Rajasthan Court February 2003 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.
R.S.R.T.C. Vs. Dharamveer Singh and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-06-2003
Reported in: RLW2003(4)Raj2677; 2003(2)WLC641
Misra, J.1. The petitioner-Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation (RSRTC for short) has challenged the award dated 17.9.1991 passed by the Industrial Tribunal Jaipur wherein it has recorded a finding that the workman-respondent No. l Dharamveer Singh was guilty of the charge which was levelled against him by the management of the RSRTC to the effect that although he had realised fares from 29 passengers, he had failed to issue tickets to these passengers and thereby he was guilty of gross misconduct in discharge of his duties. The charges were held to have been proved at the domestic enquiry conducted by the RSRTC as also before the Industrial Tribunal Jaipur wherein the respondent-workman fully participated in the proceedings and led evidence. A categorical finding has been recorded by the Tribunal that on scrutiny of the evidence on record and the other material, it is clearly established that the petitioner was guilty of the charges levelled against him and therefore committed m...
Nathu Singh Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-05-2003
Reported in: RLW2003(1)Raj632; 2003(2)WLC1
Singh, C.J. 1. Since, the point involved in the matter is short one, we proceed to dispose of the same with the consent of the parties today itself.2. The appellant was enroled in the Army on 13.11.1967. At the time of his enrolment he was placed in medical category A. While in service he fell ill. As a consequence of his illness, he was boarded out of the Army on 19.10.1968 with medical category E. The Medical Board, which was convened before the appellant was boarded out of service, assessed his disability at 100%.3. After being boarded out, the appellant filed a representation to the concerned authority for grant of disability pension. The representation however, was rejected.4. The appellant being aggrieved by the rejection of his demand for disability pension, filed a writ petition before this Court.5. The learned Single Judge, vide order dated 27.11.2002 allowed the writ petition and directed the respondents to grant the benefit of disability pension to the appellant w.e.f. 22.10...
Dr. Ajay Srivastava Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-05-2003
Reported in: AIR2003Raj164; RLW2003(2)Raj705
Calla, J. 1. These matters have come up before us on the basis of order dated 28.8.2002 passed by the Division Bench whereby the following questions law of considerable importance have been referred as also the appeals as a whole:-1. Whether any reserved quota could not be separately specified for in-service candidates; merely because such in- service category is not mentioned in Article 15(4) and/or 16(4) of the Constitution of India? 2. Whether the prescribing of separate quota for in-service candidates stands, the test of reasonable classification under Article 14 of the Constitution of India? 3. Whether in view of the observations made by the Supreme court in para 10 in the case of State of Punjab v. Dayanand Medical College and Hospital and Ors. (supra), can it be said that once the Medical Council of India has prescribed 50% qualifying marks through regulation 9, there is no question of making any in-service candidate to be qualified for admission to post- graduate course at any ...
S.S. JaIn Subodh Shiksha Samiti, Subodh College Through Its Honorary S ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-05-2003
Reported in: RLW2003(2)Raj1234; 2003(2)WLC16
Parihar, J.1. Respondent No. 2 (the concerned employee) was initially appointed as Teacher in S.S. Jain Subodh Balika Senior Secondary School, Jaipur till the end of session vide order dated 1.7.1987. Against a fresh appointment was given on the post of Teacher vide order dated 1.7.1988 and thereafter, the concerned employee was further given appointment on the post of Teacher till 16.5.1990 vide order dated 12.7.1989 which was lastly continued upto 31.8.1990 vide order dated 18.7.1990.2. Subsequently, the concerned employee was given adhoc appointment on the post of Lower Division Clerk for the period from 1.7.1991 till 16.5.1992 vide order dated 26th September, 1991 in another institution i.e. S.S. Jain Subodh Balika Senior Secondary School, Jaipur. The respondent employee continued to get such adhoc appointment on the post of Lower Division Clerk till the end of session of the year 1992-93 also and lastly, the concerned workman was appointed on the post of Lower Division Clerk purel...
Jaswant Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-05-2003
Reported in: RLW2003(3)Raj1605; 2003(3)WLC359
Garg, J.1. This writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioner on 6.8.1991 against the respondents with the prayer that by an appropriate writ, order or direction, the order dated 17.6.1991 (Annex. 5) passed by the respondent No. 2 Vikas Adhikari, Panchayat Samiti, Pali by which the services of the petitioner were dispensed with and the resolution dated 14.6.1991 (Annex. 6) passed by the Panchayat Samiti, Pali by which a decision was taken against the petitioner as he used to remain absent from duties and the respondent No. 2 yikas Adhikari was authorised to take steps for dispensing with the services of the petitioner, be quashed and set aside and the respondents be directed to reinstate the petitioner in service with all consequential benefits.2. The case of the petitioner as put forward by him in this writ petition is as follows :-The petitioner had passed Higher Secondary and S.T.C. examinations conducted in Rajasthan and he was initia...
Raja Ram @ Raju and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-04-2003
Reported in: RLW2003(2)Raj983; 2003(2)WLC501
Bansal, J. 1. As many as six accused were put on trial before the learned Special Judge (Communal riots cases) and Additional Sessions Judge, Tonk in Sessions Case No. 36/97. The learned trial Court acquitted the accused Kajod of all the charges and convicted and sentenced the accused-appellants Raja Ram @ Raju,Kistura, Prabhu Lal, Ganesh and Ram Avtar vide its judgment and order dated July 25, 1998 as under:-(1) Raja Ram @ Rajuu/Sec. 302/149IPC Life imprisonment with afine of Rs. 1,000/-, and in default of payment of fine to further undergotwo months' rigorous imprisonment.u/See. 324/149 u/Sec. 323 IPCu/Sec. 148 IPCIPC One year's rigorousimprisonment. Six months' rigorous imprisonment. Six months' rigorousimprisonment.(2) Ganeshu/Sec. 302/149 IPCLife imprisonment with a fineof Rs.1,000/-, and in default of payment of fine to further undergotwo months' rigorous imprisonment.u/Sec. 324 IPCu/Sec. 323 IPC u/Sec. 148 IPCOne year's rigorousimprisonment Six months' rigorous imprisonment Six ...
NaraIn Lal Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-04-2003
Reported in: RLW2003(2)Raj1088; 2003(3)WLC330; 2003(2)WLN505
Garg, J.1. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India against the respondents with a prayer that by an appropriate writ, order or direction, the respondents be restrained from effecting any recovery mentioned in the Audit Report (Annex. 3) to the tune of Rs. 19,000/- and further they may be directed to make payment of difference of pay between first grade and Second grade teacher treating the petitioner to be holding the post of Teacher 1st Grade from Nov., 1979.2. It may be stated here that in this writ petition, the learned counsel for the petitioner has confined his argument to the recovery of amount as mentioned in Audit Report (Annex. 3) and he does not want to press other arguments.3. The facts of the case as put forward by the petitioner are as under :(i) That the petitioner's first appointment was made on 1.9.55 as a third grade teacher in the Education Department. Government of Rajasthan in the substantive capacity. (ii) ...
Charan Singh and ors. Vs. R.S.R.T.C. and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-04-2003
Reported in: RLW2003(4)Raj2236; 2003(3)WLC684
Tatia, J.1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.2. Brief facts of the case are that the petitioners are working on the post of conductors in the buses run by the RSRTC. The respondents framed a Scheme known as Green Card Scheme for which necessary orders were issued on 7/15.12.2001. In this scheme, it was provided that the conductors may opt for this scheme and after selection the conductors will be given Green Card permitting them to ply the bus wherein the inspectors of the respondents will not be permitted to check the vehicle unless they are specially authorized by the Managing Director. In this scheme, the conductors may suggest the name of the driver and the number of the vehicle so that the same driver and the vehicle may be provided to the conductors holding Green Card, but in any case, if said driver and vehicle is not available then the other driver and vehicle will be provided, but on this ground, the conductors will not be entitled for reduction of the target fixed. The c...
Dr. Gurmeet Singh V Ito
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-04-2003
Reported in: (2004)89TTJ(NULL)362
ORDERS.R. Chauham, J.M.This is an appeal by assessee for assessment year 1989-90 directed against the order of Commissioner (Appeals), Jodhpur dated 24-1-1997.2. I have heard the arguments of both the sides and also perused the records including the written statements of the learned authorised representative of assessee furnished on record before me.3. The assessee-appellant has raised as many as four grounds of appeal but they all constitute single issue disputing the learned Commissioner (Appeals)'s impugned order in not cancelling the assessment order and not deleting the addition of Rs. 50,650 made by the assessing officer in the cost of construction on the basis of valuation report of AVO. The learned authorised representative of assessee has contended that the assessee has maintained regular books of accounts in respect of the cost of construction of clinic building for the assessment year under appeal and the said accounts are in details and are duly supported by vouchers. He ha...
State of Rajasthan Vs. Kedar Das Surendra Kumar
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-04-2003
Reported in: [2005]142STC498(Raj)
N.N. Mathur, J.1. This special appeal by the State is directed against the order of the learned single Judge dated November 22, 2001. This order was modified by order dated March 18, 2002. Having perused both the orders we are satisfied that the special appeal deserves to be dismissed.2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the Assistant Commercial Taxes Officer, Anti-Evasion II, Rajasthan, Circle-I, Jaipur, intercepted the truck bearing No. RJ-19 G-2360 on September 25, 1999 and found that it was not carrying the requisite documents referred in Sub-section (2) of Section 78 of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1994. In view of this, notice under Section 78(5) of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1994 was given on October 26, 1999. On the same day, another notice was given under Section 83 of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1994. The reply to show cause notice was given and the A.C.T.O. passed an order dated November 19, 1999 imposing penalty of Rs. 38,939 under the provision of Section 78...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »