Court : Mumbai
Reported in : 2004(1)BomCR24
C.K. Thakker, C.J.1. Writ Petition No. 1052 of 1998 is filed by the State of Maharashtra against respondent No. 1 for an appropriate writ, direction or order quashing and setting aside the order passed by the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal in Appeal Forest-3 of 1997 wherein it was held that the land in question is neither 'forest' nor 'private forest' within the meaning of the Maharashtra Private Forests (Aquisition) Act, 1975 (hereinafter referred to as 'the said Act'). A prayer is also made to set aside the order passed by Sub-Divisional Officer, Bombay Suburban District dated 23rd April, 1985 under section 6 of the said Act. A declaration is sought to the effect that the land bearing Survey No. 345-A situated at village Dahisar is 'forest' and 'private forest' under the Act and as such the land stands acquired and vested in the State of Maharashtra.2. It is the case of the petitioner-State that the land in question was part of original Survey No. 345. Survey No. 345 was admeasuring ab...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : 2004(2)ALLMR115; 2004(2)BomCR111
R.M.S. Khandeparkar, J.1. Heard the learned Advocates for the parties. Rule. By consent, the rule is made returnable forthwith.2. Since common questions of law and facts arise in both the petitions, they were heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.3. The petitioner Sadashiv Sutar was employed with the Kolhapur Zilla Janata Sahakari Bank Ltd. On 18th April, 1992, the said bank entered into a settlement with the Co-operative Bank Employees' Union in relation to the employees of the said bank for the period from 1st April, 1991 to 30th September, 1994. By an order dated 22nd August, 1992 passed by the Registrar of co-operative societies, the Board of Directors of the said bank was superseded and the Board of Administrators was appointed for the management of the said bank. The Board of Administrators by letter dated 22nd June, 1994 took various steps for reduction of financial liability towards the payment of salary to its employees, whereupon, on 4th July, 1994,...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : [2004(101)FLR88]; (2004)IILLJ519Bom
ORDER1. Whether an employee as defined under Section 3(13) of the Bombay Industrial Relations Act, 1946 (for short BIR Act) alone would be eligible to be selected and nominated as employee-Director under the provisions of Section 73-BB of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960 (for short 'the Act') is the short question which falls for determination in this petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution.2. The first petitioner is a registered trade union. The petitioner Nos. 2 and 3 are employees of respondent No. 4 Sindhudurg District Central Co-operative Bank Ltd. The elections to the Board of Directors of the 4th respondent were held in December 1997 and the newly elected Directors assumed office from January 1, 1998. The petitioner Union nominated petitioner Nos. 2 and 3 as employee Directors on the Board of Directors of the Respondent No. 4 Bank in accordance with the provisions of Section 73-BB of the Act and communicated their names to the Election Officer as ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : 2004(2)ALLMR843; 2004(2)MhLj912
S.A. Bobde, J.1. This petition is filed by a non-tribal transferor against the order dated 31-12-1990 of the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal, upholding the order dated 27-8-1989 passed by the Tahsildar, Gondia. By the said order dated 27-8-1989, the Tahsildar, Gondia, on observing that there are no heirs of the tribal transferor, has directed that the property should vest in the State Government under Section 5A of the Maharashtra Restoration of Lands to Scheduled Tribes Act, 1974 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act').2. The land in question is about 2.60 acres at village Kudwa, taluka Gondia, District Bhandara. It was indisputably owned and possessed by Kashiram s/o Laxman Parade, who was the tribal transferor. This was land was purchased by one Shriram s/o. Damodar Gadekar and his brother Shankar Gadekar under a registered sale deed dated 17-6-1966 from the said Kashiram s/o. Laxman Parade and they were placed in possession thereof immediately after its purchase. The said Kashiram s/o ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : 2004(2)ALLMR465; 2004(4)BomCR386
A.M. Khanwilkar, J.1. Rule. This matter was heard forthwith for final disposal by consent of both the sides on 17th September 2003, having regard to the fact that short question is involved.2. This writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India takes exception to the judgment and order passed by the Principal Secretary, Revenue & Forests Department, Government of Maharashtra, dated 21st April 2003, holding that the Petitioner is liable to pay non-agricultural assessment in respect of lands situated at Villages Ojhar, Konkangaon and Sakore, taluka Niphad, district Nasik. It is common ground that the said lands were acquired by the State Government and the acquisition proceedings concluded some time in 1968. As the lands thereafter vested in the State Government, the same were made over to the President of India for establishing MIG factory and related purposes by a registered document dated 19th November 1971. It is also not in dispute that the President of India thereafte...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : 2004CriLJ2177
ORDERB.H. Marlappale, J.1. This petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution prays for an appropriate writ, order or direction in the nature of a writ for quashing and setting aside the proceedings initiated by the first respondent and registered as Misc. Application No. 225 of 2003 before the Designated Court at Mumbai under the Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act, 1999 (for short MCOCA). The petitioner is presently working as Police Sub Inspector attached to the Crime Investigation Unit of crime branch, Andheri of Mumbai Police. Whereas the first respondent claims to be a journalist and associated with the petitioner in the alleged organised crime under MCOCA as has been set out in the complaint dated 6th October, 2003 addressed to Shri Shankar Kamble, Assistant Commissioner of Police, Crime Branch, Mumbai with copies to different authorities, overseas as well as within the country.2. On submission of the said complaint dated 6th October, 2003, the first respondent (he...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : 2004(3)ALLMR148; 2004(5)BomCR381; (2004)106BOMLR563
R.M.S. Khandeparkar, J.1. Since common question of law and facts arise in both these petitions, they were heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.2. Heard the learned Advocates for the parties. Perused the records. In both these petitions, the petitioners challenge the judgments and order passed by the Industrial Court declaring the petitioners to have adopted unfair labour practice towards the respondents/workmen and further directing the payment of wages to the respondents/workmen with effect from 1995-96 with continuance of contract of employment. In the Writ Petition No. 260 of 2001 the petitioners have been directed to pay wages to the respondent (No. 2) holding that the petitioners have committed unfair labour practice under Items 5 and 9 of Schedule IV of the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971, hereinafter called as 'the said Act'. In the Writ Petition No. 261 of 2001 the petitioners have been held...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : 2004(2)ALLMR678; 2004(4)BomCR120; (2004)106BOMLR264
R.M.S. Khandeparkar, J.1. Heard the learned Advocates for the parties. Perused the records. Rule. By consent, the rule is made returnable forthwith and taken up for hearing.2. Bare perusal of the orders passed by the lower authorities discloses that the Deputy Registrar, Co-operative Societies by his order dated 8.1.2001 had allowed the application filed by the petitioner on the ground that he had become deemed member in respect of Shop Nos. 8, 9 and 10 in accordance with the provision of Section 22(2) of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960, hereinafter referred to as 'the said Act'. It is apparent that the Revisional Authority has interferred with the said order on totally extraneous grounds, without addressing itself to the said issue regarding deemed membership. The learned Advocate for the respondent No. 1 Society has stated that in terms of the provisions of law by which the Society is governed, membership is available only in relation to the flats while the garages a...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : 2004(2)ALLMR869; 2004(3)BomCR473; (2004)106BOMLR41
S.T. Kharche, J.1. In both these petitions, common questions are involved and, therefore, they can be conveniently disposed of by this judgment.2. By invoking the writ jurisdiction of this Court under Articles 226 and 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner/employee has filed W.P. No. 2334/91 whereas W.P. No. 2862/91 has been filed by the management challenging the order dated 29.8.1991 passed by the School Tribunal in Appeal No. 155 of 1988-A, whereby it held that the departmental enquiry started against the petitioner/employee was vitiated and, therefore, the order of termination dated 5.12.1988 was set aside. The School Tribunal directed that the employee be treated to have been retired from the service with effect from 1.1.1989 without payment of back wages for the period from 1.1.1989 till the date of his superannuation, i.e. 30.6.1999.3. Brief facts are as under:The petitioner/employee was appointed as an Assistant Teacher some time in June, 1964 and thereafter he was ap...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : 2005(2)ALLMR768; 2005(2)BomCR416; 2005(1)MhLj949
V.G. Palshikar, J.1. By this petition the petitioner has challenged the order dated 30-5-2002 passed by the Deputy Director of Education, Pune rejecting the request of respondent No. 1 for condoning the condition of five years experience in relation to the appointment of the petitioner as Head Master.2. Facts giving rise to this petition stated briefly are that the petitioner belonging to backward class was a senior teacher in respondent No. 1-Society's School. When it came to appointment of Head Master whose experience and other attaining circumstances the Management appointed the petitioner as Head Master though he did not possess experience of five years as contemplated in the Rules. This action of the Management was disapproved by the Education Authorities by its order dated 3-7-2001. The petitioner therefore approached this Court against that order in Writ Petition No. 3627 of 2001 which was decided by a Division Bench of this Court on 24-8-2001. The order impugned dated 3-7-2001 ...
Tag this Judgment!