Court : Mumbai
Reported in : 1951CriLJ1140
Hidayatullah, J.1. This is an application purporting to be under Article 226 of the Constitution for the following reliefs:(i) A writ of Mandamus directing the respondents not to enforce against the petitioner the Central Provinces & Berar Prohibition Act VII (7) of 1938 or all such sections of the same as may be found inconsistent with the Constitution:(ii) a writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to withdraw & cancel all such notifications rules & orders made by the respondents in exercise of the powers conferred on them by the provisions of the said Act as may be found inconsistent with the Constitution:(iii) all the costs of the petition, &(iv) Any other relief that this Honourable Court may deem proper to grant.2. The petitioner states that he is a permanent resident of Nagpur and is earning Rs. 100 per month & has been accustomed for a number of years to take alcoholic drinks, generally country liquor, at an average of 4 ounces per day.3. Since the enforcement of the Central ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : AIR1993Bom327; 2004(3)BomCR371; 1993(1)MhLj685
1. By these writ petitions filed under Art. 326 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have impugned the statutory notification dated the 14th of September, 1992, bearing No. BPA-1088/ 1866/EXC-3, issued by the Government of Maharashtra under S. 139(1)(a) of the Bombay Prohibition Act, 1949, declaring the area of Gadchiroli district of the State 'as a dry district' by enforcing 'prohibition' throughout the district with effect from 2nd day of October, 1992 and follow-up and consequential orders issued by the Collector of Gadchiroli on 15th September, 1992 directing cancellation of subsisting licences expiring on 31st March, 1993 with effect from expiry of 15 days from the date of the impugned orders. Prior to issue of the impugned notification and the said orders, the petitioners in Writ Petition No. 2116 of 1992 were holding licences to sell country-liquor in Form Cl-III for the retail sale of country-liquor for the period 1st April, 1992 till 31st March, 1993. The basic facts ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : (1988)67CTR(Bom)221; [1988]173ITR136(Bom)
Pendse, J.1. This is an appeal preferred by the Revenue against the judgment dated July 30, 1982, delivered by Mr. Justice Madon (as he then was) in Miscellaneous Petition No. 218 of 1975 Siemens India Ltd. v. K. Subramanian, ITO : [1983]143ITR120(Bom) . The question which came up for consideration before the learned single judge was the ambit and the scope of the powers of the Income-tax Officer under section 7 of the Companies (Profits) Surtax Act, 1964 ('the 1964 Act'). The facts which gave rise to the filing of the petition are as follows :Siemens India Ltd. is a public limited company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956, and is assessed to income-tax. The previous year of the company is the period of 12 months ending on September 30 in each calendar year. The controversy in the petition was in respect of the provisional assessment for the assessment year 1974-75 in respect of which the previous year would be the year ending on September 30, 1973. The company submitted their...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : 1991(4)BomCR695
H.W. Dhabe, J.1. These two writ petitions which challenge the Notification of the State Government dated 26th June, 1991 issued under sub-section (3) of section 18 of the Goa, Daman and Diu Town and Country Planning Act, 1974 and its further consequential notification dated the same issued under sub-sections (1) and (3) of section 20 of the said Act can conveniently be disposed of by this common judgment. However, reference to the parties in this judgment would be as in the Writ Petition No. 240 of 1991 except where W.P. No. 243 of 1991 is particularly considered and referred to.2. The facts in Writ Petition No. 240 of 1991 are that the petitioner is the Chair-person of the South Planning and Development Authority and in Writ Petition No. 243 of 1991, the petitioner is the Goa Citizens League, which holds out itself as a Special activist organisation formed with a view to promote social, economic and educational cultural and political interests for achieving the progress and welfare of...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : (2008)215CTR(Bom)181; [2008]300ITR276(Bom)
F.I. Rebello, J.1. Petitioners have challenged the notice dt. 30th March, 1989 issued by the respondent No. 1 under Section 148 of the IT Act, 1961, seeking to reopen the petitioner's assessment for the asst. yr. 1984-85, for which the relevant previous year is year ended 30th June, 1983. Search operations were carried out on 27th Sept., 1988 at the business and residential premises amongst others of the petitioners. Assessment for the asst. yrs. 1972-73 to 1984-85 was sought to be reopened. Petitioners challenged the assessment for some of the years by separate petition being Writ Petn. No. 1374 of 1989. Petitions had been admitted and interim relief had been granted. Subsequently those petitions have been allowed in favour of the petitioner by order dt. 22nd Aug., 2005 [reported as Sanghvi Swiss Refills (P) Ltd. v. Smt. Arti Handa, Asstt. CIT and Anr. (2005) 199 CTR (Bom) 4852. The petitioner is in the business of manufacturing of ball pens and refills as also ink. Insofar as manufac...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai Aurangabad
R.M. Borde, J. 1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard finally by consent of learned Counsel for respective parties. 2.Petitioners in all these petitions are prospective applicants who are desirous of participating in the process initiated by Respondent-Maharashtra State Electricity Distribution Company Ltd., for making appointment to the post of Electrical Assistant (Vidyut Sahayyak). Petitioners are seeking direction to the Respondent-Company to provide maximum age relaxation up to 45 years to the petitioners belonging to Project/Earthquake Affected Persons category in the advertisement no.1/2012 published on 08.06.2012. It is also prayed to declare that petitioners belonging to age group of 18 to 45 years are qualified and entitled to apply for the post of Electrical Assistant and to direct the Respondent-Company to consider candidature of petitioners for the said post. Petitioners are also seeking to quash advertisement no.1/2012 being in contravention of Government Resol...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai Nagpur
B.P. Dharmadhikari, J. By this petition filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner seeks to challenge the order of termination dated 03.11.2009, passed by Respondent no.2 Additional General Manager/Engineering LMD National Aviation Company of India Limited. Though in the petition, order dated 05.10.2012 passed by the Scheduled Tribe Certificate Scrutiny Committee, Nagpur Division, Nagpur, invalidating caste claim of the petitioner as belonging to Halba Scheduled Tribe, has also been questioned, the petitioner has only claimed protection in employment and expressly restricted his challenge only to the order of termination and has given up the status as belonging to Halba Scheduled Tribe. Right to challenge order invalidating caste certificate is given up with knowledge that Respondent Employer as also Caste Scrutiny Committee are opposing the prayer for protection. This protection in service is being claimed on the basis of various judgments, particul...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
S.C. Dharmadhikari, J. 1 These Writ Petitions raise the issue of constitutional validity of the National Investigation Agency Act, 2008 (Act 34 of 2008) (for short NIA Act). 2 Hence, RULE. The Respondents waive service. By consent, Rule is made returnable forthwith. 3 Since both Writ Petitions involve common questions, they are being decided by this common judgment. For properly appreciating the arguments of parties, the facts in Writ Petition No.4049/2012 are referred to. 4 It is stated that the Petitioner has been arraigned as an accused No.1 in C.R. No.I130/ 2008 lodged at Azad Nagar Police Station, Malegaon on 30.09.2008 for offences punishable under Sections 302, 307, 324, 326, 427, 153A, 120B of the Indian Penal Code r/w Sections 3, 4, 5, 6 of the Indian Explosive Substance Act, 1908 r/w Sections 3, 5, 25 of the Arms Act, 1959 r/w Sections 15, 16, 17, 18, 20 and 23 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 along with ten other accused in the wake of a bomb blast that took...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
S.C. Dharmadhikari, J. 1. This Full Bench has been constituted to answer the following question:- Whether a remedy of election dispute under Section 16 of the said Act or Section 21 of the said Act of 1965 is available to a voter who is entitled to vote in General Ward Elections for challenging the election/nomination of a nominated Councillor? 2. Some facts necessary for the purpose of a decision on the question and the backdrop of the reference be noted now. 3. The Petitioner in Writ Petition No. 11278 of 2012 had been an elected Councillor of the Ulhasnagar Municipal Corporation and completed his tenure of five years from 2007 to 2012. He claims that he is eligible as well as qualified for being nominated as a Councillor, in terms of the Maharashtra Municipal Corporation (Qualifications and Appointment of Nominated Councillors) Rules, 2012. Apart from impleading the State of Maharashtra, the Corporation, Mayor/Presiding Officer, the Petitioner therein has impleaded Respondent Nos. ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : (1878)ILR2Bom148
Michael Westropp, C.J.1. On the 1st of May 1876 a warrant of arrest, under Section 201 of the old Civil Procedure Code (Act VIII of 1859), was issued against Ratansi Kalianji pursuant to a Judge's order of the 29th April 1876, upon an application for execution of a decree of the 27th April 1876. Ratansi Kalianji was arrested upon the 30th of October 1876, was brought before a Judge in Chamber on the 31st October 1876, and then finally committed by the Judge, 'until he (Ratansi Kalianji) satisfy the amount of the decree passed against (him) the said Ratansi Kalianji in the above suit.' Then followed in the same order the usual direction, under Section 278 of Act VIII of 1859, that the plaintiffs should pay to him subsistence allowance at the rate of 4 annas per diem, by monthly payments in advance. The receipts indorsed on the Judge's order by Mr. Lake, for the superintendent of the gaol, and by the sheriff, and the certificate of the latter, show that the detention of the prisoner Rata...
Tag this Judgment!