Rajasthan Court March 2008 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.
State of Rajasthan Vs. Sahib HussaIn @ Sahib Jan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-05-2008
Reported in: RLW2008(3)Raj2464
Shiv Kumar Sharma, J.1. Five persons of Elephant-rider's family were battered to death on October 27, 2006 in the historic Amer area of Pink City Jaipur. Sahib Hussain, appellant herein, was charged and tried before the learned Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track) No. 1 Jaipur City who convicted the appellant for the offence under Section 302 IPC and having regard to the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case found it to be rarest of rare cases imposed death penalty on him.2. The learned Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track) No. 1 Jaipur City Jaipur made a reference (bearing Death Reference No. 1/2007) under Section 366 CrPC for confirmation of death sentence. The appellant also preferred appeals challenging his conviction and sentence as aforesaid.FACTS:3. The brief facts as unraveled by the prosecution at the trial are as follows:- On October 28, 2006 at 12.30 AM, the informant Jafar @ Lotiya handed over a written report (Ex.P.1) to the SHO Police Station Amer at the place o...
Suryaveer Singh and Raghuvendra Singh Vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income T ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-05-2008
Reported in: (2009)222CTR(Raj)611
ORDER1. These two appeals arise out of the same judgment of the learned Tribunal being dated 7.12.2000. Appeal No. 68/2002 was admitted by this Court on 21.3.2007 by framing following two substantial questions of law:(1) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, when the search at the premises of Ajeet Bhawan took place in December 1987 and the declaration filed by Mr. Swarup Singh & Mr. Sobhag Singh that the jewellery found at the time of search even if accepted to be their undisclosed 2 income, the family arrangement which has been alleged to have taken place thereafter on 5.4.88, subsequent to search, could be discarded on the ground of the declaration made by Sh. Swarup Singh & Mr. Sobhag Singh in respect of status as on the date of search.(2) Whether in the present case even if the claim of the assessee about the jewellery found during search to be ancestral is discarded, on sale of such jewellery, whole of receipt can be considered as income during relevant previous yea...
State of Rajasthan and anr. Vs. Kaushal Singh Rathore and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-05-2008
Reported in: RLW2008(4)Raj2785
R.M. Lodha, J.1. The State Government through Secretary, Department of Education and the Secretary, Department of Finance have preferred this appeal aggrieved by the order dated 8th April, 2004 passed by the Single Judge whereby he allowed the writ petition filed by the present respondents and directed the appellants herein to comply with the recommendations of the Beri Commission as approved by the Committee of Secretaries.2. The short question that requires to be considered by us in this appeal is whether the direction issued by the Single Judge to the present appellants to comply with the recommendations of Beri Commission as approved by the Committee of Secretaries is legally sustainable. In other words, can a mandamus be issued by the Court as has been done by the Single Judge directing the compliance of recommendations of a Commission recommending the pay scale to various categories of employees in the State of Rajasthan.3. The controversy arises from the facts which may be brief...
Chandra Mohan Meena Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-05-2008
Reported in: RLW2008(4)Raj3034
P.B. Majmudar, J.1. This is a thoroughly misconceived writ petition filed by the petitioner seeking compassionate appointment on the ground that his father died while in service about 18 years back on 14.9.1990.2. According to the petitioner, at the time of death of his father, he was minor as at that time he was only 4 years of age and therefore, at that time, her mother made an application for giving him compassionate appointment when he becomes major and accordingly when he attained the age of 18 years, he again moved an application for giving him compassionate appointment. The department vide order dated 6.7.2007 (Annex. 4 in the compilation) rejected the application of the petitioner on the ground that at the relevant time, elder son of the deceased employee, namely Kana Ram Meena, was in Government service, therefore, under Rule 5, no compassionate appointment can be given to the any other member of the family of the deceased employee. The petitioner has challenged the said order...
Children's Garden Play School Education Society Vs. Raj. Non-Governmen ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-05-2008
Reported in: RLW2009(1)Raj169
Shiv Kumar Sharma, J.1. Smt. Kumud Singh, (abbreviated as 'Teacher' from herein) filed an application under Section 21 of the Rajasthan Non Government Educational Institutions Act, 1989 (abbreviated as '1989 Act' from herein) before the Rajasthan Non Government Educational Institutions Tribunal Jaipur (abbreviated as 'Tribunal' from herein) claiming balance of salary, Provided Fund, Gratuity and Leave Encashment from Children's Garden Play School Education Society (abbreviated as 'Institution' from herein). The Tribunal vide order dated August 28, 1997 allowed the application of Teacher. The Institution filed with petition against the said order in the High Court but learned Single Judge did not interfere with the order and dismissed the writ petition on September 8, 1998.2. In this Special Appeal, afore quoted orders have been assailed by the Institution.3. The only contention raised on behalf of the Institution was that since the Institution was not receiving any aid from the Governm...
Dalip Kumar and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-05-2008
Reported in: RLW2008(3)Raj2675
R.M. Lodha, J.1. heard this group of special appeals comprising of eight matters together as it involves identical controversy and all these matters are being disposed of by this common order.2. The appellants are unsuccessful petitioners. They filed few writ petitions before this Court principally praying for direction to the respondents to consider their candidature against 102 vacant posts of Teacher Grade-Win accordance with their merit with all benefits with effect from 17.1.2002 and for declaring the order dated 13.12.2001 issued by the State Government illegal and unconstitutional.3. The facts in nutshell are thus:4.The District Establishment Committee, Zila Parishad, Bharatpur through its Chief Executive Officer issued an advertisement in the year 1996 for 60 posts of Teacher Grade-III. The eligibility for appointment was prescribed therein. The petitioners claimed to have applied pursuant to the said advertisement. They also claimed to be qualified for such appointment possess...
State of Rajasthan and anr. Vs. Tej Singh Shekhawat
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-05-2008
Reported in: RLW2009(1)Raj163
Mohammad Rafiq, J.1. This appeal has been preferred by the State of Rajasthan against the judgment passed by learned Single Judge dated 1.2.2007, whereby writ petition of the respondent has been allowed and the order of his compulsory retirement dated 12.6.1998 has been set aside. The respondent, who was serving the petitioner State as Inspector in its Settlement Department was compulsorily retired from service by the said order dated 12.6.1998.2. Shri Harshvardhan Nandwana, learned Government Counsel has argued that the appellants had rightly retired the respondent by Invoking Rule 53 of Rajasthan Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1996 (for short 'the Rules') because in the scrutiny that Was made by the Review Committee, he was found to be an inefficient government servant who had become liability to the service. Reference was made to the records indicating that the. respondent was awarded three penalties namely, (i) the penalty of withholding of one grade increment vide order dated 3.1...
Kamal Garg Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-05-2008
Reported in: 2008(2)WLN429
H.R. Panwar, J.1. By the instant petition under Section 482 Cr. P.C., the accused petitioner seeks to try together three cases being Criminal Cases No. 663/2003, 664/2003 and 807/2003. All the three cases arise within a period of one year.2. I have heard learned Counsels for the parties.3. Section 219 of the Code of Criminal Procedure reads as under:219. Three offences of same kind within year may be charged together.-(1) When a person is accused of more offences than one of the same kind committed within the space of twelve months from first to the last of such offences, whether in respect of same person or not, he may be charged with, and tried at one trial for, any number of them not exceeding three.(2) Offences are of the same kind when they are punishable with the same amount of punishment under the same section of the Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860): Provided that, for the purposes of this section, an offence punishable under Section 379 of the Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860) shall...
Purushottam Purohit Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-05-2008
Reported in: 2008(2)WLN430
Munishwar Nath Bhandari, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.2. The short controversy involved in this writ petition is otherwise covered by the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court in the case of State of Rajasthan v. Bharat Kumar Sharma and Ors. D.B. Civil Special Appeal No. 424/2002 decided on 19.01.2005. In the aforesaid appeal, the same issue as has been raised in the present matter was considered at length and after considering the issue, the Division Bench of this Court has came to the conclusion that Sankaracharya Abhinav Sachinand Tirth Sanskrit College, Dwarika (Gujarat) an institution affiliated to Shri Vrihad Gujarat Sanskrit Parishad, Ahmedabad was entitled to provide B.Ed degree till their application for recognition was not rejected by the NCTE and thereby those candidates who has taken education in the academic Session of 1997-1998 were held to be entitled for the right of consideration based on B.Ed. degree. Similar view was thereafter taken even by the ...
Vijay Kumar Vs. Municipal Council
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Mar-05-2008
Reported in: 2008(2)WLN478
Prakash Tatia, J.1. Two Writ Petition Nos. 5190/93 and 5264/93 were decided by the learned Single Judge of this Court vide order dt. 13.10.2006. So far as the claim of the petitioners that they purchased the shops of Municipal Council, Sriganganagar in public auction in the year 1976 and respondent Municipal Council could not give possession of those shops to the petitioners and further did not give other shops in lieu of those shops inspite of Municipal Council's resolution dt. 22.12.1992, therefore, the petitioners in above two writ petitions are entitled to direction for giving other shops to the petitioners, is concerned, that was found just and legal by the learned Single Judge after holding that the petitioners who are victims of the mistake committed by the Municipal Council cannot be penalized. However, while granting relief to the petitioner of giving alternate property of the same size, i.e. 450 sq.ft. (in each writ petition), the learned Single Judge directed the Municipal C...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »