Rajasthan Court August 2001 Judgments
Shanker Lal and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-24-2001
Reported in: RLW2003(1)Raj347; 2002(4)WLN338
Garg, J.1. This appeal has been filed by the accused appellants against the judgment and order dated 16.1.1999 passed by the learned Special Judge, NDPS Cases, Chittorgarh in Session Case No. 214/97 (102/96) by which he convicted the accused appellant for the offence under Section 8/18 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychot-rophic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as 'the NDPS Act') and sentenced them to undergo ten years rigorous imprisonment and to pay fine of Rs. one lac, in default of payment of fine, to further undergo R1 for two years.2. The facts giving rise to this appeal, in short, are as follows:-On 24.6.1996 at about 11.00 PM, PW 14 Prithvi Singh, SHO, Police Station Chan-deriya District Chittorgarh made Parchakayami (Ex.P/24) stating inter-alia that he received a secret information at about 8.00 PM from mukhbir to the effect that accused appellant No. 2 Parthu, resident of Paroli and accused appellant No. 1 Shanker, also resident of Paroli had gone to Mishro-ki-pipli...
Tag this Judgment!Jhabar Mal Vs. Guddi @ Kamla
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-24-2001
Reported in: II(2002)DMC39
J.C. Verma, J.1. The appellant-husband is challenging the order dated 17.10.2000 passed by the Additional District Judge, Neem Ka Thana, Distt. Sikar in Divorce Petition No. 27/1998 by which order the divorce petition filed by the appellant-husband was dismissed.2. The parties were married on 2.7.1992 as per Hindu rites at village Jaswantpura and live together as husband and wife at Dhani Navedi Tan Trilokpura. She was sent in 'Muklava' to his matrimonial house after two years in July,1994. It was alleged that just after 5 or 6 days, the parties started quarrelling with him and his parents, younger brother and younger sister of the husband. It was further alleged that she had a habit of taking 'Gutka' (Zarda Masala) in such quantity. She was asked not to indulge in toxicating eating Masala, She left for her parents in the year 1995, but again came back in August, 1995. She was again taken away by her parents. It was alleged that some young persons from her village used to come whose vi...
Tag this Judgment!C.i.T. Vs. Phalo
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-24-2001
Reported in: 2002(2)WLN281
Bhagwati Prasad, J.1. Counsel for the respondent states that the question which is sought to be raised by the Department in this reference has become redundant, because the dispute involved in the reference has already been settled under the Kar Vivad Samadhan Scheme, 1998, and an order to this effect has been passed on 4th January, 1999. A photocopy of this order has been placed on record.2. In view of the statement of the learned Counsel for the respondent the counsel for the Department does not dispute the proposition.3. The Tax Reference has, therefore, become infructuous. It is dismissed....
Tag this Judgment!Yashpal Sharma and ors. Vs. the Rajasthan Non-government Educational I ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-24-2001
Reported in: 2003(1)WLN689
J.C. Verma, J.1. In all the above-said writ petitions common point of law and the facts are involved with the identical relief.2. The petitioners were employed on various dates as mentioned in the respective writ petitions by respondent No. 2 Hahalva Keshtriya Shiksha Samiti an educational institution, run by it. The only point involved in the writ petitions is whether the petitioners are entitled to some pay scale as that being paid in the educational institutions of State of Rajasthan to the employees employed in the same category, therefore, there is hardly any necessity to narrate any other fact.3. Respondent No. 2 (herein-in-after called the institution) is said to be un-aided institution but is recognised institution. It is running the educational institution but not paying the emoluments to its teachers and employees equal to the similarly situated employees in the Government educational institutions or aided institutions.4. For the reason that the petitioners are not being paid...
Tag this Judgment!Hemant Chouhan Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-24-2001
Reported in: 2001(3)WLC616; 2002(1)WLN274
A.R. Lakshmanan, C.J.1. This appeal is directed against the order passed by V.G. Palshikar, J. in the writ petition, by which the appellant/petitioner sought improvement of the position.2. The short facts are that on the death of the appellant's father who was serving as Senior Commercial Taxation Officer, Circle-III, Jodhpur, when he expired on 26.9.1991, the appellant's mother applied to the respondents for providing him appointment commensurate with his qualification under the Rajasthan Recruitment of Dependents of Government Servants (Dying while in Service) Rules, 1975 (for short 'the Rules of 1975' hereinafter). According to the appellant, he is possessed of Degree in Science Mathematics and Post-graduate degree in M.A. English Literature when application was sent for providing him appointment in place of his father on compassionate ground. The appellant was informed that in view of the instructions contained in the letter dated 1.4.1989, he can be appointed on the post of Commer...
Tag this Judgment!Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation, Through Its Chief Manager ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-24-2001
Reported in: 2002(4)WLN388
J.C. Verma, J.1. The Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation (here-in-after referred to as the RSRTC) has come up in this writ petition against the order of the Industrial Tribunal dated 31.12.1998 (Annexure-1) with the prayer that it should be declared illegal.2. The respondent No. 1 was the conductor with the RSRTC. He was charge-sheeted in January 1988 and was found guilty of the misconduct. An order was passed for removal of respondent No. 1 on the basis of enquiry held by the petitioner but for the reason that a general reference was pending before the Industrial Tribunal and as required under Section 33(2)(b), the petitioner had moved an application for approval before terminating the services. While exercising powers under Section 33(2)(b), the Tribunal vide its order dated 4.4.1994 had declined the approval on the ground that the enquiry held against the respondent No. 1 was defective on technical grounds and, therefore, the approval was refused. The respondent was taken bac...
Tag this Judgment!Gurcharan Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-24-2001
Reported in: 2001(3)WLC575; 2002(1)WLN338
AR. Lakshmanan, C.J.1. In view of the conflicting judgment of this Court in Bhimsen v. State of Rajasthan reported in 1991 RCC 421 and Kunj Bihari Lal and Jagdis v. State of Rajasthan reported in 1984 RCC 42, an order was passed on 3.12.1993 in S.B. Criminal Misc. Petition No. 114/93 by Hon'ble Mr. Justice A.K. Mathur (as he then was) referring the matter to the larger bench to resolve the controversy as to whether Section 67 of the Rajasthan Excise Act shall prevail as against Section 468 Cr.P.C. or not.2. The above criminal misc. petition was listed before a Division Bench of this Court which dismissed the matter on 14.2.2001. Thus, the controversy referred by Hon'ble Mr. Justice A.K. Mathur could not be resolved.3. A similar controversy is also involved in S.B. Criminal Revision No. 203/2001 which came up for hearing before Hon'ble Mr. Justice N.P. Gupta on 7.5.2001. Adopting the reasoning in the reference order dated 3.12.1993 in S.B. Criminal Misc. Petition No. 114/93 the learned ...
Tag this Judgment!Dalpat Singh and anr. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-23-2001
Reported in: 2002(4)WLC698; 2002(2)WLN261
Tatia, J.1. This is an appeal against the Judgment dated 5.5.81 by which suit of the plaintiffs Dalpat Singh and Virendra Singh against the respondents was dismissed for claim of Rs. 13,125/-.2. As stated above, the suit was filed by plaintiffs Dalpat Singh and Virendra Singh alleging therein that plaintiff No. 2 was working as Manager in the Tea Estate in West Bengal for the last twenty years and after he left the service in the month of January 1974, plaintiff No. 2 booked 72 packages of house-hold goods from Binnaguri Railway Station no North Frontier Railway to be carried to Bhilwara on Western Railway via Lacknow, Agra, Achnera and Ajmer route vide invoice R.R. No, 083034 dated 9.1.74 in wagon No. N E 51642. The above wagon was loaded on 9.1.74 at the above station in the presence of plaintiff No. 2's servants and his Assistant manager Sh. A.S. Maroo before the then Assistant Station Master and his staff at Binnaguri. The gates of wagon were locked on both the sides by different s...
Tag this Judgment!Girdhari @ Gordhan Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-23-2001
Reported in: RLW2003(1)Raj488; 2002(5)WLC261; 2002(2)WLN318
Garg, J.1. This appeal has been filed by the accused appellant from jail against the judgment and order dated 25.8.1999 passed by the learned Special Judge, NDPS Cases, Bhilwara in Sessions Case No. 46/98 by which he convicted the accused appellant for the offence under Section 8/15, of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotrophic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as 'the NDPS Act') and sentenced him to undergo RI for ten years and to pay fine of Rs. one lac, in default of payment of fine, to further undergo RI for six months.2. Since nobody was representing accused appellant as this appeal has been preferred from jail, therefore, this Court vide order dated 17.7.2001 appointed Shri Amitab Acharya, Advocate as Amicus Curiae to argue the case on behalf of the accused appellant and he has argued the same. 3. The facts giving rise to this appeal, in short, are as follows:- On 29.8.1998 at about 2.30 PM, PW 8 Jagdish Prasad, SHO, Police Station Kotdi District Bhilwara prepared a Parcha...
Tag this Judgment!State of Rajasthan and ors. Vs. Karan Singh Rathore
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-23-2001
Reported in: RLW2003(1)Raj511; 2002(1)WLC445; 2002(1)WLN325; 2002(4)WLN317
Mathur, J.1. Heard Mr. B.M. Bohra, learned counsel for the appellant State and Mr. M. Mridul, Senior Advocate, for the caveator respondent.2. The Writ Petitions from which these appeals arise, were filed by Rajasthan Vidhya Peeth and terminated senior teachers seeking following directions:'by appropriate writ, order or direction, it be declared that the B.Ed. degree granted by the petitioner to the candidates after grant of degree of B.Ed. (Child Development) and undergoing successful 3 months Bridge Course, is a B.Ed. degree which entitles a candidate to appointment being granted as Senior Teacher and above in the Government of Rajasthan. Further, the respondents be directed not to terminate the services of candidates appointed with this qualification as Grade II (Senior Teacher and above) Teacher hereinafter.'3. The Rajasthan Vidhya Peeth is a 'deemed University' as declared by the Notification dated 12.1.1987 issued by the Ministry of Human Resources Development in exercise of power...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »