Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : RLW2009(1)Raj447
Govind Mathur, J.1. All these petitions for writ raise common legal question, thus, 1 propose to decide all these cases by one common judgment.2. To regulate recruitment and other service conditions in the Rajasthan Prabodhak Service, the Government of Rajasthan, while exercising powers conferred by Section 102 of the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Act, 1994, enacted the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Prabodhak Service Rules, 2008 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules of 2008'). An intention to fill in the existing vacancies of Prabodhaks was notified by the Government of Rajasthan on 31.5.2008. Accordingly, the process of recruitment was initiated in various Districts of the State. The eligibility for appointment as Prabodhaks under the rules of 2008 is as follows:Senior Secondary School certificate or intermediate or its equivalent, with Diploma or certificate in basic teachers training of a duration of not less than two years of Diploma or certificate in elementary teachers, training of a dura...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : RLW2009(2)Raj990
Mohammad Rafiq, J.1. This appeal has been preferred by the accused-appellant against the judgment dated 10.7.1987 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bundi whereby he was convicted for offence under Section 5 of the. Explosive Substance Act, 1908 and sentenced to undergo for rigorous imprisonment of five years with a fine of Rs. 500/- with the stipulation that in the event of default for making payment of fine, he shall have to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months.2. A first information report was lodged by one Bherulal, Constable with Police Station Bundi. In the report, it was alleged that on 11.7.1984 while the said Constable was on duty on the bus stand of Bundi at 8.30, pm the appellant was found with jute bag (Katta) near the bus which was going to Nainwa. On enquiry, he told his name to be Bheru Singh and when checked, the bag was found containing capsules of gelatin. Another Sipoy Shambu Kishore, also in the meantime approached there and both of the...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : RLW2008(3)Raj2426
ORDERPrakash Tatia, J.1. The petitioner has raised questions of law in these revision petitions that (i) whether in the facts and circumstances of the case supply of explosives by the petitioner to his contractor for using the same by the contractor in petitioner's mining operation in mining area of the petitioner can be treated to be a sale within the meaning of Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1994 (hereinafter referred to as the Act of 1994) and (ii) if answer to question No. (i) referred above is affirmative and it is held that aforesaid supply of explosives is a sale whether such sale is not taxable being subsequent sale within the State of the goods on which tax on first point has already paid and (iii) whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the explosives for the purpose of blasting in the petitioner's mine could not have been purchased at concessional rates against declaration form ST17. -3The petitioner is a company duly registered under the provisions of the Rajasthan Sa...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : 2009ACJ858
Munishwar Nath Bhandari, J.1. The appellants have preferred this appeal to challenge the judgment dated 26.3.1991, passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Sri Ganganagar in Claim Case No. 40 of 1989.2. Claimants-appellants claimed a sum of Rs. 11,70,000 stating the fact that on 20.11.1988 at about 5 p.m., when Rajendra Kumar was near Telephone Exchange building and moving towards Padampur, then jeep bearing No. RSC 9170 driven by Devilal, caused accident, resulting in death of Rajendra Kumar. It was urged that accident took place due to rash and negligent driving of Devilal.3. Reply was filed by the respondent Nos. 3 and 4 before the Tribunal, denying their liabilities.4. It is contended that authorised driver of the jeep involved in the accident was Diwan Chand but jeep was unauthorisedly driven by Devilal, as nobody authorised Devilal to drive the said jeep. It was further contended that the owner of the jeep is only Panchayat Samiti and not the government. It was lastly conte...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : 2009ACJ1019
Munishwar Nath Bhandari, J.1 Aggrieved by the judgment dated 26.12.1992 passed by learned Judge, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Udaipur in Claim Case No. 3 of 1989, the claimants-appellants have preferred this appeal.2. A claim petition was filed by the claimants contending that due to rash and negligent driving by the driver of truck No. 7435, car No. GBQ 966 was dashed, resulting in death of car driver Kalu Miya. The dependants of Kalu Miya maintained claim application, claiming Rs. 3,94,000. However, the Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs. 2,15,000 and interest at the rate of 12 per cent in favour of the claimants, but out of the total claim allowed in favour of the claimants, the liability of the insurance company was maintained to the extent of Rs. 1,50,000 and remaining liability was fastened on the owner of the truck and ors.3. Assailing the judgment of the Tribunal, the learned Counsel for the appellants pressed only one issue which is pertaining to the liability of the insurance c...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : 2008(1)WLN63
Munishwar Nath Bhandari, J.1.This appeal has been preferred to challenge the judgment of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Banswara dt. 17.02.1993.2. The claimants non-appellants preferred claim petition, stating that on 07.11.1986, at about 5.00 p.m., Kanji and Dharia were going on bicycle to village Miya-ka-Parla. On the way at Ghatol Anandpuri road, a Bus bearing No. RJB 2772 hit bicycle, due to which Kanji and Dharia fell down and sustained injuries. The accident took place due to rash and negligent driving of bus driver. Dharia died in the hospital, whereas Kanji sustained fracture. Due to death of Dharia, claimants claimed a sum of Rs. 2,00,000/-, out of which a sum of Rs. 1,80,000/- was claimed towards compensation and Rs. 10,000/- were claimed towards mental agony to the parents of Dharia and Rs. 10,000/- for wife.3. In reply to the claim petition, Insurance Company disputed the income of Dharia, apart from disputing the issuance of the cover note. The Insurance Company disp...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : RLW2008(1)Raj397
Mohammad Rafiq, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.2. The State of Rajasthan has come up in writ petition against the order dated 27.6.1998 passed by the Additional District & Sessions Judge No. 5, Jaipur City, Jaipur in an appeal preferred by respondent No. 1 under Section 6C of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 (for short, 'the Act of 1955') thereby reversing the order dated 24.11.1997 passed by the District Collector under Section 6A of the said Act confiscating 240 Gas Cylinders.3. Factual matrix of the case is that the District Supply Officer received certain complaints against M/s. Tej Enterprises, having retail outlet of Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. (IOCL) for distribution of Liquid Petroleum Gas (LPG) in the allotted area. These complaints were with regard to the black marketing of gas cylinders and quantity of gas contained in the gas cylinders being lesser than the prescribed quantity is in violation of conditions of the license and the provisions of the Rajasthan Pe...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : (2007)212CTR(Raj)244
1. Heard the learned Counsel for the appellant.2. This appeal is directed against the order passed by the Tribunal, Jodhpur Bench, Jodhpur in IT Appeal No. 455/2000. The appellant assessee was a consignment agent for supply of explosive goods to I.C.I. India Limited in Rajasthan. In view of the information received, a survey under Section 133A was carried out in the case of Pooja Roadlines, Udaipur and some bill books were impounded under Section 131 of the Act. On scrutiny of the bill books of M/s Pooja Roadlines, it was noticed that the vans (motor vehicles) owned by the assessee had been used for transportation of goods to various places. On examination, it was found that the assessee had entered into an agreement with M/s India Explosives Ltd. for supplying trading items of the principal company at Udaipur. The vans owned by the assessee were used for getting goods from Udaipur to Gomia in Bihar. The vans so used for delivering goods were to be unloaded at Udaipur and empty vans we...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : 2007(3)WLN160
Gopal Krishan Vyas, J.1. By this writ petition, the petitioner insurance company seeks to challenge the order dt. 20.03.2004 passed by the Permanent Lok Adalat (Annex.-3) to the writ petition) whereby the learned Permanent Lok Adalat directed the petitioner insurance company to pay a sum of Rs. 5,17,800/- with a further direction to pay interest at the rate of 12% per annum on the claim amount of Rs. 2,48,450/- with effect from 21.02.2002 till realization.2. According to facts of the case, respondent No. 1 is involved in the business of old paper-raddi and bottles etc. and the said firm obtained shopkeepers' insurance policy for a sum of Rs. 7,00,000/- from the petitioner insurance company. The policy was valid for the period commencing from 08.11.2001 to 07.11.2002. According to the petitioner, the said policy was issued in the name of respondent No. 1 with regard to stock-in-trade stored in shop having Class-A construction, said to be situated near New Sabji Mandi, Bhadwasiya Road, J...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : RLW2007(3)Raj2602
Mohammad Rafiq, J.1. Dispute in this matter pertains to allotment of a retail outlet of Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd. at Halena in District Bharatpur located on National Highway No. 11. The petitioner has prayed for a mandamus to the respondents directing them to cancel the candidature of respondent No. 3 Smt. Sadhana Dagur and not to issue Letter of Intent to her and instead issue such Letter of Intent to the petitioner Smt. Neelam Chaturvedi who was placed at serial number 2 in the select panel. An additional prayer has been made that if in the meantime, the Letter of Intent is issued to the non petitioner No. 3 the same be quashed and set aside.2. Factual matrix of the case is that the Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd, (hereinafter referred to as 'the Corporation') a Government of India undertaking, published an advertisement in Rajasthan Patrika on 2nd January, 2004 inviting applications for allotment of 243 Retail Outlets in the State of Rajasthan. Applications were also...
Tag this Judgment!