Court : Delhi
Reported in : ILR1968Delhi364
M.M. Ismail, J.(1) These three appeals under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent are against the common judgment dated 26/5/1967 of Tatachari, J. allowing three writ petitions filed by the first respondent in each of these three Letters Patent Appeals. This judgment will dispose of all the three appeals. Shri Chittaranjan Das Sharma, the first respondent in L.P. Appeal No. 70 of 1967 and the petitioner in Civil Writ petition No. 231 of 1967 passed the Secondary School Certificate Examination in March 1963 conducted by the Gujarat Secondary School Certificate Examination Board, Baroda. In July, 1965, he applied for admission in Deshbandhu College, New Delhi, for studying in B.A. (Pass Course) of the University of Delhi. In his application dated 7/7/1965 in the prescribed form, he furnished all the required particulars including the examination passed by him. The Principal of the College accepted his application and admitted him provisionally to the B.A. First year class on his payment of fe...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Reported in : AIR1968Delhi131; 4(1968)DLT4
1. These three appeals under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent are against the common judgment dated 26-5-1967 of Tatachari, J. allowing three writ petitions filed by the first respondent in each of these three Letters Patent Appeals. This judgment will dispose of all the three appeals. Shri Chittaranjan Das Sharma, the first respondent in L. P. Appeal No. 70 of 1967 and petitioner in Civil Writ Petition No. 231 of 1967 passed the Secondary school Certificate Examination Board Baroda. In July, 1965, he applied for admission in Deshbandhu college, New Delhi, for studying B. A. (Pass Course) of the University of Delhi. In his application dated 7-7-1965 in the prescribed form, he furnished all the required particulars including the examination passed by him. The Principal of the College accepted his application and admitted him provisionally to the B. a. First Year class on his payment of fees subject to the approval of the University. On 6-9-1965, antoher application, in the prescribed for...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Reported in : ILR1969Delhi202
Inder Dev Dua, J.(1) By his judgment under appeal, dated 10th April, 1968 in Cw 217 of 1968, Hardy J. quashed the order dated 14th December, 1967 passed by the appellants, who are the relevant office bearers of Jamia Milla Islamia, an Educational Institution deemed to be University under the University Grants Commission Act, 1966, expelling the respondent who was a student of M. A. (Pre) class and debarred him from entering the Campus of the Jamia Millia, mainly on the ground that no show cause ntoice or an opportunity of submitting a written representation or any oral hearing was given to the respondent before the order of expulstion was made against him. Since then, we were informed at the Bar that the respondent was allowed to appear for the M. A. previous examination and he has passed the same. The learned counsel for the respondent made it clear that the appellants do nto now contend that the respondent should be again put back into the M.A. previous class. Indeed, he is said to h...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Reported in : ILR1970Delhi35
Jagjit Singh, J. (1) The following questions were referred to the Full Bench :-- (i) Whether the Press Note, annexure G, had the status of law and conferred a legal right on the respondent to get his unauthorised occupation of the flat regularised (ii) If it be held that the Press note had nto the status of law but was merely an administrative or executive direction, could the respondent still invoke the jurisdiction of this Court and claim that his unauthorised possession should on the basis of the Press Note be regularised (2) Detailed facts reading to the case giving rise to the above questions are given in the order of reference. In order, however, that the implications involved in the two questions may be appreciated it would be necessary to very briefly mention some of the facts. (3) Admittedly Anant Singh Respondent 1s an ex-service man and a displaced person from West Pakistan. On this migration to India he was at first given tent accommodation and on January 9, 1952, shop No. ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Reported in : ILR1972Delhi312B
D.K. Kapur, J. (1) This is a Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India brought by the Gandhi Memorial Teachers Training College, Model Town, Delhi and its Director, Hari Chand Suneja. The Writ Petition is concerned with the disaffiliation of the petitioner college from the Kameshvara Singh Darbhanga Sanskrit Vishvavidyalaya, respondent No. 1 which is a statutory corporation set up by an Act of the Bihar Legislature as a Sanskrit University. The said University affiliates various educational institutions in different parts of the country and admits students from those institutions to its examinations and grants them various degrees. The petitioner college admits students who prepare for the Navin Shastri and Shiksha Shastri examinations which are held by the University and examinations for which are held by the University in May and June every year. (2) The University has a Syndicate and a Senate. It appears that the college applied to be affiliated to the University ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Reported in : ILR1972Delhi176
Hardayal Hardy, C.J.(1) The following question of law has been referred to a Full Bench. 'WHETHERin view of Rule 5 of the Investigation of Industrial Undertakings (Procedure) Rules 1967 providing for an opportunity of hearing before the investigator and the absence of any specific provision either in the Act or in the Rules for supplying a copy of the investigator's report to the managernent, the taking over of the industrial undertaking without supplying a copy of the investigator's report is vitiated ?'(2) The question relates to a textile mill owned by Keshav Mills Company Limited, Petlad. The company was incorporated in the year 1935 and has over the years been yielding rich dividends and has been paying large sums of money by way of capital refund and bonus payment.(3) The petitioners claim that the years 1966, 1967 and 1968 were years of grave crisis for the Textile Industry in India as a whole and out of 500 and odd textile mills nearly 80 of them closed down during those years....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Reported in : [1973(27)FLR207]; ILR1973Delhi29; 1974LabIC223
T.V.R. Tatachari, J. (1) This Letters Patent Appeal filed against the judgment of a learned single Judge (V.S. Deshpande, J.) of this Court, dated March 21, 1972, dismissing Civil Writ Petition No. 1060 of 1971, came up before S.N. Andley, C.J., and T.P.S. Chawla, J. in the first instance. Two connected questions viz., (1) whether the appellant, the Industrial Finance Corporation of India, which was established under the Industrial Finance Corporation Act, 1948, is an 'authority' within the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution of India, and (2) whether promotion of an employee of the appellant Corporation is a managerial function and is not, thereforee, covered by the definition of 'industrial dispute' under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, are involved in the appeal. The Division Bench considered that there was some conflict in the various decisions cited before them on the first question, and that the second question also was of sufficient importance to be dealt with by a larg...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Reported in : 9(1973)DLT475; (1974)IILLJ191Del
V.S. Deshpande, J. (1) The common question of law involved in this letters patent appeal and the connected writ petitions (Civil Writs 497 of 1971 and 686 of 1969) is whether the termination of the service of an employee of a statutory corporation contrary to the provisions of the subordinate legislation made by the said corporation relating to the conditions of service of such an employee is a nullity remediable by the relief of reinstatement. (2) Employment is originally and still basically a contract between the employer and the employee. This bilateral relationship is, however, often found to bs superseded partly or wholly by status which is contrasted with contract. Status is determined extrinsically by law and not by agreement between parties. Status may supersede contract by affecting either of the two parties to it, namely, the master or the servant. (3) The ideal contractual relationship is when both the master and servant are individuals. Even if a master is a partnership fir...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Reported in : 11(1975)DLT79; 1974RLR453
V.S. Deshpande, J. (1) The main question referred to us for consideration is whether the mistake of law on the part of the appellant's counsel amounted to 'sufficient cause' within the meaning of section 5 of the Limitation Act for not preferring the appeal against the decision of the Subordinate Judge 1st Class in this court within the prescribed period of limitation and incidentally whether the analogy of section 14 of the said Act is applicable to the determination of the above question inasmuch as the mistake of the counsel consisted in at first filing the appeal in the court of Senior sub-Judge who ultimately returned the memo of appeal to the appellant for presentation. to this court with the consequent loss of the time resulting in the expiry of the period of limitation. (2) An application under section 20 of the Arbitration Act was filed by the plaintiff-appellant in the court of Subordinate Judge 1st Class and was registered as a suit for the purpose of court fee which was cor...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Reported in : AIR1980Delhi27
Sachar, J. (1) The Petitioner in this writ petition challenges, the order of the respondent No. 2, University of Delhi, in refusing to allow the petitioner to take the examination of M.A. (P) held in April 1979 This petition was filed on 6th April 1979 and pending the disposal of the petition the petitioner was allowed to appear for the M.A. (P) History examination commencing on 7th April 1979. She has since taken the examination but her result has been withheld to await the decision in the present writ petition. (2) The petitioner passed her B. A. (Hons.) History examination in 11978 from Delhi University. She was a. student in Indraprastha College women. She secured 354 marks out of 800 marks equivalent to 44.25 per cent. For admission to the Post Graduate course candidates desirous of seeking admission to M.A. must fulfill the requisite condition of having passed with prescribed percentage as detailed in the appendix I of the Bulletin of Information. At page 9 of the Bulletin Note 1...
Tag this Judgment!