Court : US Supreme Court
Decided on : Mar-20-1985
Heckler v. Chaney - 470 U.S. 821 (1985) U.S. Supreme Court Heckler v. Chaney, 470 U.S. 821 (1985) Heckler v. Chaney No. 83-1878 Argued December 3, 1984 Decided March 20, 1985 470 U.S. 821 CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT Syllabus Respondent prison inmates were convicted of capital offenses and sentenced to death by lethal injection of drugs. They petitioned the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), alleging that use of the drugs for such a purpose violated the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FDCA), and requesting that the FDA take various enforcement actions to prevent those violations. The FDA refused the request. Respondents then brought an action in Federal District Court against petitioner Secretary of Health and Human Services, making the same claim and seeking the same enforcement actions. The District Court granted summary judgment for petitioner, holding that nothing in the FDCA indicated an intent to circumsc...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Decided on : Aug-01-1985
Reported in : [1987]64STC324(Raj)
Dwarka Prasad, J. 1. As a common question of law arises in these two cases, we propose to dispose of them by a common order.2. These reference applications under Section 15(2) and Section 15(3A) of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1954 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') are treated as revision petitions under Section 15(1) of the Act as amended by the Rajasthan Sales Tax (Amendment) Act, 1984, because of the provisions of Sub-section (10) of Section 13 of the Amending Act of 1984, as they were pending before this Court at the time when the amending Act of 1984 came into force.3. The question which arises in both these cases is as to whether interest could be levied under Section 11B of the Act in respect of default of payment of tax for part of a month at the relevant time. The period of assessment in the case of M/s. Hemraj Udhyog in respect of which this question arose, was from June 22, 1974, to July 10, 1975. In the case of M/s. Keshrilal Lalchand the period of assessment was from ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Decided on : Dec-17-1985
Reported in : (1986)2GLR1323
Bhatt, J.1. This is a petition by an Association, registered under the Bombay Non-Trading Corporations Act. The Respondent No. 1 herein is the Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation and the Respondent No. 2 is the State of Gujarat. The petitioner-Association has various premises constructed on a plot situated on the Ashram Road, Ahmedabad. The petitioner-Association had submitted its first plan for construction on that plot and that plan was sanctioned on 1-2-80 and the due commencement certificate was given. Then the revised plan was submitted on 23-3-81, which was rejected 23-6-81 and the second revised plan submitted on 27-12-82 claiming 1-40 F.S.I. (Floor Space Index) was also rejected on 17-2-83. The petitioner alleged that the revised plans had been rejected on the sole ground that the available F.S.I. was 1 and not 1-40 as claimed. The petitioner had, therefore, ultimately filed this petition for the following prayers to be found at page 32:(b) this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to decl...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Nov-19-1985
Reported in : 1990LC69(Delhi); 1986(24)ELT205(Del)
Yogeshwar Dayal, J.1. The Kolhapur Cane Sugar Works Ltd., petitioner No. 1 herein (hereinafter referred to as 'petitioners') are challenging the order in revision passed by the Government of India, Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, dated 25th September, 1980 rejecting the revision application of the petitioners against an order dated 23rd August, 1979 passed by the Appellate Collector of Central Excise, Bombay. The petition inter alias involves the question of the effect of repeal of Rules 10 and 10-A of the Central Excise Rules 1944 which were repealed vide Notification No. 267/77, dated 6th August, 1977 whereby new Rule 10 was substituted in the Central Excise Rules. The petition also involves, inter alia, another question relating to true scope and construction of Clause 6 of the Notification No. 189/73-C.E., dated 4th October, 1973. 2. The facts of the case which are not in dispute are briefly that M/s. The Kolhapur Sugar Mills Ltd., the Holding Company have been in the b...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Decided on : Jun-03-1985
Montana v. Blackfeet Tribe - 471 U.S. 759 (1985) U.S. Supreme Court Montana v. Blackfeet Tribe, 471 U.S. 759 (1985) Montana v. Blackfeet Tribe of Indians No. 83-2161 Argued January 15, 1985 Reargued April 23, 1985 Decided June 3, 1985 471 U.S. 759 CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT Syllabus The 1891 Act that first authorized mineral leasing of Indian lands was amended by a 1924 Act that provided that "the production of oil and gas and other minerals on such lands may be taxed by the State in which said lands are located." The Indian Mineral Leasing Act of 1938, which was enacted to obtain uniformity of Indian mineral leasing laws, also permitted mineral leasing of Indian lands, but contained no provision authorizing state taxation, nor did it repeal specifically such authorization in the 1924 Act. A general repealer clause of the 1938 Act, however, provides that "[a]ll Act[s] or parts of Acts inconsistent herewith are hereby repealed." R...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Dec-19-1985
Reported in : AIR1986SC1370; [1986]59CompCas548(SC); (1986)1CompLJ91(SC); 1986(8)ECC189; 1985(2)SCALE1289; (1986)1SCC264; [1985]Supp3SCR909
ORDER TO ENABLE THE GOVERNMENT TO TAKE DECISION(.)The Importance of 2nd May, 1983 so frequently mentioned in the telex message is apparently because 2nd May, 1983 was fixed as the cut-off dale for the introduction of the ceiling of 5 per cent in shares of Indian companies by to foreign investors of Indian origin by the Circular No. I/, dated May 16, 1983 issued by the Reserve Bank of India.41. In the meanwhile, on 31.5.83, Punjab National Bank wrote to Escorts Limited incoming them that the thirteen overseas companies had been, making investments in sharer i Escorts Limited in terms, of the scheme for investment by overseas corporate bodies predominantly owned by non-residents of Indian nationality/origin to an extent to extent 60 per cent and that the thirteen overseas had designated them as their banker and M/s. Raja Ram Bhasin & Co. had been designated as the brokers for the purpose of investment. The brokers had advised the bank that up to 28th April, 83, 75,000 equity shares of Es...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Decided on : Apr-12-1985
Reported in : 1985(I)OLR545
D.P. Mohapatra, J.1. The petitioners in these six applications under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India are tenants against whom their respective land-lords filed proceedings under the Orissa House Rent Control Act, 1967 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') for eviction. The said proceedings stand at different stages; in four cases, namely, O. J, Cs. 1967/83, 1816/84, 2003/84 and 2030/84 final orders of eviction have bean passed against the petitioners, in the other two namely. O. J Cs. 2507/81 and 1217/82 the proceedings are pending before the House Rent Controller.In all these cases a common question relating to the jurisdiction of the authorities under the Act has been raised on behalf of the petitioners. The question is that the Orissa House Rent Control Act, 1967 (Orissa Act 4 of 1968 ) having spent its force by efflux of time on 3. 5.1981, the Orissa House Rent Control {Amendment) Act, 1981 (Orissa Act 15 of 1981) purporting to the extend of the life of the forme...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Decided on : Jun-27-1985
Pattern Makers v. NLRB - 473 U.S. 95 (1985) U.S. Supreme Court Pattern Makers v. NLRB, 473 U.S. 95 (1985) Pattern Makers' League of North America, AFL-CIO v. NLRB, No. 83-1894 Argued February 27, 1985 Reargued April 22, 1985 Decided June 27, 1985 473 U.S. 95 CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT Syllabus Petitioner national labor union's constitution provides that resignations from the union are not permitted during a strike. The union fined 10 members who, in violation of this provision, resigned during a strike by petitioner local unions and returned to work. Respondent employer representative thereafter filed charges with the National Labor Relations Board (Board), claiming that such levying of fines constituted an unfair labor practice under 8(b)(1)(A) of the National Labor Relations Act, which makes it an unfair labor practice for a union to restrain or coerce employees in the exercise of their 7 rights. The Board agreed, and the C...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Mar-01-1985
Reported in : AIR1985SC1293; 1986(1)ARBLR135(SC); 1985(2)SCALE410; 1985Supp(1)SCC280; [1985]3SCR26; [1985]60STC213(SC)
1. These two Appeals by Special Leave granted by this Court are against the judgment and order of the Orissa High Court allowing 209 writ petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India filed before it.Genesis of the Appeals.2. On May 23, 1977, the Government of Orissa in the Finance Department issued two Notifications under the Orissa Sales Tax Act 1947 (Orissa Act XIV of 1947). We will hereinafter for the sake of brevity refer to this Act as 'the Orissa Act'. These Notifications were Notification S.R.O. 372/77 and Notification S.R.O No. 373/77. Notification S.R.O. No. 372/77 was made in exercise of the powres conferred by Section 3-B of the Orissa Act and Notification S.R.O. No. 373/77 was made in exercise of the powers conferred by the first proviso to Sub-section (1) of Section 5 of the Orissa Act. We will refer to these Notifications in detail in the course of this judgment but for the present suffice it to say that notification S.R.O. No. 372/77 amended notification No. ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Aug-07-1985
Reported in : AIR1986SC3; 1985(2)SCALE1142; 1985Supp(1)SCC611; [1985]Supp2SCR399
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 6623 of 1983. From the Judgment and Order dated 3.6.1983 of the Punjab & Haryana High Court in E.P. 13/82. Kapil Sibal, Gopi Chand, K.C. Sharma, R. Karanjawala, Mrs. M. Karanjawala, Miss Neethu & Mrs. Madhu Tewatia for the Appellants. K.G. Bhagat, Additional Solicitor General, R.Venkataramani, Ranbir Singh Yadav, P.S. Pradhan, Chandra Shekhar Panda and A. Mariaroutham for the Respondent. The following Judgments were delivered: FAZAL ALI, J. The election process in our country has become an extremely complex and complicated system and indeed a very difficult and delicate affair. Sometimes, the election petitioner, who has lost the election from a particular constituency, makes out on the surface such a probable feature and presents falsehood dextrously dressed in such a fashion as the truth being buried somewhere deep into the roots of the case so as to be invisible, looks like falsehood which is depicted in the grab of an attractiv...
Tag this Judgment!