 to the writ petition.2. Respondent No. 1, who was employed as a Conductor with the appellant Corporation was given a memo of charge on 6.6.1983, contained in Annexure. 1 to the petition, with the allegation that he was found carrying ten passengers without ticket and he had the intention to recover the charges of tickets from those passengers and misappropriate the said amount. The petitioner Corporation was not satisfied with the reply submitted by the respondent No. 1 and subsequently a full-fledged enquiry was held against him. The Enquiry Officer submitted its report holding that the charges were proved against the contesting respondent and on the basis of the same, the competent Authority passed the order imposing the punishment of stoppage of two annual grade increments with cumulative effect. Being aggriev...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›