Rajasthan Court November 2002 Judgments
Miss Sachi Vs. the University of Jodhpur and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-28-2002
Reported in: 2003(2)WLC74; 2003(2)WLN455
Sunil Kumar Garg, J.1. This writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioner against the respondents on 25.2.1992 with a prayer that by an appropriate writ, order or direction, the respondent University may be directed to confirm the provisional merit certificate issued to the petitioner on 3.10.1991 (Annex. 3) and it may further be directed to declare that the petitioner is entitled to get the merit certificate as well as the Gold Medal as a result of her first position in B.A. Examination, 1991.2. That it may be stated here that this Court vide order dated 17.8.1992 allowed the application of Smt. Deepti Lodha for impleading her as party in this writ petition and she was impleaded as respondent No. 2 in the writ petition.3. The facts as put forward by the petitioner are as under:(i) That the petitioner secured 71st position in her Secondary School Examination held by the Board of Secondary Education for Rajasthan at Ajmer in the year 1987....
Tag this Judgment!Union of India and ors. Vs. Deen Dayal Gupta and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-28-2002
Reported in: 2003(3)WLN453
N.N. Mathur, J.1. By way of instant writ petition, the Union of India through the General Manager, Northern Railway seeks direction to quash and set aside the order of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Jodhpur dt 4.3.1998 whereby the Original Application preferred by the respondent Deen Dayal and Satya Narain has been allowed with the direction to regularise them from the date of their appointment as Material Chasing Clerk (hereinafter referred to as MCC) with all consequential benefits.2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the first respondent Deen Dayal was engaged as a Casual Labour on 13.12.1972 to utilise him as a Gangman with the Assistant Engineer, Northern Railway, Bikaner. Later on he was inducted in the Construction Organisation on 1.2.1976 on ad hoc basis as Gangman in Grade of Rs. 200-250/-. Subsequently his services were utilised on the post of MCC w.e.f. 15.10.1976. The second respondent Satya Narain was initially engaged as a Casual Labour and subsequently ...
Tag this Judgment!Kiran Prakash Gaur Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-27-2002
Reported in: 2003(3)WLC758; 2003(2)WLN423
Sunil Kumar Garg, J.1. This writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioner against the respondents on 7.1.2002 with a prayer that by an appropriate writ, order or direction, the order dated 18.12.2001 (Annex. 3) passed by the Director. Science and Technology Department (respondent No. 1) by which grant of selection grade on completion of 9 years of service to the petitioner vide order dated 19.10.1995 (Annex. 2) passed by the respondent No. 1 (Director, Science and Technology Department) was withdrawn on the ground that the petitioner who was working as Ferroman was not holding the requisite qualification for promotion to the post of Tracer, be quashed and set aside.2. The facts as put forward by the petitioner are as under:(i) That the petitioner was initially appointed on the post of Ferroman vide order dated 29.7.1986 in the Department of Science and Technology, Government of Rajasthan and his services were confirmed on the post of Ferr...
Tag this Judgment!Shankar Lal Vs. the Director, Primary Education and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-27-2002
Reported in: 2003(2)WLC155; 2003(2)WLN458
Sunil Kumar Garg, J.1. This writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioner against the respondents on 18.6.2002 with a prayer that by an appropriate writ, order or direction, the respondents may be directed to appoint the petitioner as Para Teacher Physical Education in the Gram Panchayat Galiwas Pachpadriya as he secured first merit position in the select panel dated 20.5.2002 and the respondents may further be directed to allow the petitioner for training immediately in pursuance to petitioner's merit position secured in the select list dated 20.5.2002.2. The facts as put forward by the petitioner are as under:(i) That the petitioner belongs to Scheduled Caste and possesses Bachelor's degree in Arts and Bachelor's degree in Physical Education.(ii) That in pursuance of the advertisement dated 5.5.2002 (Annex. 1) for the post of Para Teacher Physical Education in the Gram Panchayat Galiawas Pachpadriya under Rohit Panchayat Samiti, the pet...
Tag this Judgment!Lalchand Vs. Rameshwarlal
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-26-2002
Reported in: 2003(2)WLC170; 2003(2)WLN427
Sunil Kumar Garg, J.1. This civil revision has been filed by the petitioner-defendant against the judgment dated 24.7.2001 passed by the leanred Addl. District Judge No. 2 Bhilwara in Civil Appeal No. 11/2001 (23/2001) by which he allowed the appeal filed by the respondent-plaintiff against the order dated 14.3.2001 passed by the learned Addl. Civil Judge (JD) No. 2, Bhilwara by which the learned Addl. Civil Judge determined the provisional rent at the rate of Rs. 100/- p.m. but the learned Addl. District Judge No. 2 enhanced the provisional rent from Rs. 100/- p.m. to Rs. 2500/- per month.2. It arises in the following circumstances--The respondent-plaintiff filed a suit to the Trial Court under Section 6(1) of the Rajasthan Premises (Control of Rent & Eviction Act, 1950) (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rent Control Act') for fixation of standard rent and in that suit, it was also prayed that provisional rent may also be fixed to the tune of Rs. 2000/- or Rs. 2500/- per month.A reply ...
Tag this Judgment!Ram Singh and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-26-2002
Reported in: 2003(2)WLN444
Sunil Kumar Garg, J.1. The above four writ petitions are being decided by this common order as in all of them, common questions of law and facts are involved.FACTS OF WRIT PETITION No. 2281/20022. This writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioner against the respondents on 10.7.2002 with a prayer that by an appropriate writ, order or direction, the order dated 29.6.2002 (Annex. 6) passed by Secretary, Rajasthan State Agriculture Marketing Board (hereinafter, referred to as the Board) (respondent No. 2) by which services of the petitioner were terminated after making compliance of Section 25-F of the Industrial Diputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as the Act of 1947) be quashed and set aside and further more, if the petitioner is treated as surplus, he may be dealt with under the provisions of Rajasthan Civil Services (Absorption of Surplus Personnel) Rules, 1969 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules of 1969).3. The facts of the cas...
Tag this Judgment!Mangat Rai Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-25-2002
Reported in: AIR2003Raj181
ORDERJagat Singh, J.1. The petitioners herein were allotted commercial shops in Mandi Rawla District Sriganganagar in April, 1990 as per the provisions of the Rajasthan Colonisation (Sale and Allotment of Land in Mandis in Bhakhra and Indira Gandhi Canal Project Colony Areas) Conditions, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Conditions of 1973). Each of the petitioners was allotted shops being the highest bidder in open auction. The size of the shop was 25 x 60 ft. The petitioners constructed the shops and started their business immediately after the purchase. On 15-11-1994 the respondents passed a resolution No. 16 Anx. P/1 by which a decision was taken that behind each shop there is an area of 25 x 30 ft. which is being used by the owners of the shops without making any payment, therefore, the owners of the shops may be allotted the land on payment of Rs. 500/- per sq. yard for commercial use and Rs. 300/- for residential purposes. This resolution was for all the mandi samitis situat...
Tag this Judgment!Girdhari Lal Saraf Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-25-2002
Reported in: (2003)185CTR(Raj)465
S.K. Keshote, J. 1. The Tribunal, Jaipur Bench, Jaipur, made this reference under Section 256(1) of the IT Act, 1961, thereunder, two questions, reproduced below, have been referred for the Court's opinion at the instance of the assessee :'In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, was the Tribunal right in holding that granting an interest-free advance by the assessee-company to the lessor, the assessee and director of the assessee-company, constituted a perquisite and therefore, interest calculated at market rate was an income under Section 2(24)(iv) of the Act ?' 'Whether the Tribunal was right in not directing the AO to allow interest deemed as income under Section 2(24)(iv) of the Act as a deduction under Section 24(1)(vi) of the Act against income from house property when admittedly the impugned property was acquired with the amount of Rs. 5,50,000 advanced by the assessee free of interest ?' 2. Learned counsel for the parties are in agreement that the first question ...
Tag this Judgment!Shivdass Tyagi and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-25-2002
Reported in: 2003CriLJ1811
ORDERA.C. Goyal, J.1. This petition under Section 482, Cr. P.C. has been filed by the accused persons to quash the FIR No. 102/99, registered at Mahila Police Station, Kota, for offences under Sections 498-A and 406, IPC.2. Facts in brief are that the complainant non-petitioner No. 2 Smt. Kavita Tyagi submitted a written report on 18-6-1999 at Mahila Police Station, Kota, with the averments that she was married to accused Sandeep at Gurgaon on 22-1-1999 and her parents spent a sum of Rs. 3.50 lacs in that marriage. She started living with her husband and other in-laws at Gurgaon. After some time the accused petitioners started harassing her and raised dowry demands. Thereafter, she was compelled to go at Kota to her parents and all the articles of 'stridhan' were taken away from her.3. On the basis of this report, criminal case as stated hereinabove was registered and investigation commenced.4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties. Counsel for the petitioners submitted that the...
Tag this Judgment!Raje Singh Vs. Ajmer Vidhyut Vitrarn Nigam Ltd. and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Nov-25-2002
Reported in: 2003(4)WLC326; 2003(2)WLN441
Sunil Kumar Garg, J.1. This writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioners against the respondents on 11.7.2001 with a prayer that by an appropriate writ, order or direction the impugned Order dated 1.7.2001 (Annex. 12) passed by the Assistant Engineer (O & M), Ajmer Vidhyut Vitaran Nigam Ltd. be quashed and set aside and services of the petitioner be regularised and further the respondents be directed to pay the petitioner his emoluments from 1.9.2000.2. At the very outset, it may be stated that originally this writ petition was filed before Division Bench of this Court as provisions of Rajasthan (Regulation of Appointment in Public Service and Rationalisation of Staff) Act, 1999 (hereinafter referred to as the Act of 1999) were challenged and since the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Bhawani Singh v. State of Rajasthan, D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3271/2001 decided on 23.7.2002 (reproted in 2002(3) WLC (Raj.) 728, has decla...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »