Court : Gujarat
Decided on : May-02-1974
Reported in : AIR1975Guj194
J.B. Mehta, J.1. The District Development Officer and the Ahmedabad District Panchayat, hereinafter referred to as 'the Panchayat', have filed this appeal as the learned Single Judge quashed the order of the District Development Officer removing the petitioner on August 21, 1971, and gave a declaration that he continued in service and was entitled to all emoluments and other benefits arising from his said appointment. The respondent originally joined service as a clerk in July 15, 1941, and thereafter he was made Assistant Accountant in the Ahmedahad District School Board from December 2, 1961. The Gujarat Panchayats Act, 1961, hereinafter referred to as 'the Panchayat Act' came into farce from April 1, 1963 under which the Ahmedabad District School Board was dissolved. Therefore, the petitioner was allocated to the District Panchayat from August 1, 1963, by the order, dated July 8, 1966, The D.D.O. transferred the petitioner to Agricultural branch under the District Panchayat and that...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Nov-07-1974
Reported in : AIR1975SC797; [1975]98ITR209(SC); (1975)3SCC765; [1975]2SCR640
R.S. Sarkaria, J.1. These writ petitions under Article 32 of the Constitution raise a question with regard to the validity of the 2nd Proviso to Clause (3) of the Taxation Laws (Extension to Union Territories) (Removal of Difficulties) Order 2 of 1970. The first five petitions of 1971 were urged earlier by Shri Ashok Sen and the rest have been argued now by Shri N. A. Palkhiwala. They are being disposed of by a common judgment.2. The petitioners are carrying on business in the Union Territories of Goa, Daman and Diu. Respondents 1 and 2 are the Union of India and the Income-tax Officer, respectively.3. Goa, Daman and Diu are erstwhile Portuguese territories which became a part of the Union of India on and from December 19, 1961. Thereupon, the President of India in exercise of powers under Article 240 of the Constitution promulgated the Taxation Laws (Extension to Union Territories) Regulation III of 1963 (for short, the Regulation). By Clause (3) of this Regulation, amongst other laws...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Decided on : Jun-17-1974
Morton v. Mancari - 417 U.S. 535 (1974) U.S. Supreme Court Morton v. Mancari, 417 U.S. 535 (1974) Morton v. Mancari No. 73-362 Argued April 24, 1974 Decided June 17, 1974 417 U.S. 535 APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO Syllabus Appellees, non-Indian employees of the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA), brought this class action claiming that the employment preference for qualified Indians in the BIA provided by the Indian Reorganization Act of 1934 contravened the anti-discrimination provisions of the Equal Employment Opportunities Act of 1972, and deprived them of property rights without due process of law in violation of the Fifth Amendment. A three-judge District Court held that the Indian preference was implicitly repealed by 11 of the 1972 Act proscribing racial discrimination in most federal employment, and enjoined appellant federal officials from implementing any Indian employment preference policy in the BIA. Held: 1. Congress...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Sep-24-1974
Reported in : AIR1975SC17; (1974)2SCC777; [1975]2SCR138
P. Jaganmohan Reddy, J.1. These appeals raise a common question as to whether Dumpers, Rockers and Tractors are motor vehicles within the meaning of the relevant State Motor Vehicles Taxation Acts, and are accordingly taxable thereunder. Apart from these appeals, Bolani Ores Ltd.-Appellant in Civil Appeal No. 1816 of 1968-has filed a writ petition challenging the Constitutional validity of the Bihar and Orissa Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, 1930. The question raised in the writ petition will only arise for determination, if the judgment of the High Court of Orissa is held to be valid otherwise the question of the Constitutional validity of the Bihar and Orissa Motor Vehicles Taxation Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Taxation Act') does not fall for determination as that would be purely academic.2. The two Civil Appeals Nos. 1816 of 1968 and 1817 of 1968 arise out of two suits-one filed by Bolani Ores Ltd. and the other by Orissa Minerals Development Company Ltd., respectively, for a ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Decided on : Jun-19-1974
Warden v. Marrero - 417 U.S. 653 (1974) U.S. Supreme Court Warden v. Marrero, 417 U.S. 653 (1974) Warden v. Marrero No. 73-831 Argued April 29, 1974 Decided June 19, 1974 417 U.S. 653 CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT Syllabus The Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Act of 1970, which became effective May 1, 1971, makes parole under the general parole statute, 18 U.S.C. 4202, available for almost all narcotics offenders. Respondent, who had been sentenced before May 1, 1971, and was ineligible for parole under 26 U.S.C. 7237(d), which was repealed by the 1970 Act, sought habeas corpus in the District Court, claiming parole eligibility when one-third of his sentence had been served. The District Court denied relief on the ground that the prohibition on parole eligibility under 26 U.S.C. 7237(d) had been preserved by 1103(a) of the 1970 statute (which provides that "[p]rosecutions" for violations before May 1, 1971, shall n...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : May-02-1974
Reported in : AIR1974SC1480; (1974)2SCC376; [1975]1SCR429; 1974(6)LC433(SC)
P. Jaganmohan Reddy, J. 1. The appellant had filed a suit against the respondent, State of Andhra Pradesh, for a declaration that the abkari rights of the appellant in the suit inam lands were not abolished when the inams, which included the inams granted to him were abolished under the Hyderabad Inams Abolition Act, 1955, and, Therefore, he was entitled to the full income namely 'Bailhak' of Sendhi shops (rental or licence fee or right of sale), tree tax, Haque Malikana (tree owners' fee) and for recovery of the said abkari income from the respondent. This suit was dismissed against which an appeal was filed in the High Court of Andhra Pradesh which was dismissed. Against that judgment this appeal is by certificate.2. The appellant is the maktedar of the suit inam lands situate in Sardarnagar and Kurvaguda in Hyderabad District. The grant by the Nizam of the Makta in favour of his predecessors-in-interest in respect of Sardarnagar inam lands was by muntakab (decree) Ex. P-1 dated Augu...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Decided on : May-28-1974
Reported in : AIR1975Cal178
Dipak Kumar Sen, J.1. The alleged invention which is the subject-matter of this appeal from a Patent's order is (a) a pil-ferproof closure for a container comprising a top ring seamed to the body of the container, and aperture in the top ring of substantially smaller dismensions than the dimensions of the said top ring, a diaphragm covering the said aperture and a lid adapted to fit over the aperture, characterised in that the lower free edge of the wall of the aperture is crimped with the free edge of the diaphragm; (b) a closure as claimed hereinabove further characterised in that the upper edge of the wall of the aperture is curled, (c) a closure as claimed above wherein the flange of the lid is adapted to rest on the said curled upper edge of the aperture in the closed position, (d) a closure as claimed wherein the diaphragm is adapted to be cut along an edge adjacent to the said crimp.2. The Metal Box Company of India Ltd.. of Barlow House. 59, Chow-ringhee. Calcutta 20, an Indian...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Decided on : Jan-09-1974
Marshall v. United States - 414 U.S. 417 (1974) U.S. Supreme Court Marshall v. United States, 414 U.S. 417 (1974) Marshall v. United States No. 72-5881 Argued October 16-17, 1973 Decided January 9, 1974 414 U.S. 417 CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT Syllabus Petitioner, who had three prior felony convictions, moved for commitment as a narcotic addict pursuant to Title II of the Narcotic Addict Rehabilitation Act of 1966 (NARA), following a fourth felony conviction. The District Court held that the NARA's "two prior felony" exclusion precluded the requested commitment, rejecting petitioner's post-sentence motion to vacate his sentence on the ground that the "two prior felony" exclusion violated equal protection as embodied in the Fifth Amendment. The Court of Appeals affirmed. Held: Title II of NARA does not deny due process or equal protection by excluding from rehabilitative commitment, in lieu of penal incarceration, addicts with two...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Jan-21-1974
Reported in : AIR1974SC994; (1974)2SCC70; [1974]3SCR152
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeals 1756 of 1967. Nos. 1755 and From the judgment and order dated the 4th October, 1966 of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in Civil Writ Petition No. 854 and 855 of 1963. V. C. Mahajan and R. N. Sachthey, for the appellants. S. K. Dhingra for the respondents. The Judgment of D. G. PALEKAR and V. R. KRISHNA IYER, JJ. was delivered by Krishna lyer, J. R. S. SARKARIA, J. gave a dissenting, Opinion. KRISHNA IYER, J. These two appeals by the State of Haryana challenge the High Court's approach to an interpretation of two, crucial provisions of a land reforms law, namely, Ss. 10-A and 18 of the Punjab Security of Land Tenures Act (X Of 1953) 1953 (for short called "the Act"). Counsel for the appellants complains; that if the view upheld by the High Court of subordinating S. 10-A to S. 18 were not upset by this Court, large land' holders may extricate their surplus land in excess of the ceiling set, through legal loopholes, such as have been practise...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Mar-04-1974
Reported in : [1975]101ITR491(Bom)
Kantawala, C.J.1. This is a reference under section 66(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), at the instance of the assessee, Messrs. Dhrangadhra Chemical Works Ltd. The assessee was incorporated in the then Dhrangadhra State of Saurashtra, situated in India. In respect of its business in British India as then constituted it was assessed to income-tax under thee Act in respect of the income liable to be assessed under section 4(1)(a) and/or section 4(1)(c) of the Act, as the case may be, the status for the purpose of assessment being taken as non-resident. In computing the total income liable to be so assessed under the Act proportionate allowance used to be made for depreciation of assets under section 10(2)(vi) of the Act on the basis of the world income to total income as determined in the assessment orders. Such assessments have been made on the assessee for and up to the assessment year 1949-50. 2. Dhrangadhra State became a part of the Unit...
Tag this Judgment!