Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi
1. In the justice delivery system as regards the cardinal principle to dispense justice in functioning of the judiciary, the Apex Court in Rupa Ashok Hurra v. Ashok Hurra The role of the judiciary to merely interpret and declare the law was the concept of a bygone age. It is no more open to debate as it is fairly settled that the courts can so mould and lay down formulating principles and guidelines as to adapt and adjust to the changing conditions of the society, the ultimate objective being to dispense justice. In the recent years there is a discernible shift in the approach of the final courts in favour of rendering justice on the facts presented before them, without abrogating but bypassing the principle of finality of the judgment.2. Judicial propriety insofar as judicial certainty is concerned, warrants following of a decision of the coordinate Bench, failing which, to refer it to a larger Bench. The Apex Court in Sub Inspector Rooplal and Ors. v. Lt. Governor through Chief Secr...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : 2003(1)AWC739; (2003)1UPLBEC749
R.B. Mishra, J. 1. In this writ petition order dated 29.11.1997, passed by Sub-Divisional Officer/ Appointing and Punishing Authority, Garautha (Jhansi), has been challenged whereby the petitioner's service has been terminated on the ground that the petitioner was absent from duty, for less collection of revenue, depositing the revenue to the treasury without getting it verified by senior officer, not depositing the revenue timely to the treasury or for not depositing to the concerned man. Heard Sri Chandra Mohan Jha, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Sri S.S. Sharma, additional chief standing counsel along with Sri Raj Kumar standing counsel for the respondents. 2. Brief fact necessary for adjudication of the present writ petition was that petitioner was suspended on 21.3.1996 and was served a charge-sheet on 5.9.1996 which was replied by the petitioner. An Enquiry Officer served a supplementary charge-sheet and the petitioner had again submitted his reply and thereafter t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : 1992(3)ALT224
D.J. Jagannadha Raju, J.1. These two writ appeals arise out of the common judgment dated 16th October, 1987, in writ petitions W.P. No. 3555 of 1986 and W.P. No. 4753 of 1986. W.P. No. 3555 of 1986 was filed questioning the proposal to conduct an investigation by the Lokayukta into Complaint No. 871 of 1986 regarding three allegations. W.P. No. 4753 of 1986 was filed questioning the proceedings of the Lokayukta in Dis. No. 4144 dated 15-4-1986 initiating an investigation on his own motion. The learned single judge allowed the two writ petitions and quashed the proceedings impugned in the two writ petitions.2. The present respondent Dr. B. Seshadri was working as the Principal and Superintendent of the Government Dental College/Hospital, Hyderabad. A student by name C. Sekhar gave a complaint to the Lokayukta. Subsequently the complainant did not support the allegations in the complaint and when an opportunity was given to him to fulfil the formalities of a complaint under the Andhra Pr...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : AIR1996Cal28,100CWN197
ORDER1. The petitioner in this application have, inter alia, questioned a notification dated 4-2-1994 issued by the Central Government in exercise of its power conferred upon it under Section 24(1) of the Mines Act, 1952 (hereinafter referred to as 'the said Act').2. The fact of the matter lies in a very narrow compass.The petitioner No. 1 is an Association of Officers of Coal Industries and the petitioner No. 2 is the General Secretary of the petitioner No. 1. The other petitioners are Officers of the New Kenda Colliery belonging to Eastern Coal Fields Ltd. An accident occurred in the said New Kenda Colliery as a result whereof 55 lives were lost on 25-1-1994. The impugned notification reads thus:--'Whereas an accident took place on 25th January, 1994 at New Kenda Colliery of Eastern Coal Fields, situate at Burdwan District in the State of West Bengal as result of which there has been loss of lives and properties. And whereas it is the opinion of the Central Government that there must...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 2357 OF2017GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI .....APPELLANT(S) UNION OF INDIA VERSUS WITH .....RESPONDENT(S) CONT. PETITION (CIVIL) No.175 OF2016IN WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) No.539 OF1986CIVIL APPEAL No.2360 OF2017CIVIL APPEAL No.2359 OF2017CIVIL APPEAL No.2363 OF2017CIVIL APPEAL No.2362 OF2017CIVIL APPEAL No.2358 OF2017CIVIL APPEAL No.2361 OF2017CRIMINAL APPEAL No.277 OF2017AND CIVIL APPEAL No.2364 OF20172 JUDGMENT A.K. SIKRI, J.Prologue All these appeals arise out of the judgment dated August 04, 2016 rendered by the High Court of Delhi in writ petitions filed before it under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. We would refer to the subject matter of those writ petitions and the manner in which the High Court dealt with and decided the same at the appropriate stage. However, it would be pertinent to point out that in the said impugned judgment, main issue related to the status of National Capital Terri...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
1. Whether reporters of Local papers may be Yes allowed to see the judgment?2. To be referred to the reporter or not? Yes3. Whether the judgment should be reported in Yes the Digest?ORDER.1. We preface our decision by noting the argument of learned counsel for the petitioners, being that so reprehensible is the conduct of the respondents, who have been caught literally with their pants down of accepting bribe that this Court ought to extend no benefit to the respondents. It was urged that law has to be interpreted, in the instant case, keeping in view the grave misdemeanour of the respondents. In other words, the counsel for the petitioners urged that the respondents are not entitled to any hearing. The argument is emotional and is rejected at the outset for the reason a system governed by the rule of law requires dispute resolution as per law. The submission made by learned counsel for the petitioners can be best repelled by noting a dialogue between Sir Thomas More on the one side an...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
V. Kameswar Rao, J 1. The challenge in this writ petition by the State Bank of India, is to the recommendation/order/advice dated February 9, 2016 issued by the National Commission for Scheduled Castes, respondent No.1 directing the petitioner Bank to reconsider and re-examine the whole issue of penalty imposed upon the respondent No.2 by the Disciplinary Authority. 2. Some of the relevant facts as noted from the writ petition are, the respondent No.2 was posted at Faridabad Main Branch as Special Assistant on March 1, 2007. While he was working such, a surprise investigation was carried out in the Faridabad Main Branch by an investigating team. The investigating team submitted its report, wherein it inter-alia stated as under:- Later on one Shri Raj Kumar Shubh who was earlier posted at this branch and since transferred to CAC Faridabad at the 1st floor of the same building, entered the room a number of times trying apparently to help the staff to tally the cash ..so according to us a...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Reported in : AIR1967Mad263; 1967CriLJ1007
(1) In view of the ultimate order which I propose to pass in this case, namely, for reference to an appropriately constituted Bench, I shall refer to the facts of this revision case as well as the arguments advanced, therein briefly.(2) A compliant was laid by the Collector of Customs, Madras against ten persons for offences under Section 120-B I.P.C. (conspiracy) read with Section 135 of the Customs Act 1962 (Central) Act 52 of 1962 (concerning smuggling of prohibited goods including possession knowing or having reason to believe them to be smuggled and therefore liable to confiscation), under Section 23(1)(A) and 23(B) of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act and under rule 131-B of the Defence of India Rules (illegal possession of gold). The complaint arose out of an incident which involved transport from Bombay to Madras of 750 bars of gold each weighing ten tolas, whose value would exceed Rs. seven lacks. It was alleged that out of those, 700 bars were brought in a car from Bombay ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi
1. This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the learned CIT(Appeals) dated 5-8-2004 relating to assessment year 1999-2000.2. The assessee has taken as many as 14 grounds in this appeal but at the time of hearing, the learned Counsel for the assessee submitted that ground Nos. 1 to 4 involving a purely legal issue relating to assumption of jurisdiction by the AO should be adjudicated first. The learned DR agreed for this course. Hence, we proceed to adjudicate ground Nos. 1 to 4 first. 1. That the provisions of Section 147/148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 are not applicable at all. 2. That the AO has no valid material to have any reason to believe that the income has escaped assessment Under Section 147 of the IT At and the reassessment made in furtherance of such invalid assumption of jurisdiction is invalid, non-est in law. 3. That there is no nexus between alleged material and the facts of the appellant's case and, therefore, the provisions of Section 147 are not ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : (1994)2GLR1234; (1994)IILLJ1234Guj
1. The only question which arises in these three petitions under Arts. 226 and 227 of the constitution of India filed by the Industrial Company is whether the Labour court had committed an error of law or jurisdiction by committing procedural irregularity in calling upon the employer to produce documentary and oral evidence in three reference cases relating to dismissal of the three workmen. The petitioner in all the three petitions is the same. Originally thirty-three references were made to the Labour court, Rajkot, under Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act relating to dismissal of thirty-three workmen, but thirty disputes came to be settled or disposed of in accordance with law. 2(a) The workman Mahavirsinh Shivubha was a gardener in the garden department of the petitioner's factory and his services were terminated with effect from 25.1.1982, hence the dispute was referred to the Labour Court in Reference (LC) No. 958 of 1984. 2(b) The workman Raghu Arjan who was serving as T...
Tag this Judgment!