Rajasthan Court August 2002 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.
Durga Shankar Sharma Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-14-2002
Reported in: RLW2004(1)Raj584
Misra, J.1. An award was passed against the petitioner by the Industrial Tribunal and labour Court Kota on 11.8.93 holding therein that the petitioner's appointment as a 'Mistry' was made in Chambal Project for construction of R.P.S. Dam and the working of Dam having been completed, the services of the petitioner were terminated after giving him one month's notice in lieu of pay and hence no fault could be found with the order of termination.2. The admitted case of the petitioner-workman is that his services were terminated by order dated 14.10.70 and it is further admitted by him which finds mention at para No. 6 of the impugned award that he had been appointed in the Chambal Project for construction of R.P.S. Dam and his services were terminated after completion of project, it is still further the admitted case of the parties that the petitioner filed an application for initiation of reference before the competent authority after 11 years of his termination on 12.10.81. Inspite of th...
Gopal Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-14-2002
Reported in: RLW2004(2)Raj1037; 2002(5)WLC950
Goyal, J.1. Since common points of law and facts are involved, both the petitions are being disposed of vide common order. The relevant facts giving rise to both the petitions are that the petitioner Sh. Gopal Singh submitted a written report at Police Station Jamwa Ramgarh on 27.10.1995 against the respondent No. 2 Gulla Ram with the averments that the petitioner and the respondent No. 2 Gulla Ram had purchased a tractor No. RJ. 14 R. 3952 after obtaining loan from the Cooperative land Development Bank Ltd. Jaipur. Subsequently, the petitioner and the respondent No. 2 entered into a written agreement, whereby the petitioner had paid a sum of Rs. 26,000/-to the respondent No. 2 and further undertook to repay the loan of the bank and retained the custody of the tractor, thereafter on 2 7.10.1995 the petitioner with a sum of Rs. 20,000/- was going to Jaipur by this tractor. On they way, 4-5 persons including respondent No. 2 Gulla Ram having lathis came in front of the tractor, started a...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Ajay Kumar Sharma
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-13-2002
Reported in: [2003]259ITR240(Raj)
1. This appeal has been admitted in terms of the following questions :'Whether the learned Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was right in its wisdom to hold that entries reflected in the regular books of account cannot be considered for the block assessment period ?Whether the learned Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in deleting additions by holding that the assessee had discharged its onus by producing the creditors ?Whether it can be said that the mere production of creditors is sufficient to discharge the onus of the assessee and the creditworthiness/paying capacity is of no relevancy at all ?Whether the learned Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in deleting the additions without rejecting the findings of the Assessing Officer with regard to the creditworthiness and genuineness of the transactions ?Whether the learned Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in not applying the ratio in the case of Shankar Industries v. CIT : [1978]114ITR689(Cal) , as decided by t...
Rastradoot Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-13-2002
Reported in: [2003(97)FLR453]; (2003)ILLJ528Raj; RLW2004(1)Raj582; 2003(1)WLC659
Cyan Sudha Misra, J.1. This petition was filed for a review of the order passed by this Court on December 17, 1996, in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1053A/1994 Rastradoot, Jaipur v. Union of India and Anr. whereby the writ petition preferred by the petitioner Rastradoot Jaipur was dismissed holding therein that the Employees' Provident and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (the Act of 1952 for short) was not (sic ?) applicable on the petitioner-organisation which is a newspaper establishment having a printing press. The petitioner had further challenged the levy of penalty on delayed payment of the provident tuna contribution by the employer with the R.P.F. Commissioner.2. After considering several authorities mentioned in the impugned order, the objection of the petitioner that the aforesaid Act is not applicable on the petitioner-newspaper, was rejected in view of the ratio of the Apex Court judgment delivered in the matter of Organo Chemical Industry and Anr. v. Union of India and O...
Laxman Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-13-2002
Reported in: RLW2004(2)Raj1250; 2003(1)WLC337; 2003(2)WLN207
Sunil Kumar Garg, J.1. This writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioner on 31.3.1998 against the respondents with the prayer that by an appropriate writ, order or direction, the order dated 23rd March, 1998 (Annex.2) in so far as it has deleted the name of the petitioner form the select list dated 10th March, 1998 (Annex.1) be declared illegal and be quashed and the order dated 10th March, 1998 (Annex.1) qua the petitioner be ordered to be restored with all consequential benefits to the petitioner.2. The case of the petitioner as put forward by him in this writ petition is as follows:-The petitioner obtained B.Sc. degree in Agriculture from Mahrishi Dayanand Saraswati University, Ajmer. In addition to the above, the petitioner has following other qualifications:-A. Secondary School Examination, 1982B. Higher Secondary Examination, 1983.C. Bachelor of Physical Education (Nagpur University), 1995.D. Certificate of 27th Dist. Level Sports ...
Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation Vs. Mahesh Kumar Mathur
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-13-2002
Reported in: 2003WLC(Raj)UC167; 2002(4)WLN705
Ashok Parihar, J.1. Challenging the order of termination dated 25.1.1984, the plaintiff respondent (concerned workman) filed a suit for declaration before the trial court. After considering the evidence and material on record, the suit was decreed by the trial court vide order dated 15.4.1993 declaring the order of termination as illegal and void ab-initio and the concerned workman was ordered to be reinstated. So far as the back wages are concerned, a decree of Rs. 30015/- was also passed. Aggrieved by the above order, the appellant corporation filed an appeal. However, the same was dismissed by the first appellate court vide order dated 12.8.1994. Hence the present appeal challenging both the orders by the courts below.2. There is no dispute that though when the bus was checked, two passengers were found without ticket, however, the fair could not be realized from them because they started quarreling with the concerned workman and the checking party only could realize the fair from t...
Cit Vs. Ajay Kumar Sharma
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-13-2002
Reported in: (2002)177CTR(Raj)539
By the CourtThis appeal has been admitted in terms of the following questions :'Whether the learned Tribunal was right in its wisdom to hold that entries reflecting in the regular books of accounts cannot be considered for the block assessment period ?''Whether the learned Tribunal was justified in deleting additions by holding that the assessee had discharged its onus by producing the creditors ?''Whether it can be said that the mere production of creditors is sufficient to discharge the onus of assessee and the creditworthiness/paying capacity is of no relevancy at all ?''Whether the learned Tribunal was justified in deleting the additions without rejecting the findings of assessing officer with regard to the creditworthiness and genuineness of the transactions ?''Whether the learned Tribunal was justified in not applying the ratio in the case of Shanker Industries v. CIT : [1978]114ITR689(Cal) as decided by the Hon'ble court to the present matter ?'2. A search and seizure operation ...
Pratap Singh Vs. Superintendent of Police and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-13-2002
Reported in: 2003(1)WLC80; 2002(5)WLN403
Sunil Kumar Garg, J.1. This writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioner on 3.6.1998 against the respondents with the prayer that by an appropriate writ, order or direction, the order dated 26.6.1995 (Annex. P/3) passed by the respondent No. 1 Superintendent of Police, Churu (Disciplinary Authority) by which the Disciplinary Authority found the petitioner guilty of the charge framed against him in the departmental enquiry under Rule 17 of the Rajasthan Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as 'the CCA Rules') and thus, imposed the penalty of withholding of three annual grade increments without cumulative effect upon the petitioner, and further the order dated 4.9.1995 (Annex. P/5) passed by the respondent No. 2 Dy. Inspector General of Police, Bikaner Range, Bikaner (Appellate Authority) by whcih the appeal of the petitioner was dismissed and furthermore, the order dated 23.9.1997 (Annex...
Satveer Singh and anr. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-12-2002
Reported in: RLW2004(2)Raj1034; 2003(1)WLC350
Goyal, J.1. This revision is directed against the impugned order dated 10.5.2002, whereby learned Additional Sessions Judge, No. 2 (Fast Track), Kota, ordered to frame charge under Section 306 IPC against both the accused petitioners in Sessions Case No. 147/2001.2. The relevant facts in brief are that the complainant Prakash Chand Jain (father of deceased Jitendra Jain), submitted a written ruport at Police Station, Ram-pura, Kota on 21.4.2001, with the averments that Jitendra Kumar Jain was appointed as Medical Representative in September 1999, in Menarini Ranaq Pharma Ltd. a registered company. Jitendra Kumar Jain attended a meeting at Jaipur on 15.3.2001, which was also attended by accused petitioners as representative of the company. Both the accused petitioners misbehaved with his son and told 102 ^^rqe bl dEiuh esa ukSdjh djus ds ;ksX; ughagks] rqe fudEes gks] pqYyq Hkj ikuh esa rEgsa Mwc ejuk pkfg,** The accused petitioners further asked his son to resign, otherwise he would be...
Cit Vs. P.N. Tewari, Lic of India
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-12-2002
Reported in: [2003]131TAXMAN295(Raj)
On an application filed under section 256(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Jaipur, has referred the following question for our opinion :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in upholding the order of the learned Deputy Commissioner (Appeals) on the ground that the issue before him was debatable and hence could not be considered as a mistake apparent on record rectifiable under section 154, despite the fact that when the Tribunal decided the appeal, the issue was no longer debatable as far as the State of Rajasthan was concerned, in view of the decision of the Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court in the case of CIT v. Shiv Raj Bhatia (DB IT Ref. No. 8/1992 dated 1-5-1996)?'2. The assessee is a Development Officer of the LIC of India. In his income tax returns for both the years, the assessee had claimed deduction to the extent of 50 per cent from the incentive bonus received by him. The returns were processed under ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »