Rajasthan Court September 2005 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.
Rajasthan Vidyapeeth Kul Vs. Rajasthan Non Government Educational Inst ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-01-2005
Reported in: 2005(4)WLC698
Shiv Kumar Sharma, J.1. The petitioner/Institution (for short 'Institution') appointed respondent employee Durga Shankar Sharma (for short 'employee') on the post of Sr. Teacher (Maths) on December 29, 1992 for a period of one year. The services were extended, therefore, the employee approached the Rajasthan Non Government Educational Institutions Tribunal Jaipur (for short 'the Tribunal') and in pursuance of the order of the Tribunal the employee was taken back in service. Thereafter the Institution placed the employee under suspension and on the basis of departmental enquiry the services of the employee were terminated vide order dated August 10, 2001. The order was challenged by the employee before the Tribunal by filing appeal under Section 19 of the Rajasthan Non Government Educational Institutions Act, 1989 (for short 'Act'). Learned Tribunal vide judgment dated June 7, 2003 allowed the appeal and set aside the order dated August 10, 2001 and reinstated the petitioner in service ...
Chhote Lal Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-01-2005
Reported in: RLW2005(4)Raj2989
Shiv Kumar Sharma, J.1. The appellants, three in number, along with Smt. Lali (wife of deceased Shravan) faced trial in Sessions Case No. 14/99 before the learned Special Judge, Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Cases Dausa (for short 'trial judge') who vide Judgment dated July 20, 2002, while acquitting co-accused Lali, convicted and sentenced the appellants as under:--Peeru Shah, Shafi Shah and Chhote Lal:Under Section 302 & 302/34 IPC:Each to suffer life imprisonment and fine of Rs. 1000/-, in default to further suffer three months simple imprisonment.Under Section 449 IPC:Each to suffer rigorous imprisonment two years and fine of Rs. 500/-, in default to further suffer one month simple imprisonment.Under Section 201 IPC:Each to suffer rigorous imprisonment eight months and fine of Rs. 1000/-, in default to further suffer one month simple imprisonment.Under Section 3(2)(v) SC/ST (PA) Act:Each to suffer life imprisonment and fine of Rs. 1000/-, in default to ...
Shakun Arora (Mrs.) Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-01-2005
Reported in: RLW2006(1)Raj55; 2005(4)WLC530
K.S. Rathore, J.1.The Petitioner has challenged the selection process for allotment of petrol pump on the ground that the respondent has not properly marked the petitioner under various categories and given much emphasis that although the petitioner was eligible to secure 20 out of 20 marks for the ready availability of finance but instead of 20, 18 marks were awarded. Again, for the purpose of project report, instead of 3, only 2 marks were awarded and same is the position with the overall assessment and instead of 1.7, 1.5 marks were allotted and same is with the experience and only 1 mark was awarded instead of 4. Under the category of business ability/acumen the petitioner deserves to be awarded 4 marks whereas 2.7 marks were awarded and if the marks would have been correctly awarded for which the petitioner is eligible the petitioner would stand at No. 1 and able to get the allotment of petrol pump in her favour.2. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the documents whic...
Sardar Harnam Puri Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Sep-01-2005
Reported in: AIR2006Raj36
ORDERGopal Krishan Vyas, J.1. By filing the present revision petition the petitioner has challenged the order dated 20-7-2002 passed by the Addl. District Judge No. 2, Chittorgarh in Civil Original Case No. 34/99.2. After the arguments were concluded in the matter, learned Counsel for the petitioner moved application for correction of the cause-title praying that by typographical error Civil Original Case number has been mentioned as 33/99 whereas the correct number is 34/99. The application is allowed. Counsel to carry out necessary correction In the petition in his hand.3. The facts indicate that as per the contract agreement in between the respondent and petitioner with regard to certain works there was arbitration clause in the contract agreement for adjudicating dispute in between the parties. Accordingly, when the dispute arose the petitioner requested for appointment of the arbitrator and Shri R.K. Garg, Sr. Divisional Electrical Engineer, Western Railway, Kota was appointed as ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›