Rajasthan Court September 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.
Tajinder Pal Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-09-2002
Reported in: [2006]143STC112(Raj)
Jagat Singh, J.1. The petitioner is proprietor of Ganga Steels, Mandi Gobindgarh (Punjab), who vide bill annexure 1 dated August 17, 2002 through truck No. PB-13H-9698 despatched iron goods 22.900 metric tons to Vikas Industries, Nagaur (Rajasthan). The truck driver was expected to get the goods and invoices checked at inter-State Ratanpura check-post. However, he passed straightaway and was apprehended 45 Kms. ahead of Domanwali check-post and vide annexure 7 dated August 27, 2002 a demand of Rs. 1,67,322 was raised against him. Hence this petition.2. Learned Counsel for the respondents submitted that the order is appealable under Section 84 of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1994 and the alternate efficacious remedy is available, which could be availed by the petitioner. Learned Counsel for the petitioner also submitted that even if the order is appealable, however, in the truck goods was found according to the invoices and the truck driver was carrying all necessary papers and there wa...
Om Prakash Srivastava Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-06-2002
Reported in: RLW2004(1)Raj599
K.S. Rathore, J.1. Additional Superintendent of Police. Anti-Corruption Bureau. Kota, on the basis of information furnished by the informant registered an F.I.R. No. 154/1998 under Section 13(1) and 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act read with 120-B, IPC.2. This petition is filed by the petitioner praying for quashing F.I.R. No. 145/1998, vis-a-vis, the petitioner.3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegations alleged against the petitioner is that the petitioner verified the award on the basis of the record supplied lo him by his superiors and as a result of that, it is stated that the amounl of award for the same land, for which, the amount of award was already paid to Shri Manna Lal, was paid doubly and the specific allegation against the petitioner if that **Jh vks- ih- JhokLro us tkurs gq, fd iwoZ esaHkqxrku gks pqdk gS] fQj Hkh Hkqxrku djus dh flQkfj'k dhA**4. It is further given out that the computation of the amount of the award was done by the petitioner...
Ram NaraIn Upadhyaya Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-06-2002
Reported in: 2003(4)WLC217; 2003(1)WLN123
Prakash Tatia, J.1. The petitioner who was initially appointed as Field Inspector in Reserve Bank of India, subsequently, after establishment of National Bank of Agriculture and Rural Development (for short the NABARD) was given option to opt for services of the NABARD. Upon petitioner's option, the petitioner's services were transferred to the NABARD finally. The service of the petitioner was governed by the Rules called National Bank for Agriculture and Rural Development (Staff) Rules, 1982. (here in after referred as Rules of 1982) These Rules came into force on 12.12.1982. The Rule 19(1) provides the age of superannuation. The petitioner was employee of Group-A, therefore, his age of superannuation is on completion of 58 years. As per Sub-Clause (a) of Sub-Rule (4) of Rule 19, at the time of retirement, the employees had two options:(a) Either employees may take benefit of leave subject to maximum of six months in respect of ordinary leave earned during these Rules of 1982 and in t...
Deep Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-05-2002
Reported in: 2003(1)WLC187; 2002(4)WLN681
Sunil Kumar Garg, J.1. This writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioner on 12.10.2001 against the respondents with the prayer that by an appropriate writ, order or direction, the respondents be directed to give appointment to the petitioner on the post of Teacher Gr. III in pursuance of the advertisement issued in the year 1998 advertising the posts of Teacher Gr. III in Churu Distt. with all consquential benefits.2. The case of the petitioner as put forward by him in this writ petition is as follows:The petitioner passed his Secondary Examination in the year 1993 and Senior Secondary Examination (Vocational) in the year 1995 from the Board of Secondary Education, Rajasthan and copies of the respective mark-sheets are marked as Annex. 1 and Annex. 2 respectively. Thereafter, the petitioner did his STC Course from the Department of Education, Rajasthan in the year 1997 and a copy of the markesheet of STC is marked as Annex. 3. The case o...
Ganpat Raj Mehta Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-05-2002
Reported in: 2002(5)WLC17; 2003(2)WLN192
Prakash Tatia, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties. The petitioner who was serving as Executive Engineer, was served with a charge-sheet on 2.1.1995, before which he was suspended on 28.6.1994. The petitioner challenged the suspension order by filing the Writ Petition No. 2489/1996. It was decided by this Court by order dated 14.2.1997 wherein this Court directed respondents to complete the domestic enquiry within a period of six months and incase, by any reason whatsoever, the departmental enquiry is not concluded by that date, suspension order shall be deemed to be automatically vacated. Thereafter the respondents submitted an application for extension of time which was dismissed on 12.10.1998 which appears to be due to reason that suspension order was revoked and, therefore, it was thought that application for extension of time has become infructuous. It is relevant to mention here that as per order dated 14.2.1997, the only consequence of not completing the domestic enquiry ...
Sujan Singh Khichi Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-05-2002
Reported in: 2003(1)WLC410; 2002(5)WLN526
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 9.11.1995 with a prayer that the impugned order dated 22.7.1995 (Annex. P. 13) by which the petitioner was not given appointment on the post of Teacher Grade-III on the ground that the select list had expired be quashed and set aside with all consequential benefits and the petitioner may be given appointment on the post of Teacher Grade-III according to his merit.2. The facts of the case as put forward by the petitioner are as under(i) That the petitioner passed his B.Ed. examination from Mahirishi Dayanand University, Rohtak (hereinafter referred to as the University, Rohtak) by correspondence course and thus, the petitioner had requisite qualification to be appointed on the post of Teacher Grade-III.(ii) That in the year 1991, the respondent No. 3 (The Chief Executive Officer and Secretary Dist. Establishment Committee, Zila Parishad, Ch...
Murari Lal Khandelwal Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-04-2002
Reported in: (2003)181CTR(Raj)519; [2003]263ITR642(Raj)
1. On an application filed under Section 256(1) of the IT Act, 1961, the Tribunal has referred the following question for our opinion :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in determining the reasonableness of salary paid to the sons of the applicant Shri Anoop Kumar Khandelwal and Shri Alok Kumar Khandelwal @ Rs. 3,000 and Rs. 2,500 per month, respectively, by comparing their salaries with that of the salary of a peon working with the assessee-applicant ?'2. The assessee is an individual deriving income from house property, investments, interest, dividend and from two proprietary concerns of M/s Khandelwal Investment Consultants, Ajmer, and M/s M.L. Khandelwal & Co., Jaipur, both carrying on the business of buying and selling of share scripts for their investor clients and also acting as brokers for public issue and earning commission and brokerage from this activity. The entire activities carried on at Jaipur by his three employees, t...
Shiv Kumar Joshi Vs. the State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-04-2002
Reported in: 2002(5)WLC908; 2002(4)WLN679
Sunil Kumar Garg, J.1. The instant writ petition has been filed by the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India against the respondents with a prayer that the impugned order dtd. 4.4.2002 (Annex. 8) by which the petitioner who was holding the post of Ayurvedic Chikitsak was transferred from Dist. Bhilwara to Nagore District be quashed and set aside.2. The facts as put forward by the petitioner are as under:(i) That the petitioner was initially appointed as Valdya Grade-Ill on 3.10.1071. The petitioner is working as 'Ayurved Chikitsak' at Govt. Ayurved Hospital Rupaheli Kalan via Tehsil Hurda, Dist. Bhilwara.(ii) That the petitioner's services are governed by the Rajasthan Ayurvedic Unani, Homeopathy and Naturopathy Subordinate Service Rules, 1966 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules of 1966).(iii) That respondent No. 3, Divisional Commissioner, Ajmer through impugned order dtd. 4.4.2002 (Annex. 8) transferred the petitioner from Dist. Bhilwara to Dist. Nagaur on the g...
Mool Singh Vs. Rajasthan Taxation Tribunal and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-04-2002
Reported in: [2004]138STC671(Raj)
1. The instant writ petition Under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed seeking direction to quash the order dated October 26, 1998 passed by Rajasthan Taxation Tribunal, Jodhpur* (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal').2. Petitioner Mool Singh was awarded a contract for collection of sales tax on 'Bajri' at the check-post situated at Rani Under Section 79(1) of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1994, for the period May 30, 1998 to May 29, 1999. Petitioner was served with notice dated June 3, 1998 calling upon him to explain as to why the amount collected in violation of the condition of the contract may not be forfeited. According to the A.O., assessee had collected the sales tax form M/s. Sanghvi Stone and M/s. Shiv Industries, Rani, at the rate of Rs. 24 per tractor passing from check-post. He was served with another communication dated June 3, 1998, whereby he was directed not to collect the sales tax from the registered dealers in view of the condition N...
Smt. Jamna Devi Vs. State and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-04-2002
Reported in: 2003(1)WLC225; 2003(1)WLN72
Prakash Tatia, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Counsel for the respondents.2. The petitioner submitted in the writ petition that his husband Shri Ambalal who was an employee of Government of Rajasthan, being a member of Rajasthan Police, died in the year 1967. In the affidavit filed by the petitioner along with the writ petition her age has been shown as 30 years. In para 4 of the writ petition, it is mentioned that in the year 1970, the family pension pertaining to the petitioner was stopped by the respondents and the family pension, which has already been paid from 19.9.1970 to 31.11.1970, was also recovered from the petitioner and she was directed to deposit her PPO with the State Government. In para 5 of the writ petition, it is mentioned that pension account of the petitioner was closed by saying that the petitioner got re-married with one Shri Vikramchand Nayak in the month of September, 1970. According to the petitioner, she never re-married with...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »