Rajasthan Court February 2005 Judgments
R.S. Gauri Shankar Vs. Uco Bank and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-28-2005
Reported in: (2005)IIILLJ123Raj; RLW2005(2)Raj1020; 2005(2)WLC764
Ashok Parihar, J.1. The petitioner was appointed as Assistant Cashier-cum-Godown Keeper on 15.09.1993. The petitioner stood retired from the same post w.e.f. 31st December, 1997 on reaching the age of superannuation. The petitioner is seeking additional five qualifying years for the purpose of calculation of pension and other retiral benefits as provided under Regulation 26 of the U.Co. Bank (Employees) Pension Regulations, 1995 mainly on the ground that the petitioner has additional higher qualifications required for the post as also the age relaxation had been given to the petitioner at the time of his appointment.2. Regulation 26, as relied upon, is reproduced here as under :-'26. Additional to qualifying service in special circumstances.-An employee shall be eligible to add to his service qualifying for superannuation pension (but no for any other class of pension) the actual period not exceeding one fourth of the length of his service or the actual period by which his age at the t...
Tag this Judgment!Surjit Kaur (Smt.) and ors. Vs. the New India Assurance Co. Ltd. and o ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-28-2005
Reported in: 2007ACJ72; RLW2005(2)Raj1041; 2005(2)WLC562
Shiv Kumar Sharma, J.1. Instant appeal impugns the judgment dated April 5, 2002 whereby the learned Single Judge allowed the misc. appeal preferred by respondent Insurance Company and dismissed the claim petition and the award of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal Dausa.2. Claimant appellants, who were the legal heirs of Darshan Singh, filed the claim petition in respect of the death of Darshan Singh who died in an accident on June 10, 1990. It was stated in the claim petition that while Darshan Singh was going in truck No. RSB 6633, another truck No. RNG 1944 came from behind and overtook the truck No. RSB 6633. In the process of overtaking, the driver of the said truck without giving any signal suddenly applied breaks. The truck No RNG 1944 was loaded with iron girders, which were protruding outside the truck pierced into the chest of Darshan Singh who was sitting on Khalasi side, as a result of which Darshan Singh died. At the time of death the age of Darshan Singh was 46 years and ...
Tag this Judgment!Deepak Goyal (Dr.) Vs. University of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-28-2005
Reported in: RLW2005(2)Raj1043; 2005(2)WLC584
Dalip Singh, J.1. These special appeals through filed against separate judgments in (i) S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1676/2004 Dr. Mukesh Garg and Ors. v. State of Rajasthan and Ors. decided on 16.06.2004 and (ii) S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 881/2004 Dr. Deepak Goyal v. University of Rajasthan decided on 25.02.2004 raise a common question, inasmuch as, a challenge has been made to the provisions contained in the Instructions issued for the Pre-P.G. Medical Examination, 2004 in so far as in the category of 'in-service Doctors' who have rendered 2/3 years rural service the State Government has permitted by way of said Instructions in the eligibility clause in Annexure-1 in the writ petition of Dr. Deepak Goyal. The candidates who have worked in the rural areas continuously for three years in the service of State in the category of ad hoc/temporary appointees or on consolidated pay to be eligible as 'in-service' category along with such candidates who are duly selected by the Rajasthan P...
Tag this Judgment!Devendra Kumar @ Kalua Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-28-2005
Reported in: RLW2005(2)Raj1467; 2005(3)WLC129
F.C. Bansal, J.1. The instant appeal has been preferred by accused-appellant Devendra Kumar @ Kalua against the Judgment dated 27.02.2003 passed by the learned Special Judge (SC/ST Act Cases) cum Sessions Judge, Bharatpur whereby the accused appellant has been convicted for the offence under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to suffer R.I. for 7 years and a fine of Rs. 5,000/-, in default of payment of fine to further suffer S.I. for one year. He has been acquitted of the charge under Section 3(2) (V), SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.2. Briefly stated the facts of the prosecution case are that on 23.07.2000 at 9.00 p.m. prosecutrix PW2 Reshma submitted a written report Ex.P2 before the Circle Officer, Bharatpur City at P.S. Mathura Gate, Bharatpur wherein it was interalia stated that today at about 5.30 p.m. she had gone to her employer (contractor) to receive her payment of wages. The contractor told her that payment would be made on next day. When she was return...
Tag this Judgment!Prabhu and anr. Vs. Raghuveer Singh and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-28-2005
Reported in: 2006ACJ1389; RLW2005(4)Raj2468
J.R. Goyal, J.1. This appeal Under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, has been filed by the appellants for enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Karauli in Claim Petition No. 26/1994.2. The claimant-appellants, who are father and mother of deceased-Bachhu Singh, filed claim petition with the averments that on 19.2.1994 at about 1.00 p.m., on account of rash and negligent driving, the bus bearing No. MP 06-A 1428 hit their son Bachhu Singh, aged 10 years, as a result of which he received severe injuries and died in the hospital. Bachhu Singh was a student of II Standard.3. Learned Tribunal passed an award of Rs. 76,800/- in favour of the appellants. Aggrieved by the award on the ground of inadequacy, this appeal has been preferred.4. Heard learned Counsel for the parties and perused the entire record.5. Learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the deceased-Bachhu Singh died at the age of 10 years due to rash and negligent driv...
Tag this Judgment!Raj. Housing Board and anr. Vs. Shri Chandar Shekhar Sharma
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-28-2005
Reported in: RLW2006(2)Raj1443
G.S. Misra, J.1. The appellant-Rajasthan Housing Board has preferred this appeal against the judgment and order of the learned Single Judge passed in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7122/2004 dated 13.10.2004 by which the learned Single Judge relying upon the reasonings assigned in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3415/2002 dated 4.8.2004 was pleased to grant liberty to the petitioner, who is respondent herein to file fresh representation before the respondent i.e., Rajasthan Housing Board and further directed to consider his representation after which it was directed to issue demand notice for the balance amount of bid which had been accepted by the Rajasthan Housing Board.2. To make the position clear, it is relevant to state that the appellant Rajasthan Housing Board had held an auction for allotment of plots where shops were to be constructed. The auction proceeding was held for this purpose on 20.2.2002 and several plots were auctioned on the said date. After completion of the auction pr...
Tag this Judgment!Prabhu and anr. Vs. Raghveer Singh and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-28-2005
Reported in: 3(2005)ACC221
J.R. Goyal, J.1. This appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, has been filed by the appellants for enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Karauli in Claim Petition No. 26/1994.2. The claimant-appellants, who are father and mother of deceased Bachhu Singh, filed claim petition with the averments that on 19.2.1994 at about 1.00 p.m., on account of rash and negligent driving, the bus bearing No. MP 06-A 1428 hit their son Bachhu Singh, aged 10 years, as a result of which he received severe injuries and died in the hospital. Bachhu Singh was a student of II Standard.3. Learned Tribunal passed an award of Rs. 76,800/- in favour of the appellants. Aggrieved by the award on the ground of inadequacy, this appeal has been preferred.4. Heard learned Counsel for the parties and perused the entire record.5. Learned Counsel for the appellants submitted that the deceased Bachhu Singh died at the age of 10 years due to rash and negligent drivi...
Tag this Judgment!Popular Art Palace Ltd. Vs. Manbhar and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-28-2005
Reported in: II(2005)ACC562
Gyan Sudha Misra, J.1. This appeal has been preferred against the order passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal and ADJ No. 7, Jaipur City, Jaipur (for short 'the Tribunal') refusing to set aside the ex parte award which has been passed in favour of the claimant-respondents awarding compensation of Rs. 3,33,400/-. In fact the claim had been contested by the Insurance Company and during determination of the proceeding a finding was recorded that the Insurance Company was not liable to pay the compensation to the claimant-respondents as the liability of the labourers was not covered under the policy of insurance. It is admitted mat the summons in regard to the proceeding had been duly served on all the respondents including the non-claimant-appellant herein. Once it is noticed mat the summons had been duly served on the appellant, there can be no scope to interfere with the ex parte award which had been passed.2. The appeal under the circumstance stands dismissed....
Tag this Judgment!Door Sanchar Vibhag Through Its Chief General Manager Doorsanchar and ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-25-2005
Reported in: AIR2005Raj206; RLW2005(2)Raj1012; 2005(2)WLC535
Prakash Tatia, J.1. Those writ petitions have been filed by the petitioners against the order dated 9.4.2004 passed by the permanent Lok Adalat, Merta by which the permanent Lok Adalat directed the petitioners to provide telephone connections to the complainant-non-petitioners, who submitted their complaint before the permanent Lok Adalat alleging that the petitioners are not providing telephone connections to the non-petitioners malafidely despite the fact that 28 consumers have already deposited the amount as demanded by the demand notices issued to the complainant-non-petitioners.2. Brief facts of the case are that non-petitioner-complainants submitted complaint before the permanent Lok Adalat that the petitioners issued the demand notices for giving telephone connections and in pursuance of that the complainants deposited the requisite amount of Rs. 500/-, in the year 2001. The petitioners can provide telephone connections to the complainants without any delay but because of ulteri...
Tag this Judgment!Gordhan and ors. Vs. State of Raj. and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Feb-24-2005
Reported in: RLW2005(2)Raj1026; 2005(3)WLC103
Prakash Tatia, J.1. Heard learned counsel fur the parties.2. Brief facts of the case are that about 125 plots were sold by dram Panchayat, Lathi by conducting auction during the period from 1.10.1983 to 8.5.1984. The Collector, Jaisalmer received certain complaints that the plots were sold by Gram Panchayat below the market rate and thereby loss has been caused to the Government. The Collector, Jaisalmer issued notice to Gram Panchayat. Lathi and examined the files of Gram Panchayat and cancelled the allotment of all 125 plots vide order dated 13.8.1984. The said order was challenged by way of two writ petitions namely, (1) S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 801/1985 (Gordhan Ram and 65 Ors. v. State of Rajasthan and Ors.) and (2) S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3001/198-1 (Ramzan v. State of Rajasthan and Ors.). The writ petitions were heard together and by a common order dated 9.12.1986, this Court allowed the writ petitions and set aside the order of District Collector cancelling the sale of...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- Next ›
- Last »