Rajasthan Court May 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.
Mool Chand Vs. Competent Officer, Zone-b-1, Jaipur Development Authori ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-30-2008
Reported in: RLW2008(3)Raj2544
Narendra Kumar Jain, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.2. Petitioner has preferred this writ petition challenging the order dated 18th February, 2005 (Annexure-4), passed by the Divisional Commissioner, Jaipur, dismissing his appeal against the order dated 23rd June, 2001 (Annexure-3) passed by the Authorized Officer, Zone-B-1, Jaipur Development Authority, Jaipur, whereby, the Authorized Officer passed an order under Section 90B of the Rajasthan Land Revenue Act, 1956 (hereinafter shall be referred to as the Act of 1956') read with Section 63(1)(ii) of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act, 1955 (hereinafter shall be referred to as 'the Act of 1955') terminating the tenancy rights and resumption of the disputed land.3. The Tehsildar, posted for Zone-B-1 of Jaipur Development Authority and duly authorized by the State Government, vide Notification dated 23.09.1999, filed an application with affidavit before the Authorized Officer that over the land situated in village Manoharpura, Tehsil ...
Kamlesh Kumar Sharma Vs. Jaipur Vidyut Vitaran Nigam Ltd. and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-30-2008
Reported in: RLW2008(3)Raj2598
Mohammad Rafiq, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.2. The appellant in this appeal has challenged the judgment dated 16/5/2008 by which his writ petition was dismissed on the ground of delay and latches. In the writ petition, the writ-petitioner challenged the seniority list dated 29/5/2007 and prayed for consideration of his case for promotion to the post of Executive Engineer in preference to the private respondents.3. The learned Single Judge on consideration of the matter held that seniority list dated 29/5/2007 was in fact reiteration of the seniority list which was issued way back on 30/5/2001 and which was lateron again issued on 19/2/2004. The writ petitioner failed to challenge the seniority lists which were issued on 30/5/2001 and 19/2/2004 and now at this belated stage, he could not be permitted to challenge the recently issued seniority list on 29/5/2007 after a lapse of 7 years of issuing the earlier seniority list dated 30/5/2001.4. Learned Counsel for the appella...
Jaddamba Lal Hada Vs. State and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-30-2008
Reported in: RLW2008(4)Raj2969
Mohammad Rafiq, J.1. These two appeals are directed against the common judgment whereby the learned Single dismissed three identical writ petitions. The writ-petitioners had challenged the order dated 21.9.1993 whereby the promotions from LDC to UDC granted in Anti Corruption Department (for short-'ACD') of the police treating it to be a separate range were ordered to be reviewed by convening Department Promotion Committee afresh treating the ACD as part of the Police Headquarters in terms of the Standing Order No. 1 dated 17.1.1996.2. The appellant-writ petitioners who had secured promotion in the meantime because of the ACD being treated as separate .range than the Police Headquarters apprehending reversion consequent upon review Department Promotion Committee being held, approached this Court by filing the writ petitions. Now with the dismissal of the writ petitions, they are before the division bench in the present special appeals.3. We have heard Shri Ashok Gaur and Ms. Neerja Kha...
Deepika Motwani Vs. State of Raj. and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-30-2008
Reported in: RLW2008(4)Raj3360
Gopal Krishan Vyas, J.1. In this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for following reliefs:It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that this writ petition may kindly be allowed with costs and by issuance of an appropriate writ, order or direction the respondents may please be directed to regularise the period of study leave and complete the service book. It is further prayed that the payment of study leave and the period as teacher grade-III for 11 days may kindly be directed to be made to the petitioner. It is further prayed that the service book may kindly be directed to be sent to the school where the petitioner is serving after making all the relevant entries.2. The case of the petitioner is that she was initially appointed as Laboratory Assistant in accordance with Rule 20 of the Rajasthan Educational Subordinate Service Rules, 1971 (hereinafter as 'the Rules of 1971') and in pursuance of the order dated 27.12.1991, she joined her duties at Govt. Girls Secondary School, Ja...
Raju @ Jagdish Vs. State
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-30-2008
Reported in: RLW2008(4)Raj3222
Chand Mal Totla, J.1. The accused appellant Raju @ Jagdish S/o Shankar lal and one another stands convicted by learned Additional Sessions Judge (Fast track), Anupgarh vide judgment dated 09.08.2002 in Sessions Case No. 136/2001 for the offence of Section 302 read with 34 and Section 201 with 34 and sentenced to life imprisonment and, fine of Rs. 100/- in default one month rigorous imprisonment for Section 302/34 1PC and for Section 201/34 IPC, five years rigorous imprisonment and Rs. 100/- fine in default one month rigorous imprisonment.2. Appellant Raju @ Jagdish preferred the appeal through jail and the same registered as Appeal No. 777/02 and order dated 11.03.08 and other orders were passed. An application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. preferred on behalf of Raju @ Munna S/o Ram Charan requesting that in the Appeal No. 77/02 on behalf of Raju @ Jagdish inadvertently jail authorities failed to mention name of applicant Raju @ Munna S/o Ramcharan, so the appeal No. 777/02 may also be tr...
Vidhya Devi (Smt.) Vs. State and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-30-2008
Reported in: RLW2008(4)Raj3308
Gopal Krishan Vyas, J.1. In this writ petition, the petitioner being widow of late Rekha Ram, employee of the respondent Department, who died while in service on 2.6.1984 has preferred this writ petition for directions to the respondents to grant family pension in accordance with law. Further, it is prayed that entire arrear of the pension along with 18% interest may be granted to the petitioner.2. Brief facts of the case are that the husband of the petitioner late Rekha Ram entered into the service in the erstwhile Rajasthan Nahar Pariyojna on 20.12.1968 on the post of Beldar and he was posted under the respondent Assistant Engineer in the Rajasthan Nahar Pariyojana at Rawatsar.3. The husband of the petitioner late Rekha Ram was granted semi permanent status in accordance with Rule 3(3) of the Work charged Rules, 1964 w.e.f. 20.12.1970 and his pay was fixed in the pay-scale of Rs. 240-290 w.e.f. 1.9.1976 and further his pay was fixed to Rs. 415/- per month in the revised pay scale Rul...
Karan Singh Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-30-2008
Reported in: RLW2008(4)Raj3329
Gopal Krishan Vyas, J.1. In this case, the petitioner has prayed for direction to the respondents to grant pension w.e.f. 1.2.1979 and pay him all consequential benefits along with interest @ 18% per annum.2. As per the facts of the case, the petitioner joined BSF on 30.7.66 as constable and further he was promoted to the rank of Havildar and then after completion of more than 12 years of service, the petitioner sought voluntary retirement from service.3. According to the petitioner, the respondent No. 4 accepted the resignation under Rule 19 of BSF Rules 1969 with full pensionary benefits. The petitioner has placed on record the certificate of termination of service issued by the respondent No. 4 dated 1.1.1979. As per the petitioner, a BSF employee is entitled to seek voluntary retirement after completion of 10 years of service under Rule 19 of the BSF Rules. The petitioner has reproduced Rule 19 under which the petitioner made a prayer for resignation from service. The petitioner is...
National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Sikandar Ali and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-30-2008
Reported in: RLW2008(4)Raj3406
Mohammad Rafiq, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.2. This appeal has been preferred by the National Insurance Company Ltd. against the award dated 9.8.1995 passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal Jhunjhunu. The Tribunal therein awarded a sum of Rs. 1,02,400/- for the death of husband of respondent No. 3.3. Shri Ganesh Joshi, learned Counsel appearing for the appellant has argued that the Tribunal has seriously erred in law in holding the appellant-Insurance Company liable for making payment of compensation even though deceased was gratuitous passenger in a goods vehicle. Deceased-Ramjan was admittedly travelling in a truck which was being driven by the driver rashly and negligently and which overturned resulting into serious injuries to Ramjan who later succumbed thereto. It was argued that permitting deceased to travel in a goods vehicle was in clear breach of the terms and conditions of the policy of the insurance. Tribunal failed to appreciate the defence of the appellant ...
National Insurance Company Vs. Sua Lal Sharma and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-30-2008
Reported in: 2009ACJ1686; RLW2009(1)Raj559
Mohammad Rafiq, J.1. Since both these appeals arise out of the same award passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Tonk, they were heard together and are being disposed of by this common order.2. First of the above appeals has been preferred by the National Insurance Company Ltd. against the award dated 26.9.2000 passed by MACT Tonk whereby it awarded a sum of Rs. 1,42,000/- to the claimant-respondents as compensation for the loss of Truck No. RND 6065 and the cement loaded therein, which were burnt as a result of the accident involving Tanker No. HNU 885 insured with the appellant insurance company. Another appeal has been Tiled by the claimant for enhancement of the amount of compensation.3. Shri Ganesh Joshi, learned Counsel for the appellant- National Insurance Company has argued that the liability of compensation could not be fastened on the appellant because the vehicle in question was insured with them on 5.10.1992 but the cheque of premium amount was dishonoured on 9.10.19...
Krishan Kumar Vyas (Dr.) Vs. State of Raj. and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-30-2008
Reported in: RLW2008(4)Raj3664
Gopal Krishan Vyas, J.1. In this writ petition, petitioner has prayed for following reliefs:i. the respondents No. 1 to 5 may kindly be directed to make payment of salary to the petitioner for the period from 1.6.1990 to 11.4.1993 alongwith the interest thereon @ 18% per annum from the date of its accrual till the actual payment is made to the petitioner;ii. the F.I.R. (An.16) dated 4.3.2002, lodged against the petitioner with the Police Station, Shastri Nagar, Jodhpur may kindly be quashed and set aside and respondents No. 6 and 7 may kindly be restrained from taking any further action pursuant to the said F.I.R.iii. the respondents No. 1 to 5 may kindly be restrained from initiating any fresh enquiry against the petitioner for the same charges for which a charge sheet U/R 16 was issued to him and he was exonerated and they be further restrained from placing the petitioner under suspension on the basis of F.I.R. dated 4.3.2002 (An.16);iv. the respondents may kindly be restrained from ...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »