Court : Patna
Chandramauli Kr. Prasad, J. 1. Prayer of the petitioner in this writ application are as follows :--(1) To quash the order dated 27.2.2001 (Annexure-4) of the Government of Jharkhand in the Department of Water Resources and Energy whereby Tenughat Vidyut Nigam Ltd. has been declared to be an undertaking of the Government of Jharkhand in exercise of the power under Section 47 of the Bihar State Re-organisation Act, 2000. By this order it has been further declared that in the Memorandum and Article of Association of the Tenughat Vidyut Nigam Ltd. the expression 'Bihar' and 'Bihar Rajya' be read as 'Jharkhand' and 'Jharkhand Rajya' respectively;(2) To quash the order dated 24.5.2001 (Annexure-5) of the Government of Jharkhand in its Energy Department whereby in exercise of power under Article 49(1)(b)(d) and (e) of the Articles of Association and in supersession of all the earlier orders, it had constituted the Board of Directors of the Tenughat Vidyut Nigam Ltd;(3) To quash the order da...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Jharkhand
-1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W. P. (S) No. 7438 of 2013 ... Munni Devi Petitioner -V e r s u s- 1. Central Coalfields Ltd. represented through its Chairman-cum-Managing Director, Ranchi 2. The General Manager (Personnel), CCL, Ranchi 3. The Project Officer, Kargali Washery Project, CCL, Bermo, Bokaro 4. Personnel Manager, Kargali Washery Project, CCL, Bermo, Bokaro 5. Commissioner, Coal Mines Provident Fund, Dhanbad. ... ...Respondents CORAM: - HONBLE MR. JUSTICE APARESH KUMAR SINGH For the Petitioner: - Mr. Manish Kumar , Adv. For the CCL : - M/s D. K. ChaKrawarty, Adv. For the CMPF :- M/s Prashant Vidyarthy & Mritunjay Choudhary ... 02/13.07.2015 Heard learned counsel for the parties. The petitioner is widow of late Lal Mohan Prasad, who went missing on 05.06.2003 after leaving his house to attend his office as a piece rated worker at Kargali Washery Project of the respondent-CCL. A 'sanha' was also lodged being S.D.E. No. 434 dated 24.08.2003 as a report of his mi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Reported in : (1993)IILLJ226P& H; (1992)101PLR408
V.K. Jhanji, J.1. The petitioner-firm is carrying on its business at Sonepat and is subject to the Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). The petitioner-firm made a default in paying employees' provident fund, family pension fund contribution, insurance fund contributions and administrative charges/inspection charges for the period April 1979, to December, 1986. On account of this default, the respondent served a notice dated October 6, 1987 (Annexure P-1), under Section 14B of the Act calling upon the petitioner-firm to show cause as to why damages under different heads be not imposed and recovered from the petitioner-firm as the firm had defaulted to pay contributions in time. In response to the said notice, the petitioner firm submitted a detailed reply explaining the circumstances which prevented it from making deposit within the stipulated time. The respondent, after considering the reply, ordered that a sum of Rs....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : 90CWN370,(1994)IIILLJ825Cal
P.K. Mukherjee, J.1. The short point that calls for determination in this case is whether an employee is entitled to the gratuity in terms of Section 4 of the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972, after leaving the service and being re-appointed subsequently by the Company, as, in view of clear provisions contained in the said section that gratuity shall be payable to an employee on the termination of his employment after he has rendered continuous service for not more than five years.(a) on his superannuation, or (b) on his retirement or resignation, or (c) on his death or disablement due to accident or disease. 2. In this matter, the employee claimed a sum of Rs. 4,745.25 ps. being gratuity payable to him, on the basis of 19 years of continuous service, and the controlling authority refused the claim but in an appeal, the Appellate Authority had allowed the claim and the petitioner moved the present writ petition against the appellate order.3. Although the Rule was issued by this Court as...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Kolkata
Reported in : (1985)13ITD309(Kol.)
1. In all these appeals filed by the department, the only ground taken assails the finding of the Commissioner (Appeals) holding that income from leasehold property at 57, Park Street Calcutta is assessable as profits and gains of business and not as income from other sources under Section 56 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act').2. The assessment years with which we are concerned in these appeals are 1973-74 to 1978-79. The assessee is a limited company. During the previous year relevant to the assessment year 1973-74, the assessee took house property at 57, Park Street, Calcutta, on lease from Karnani Properties Ltd. At the time of taking the property on lease by the assessee-company, the ground floor of the building was already in occupation of two tenants. After renovation of the building, the assessee let out the entire ground floor to the Allahabad Bank on a monthly rent of Rs. 5,000. Before the ITO, the assessee claimed that the income derived from the said property should be...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1976SC2520; (1976)3SCC852; [1977]1SCR359
Jaswant Singh, J.1. This appeal by certificate granted under Article 133(1)(a) and (c) of the Constitution which is directed against the judgment and decree dated March 25, 1968 of the High Court of Calcutta in Appeal No.255 of 1963 raises important questions relating to the interpretation of certain provisions of the Bihar Land Reforms Act, 1950 (Act XXX of 1950) (hereinafter referred to as 'the B.L.R. Act') as also of the Mining Leases (Modification of Terms) s, 1956 providing for the modification and alteration of terms and conditions of the mining leases granted prior to the commencement of the Mines and Minerals (Regulation and Development) Act, 1948 (Act 53 of 1948) (hereinafter referred to as 'the 1948 Act') and of the Mines and Minerals (Regulation and Development) Act, 1957 (Act 67 of 1957) (hereinafter referred to as 'the 1957 Act') which replaced the 1948 Act on June 1, 1958.2. The facts and circumstances leading to this appeal are : By an indenture of lease dated July 31, 1...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1972SC1216; 1974(0)BLJR176; 1972LabIC659; (1972)IILLJ90SC; (1972)2SCC27; [1972]3SCR805
I.D. Dua, J. 1. Facts giving rise to this appeal by special leave may briefly be stated:2. On May 18, 1956 an award was made by Shri Majumdar,which is popularly known as the Majumdar Award. On May 23,1960 the Central Government, in exercise of the power conferred by Section 36A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 14 of 1947 (hereinafter called the Act) referred to Shri G. Palit, Chairman, Central Government Industrial Tribunal, Dhanbad the question.Whether 'traffic' is to be placed in Grade II of the clerical service in terms of the said Award the award being the award of the All India Industrial Tribunal (Colliery Disputes) published in the Gazette of India Extraordinary Part II, Section 3 dated the 26th May, 1956 (S.R.O. No. 1224 dated 18.5.56).'Traffics' are a category of clerical staff covered by the award of the All India Industrial Tribunal (Colliery Disputes), popularly known as the 'Majumdar Award', and it appears that in the opinion of the Government a difficulty or doubt had aris...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : 1993(1)ALT439
ORDERImmaneni Panduranga Rao, J.1. This writ petition is filed by a Senior Advocate for issue of a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondent to pay Rs. 2,18,600/- (Rupees two lakhs eighteen thousand and six hundred only) together with simple interest at 12% per annum from 1st April, 1966 to the date of payment.2. The claim of the petitioner is that he worked as the Legal Adviser to Messrs Jayanthi Shipping Company (hereinafter referred to as 'the company') for the years 1961 to 1966; that he has been submitting a diary of work done for the company regularly for each year's work done, in. the subsequent year: that the company was usually making payments in the next financial year for the work done in the previous year; that the company was taken over with its assets and liabilities by the respondent; that as such the respondent is bound to pay whatever sum is due to the petitioner from the company; that there was lot of correspondence between the parties; that the petitioner addressed s...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : (1995)IIILLJ769Kant
ORDERRajendra Babu, J.1. These two petitions are disposed off by this common order since the question of law involved is one and the same.2. The petitioner in Writ Petition 2040/1984, which is a public limited company, was supplying electricity to the city of Belgaum till 1974 when by virtue of Section 4 of the Karnataka Electricity Supply Undertakings ( Acquisition) Act, 1974 (hereinafter referred to as the Acquisition Act) the undertaking of the petitioner company stood transferred to and vested in the Government. As a consequence thereof under Section 11 of the Acquisition Act the employees under the petitioner company, employed before the vesting date became, as from that date, the employees of the Government and thereafter when the undertaking was handed over to the second respondent -Electricity Board those employees continued to be such on the same terms and conditions and with same rights and privileges in the matter of conditions of service. The proviso to that section also pr...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : [1982]137ITR346(MP)
G.P. Singh, C.J. 1. The question of law referred in this reference is as follows: 'Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was justified in allowing continuation of registration to the assessee-firm for the assessment year 1973-74?' 2. The reference arises out of the proceedings for a continuation of the registration of the assessee-firm for the year 1973-74. The facts briefly stated are that Rani Padmavati Devi, wife of the former ruler of Khairagarh, obtained the lease of a forest block from the ruler on 29th December, 1947. The area included within the block was 5,585 acres. After the merger of the State of Khairagarh, the Governor of Madhya Pradesh on 23rd June, 1953, executed a lease deed in favour of the Rani. Under this lease the Rani is required to pay annual rent of Rs. 100. The lease is a perpetual lease. The lease authorises the Rani to exploit the forest within the leased area in accordance with the working plan sanctioned by the Governme...
Tag this Judgment!