Court : Kerala
Reported in : 1979CriLJ177
ORDERP. Janaki Amma, J.1. The petitioner is the complainant in C. C. 8/77 on the file of the Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Alwaye. Offences punishable under Sections 403, 409, 420 and 477-A read with Section 34 I. P. C were alleged against the first respondent and 5 others who are the office bearers of the H. M. D. P. Sabha, Moothakunnam. After the filing of the complaint, a search warrant was issued under Section 93 of the Code of Criminal Procedure Act 2 of 1974 for searching the office of the Sabha and for seizing certain documents specified therein. Pursuant to the search warrant, books, documents and papers were produced before the Court. The 2nd accused thereafter filed Cri. M. P. 50 of 1977 for recalling the search warrant and for the return of the seized documents to him.The contention put forward on his behalf was that the issue of search warrant was illegal and without jurisdiction in view of Article 20(3) of the Constitution. Reliance was placed on the decisions in Sta...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : AIR1981Ker64
ORDERGeorge Vadakkel, J.1. The petitioner complains of undue return of the 1st respondent from the Ollur Assembly Constituency at the election held in Jan., 1980. He alleges commission of the corrupt practices of undue influence and appeal to religious sentiments by the 1st respondent's agents with his (1st respondent's) knowledge and consent and at his instance; and of the electoral offence of violation of Section 130(1)(e) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 (hereinafter, the Act) by the 1st respondent. He also complains of undue election on the ground of non-compliance with Article 326 of the Constitution. The 1st respondent defends his return denying all the material allegations advanced by the petitioner.2. The corrupt practices alleged are : (i) Publication of Ext. P 4 by P. W. 6 as the Convenor of the Diocesan Political Committee of the Trichur Catholic Diocese (hereinafter mentioned as the Political Committee) and of Ext. P 5 by him in his personal capacity; and (ii) ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : AIR1982Ker257; 1984(3)ECC328; 1984(17)ELT81(Ker)
ORDERU.J. Bhat, J. 1. This is a petition filed by the Madras Rubber Factory Limited under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for a declaration that Section 12(1) of the Rubber Act 24 of 1947 (for short the 'Act') is violative of Article 14 of the Constitution if construed as conferring power to levy cess in some cases on the weight of rubber including moisture and foreign materials and in other cases by excluding the foreign materials and moisture; to declare that notification, Ext. P-11 is violative of Article 14 of the Constitution; to declare that the petitioner company is liable to pay cess only on the dry rubber contents of the scrap rubber purchased after excluding milling waste; and to issue a writ of certjorari quashing demand notices Exts. P-t to P-9 in relation to levy of cess on scrap rubber and to call for the records relating to poceedings in O. P. Nos. 528 of 1976, 529 of 1976, 167 of 1977, 637 of 1977, 139 of 1978, 184 of 1979, 269 of 1979, 468 of 1979 and 27 of 19...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : AIR1983Ker200
Khalid, J.1. A Division Bench of this Court while considering a series of writ petitions in which judgment waspronounced on 23rd December, 1981 detected various irregularities in the conduct of examination, preparation of mark-lists etc. During the hearing, some of the answer papers, chosen at randoms of the candidates selected for admission to the M. B. B. S. Degree were re-examined with the help of competent academicians. Re-examination made alarming disclosures. Such disclosures made the Court to alert the authorities far necessary follow-up action in the following words:'Certain element of deterrence is necessary in dealing with persons associated with malpractices whether it be the candidates, examiners or the University Staff. Having looked into files concerning such action by the University of of Kerala in the past, we arc afraid that persons concerned in such malpractices have been dealt with very softly. Whenever cases come to the notice of the University authorities or Govern...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : AIR1986Ker15
P.C. Balakrishna Menon, J.1. By this writ petition the petitioner seeks a declaration that the Pulaya caste in Kerala falls under Entry 54 in the list of Scheduled Castes in Kerala appended to the Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order, 1950, as amended by Central Act 108 of 1976.2. The petitioner is a member of the Pulaya Community belonging to the erstwhile Travancore-Cochin area of the Kerala State. He is presently working as Supervisor in the Posts and Telegraphs Department in the Cochin Foreign Post Office. He is also the Vice President of the Kerala Harijan Federation and the President of the All India Scheduled Castes/Tribes Federation of Post and Telegraph Employees, Kerala Circle.3. After the amendment of the Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order, 1950 by Act 108 of 1976, the 4th respondent issued a circular letter requiring all officials belonging to Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes, working in the Department to produce caste certificates. As per orders issued by the Stat...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : [1986]157ITR711(Ker)
Bhaskaran, C.J.1. The counsel for the assessee having canvassed the correctness of the decision of this court in Jairam v. CIT : [1979]117ITR638(Ker) and George Paul Puthumn v. CIT : [1980]126ITR168(Ker) , the question of law arising from the decision of the Appellate Tribunal has been referred to a Full Bench by the Division Bench, before which the matter came up for hearing at the first instance. The question of law referred to this court by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Cochin Bench, under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, pursuant to the direction by this court in the judgment dated February 28, 1978, in O. P. Nos. 4770 and 4772 of 1975, reads as follows ;' Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, as per the ratio of the Supreme Court decisions in Shamlal Narula v. CIT : [1964]53ITR151(SC) and Ramanathan Chettiar v. CIT : [1967]63ITR458(SC) , the land acquisition interest of Rs. 80,253 included by the Income-tax Officer under Section 5(l)(b) of the...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : AIR1986Ker256
Sukumaran, J. 1. The forty eight. writ appeals now raise one vital point about vires, scope and amplitude of Rule 6 of the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Cess Rules, 1978. The rule has been framed under the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Cess Act, 1977 (Central Act 36/77) (hereinafter referred to for brevity's sake as the 'Cess Act'). The inter connection between the Cess Act and the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974, (hereinafter referred to as the 'Pollution Act') (Central Act 6/74) would be an important facet of the question under consideration.2. The writ petitions sought diverse reliefs; and raised before the learned single Judge three points :(i) The Pulp Division is not a 'Specified industry' within the meaning of Section 2(c) of the Act, and no cess can consequently be levied in respect of that Division under Section 3; (ii) The proceedings of the appellate committee are vitiated by legal bias; and (iii) Rule (6) of the Water (Prev...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : 1988(15)ECC146; 1988(15)LC9(Kerala); 1988(34)ELT571(Ker)
P.K. Shamsuddin, J.1. This appeal has been directed against the order of acquittal passed by the Court of Additional Judicial Magistrate of I Class, Trivandrum in a complaint filed by the Assistant Collector of Central Excise, Trivandrum, alleging that both the respondents committed offences punishable under Section 135(1) of the Customs Act, 1962. In acquitting the respondents the learned Magistrate based his decision mainly on the non-production of the notifications or copies thereof issued by the Central Government in exercise of the powers conferred by Section 11B and 123(2) of the Customs Act which is referred to hereinafter as 'the Act' for short.Section 11B of the Act lays down as follows :'11B, Power of Central Government to notify goods. If having regard to the magnitude of the illegal import of goods of any class or description, the Central Government is satisfied that it is expedient in the public interest to take special measures for the purpose of checking the illegal impo...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : 1988CriLJ1217
P.K. Shamsuddin, J.1. This appeal has been directed against the order of acquittal passed by the court of Additional Judicial Magistrate of I Class, Trivendrum in a complaint filed by the Assistant Collector of Central Excise, Trivendrum, alleging that both the respondents committed offences punishable under Section 135(1) of the Customs Act, 1962. In acquitting the respondents the learned Magistrate based his decision mainly on the non-production of the notifications or copies thereof issued by the Central Government in exercise of the powers conferred by Section 11-B and 123(2)of the Customs Act which is referred to hereinafter as 'the Act' for short.Section 11-B of the Actlays down as follows:11-B. Power of Central Government to notify goods. - If having regard to the magnitude of the illegal import of goods of any class or description, the Central Government is satisfied that it is expedient in the public interest to take special measures for the purpose of checking the illegal imp...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : (1990)ILLJ502Ker
ORDERV. Sivaraman Nair, J.1. Petitioner and the third respondent are Technical Assistants under the Kerala Water Authority. The former was working in Trivandrum for some considerable time and the latter at Alwaye for over three years. Both had rendered sufficiently long period of service at the respective stations and were due for transfer. In Ext.P1 order dated 15th March, 1989, petitioner was transferred to the World Bank Project Division, Alwaye, in the place of the third respondent, who was transferred from Alwaye to Public Health Division, Perumbavoor. Petitioner was relieved from Trivandrum pursuant to that order and he joined duty at Alwaye on 27th March, 1989. The third respondent joined duty at Perumbavoor.2. The Chief Engineer of the Water Authority passed a further order on 20th July, 1989, whereby the petitioner was transferred from Alwaye and was posted as Assistant Executive Engineer in the office of the Chief Engineer, Cochin. The 3rd respondent was transferred back from...
Tag this Judgment!