Court : Karnataka
Reported in : AIR1958Kant184; AIR1958Mys184; (1958)36MysLJ150
S.R. Das Gupta, C. J. 1. This application relates to the validity of an order made by the learned Judge who decided an election case By which he ordered that the election of the petitioner be set aside and respondent 1 be declared duly elected. The matter arises in this way :The election in question was held on 3-6-1957, to Ward No. 5 of the Athani Municipality, Belgaum District. On 5-6-1957, the scrutiny was made and the results were declared. The petitioner was declared elected along with two others, it being a three-seated constituency. Respondent 1 before us, applied to the District Judge, Belgaum on 12-6-1957, for setting aside the election and for an order that he should be declared elected.The grounds taken by the respondent in his said application inter alia were that there were corrupt practices committed in the said election and there was partiality of one Kulakarni who was the Chairman of the Municipality and the Chairman of the scrutiny committee. It was also alleged that c...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : 2007(4)BomCR784; 2007(5)MhLj454
Chavan R.C., J.1. Rule. By consent made returnable forthwith.2. By this petition the petitioner, a student of engineering with respondent No. 4 college, takes exception to the communication dated 8.12.2005 by the Caste Scrutiny Committee, informing the petitioner that he was not entitled to have his claim as belonging to caste Kalar (OBC) examined by the committee since he was a migrant. The petitioner, therefore, seeks direction to the committee to decide his caste claim within stipulated time since absence of decision of his caste claim has hampered his educational career. He also sought direction to the university and college to declare his result of first year examination, to which he was provisionally admitted, subject to verification of his caste claim, and to allow him to continue his education as a candidate belonging to O.B.C., or in the alternative as a candidate of open category.3. Respondent No. 3 university filed submission stating that failure of the petitioner to produce...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1964SC1690; (1964)66BOMLR698; [1964(9)FLR324]; (1964)IILLJ639SC; 1965MhLJ73(SC); [1964]7SCR639
Das Gupta, J.1. A short point arises for consideration in this appeal. But to understand how the point arises it is necessary to embark on a somewhat lengthy statement of facts. 2. Three Road Transport Corporations established under the Road Transport Corporation Act, 1950 were operating in the States of Bombay, Madhya Pradesh and Hyderabad in 1956 when the States Reorganisation Act, 1956 was enacted. These three corporations were known as the Bombay State Road Transport Corporation, the Provincial Transport Service and the State Transport Marathewada respectively. As a result of the reorganisation of the States under the States Reorganisation Act, 1956 the former State of Bombay lost certain of its territories to the newly formed State of Mysore and some areas to the State of Rajasthan. On the other hand, the State of Bombay gained the Marathewada from the State of Hyderabad and the Vidharbha area from the State of Madhya Pradesh and certain other areas from the then existing State of...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : AIR2000Bom211; 2000(2)ALLMR48; 2000(2)BomCR556
ORDERR.M. LODHA, J.1. The plaintiffs have filed this suit against the 1st defendant vessel to be condemned in the sum of Rs. 45 lacs along with interest at the rate of 18%f per annum and for direction that the 1st defendant vessel to be sold and the proceeds thereof to be applied towards the satisfaction of plaintiffs claim. The plaintiffs have claimed damages and prayed that 2nd defendant be ordered and decreed to pay to the plaintiffs the sum of Rs. 45 lacs along with 18% interest thereon.2. The plaintiffs are the parents of Mr. Arvind Dube who died on 16-8-1996 on board the 1st defendant vessel when she was lying at Kandla Port. The 1st defendant is the vessel M.V. 'Umang' registered in St. Vincent and Grenadines. The 2nd defendant is a Liberian Shipping company and owner of the 1st defendant vessel. The 3rd defendant is the local agent of the 1st defendant vessel. The suit has been filed in the Admiralty jurisdiction of this Court on 11-3-1997 and at that time the vessel was lying ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : ILR1998KAR1532; 1998(2)KarLJ621
ORDER1. A question of considerable public importance arises for consideration in this writ petition. The question precisely is whether the Bombay Public Trusts Act, 1950 is in its application to what are known as Bombay Karnataka Areas of the present day State of Karnataka unconstitutional being discriminatory hence offensive to Article 14. In order to correctly appreciate the rival contentions urged at the Bar, it is necessary to briefly trace the historical background, in which the impugned enactment continues in its extra territorial application beyond the limits of the erstwhile State of Bombay now the State of Maharashtra.2. Consequent upon the enactment of the States Reorganisation Act, State of Mysore-now the State of Karnataka was carved out as an independent administrative unit comprising the following:(1) Areas included in the erstwhile Princely State of Mysore;(2) Areas from the erstwhile State of Hyderabad presently known as the Hyderabad Karnataka areas;(3) Areas from the ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : 1974MPLJ691; [1974]34STC504(MP)
ORDERR.K. Tankha, J. 1. The petitioner by this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution seeks to challenge an order of assessment of sales tax passed by the Sales Tax Officer, Chhindwara Circle, on 23rd April, 1960. The period for which the tax was assessed by this order is from 1st October, 1953, to 26th December, 1968. The sales assessed relate to manganese ore raised from the mines of the petitioner which are situated in Balaghat District of Madhya Pradesh and Nagpur District of Maharashtra. But as regards sales of manganese ore raised from the mines in Nagpur District, the period covered is up to 31st October, 1956, i.e., the sales subsequent to this date of manganese ore raised from the mines of Nagpur District have not been included in the assessment. The Sales Tax Officer determined the turnover in a lump sum at Rs. 10,42,153.75. On this turnover the petitioner was assessed to Rs. 31,580 as tax and a sum of Rs. 5,000 was imposed as penalty for failing to apply for registra...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : (1997)2GLR1530
S.K. Keshote, J.1. Heard learned Counsels for the parties.2. The petitioners, in all 25 in number, filed this Special Civil Application and claim has been made that the action of the respondents not to consider the petitioners for promotion to the cadre carrying a pay scale of Rs. 425-700, be declared to be illegal, null and void.3. The petitioners were originally appointed in the cadre of Surveyor/Clerk between the period 15th January 1951 to 1st August 1955, in the then State of Saurashtra. The petitioners have passed the sub-service Departmental Examination and they were promoted to the post of Maintenance Surveyors. The petitioners have given out in the writ petition that the present pay scales of the post of Surveyor/ Clerk and Maintenance Surveyor are Rs. 290-489 and Rs. 380-560 respectively. All the service conditions of the petitioners were to be governed by the Rules and Regulations framed by the State of Saurashtra from time to time. The petitioners have come up with the case...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : AIR1992Bom435; 1992(3)BomCR494; (1992)94BOMLR984
ORDER1. The Petitioner, who is the Chairman of Airfreight Limited and claims to be the Director of 14 other Public Companies espousing the cause of litigants in Greater Bombay, by way of public interest litigation has filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging the constitutional validity of the Bombay City Civil Court and Bombay Court of Small Causes (Enhancement of Pecuniary Jurisdic-tion and Amendment) Act, 1986 (Maharashtra Act No. XV of 1987) -- hereinafter referred to as 'the impugned Act'. 2. Apart from challenging the competency of the State Legislature as regards the impugned Act the Petitioner has also sought a declaration that the Notification dated 20th August 1991 -- Exh. B to the petition, issued by the State of Maharashtra is illegal, arbitrary and violative of Article 14 and Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India. 3. This petition raises pure questions of law relating to the legislative competence of the State Legislature. ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : AIR1962Guj128; (1962)0GLR269
Desai, C.J. 1. This Special Full Bench has been constituted in order to consider the question relating to the binding nature of the judicial precedents of the Bombay High Court prior to 1st May, 1960, on this High Court. This very matter was considered by a Full Bench of three Judges of this Court including the then Chief Justice in the case of Anand Municipality v. Union of India, reported in : AIR1960Guj40 . Later on, a Division Bench of this Court consisting of Mr. Justice Raju and Mr. Justice Bakshi found it difficult to accept the view expressed by the Full Bench in the aforesaid case and made a request for referring the question to another Full Bench for a re-consideration of the matter. It was held by the Full Bench of this Court in the aforesaid case of (1960) 1 Guj LR 82 : (AIR 1960 Gujarat 40) (FB) that the judicial precedents of the Bombay High Court prior to the 1st of May, 1960, i. e., the day on which the State of Gujarat came into being fell within the ambit of the words...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : AIR1965Guj234a
Desai, C.J. (1) This special civil application raises important questions of law relating to the construction of some of the provisions of the States Reorganisation Act, 1956. There has been a divergence of opinion between the State Government on the one hand and the Central Government on the other, and divergent views have been held at different times. The petitioners are persons employed in the subordinate secretariat service of the Government of the State of Gujarat. Prior to the reorganisation of the State of Bombay on 1st November 1956, they were employed in the subordinate secretariat service of the existing State of Bombay. They have prayed for the issue of a writ of mandamus or a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction to restrain the State of Gujarat, its agents and servants from implementing the resolution dated 1st April 1960,passed by the Government of the former State of Bombay where under an alteration had been made in the previous...
Tag this Judgment!