Rajasthan Court January 2010 Judgments

Satya Narayan and ors. Vs. State of Raj. and ors.

Court: Rajasthan

Prakash Tatia, J.1. Since learned Addl. Advocate General Sh. RL Jangid and learned Sr. CGSC Sh. VK Mathur have put in appearance for all the respondents in connected matters and they have been decided finally, therefore, the service is complete and at the request of learned Counsel for the respondents, these writ petitions are decided in the light of the judgment of this Court delivered in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2718/2009 - Prem Prakash v. UOI and Ors. decided on 21.11.2009 alongwith other connected matters.2. In view of the above, the present writ petitions are also allowed and the petitioners are allowed to continue on the respective posts till the scheme of Lok Talim (or scheme in any other name) is implemented. The petitioner(s) shall be entitled for continuity in service, but not entitled to fix remuneration for intervening period in case the scheme of Lok Talim (or in any other name) is implemented.3. In the result, this writ petition is allowed [see separate judgment in S....

A.C.T.O. (Flying Squad) Vs. C.D. Motors

Court: Rajasthan

Reported in: RLW2010(2)Raj1664

Vineet Kothari, J.1. This revision petition has been filed by the Revenue being aggrieved by the order dtd. 7.12.2008 passed by the Rajasthan Tax Board, Ajmer. While dismissing the appeal of the ACTO, the learned Tax Board upheld the order of the Dy. Commissioner (Appeals) and thus both the appellate authorities set aside the penalty imposed upon the respondent-assessee by the Assessing Authority under Section 78(5) of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act on the ground that invoice accompanying the goods in transit at the time of checking by the said ACTO showed the goods to be S.T. Paid, whereas according to the said assessing authority- ACTO (Flying Squad), Sri Ganganagar who checked the said goods in transit in accordance with the provisions of Section 78 of the Act, the sale in question amounted to inter-state sale as the seller was of State of Rajasthan and the purchaser was of the State of Punjab, who under the said invoices purchased the said motor spare parts and since no Central Sales ...

Harjeet Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan and anr.

Court: Rajasthan

Dinesh Maheshwari, J.1. This intra-court appeal is directed against the order dated 09.11.2001 as passed in S.B.Civil Writ Petition No. 2237/2001 whereby the learned Single Judge has dismissed the writ petition preferred by the petitioner-appellant against the order dated 12.04.2001 as passed by the Board of Revenue for Rajasthan, Ajmer ('the Board' / 'the Board of Revenue') dismissing the revision petition preferred by the petitioner against the order dated 28.02.1996 as passed by the Additional Collector, Sriganganagar whereby the learned Additional Collector, while declining the application for regularisation moved by the petitioner under Section 13A of the Rajasthan Colonisation Act, 1954 ('the Act of 1954'), proceeded to order resumption of the land in question in the State for the alleged transfer being in violation of the provisions of Section 42 of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act, 1955 ('the Act of 1 955'/'the Tenancy Act').2. Briefly put, the relevant facts and background aspects of...

Hem Raj Bhavsar Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.

Court: Rajasthan

ORDERAjay Rastogi, J.1. Instant petition has been filed by the petitioner assailing the order Annx. 9 dated 10th January, 2008 whereby his application for grant of selection scale from the date of initial appointment was rejected and it was observed that he was entitled from the date he qualified Patwar examination.2. The petitioner was initially appointed as Patwari in the Department of Irrigation vide order Annx. 1 dated 04th September, 1975. As per names nominated by the Employment Exchange, petitioner was considered for appointment as Patwari, on temporary basis. Although there was a condition that his services may be continued till Patwar pass candidates are availabile but the fact remains that by an order dated 27th April, 1977, petitioner's name was included in the seniority list of Patwaris, after being confirmed with effect from 01st March, 1977. He later on also passed Patwar examination in December, 1980.3. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that once the petitioner ...

Alcobex Metals Ltd. Vs. Shesha Ram and anr.

Court: Rajasthan

Prakash Tatia, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.2. As per the respondent workman, he was appointed on the post of Turner with effect from 4.8.1986. On 7.1.1987, the personnel manager of the petitioner employer got one paper typed in English signed from the respondent by projecting that the respondent is being confirmed in service as permanent employee. However, after one month, when the petitioner was not paid salary as confirmed employee, then on 10.2.1987, the respondent went to the petitioner upon which the personnel manager told the respondent that because of some objection of the union members, he is not being paid the salary of a permanent employee, however, the personnel manager of the petitioner assured that the petitioner has been made permanent. The respondent continued in service obviously on the salary of non-confirmed employee. On 4.1.1989, the same personnel manager of the petitioner called the respondent in his office when he was going to his house after comple...

Shri Prahlad Gurjar Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court: Rajasthan

Raghuvendra S. Rathore, J.1. The petitioner has filed this writ petition with the prayer that an appropriate writ, order or directions be issued to non-petitioners No. 1 to 3 to either immediately prosecute Shri Ranjeet Singh under Section 12(1) and Shri Sanjay Dixit under Section 12(2) of the Passports Act, 1967 or the petitioner may be permitted, under Section 15 of the Act of 1967, to prosecute the above two persons for the offences committed by them. Alternatively, it is prayed that if the permission of the Chief Secretary of the State (respondent No. 4), before prosecuting Shri Sanjay Dixit under Section 12(2) of the Passport Act is considered necessary, then he be directed to grant such permission to non-petitioners No. 1 to 3 or to the petitioner.2. One Shri Ranjeet Singh son of Shri Narayan Singh claiming to be resident of Plot No. 85, Sonabari, Gopalpura Byepass, Jaipur had applied for an urgent passport to go abroad. He had obtained a verification certificate from Shri Sanjay...

Baldeo Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan

Court: Rajasthan

Reported in: 2010CriLJ1343

Gopal Krishan Vyas, J.1. The instant appeal has been filed by accused appellant Baldeo Singh against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 8-5-2003 passed by Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track), Hanumangarh in Sessions Case No. 117/2002, by which accused -appellant has been convicted for the offence under Sections 302, 449 IPC and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life with fine of Rs. 1000/- in respect of each offence, in default of payment of fine to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for one month.2. According to the facts of the case, upon statement of deceased Smt. Rani dated 1st July, 2002, an FIR was registered at Police Station, Hanumangarh Junction. In the statement so made at about 10.30 p.m. in the hospital, it was stated by Smt. Rani, wife of accused appellant Baldeo Singh that after marriage her husband Baldeo Singh used to beat her after taking liquor, therefore, before 15 days of the incident, when she was beaten by Baldeo Singh, she came back ...

Shyopat Singh Bajigar, Vs. State and ors.

Court: Rajasthan

Prakash Tatia, J.1. The learned Counsel for the petitioners as well as the learned Counsel for the State submit that the issue raised in these writ petitions has already been answered in the judgment of this Court delivered in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2579/09-Devendra Kumar and Ors. v. The State and Ors. and 502 connected matters decided on 15.5.2009 and, thereafter, the Division Bench of the Rajasthan High Court at Jaipur dismissed the appeals preferred by the private parties, therefore, these writ petitions may also be decided in the light of the decision given in above S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2579/09 as well as in the light of the decision given in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 4652/09 and connected 632 writ petition decided on 8.5.2009.2. In view of the statement of both the learned Counsel for the parties, these writ petitions are also allowed in the following terms:I. During continuation of the work, as detailed out hereinabove, the invocation of the last extension is arb...

Rajasthan State Seed Organic Production Certification Agency Vs. Dr. G ...

Court: Rajasthan

Reported in: RLW2010(1)Raj809

Gopal Krishan Vyas, J.1. The instant special appeal has been filed by Rajasthan State Seed Organic Production Certification Agency against the judgment dated 29.4.2008 passed by learned Single Judge in SB Civil Writ Petition No. 1319/2007 whereby the writ petition filed by the petitioners-respondents was allowed.2. As per the brief facts of the case, the respondents - petitioners filed a writ petition before this Court challenging the order of superannuation, attaining the age of 58 years in which it was submitted that there are no service rules and service conditions in existence in the appellant Agency and service conditions of the employees are regulated by the Rajasthan Service Rules and all the employees are availing facilities of house rent, bonus, surrender leave and selection scale etc. as are availed by the State Government servants. It is also contended that for the purpose of promotion, the promotions were granted to the employees as per the procedure through the departmenta...

The State of Rajasthan Vs. Kayamdeen and ors.

Court: Rajasthan

N.P. Gupta, J.1. This appeal by the State has been filed to challenge the judgment of the learned Sessions Judge, Jodhpur dated 20.8.1985, acquitting the three accused respondents Kayamdeen, Jamaldeen and Kale Khan for the offence under Section 302 and 302/34 so also 404 IPC.2. The necessary facts are, that on 10.3.1982 Nasirudin P.W.1 lodged an oral report Ex. P/1 at Police Station Phalodi, to the effect, that in the area of village Khinchan, he was grazing his herd at about 12 in the noon on hearing the shrieks, whereupon he ascended the sand dune and saw that Gafoor Khan son of Mahmood Khan resident of Naneu was running, being chased by Kala son of Ismile Musalman resident of Dayakaur, riding a camel, while the other two accused Jamaldeen and Kayamdeen sons of Mehardeen were following on foot, all the three were armed with Farsis. Kala rushed the camel and waylaid Gafoor and stopped him, in the meanwhile Kayamdeen and Jamaldeen also arrived, and all the three persons inflicted injur...