Rajasthan Court July 1999 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.
Avinash Sharma and Etc. Vs. Mohanlal Sukhadia University, Udaipur and ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-08-1999
Reported in: AIR2000Raj27; 1999(3)WLC759
ORDERB.J. Shethna, J.1. As per the present roster, this Court is assigned with admissions, orders and hearing of misc. writ petitions by or against local bodies. Revenue Board and Educational Institutions. Accordingly, writ petition No. 1546/97 was placed at serial No. 24 on today's cause list. When the aforesaid writ petition was called out in the morning, learned counsel Shri Vyas for the respondent University pointed out that as per the earlier order of this Court (Dr. B.S. Chauhan, J.) dt. 18-5-1999, this petition was required to be heard along with three other revision petitions Nos. 823/96, 416/ 97 and 1029/97. Accordingly, all the three revision petitions were ordered to be listed at 2.00 p.m. along with the writ petition. And, accordingly, the writ petition and all the three revision petitions were heard at 2.00 p.m. and disposed of by this common order as the parties are same and result of main writ petition will decide the fate of three other revision petitions also.2. David ...
Padam Singh Vs. State
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-08-1999
Reported in: 2000(3)WLC147; 1999(0)WLN675
B.J. Shethna, J.1. The petitioner is a Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat Ramgarh which is on the border. He has challenged In this petition the impugned order at Annexure-P14 dated 17.6.1999 passed by the Collector Jaisalmer by constituting a committee under the Chairmanship of Vikas Adhikari with AEN, Headmaster of Senior Secondary School, Ramgarh, Gram Sevak, Gram Panchayat Ramgarh and Patwari Ramgarh in exercise of his powers Under Section 33(11) of the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Rules 1996 (for short the Rules') for completing the development work which could not be complete after the election of Sarpanch, Gram Panchayat Ramgarh and to report about the completion of the work.2. Shri Udawat Senior Advocate has submitted that by passing the order Annexure-P14 indirectly the petitioner is removed from the post of Sarpanch. He submitted that it is only Sarpanch who must complete the pending development works of the Panchayat, for which no committee required to be constituted. Relying upon the p...
Smt. Idith J. Jacob Vs. the Board of Revenue
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-08-1999
Reported in: 2000(3)WLC161; 1999(0)WLN670
Arun Madan, J.1. Despite the matter duly notified in the cause list for today none appeared on behalf of the petitioner. Request was made for short adjournment by Mr. D.K. Tewari on behalf of Mr. R.k. Goyal, learned Counselfor the petitioner on the ground that Mr. Goyal is out of station and hence will not be available to assist the court. No prior intimation was received by this court as regards the absence of the counsel nor any intimation was given to Shri N.K. Maloo, learned Counselfor respondent Nos. 5 and 6. It is the settled practice of the court that whenever a counsel is not available within station, he should inform not only the court that he would not be available on a particular date but should also obtain no objection from the other side by means of a letter explaining plausible ground for absence and only thereafter the matter may be adjourned. The adjournment should not be granted for the sake of adjournment particularly when the matter has been duly notified in the caus...
Prahlad Sahay Sharma Vs. District Education Officer, Second, Jaipur an ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-07-1999
Reported in: AIR1999Raj363; 2000(1)WLC622
ORDER1. The case of the petitioner in short is that the petitioner is a regular student of Class-VIII and is studying in Hansraj Govt. Higher Secondary School, village Badhal, Tehsil Phulera, District Jaipur. He was admitted to that school on 8-7-1991 but on account of financial difficulty he could not deposit the fee therefore, the school authorities struck off his name from the roll of the school. The petitioner was again readmitted in the said school on 11-9-1998 for the academic session 1998-99.2. It has been contended by the learned Counsel for the petitioner during the course of hearing that petitioner ever since his readmission w.e.f. 11-9-1998, has been regularly attending the classes and as per the criteria laid down in the rules governing the examination of the Board for Class-VIII for the session 1998-99, the minimum requisite percentage which the candidate should possess for the purpose of determining his/her eligibility to appear in the Board's Examination is 70% and that ...
Dev Chand and Etc. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-06-1999
Reported in: 2000CriLJ194
M.A.A. Khan, J. 1. Both these appeals involve common facts. These are, therefore, disposed of by this common order.2. The dates, time and place of hearing of both the appeals were duly notified to their common counsel, Sh. N. L. Saran, Advocates appointed as Amicus Curiae for both the appellants. However, he did not appear for and on behalf of either of the appellants. The learned Public Prosecutor was, therefore, heard in both the appeals and orders were reserved with a view that if the counsel of the appellants appeared later on he may be heard. But despite waiting for the counsel for sufficiently long time, he did not appear for the appellants. The appeals are now being disposed off on merits.3. The facts relevant and sufficient to dispose of the two appeals are these :On March 23, 1996 at about 1-15 p.m. PW. 6 Mohan Singh, Station House Officer, Police Station Bakani Distt. Jhalawar (Raj;) received a secret information to the effect that two persons were possessing bags, containing...
Jahid Vs. the State
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-06-1999
Reported in: 1999CriLJ4430; 2000(2)WLC145
M.A.A. Khan, J.1. Smt. Kismat deceased (22) was married with the appellant about 6 or 7 years prior to her death in the year 1995. After the marriage some differences appeared in the relationship of the two families but on efforts having been made by the wellwishers of the two sides, the husband and wife united and were living together in appellant's house at village Aaphoo Kheri under Police Station Jawar, Distt. Jhalawar.2. On May 6, 1995 PW/1 Yaqub Khan, brother and PW/14 Yusuf Khan, a cousin of the deceased, besides several others of their village went to Aaphoo Kheri to participate in the marriage of the son of PW/24 Dulley Khan who was a collateral to the appellant. As per custom prevalent, the two boys had taken 'Pehnawani' (clothes) for the deceased and others in the family. Yusuf Khan returned in the evening but PW/1 Yqub Khan stayed with the deceased.3. It is alleged that after having entertained himself on the video film till late hours of the night Yaqub Khan retired to tak...
Mahesh Alias Sanjay Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-06-1999
Reported in: 1999CriLJ4625
ORDERM.A.A. Khan, J.1. Briefly stated the prosecution case is that during the year 1988 PW 7 Suman alias Pinky, aged about 12 or 13 years at that time, was living in village Hamirpur under Police Station Mundawa, Distt. Jhunjhunu (Raj.) with her grandmother PW 2 Smt. Harkari (80) and mother PW 3 Smt. Janki Devi (58). Her father RW 1 Bhagwan Singh (60) used to reside at Pilani where he was employed as a Teacher. Her brother, Mahender, is stated to be living at Calicut in connection with his employment there.2. Suman was studying in VIIIth class in Palika Ucha Prarthamic Vidhayalay at Nuwa and used to go to her school along with other girls of her village. Mahesh appellant, then aged about 20 or 22 years is resident of the same village Hamirpur. Earlier he was living in Assam wherefrom he had returned to his village. He is stated to be loafer type fellow doing nothing in the village and simply chasing the school going girls. He is stated to have developed intimacy with Suman with whom he...
Bhadar Ram Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-05-1999
Reported in: 2000CriLJ1174
ORDERMohd. Yamin, J. 1. Appellant Bhadar Ram has been convicted under Section 326, IPC by learned Sessions Judge, Sriganganagar in Sessions Case No. 28/83 for a period of three years rigorous imprisonment with a fine of Rs. 100/- and in default of payment of fine to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three months. Appellant was tried for offence under Section 307, IPC as well.2. The facts in brief are that on 24-3-1983 at 9.00-10.00 P.M. Nand Ram went to out-skirts of village Mammar to defecate. House of Meera is situated nearby. Mohan, Bhadar and Bholia were found present there out of whom Mohan and Bhadar were armed with gandasi and Bhola was armed with a sela. After seeing Nand Ram, Mohan Ram cried that Nand Ram had come and he should be done away with Nand Ram then cried and his wife Smt. Niko, mother Smt. Narayani, sister Reshma and brother Gyani Ram came immediately. Then Bhadar Ram appellant inflicted gandasi blow on the head of Nand Ram. Nand Ram fell down. It was further allege...
Mukesh Ajmera Vs. Satyanarayan Ayar
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-05-1999
Reported in: 2000(2)WLC580; 1999(0)WLN672
B.J. Shethna, J.1. Mr. B.L. Maheshwari appears on caveat for the respondent No. 1 Shri Satya Narain - original complainant, who has filed complaint against the present petition-sarpanch to the effect that after he was elected as Sarpanch 3rd child has born to his place, therefore, under the law he had incurred automatic disqualification. Hence, he should be removed immediately from the post of Sarpanch. Mr. Maheshwari made a grievance that though caveat was entered way back on 27.5.1999 and the copy of the same was served upon the petitioner, Mr. Joshi learned Counsel for the petitioner failed to supply copy of writ petition to him; He, therefore, submitted that this petition should be straightway dismissed only on this ground. If it is not to be dismissed then the petitioner should supply copy of writ petition to him.2. Once caveat is filed it is the duty of the petitioner to supply copy of petition to the caveator. Mr. Joshi, a senior advocate of this Court, tendered his apology for ...
Paramjit Singh and anr. Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-01-1999
Reported in: 2000CriLJ100
Arun Madan, J. 1. Appellants have preferred this criminal appeal against the judgment dated 21-11-98 passed by the learned Special Judge NDPS Cases, Bundi in Sessions/ Criminal Case No. 190/98; whereby each of the appellants has been convicted under Section 8/18 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short 'the NDPS Act') and sentenced to undergo RI for ten years and a fine of Rs. one lac each in default of payment of fine, to further undergo two years RI. Maruti Car seized during investigation, bearing No. DL/IC/B/ 1117 was ordered to be confiscated.2. The facts relevant for deciding the appeal, briefly stated, are that on 23-11-1991 at about 11.00 a.m.,' a Maruti Car No. DL-1C-B-1117 was apprehended by the raiding party of the Narcotics Department near Talera Petrol Pump of Bundi town. The raiding party was headed by Anand Singh Negi, Superintendent, and consisted of Satpal Singh Sabbarwal SI, Bajranglal, Behari Singh, Jahin Ahmad and Manohar Singh (Driver)....
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »