Rajasthan Court April 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.
Smt. Sonu Bhatia Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-16-2008
Reported in: RLW2008(4)Raj3181
ORDERGopal Krishan Vyas, J.1. In this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for quashing the order impugned dated 13.5.2005 (Annexure-6) and further prayed that the respondents may be directed to treat the petitioner's husband late Ravi Kumar Bhatia as regular Central Government employee w.e.f. 1.10.1991 and pay her all the terminal/pensionary benefits along with interest and other dues. 2. The petitioner's husband Late Ravi Kumar Bhatia was initially appointed as Tea Maker in the pay scale of Rs. 160-375 in the Canteen run by the respondents at Bikaner on 1.12.1983. The services of the petitioner's husband were terminated and thereafter, the petitioner's husband raised an industrial dispute and the Judge, Labour Court Bikaner decided the reference made by the appropriate Government in favour of the petitioner's husband vide award dated 3.8.1991 whereby the termination of the services of the petitioner's husband w.e.f. 15.9.1984 was set aside. Accordingly, an order was passed for re...
Satya NaraIn Girdhari Lal Vs. Rajasthan Financial Corporation and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-16-2008
Reported in: AIR2008Raj143
Shiv Kumar Sharma, J.1. The Rajasthan Financial Corporation (for short 'RFC') granted term loan in the sum of Rs. 1,55,000/- to Ram Niwas Gupta (for short 'RNG') who established factory for manufacturing and processing Sodium Silicate at 246, Saloda Industrial Area, Gangapur City. Since RNG committed default in making payment of installment the RFC issued a legal notice under Section 29 of the State Financial Corporations Act, 1951 and took possession of the unit on February 7, 1987. Land, building and machinery of the unit were put to open auction and the sale was finalised and possession of the entire unit was handed over to the appellant on February 28, 1989 after executing agreement on February 27, 1989 by RFC in favour of appellant. RNG filed writ petition seeking declaration of the said transfer as null and void. Learned single Judge vide order dated August 28, 1998 allowed the writ petition. Hence this appeal....2. We have heard learned Counsel for the parties.3. A look at the m...
Vijay Verma and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-16-2008
Reported in: RLW2008(4)Raj3480
G.S. Sarraf, J.1. The petitioners have filed this misc. petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. with the prayer that the F.I.R. No. 150/2006 registered at Kotwali, Jhunjhunu under Sections 498A, 406 IPC be quashed.2. Learned Counsel for the petitioners have contended that even If the allegations contained in the F.I.R. are accepted in toto still Kotwali, Jhunjhunu has no jurisdiction to entertain the report because no part of cause of action has arisen within the jurisdiction of Kotwali, Jhunjhunu as the respondent No. 2 herself has disclosed in the F.I.R. lodged on 14.5.2006 that she returned to her parental home on 25.6.2005 and that all the acts which are per se without basis were committed at Bikaner. He, therefore, prays that the F.I.R. against the petitioners be quashed. He places reliance on (2004) 8 SCC 100.3. Learned Counsel for the respondent No. 2 has submitted that the marriage took place at Jhunjhunu and that the articles given in dowry were entrusted at Jhunjhunu, therefore, K...
Dcm Sriram Industries Ltd. Vs. State of Rajasthan and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-16-2008
Reported in: RLW2008(4)Raj3063
Shiv Kumar Sharma, J.1. The appellant company approached learned Single Judge by filing writ petition against the notification dated May 17, 1995 of the State of Rajasthan whereby price/charges for water supply in bulk for industrial purposes have been raised from Rs. 10 per 1000 CFT to Rs. 20 per 1000 CFT. Learned Single Judge vide order dated October 6, 1999 dismissed the writ petition.2. The appellant company is, thus, before us.3. Contextual facts depict that:(i) For regulating the irrigation and drainage in the State of Rajasthan the Government enacted the Rajasthan Irrigation and Drainage Act, 1954 (for short '1954Act'). Under Section 31 of 1954 Act the supply of water from an irrigation work deemed to be given at the rates and subject to the conditions prescribed by the rules to be made by the State Government. Section 60 empowers the Government to make rules for regulating the matters enumerated in Clauses (a) to (e) and Sub-section (2) of Section 60. State also framed the Raja...
Hans Raj Vs. National Insurance Co. Ltd. and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-16-2008
Reported in: RLW2008(4)Raj2994
Mohammad Rafiq, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.2. Appellant being dis-satisfied with the quantum of compensation in case of 100% disability has filed this appeal questioning the correctness of quantum of compensation. The appellant met with an accident on 10.4.1996 when he was coming from Govindpura to Shahpura by road. He was hit from behind by Truck No. DL-1G-A-618 which was being driven by respondent No. 3 in rash and negligent manner. As a result of the said accident, appellant sustained grievious injuries and he had to remain hospitalized, in S.M.S. Hospital Jaipur for more than a month. He was subjected to operation during his hospitalization. Since appellant had sustained fracture of his back bone at Vertribra Section at L-l, both his legs were rendered senseless and this disease was described by the doctors attending on him as 'paraplegia'. Medical Board upon examining him, certified that' appellant sustained 100% permanent disability. The injury report Ex. 9, X-Ray...
Narendra Mishra Vs. State and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-16-2008
Reported in: [2008(117)FLR887]; 2008(3)WLN595
Ajay Rastogi, J.1. Instant petition has been filed by petitioner, who initially joined service as Junior Engineer (Civil) on 05.09.1994 in Municipal Board, Niwai, has challenged the validity of order Annex. 2 dt. 25.10.2002.2. The State Government during service tenure of petitioner took a policy decision to regularize such Junior Engineers appointed in various Municipalities under its notification dt. 22.01.1998. Through screening and their other relevant record, present petitioner was also subjected to screening which was conducted by the committee constituted by the State Government. In pursuance of screening referred to supra, order dt. 25.10.2002 was passed and applicants namely; Kailash Vyas, Anil Kumar Gupta and Shankerlal Raiger were found suitable to be regularized as Junior Engineer and the present petitioner and other similarly situated Junior Engineers were not found fit to be regularized.3. It has been informed to this Court that order passed on the recommendation of scree...
Prahlad Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-15-2008
Reported in: RLW2008(4)Raj2901
Gopal Krishan Vyas, J.1. In this petition, petitioner is challenging the impugned order Annex. A/7 dated 22.3.1993, whereby, petitioner was dismissed from service so also it is prayed that respondents may be directed to decide the appeal Annex. A/8.2. The petitioner was initially appointed as Cattle Guard/Chowkidar in the Forest Department at range Desuri on 16.6.1982 and vide Annex. 1 he was declared semi permanent in accordance with Work Charged Rules, 1964 and pay was fixed in pay scale of Rs. 350.5.430. Thereafter, on 1.5.1991 he was placed under suspension on the ground that he was arrested in connection recovery of 240 bottles of liquor from him by Police Station Rani District Pali and he remained in custody for more than 48 hours. The suspension order was lateron revoked vide Annex.3 dated 23.3.1992 during pendency of inquiry. Vide order dated 20.6.1992 petitioner was transferred from Range Pali to Range Desuri by the Deputy Conservator of Forest, Pali.3. A communication was sen...
Bulaki Das Vs. Bansidhar Parwal and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-11-2008
Reported in: RLW2008(3)Raj1999
Mohammad Rafiq, J.1. This appeal, which has been filed against the order of the learned Single Judge dated 11.10.2006, is barred by limitation.2. In view of the reasons stated in the application for condonation of delay, we are satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing this appeal within limitation and, therefore, we condone the delay of 26 days.3. The, matter was heard on merits.4. Learned Counsel for the appellant-tenant in the writ petition has challenged the order dated 11.7.2005 passed by the Rent Tribunal, Jaipur City, Jaipur under Section 6 of the Rajasthan Rent Control Act, 2001 (for short, the 'Act of 2001') whereby, the rent payable by the appellant-tenant to the respondent-landlord was revised and , enhanced to Rs. 1235/- per month. The appellant has further challenged the order passed by the Appellate Rent Tribunal vide order dated 1.3.2006 whereby, it dismissed the appeal upholding the above referred to order passed by the Rent Tribunal. Th...
Bennett, Coleman and Company Ltd. Vs. Regional Provident Fund Commissi ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-11-2008
Reported in: (2008)IIILLJ782Raj; RLW2008(3)Raj2300
Mohammad Rafiq, J.1. These three appeals are directed against the common judgment dated 20.11.2006 passed by the learned Single Judge whereby and whereunder three writ petitions preferred by the appellants herein have been dismissed together.2. The appellants had in the writ petition questioned the validity of the order dated 4.10.1990 passed by the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner holding them not entitled to infancy period and the order dated 10.10.1997 passed by the Employees Provident Fund Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi dismissing their appeals there against.3. Factual matrix of the case giving rise to these appeals is that M/s. Bennett, Coleman & Company Ltd., Jaipur i.e. appellant in D.B. Civil Special Appeal (Writ) No. 1227/07 entered into two separate agreements with the other two appellants; namely-Times Publishing House Ltd., Jaipur in D.B. Civil Special Appeal (Writ) No. 1228/07 and M/s.) Shree Vishal Printers Ltd., Jaipur in D.B. Civil Special Appeal (Writ) No. 1229/07. ...
Aruna Mills Vs. State and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Apr-11-2008
Reported in: RLW2008(3)Raj2477
Munishwar Nath Bhandari, J.1. This bunch of writ petitions involves common issues for decision, thus, at the request of all the learned Counsel appearing for the parties, the matter was heard finally and is being decided by this Judgment.2. The writ petitions, not only involves a challenge to the orders passed by the Rajasthan State Pollution Control Board, but the further prayer is that the petitioner-industries should not be closed/shifted to the newly set up industrial areas, unless adequate infrastructure is provided by the RIICO.3. For the purpose of considering the issues involved in the present matters, it is necessary to refer certain facts material to the case.4. Looking to the discharge of trade effluent by the textile industries in Pali, a public interest litigation was filed by Manaveer Nagar Vikas Samiti. The said D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 759/2002 was decided by the Division Bench of this Court with the following six directions, which are reproduced for ready reference...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »