Rajasthan Court July 2002 Judgments
S.K. Popli (Dr.) Vs. Rajasthan Non-government Educational Institutions ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-30-2002
Reported in: RLW2003(3)Raj1907; 2003(1)WLC95; 2002(5)WLN413
Tatia, J.1. This appeal is directed against the order dated 31.3.1998 of the Rajasthan Non-Government Educational Institution Tribunal, Jaipur.2. The fact of the case are that the petitioner was appointed as Lecturer (English) in B.J.S. Rampuria Jain College on 21.7.1967. The B.J.S. Rampuria Jain College is a Society registered under the Societies Registration Act and is an aided non-government educational institution. It is running Graduate and Post-graduate College in Bikaner. According to the petitioner, in view of the Ordinance 67A of the Rajasthan University Ordinances, the petition can be retired on attaining the age of 60 years and the petitioner cannot be retired at the age of 58 years even after coming into force of the Rajasthan Non-government Educational Institution Act, 1989 (for short 'the Act of 1989'). The petitioner's contention is that at the time of entering the service with the respondent-College, no agreement was executed by the petitioner with Managing Committee of...
Tag this Judgment!Ghisia and anr. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-30-2002
Reported in: RLW2003(4)Raj2420; 2002(5)WLC7
Bansal, J.1. As many as five accused were put up for trial before learned Additional Sessions Judge, Baran in Sessions Case No. 52/93. The accused Basania, Moriya and Kajod were acquitted of all the charges framed against them but accused-appellants Ghisia and Ghanshyam were convicted and sentenced vide judgment dated January 6, 1996 as under:-Ghisia & Ghan-shyam both.U/Sec.302 IPC for causing death of RameshwarLife Imprisonment with a fine of Rs.100/-, in default tofurther undergo one month's simple imprisonment.U/Sec.307 IPC for causing injuries to Brijmohan5 years' Rigorous Imprisonment with a fine of Rs.100/-, indefault to further undergo one month's rigorous imprisonment.2. The said judgment has been assailed by the appellants in the instant appeal. State has not challenged the acquittal of the remaining accused by filing an appeal.3. The brief facts of the prosecution case are that 'Parchabayan' Ex.P.1 of Brijmohan was recorded by PW-22 Ratan Singh, ASI, Police Station, Baran on ...
Tag this Judgment!Suwalal Giriraj Ajmera Vs. Ito
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-30-2002
Reported in: (2004)86TTJ(NULL)414
ORDERB.L. Khatri, A.M.ITA Nos. 96, 97 and 29/Ju/2001 are appeals by assessee Shri Suwalal Giriraj Ajmera against the order of Commissioner (Appeals), Ajmer, for assessment yrs. 1994-95, 1996-97 and 1997-98. There are common grounds of appeal. Therefore, all these three appeals are being decided through a consolidated order.2. We shall take up ITA No. 97/Ju/2001 for assessment year 1994-95. First of all, we shall deal with the following additional grounds of appeal raised by the appellant for assessment year 1994-95 :(i) The assessing officer erred in initiating proceedings under section 147 of the Income Tax Act, on the basis of valuation report.(ii) Disallowance of interest paid to the creditors.(iii) Disallowance of interest on debtors as per W/S P.G.3. This Bench of Tribunal has taken a consistence view that additional grounds can be raised within time-limit allowed under section 253(3) of Income Tax Act as held in the following cases :(i) Assistant Commissioner v. Ansari Builders, ...
Tag this Judgment!Associated Stone Industries Vs. Cit
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-30-2002
Reported in: (2002)177CTR(Raj)173
By the CourtOn an application filed under section 256(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, the Tribunal has referred the following questions for our opinion :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in law in confirming the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) by which he had restored the matter regarding levy of interest under section 216 to the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner for fresh consideration and rejecting the assessee's additional ground raised in this behalf ''Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in law in holding that the expenditure of Rs. 2,500 incurred by the assessee in the preparation of the income-tax return was covered by section 80VV of the Income Tax Act and, therefore, not allowable under section 37 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 2.The assessee filed the return of income on 22-6-1982, declaring total income of Rs. 84,66,140. Relevant assessment year is 1982-83. While making the a...
Tag this Judgment!V.N. Pradhan Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-30-2002
Reported in: 2003(2)WLN648
Sunil Kumar Garg, J.1. This writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioner on 19.8.1998 against the respondents with the prayers that by an appropriate writ, order or direction.(1) it be declared that the proposed closure/closure of academic activities of Mohta Ayurveda College, Sadulpur (respondent No. 5) is illegal.(2) alternatively and without prejudice respondent-State be directed to either take over Mohta Ayurveda College, Sadulpur (respondent No. 5) or to appoint an Administrator to run the College.(3) alternatively, the respondent No. 6 Bhaskar Educational Society be directed to fulfill its undertaking of making finances available for the purpose of running the College.(4) the notice dated 21st July, 1998 (Annex. 1) informing the petitioner that his services stand terminated at the end of three months be declared to be invalid and be quashed and the respondents No. 4 and 5 be restrained from terminating services of the petitioner at...
Tag this Judgment!State of Rajasthan Vs. Ishwar Chand and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-30-2002
Reported in: 2002(5)WLN461
O.P. Bishnoi, J.1. This appeal has been filed by the State against a judgment dated 21.11.1986, where by the two respondents - Ishwar Chand and Subhash were acquitted of the charges under Sections 379 and 414 of the IPC.2. Some time, during the night intervening between 15th/16th August, 1976, certain idols from the temple situate in village Kothian were stolen by some unknown thieves. The matter was reported to the police by the 'Pujari' of the temple and a case of theft was registered at Police Station, Phuliakala. From the investigation, it came out that during the early hours of 16.8.1976, four persons were seen near the place of occurrence with an Autorickshaw and they were also seen carrying a bedding in the said Autorickshaw. Further, it came out that the Autorickshaw belonged to respondent Ishwarchand. According to the prosecution story, the accused Satyanarian and Kishanlal were the persons who lifted the statues from the temple and brought them to the waiting Autorickshaw, wh...
Tag this Judgment!State of Rajasthan and anr. Vs. Mohan Singh and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-30-2002
Reported in: 2002(2)WLC281; 2003(3)WLN238
K.S. Rathore, J.1. This present petition is directed against the order dated 10.5.1999 and 9.8.1999.2. Brief facts of the case are that after resumption of Jagir of village Kanota, the Jagirdar submitted the list of personal property under the Rajasthan Land Reforms and Resumption of Jagirdars Act on 29.9.1959. Upon which Tehsildar, Bassi submitted his report regarding list of personal property on 9.5.1960 and on 19.2.1961.3. The Jagir Commissioner, Jaipur passed an order on application so moved by the petitioner dated 29.9.1959 declaring the personal property of the petitioner on 30.11.1994.4. Against the order dated 30.11.1994 passed by Jagir Commissioner, Jaipur the appeal was preferred by the Jagirdar respondent No. 1 before the Board of Revenue. The Board of Revenue partly allowed the appeal vide order dated 3.8.1995 and case was remanded back to Jagir Commissioner for further inquiry in the case.5. Against the order dated 3.8.1995 passed by the Board of Revenue respondent No. 1 p...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Rajasthan Mirror Manufacturing Co.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-29-2002
Reported in: [2003]260ITR503(Raj); RLW2003(4)Raj2594
1. On an application filed under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the Tribunal has referred the following questions for the opinion of this court: 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that there was no actual transfer, there being no document in support of the alleged transfer of immovable property to Hindustan Safety Glass Works Ltd., Jaipur, as a going concern ? Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that there was no justification for charging capital gains as well as profit under Section 41(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ?' 2. The assessee is a firm which was carrying on business of manufacture and sale of wind screen glass for automobiles and toughened glass. The business and the factory was leased out to Auto Glass Industries which lease was also terminated in the accounting year relevant to the assessment year 1979-80. The relevant assessment year in hand i...
Tag this Judgment!Tayyab HussaIn Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-29-2002
Reported in: RLW2003(3)Raj1886; 2003(1)WLC489
Balia, J. 1. This application is to review the order passed by a Division Bench of this Court in D.B. Special Appeal No. 427/98 on 7.9.2000 with consequential relief of allowing the said Special Appeal and writ petition out of which the Special Appeal had arisen.2. The facts leading to these proceedings are as under:-The Applicant had applied for the post of Teacher Grade III in Urdu language in pursuance of the Advertisement as amended and notified by the District Education Officer (Boys), Churu, which was published on 8th October 1996 (Annex. P-1).3. The qualification prescribed for eligibility to the appointed to the Teacher grade-III Urdu in the Advertisement as well as in the conditions prescribed in the form of application reads as under: -3- fu/kkZfjr ;ksX;rk %&vnhc@vnhc eghj@vnhcdkfey] led{k ,oa mPp vFkok jktLFkku ljdkj }kjk ekU;rk izkIr f'k{kk cksMZ lhfu;jlSds.Mjh izek.ki= vkSj jktLFkku ljdkj }kjk ekU;rk izkIr ikap fo'k;ksa dslkFk lSds.Mjh ;k lel{k ijh{kk ftuesa ls rhu fo'k; x...
Tag this Judgment!Gulab Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jul-29-2002
Reported in: RLW2003(3)Raj1842; 2003(1)WLC100; 2002(5)WLN429
Sunil Kumar Garg, J.1.This writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioner on 14.12.2000 against the respondents with the prayer that by an appropriate writ, order or direction, the impugned order Annex. 5 dt. 22.11.2000 by which on the application of the petitioner, the petitioner was voluntarily retired with effect from 30.11.2000, be quashed and set aside with all consequential benefits.2. The case of the petitioner as put forward by him in this writ petition is as follows-The petitioner was initially appointed on 29.11.1973 on the post of Survey Luskar in the Department of Irrigation. On account of abolition of the post of Survey Luskar, the petitioner was absorbed in the irrigation Department in the year 1975 on the post of Class IV employee. Thereafter, the petitioner was promoted on the post of LowerDivision Clerk on 3.11.1988. Thereafter, the petitioner was transferred from Irrigation Department to the Department of Finance on 8.4.1...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »