Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : RLW2006(3)Raj2123; 2006(2)WLC697
Ashok Parihar, J.1. Since on similar set of facts, same prayers have been made in all the above writ petitions, the same have been heard together and are being decided by this common order.2. After receiving requisition from the State Government an advertisement was issued by the Rajasthan Public Service Commission (herein after to be referred as the Commission) on 20.01.1997 by which amongst others 12 posts of Lecturer in Beauty and Culture had also been notified The last date for submission of application forms was 15.3.1997. Eligible candidates including the petitioners were called for interview on 26th to 28th May, 1997 and subsequently, a select list was prepared and sent to the State Government. Name of one of the petitioners namely; Ku. Chanchal Bala also appeared in the reserve list. Not been successful in the selections made above by the Commission, the petitioners have preferred the above writ petitions not only challenging the entire selections but also the amendment made in...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : [2006(110)FLR800]; (2006)IIILLJ650Raj; RLW2006(3)Raj2150; 2007(1)SLJ320(Raj); 2006(3)WLC107
Shiv Kumar Sharma, J.1. The industrial dispute was between the individual driver (the respondent) and the Management of UCO Bank (appellant) and the reference was as to the justifiability of the termination of the services of Ratan Singh Bhati, driver of the said bank with effect from March 12, 1995. The reference assumes what really is the most contested point in the case as to whether Ratan Singh Bhati was the driver of the said Bank, definition, a workman means 'any person employed in any industry' and so the basic jurisdictional issue is as to whether the respondent workman was a person employed by the Bank. If he was, his termination was illegal. IT he was not, the reference to the industrial dispute was without jurisdiction. The Industrial Tribunal examined the matter and came to the conclusion that the driver was employed by the Bank. Consequently, a direction for reinstatement without back wages but with continuity of service, was made. The Management of Bank came up in writ pe...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : RLW2006(3)Raj2190; 2006(3)WLC128
Shiv Kumar Sharma, J.1. Four appellants, along with co-accused Prakashi who died during trial, were tried by the learned Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track) No. 2, Bharatpur in Sessions Case No. 195/2001. Learned Judge vide judgment dated November 23, 2002 convicted and sentenced the appellants as under:Atar Singh:Under Sectionb 302 IPC:To suffer imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 500/- in default to further suffer rigorous imprisonment for two months.Under Section 307 IPC:To suffer rigorous imprisonment for five years and fine of Rs. 500/-in default to further suffer rigorous imprisonment for two months.Under Section 147 IPC:To suffer rigorous imprisonment for one year.Under Section 148 IPC:To suffer rigorous imprisonment for one year.Under Section 323 IPC:To suffer rigorous imprisonment for six months.Under Section 341 IPC:To suffer rigorous imprisonment for one month.Jal Singh:Under Section 302/149 IPC.To suffer imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 500/- in default to further...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : AIR2006Raj209; RLW2006(3)Raj1768; 2006(2)WLC520
Dinesh Maheshwari, J.1. This Court is constrained to observe at the outset that the only fault that could be attributed to the ward of the petitioner necessitating this writ petition is that he excelled in the studies and secured better marks.2. The petitioner has prayed for direction to the respondents for issuance of fresh corrected marks sheet of Secondary School Examination for his son Dixit Dutt Bohra in the circumstances narrated hereafter.3. Dixit Dutt Bohra appeared in Secondary School Examination 2004 while studying at the respondent No. 2 School, Navin Adarsh Vidhya Mandir, Ram Chowk, In-side Nagori Gate, Jodhpur, Another student named Dinesh Pareek was also studying at the same School and appeared in the same examination. As per the system of assessment, it appears that 10% of the marks are provided for the sessionals and are supplied by the School concerned on the basis of the marks obtained by a student in the Half-yearly examination conducted by the School.4. It is not in...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : III(2006)ACC85
ORDERG.S. Sarraf, J.1. Heard Mr. K.N. Tiwari, for the appellants and Mr. Vinod Tyagi for respondent No. 3.2. The facts in brief are that at about 6.15 p.m. on 27.8.1991, Truck RRL 9691 collided with a Babool tree near Ladi Ki Puliya within the jurisdiction of Jamwa Ramgarh Police Station and then fell down under the Puliya. One Srawan Lai died while the applicant-appellant Phool Chand Yogi sustained injuries in the accident. The injured Phool Chand Yogi and the legal representatives of the deceased Srawan filed two separate claims in the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jaipur District Jaipur. According to the claim petitions, the driver Sawai Singh was driving the truck rashly and negligently. The learned Tribunal disposed of the two claims by one judgment and passed an award of Rs. 1,83,000 in favour of the legal representatives of the deceased Srawan and an award of Rs. 21,000 was passed in favour of the injured Phool Chand. The claimants have filed these two appeals against the judg...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : AIR2006Raj302; 2006WLC(Raj)UC695
ORDERPrakash Tatia, J. 1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.2. The appellant/plaintiff filed a suit for recovery of Rs. 3,282.13p. against the defendants with the allegation that the plaintiffs are doing the business and the defendant used to purchase cotton from the plaintiffs. On Ashad Sud Dasham Samwat Year 2034 (upto 26-6-78), the accounts of the defendant were settled and the defendant admitted that the amount of Rs. 2,535/- in this account is due in him. The defendant after admitting his liability in security to that due amount, executed a promissory note in favour of the plaintiffs but he did not pay the said principal amount and interest levied thereon, therefore, the plaintiffs' case is that at the time of filing the suit, the total amount of interest is Rs. 560/- along with the principal amount is Rs. 2535/- total Rs. 3042. were due in the defendant. The plaintiffs further stated that on Ashoj Bad Ekam Samwat 2034 i.e. 28-9-1979, the defendant further purchased one bag of...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : RLW2006(1)Raj838; 2006(2)WLC559
N.N. Mathur, J.1. The instant writ petition is yet another case seeking to bring to the fore serious administrative & financial irregularities against the present administrative set up of the J.N.V. University, Jodhpur, Petitioner seeks direction to the Central Bureau of Investigation to seize the entire papers, accounts & material relating to the Rajasthan Pre- Engineering Test 2003, hereinafter referred to as 'RPET-2003', conducted by the respondent No. 3 Dr. Naseem Bhatia Vice Chancellor JNV University Jodhpur, Professor Rajesh Mathur and Shri Ravi Saxena, both members of the Faculty of Engineering, JNV University, Jodhpur and to investigate the entire matter and submit its detailed report in a time-bound programme.2. It is averred that admissions to the First Year of BE/BTEXT/BR Degree Courses for the Sessions 2003-04 in various Engineering Colleges of the State of Rajasthan, were to be made on the basis of Pre-Engineering Test and so the State government authorized the respondent ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : RLW2006(2)Raj1654; 2006(3)WLC620
S.N. Jha, C.J.1. The State of Rajasthan has come in appeal against the decision of the learned Single Judge dated 29.5.97 allowing the writ petition of respondent No. 1 R.P. Agrawal with a direction to the appellant and respondents Nos. 2 and 3 herein to treat him as having voluntarily retired with effect from 30.9.94 and to grant/sanction all consequential retiral benefits to him.2. Brief facts of the case so far as relevant to dispose of this appeal are that respondent No. 1 who was holding the post of Technical Advisor in the State Enterprises Department of the State Government, sought voluntary retirement with effect from 30.9.1994 by giving notice to that effect on 2.6.94. He was informed vide letters dated 20.6.94 and 6.7.94 that his request was under consideration but no decision in the matter was communicated. On 30.9.94 he relinquished the charge of the post. Later, on 25.3.95 he was served with a charge-sheet in respect of a departmental proceeding under Rule 16 of the Rajast...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : III(2007)BC139; RLW2006(2)Raj1366; 2006(2)WLC355
K.S. Rathore, J.1. This writ petition is directed against the order passed by the Registrar, Debt Recovery Tribunal dated 7.12.2005.2. Brief facts of the case are that on 30th March, 2001, a certificate was given by the Recovery Officer against which an appeal has been filed by one of the party which is pending before the Debt Recovery Tribunal, New Delhi. In that appeal an application was filed by the petitioners for impleadment since the summons were not served upon the petitioners.3. The said application was decided by the Debt Recovery Tribunal stating that the final order of impleading the party shall be given at the time of final hearing of the appeal.4. On 9.11.2005, the recovery officer passed an order ex parte against which an application for re-hearing the matter was filed on 14.11.2005 but the recovery officer refused to hear the application and the same was rejected.5. Aggrieving against the aforesaid orders, the petitioners filed an appeal before the Debt Recovery Tribunal...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : RLW2006(3)Raj2231; 2006(4)WLC118
R.P. Vyas, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment dated February 27, 2002, passed by the Additional Sessions Judge No. 3, Udaipur, by which accused -Anda has been convicted and sentenced under Section 366 IPC, to two years' rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 200/-, in default of payment of fine to further suffer fifteen days' additional simple imprisonment; under Section 376 IPC, 5 years' rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs. 2000/-, in default of payment of fine to further suffer one month's additional simple imprisonment; under Section 342, IPC 6 month's rigorous Imprisonment; under Section 323*, IPC, 6 months' R.I. and under Section 324 IPC, one year's rigorous imprisonment. All the sentences were ordered to run concurrently.2. Briefly stated, the prosecution story is that on May 17, 2001 at 8.30 p.m., Kum. Dhani D/o Bhika by caste Garasia, R/o Parla-ka-Chaura, District Udaipur lodged a report (Ex.P/1) with the Police Station, Ogna, District - Udaipur that o...
Tag this Judgment!