Court : Himachal Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1982HP97
H.S. Thakur, J.1. Civil Writ Petitions Nos. 82 of 1974, 252 of 1974, 254 of 1974, 259 of 1974, 236 of 1979, 68 of 1981 and 89of 1981, can be conveniently disposed of together, since the main points involved in these writ petitions are common to all of them. However, additional point or points raised in any petition would be also dealt with in the judgment that follows.2. To start with, it is desirable to narrate the facts and contentions raised in C. W. P. No. 254 of 1974. In this writ petition, besides other reliefs, it is prayed that the Himachal Pradesh Agricultural Produce Markets Act, 1969 (9 of 1970) (hereinafter referred to as the Act) be declared ultra vires of the Constitution. It is stated that the petitioner is carrying on the business of commission agent in fruits and other vegetable articles within the territorial jurisdiction of Simla District. It is pointed out thatthe Act was promulgated in the State of Himachal Pradesh in the year 1970 and a notification to this effect...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Himachal Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1995HP15
Bhawani Singh, J. 1. The petitionerhas challenged the constitutional validity of the Himachal Pradesh Kutlehar Forest (Acquisition of Management) Act, 1992 (hereafter shortly, 'the Management Acquisition Act' or 'this Act'), on numerous grounds being recorded in the latter part of this judgment. Before passing of this Act, the State Government issued Notification No. Rev. D(F)7-1/90, dated January 19, 1990, under Section 3 of the Punjab Resumption of Jagirs Article 1957 directing the Principal Chief Conservator of Forests to take over management and possession of Kutlehar Jagir Forest from the petitioner with the assistance of the Collector. This Notification was assailed by the petitioner through Civil Writ Petition No. 42 of 1990 (Shri Mohinder Pal v. State of Himachal Pradesh and others). By orders of January 22, 1990 and June 26, 1990, operation of this Notification was stayed and the writ petition admitted for hearing. Since both the actions of the respondents relate to the same f...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Himachal Pradesh
Reported in : (2008)ILLJ618HP
ORDERRajiv Sharma, J.1. This petition is directed against the order dated April 5, 2006 passed by the appellate authority in appeal No. 86/2005.2. The brief facts necessary for the adjudication of this petition are that the respondent No. 1-company had submitted a draft proposal for the modification of standing orders for certification on June 18, 2005. The copy of draft proposal for modification of Standing Orders is at page 74 of the paper book of this petition. Paragraph 29 of the draft Standing Orders is reproduced below for better appreciation of the facts:The age of retirement on superannuation of a workman shall be as may be agreed upon between the Management and the Workman through a contract or as specified in a settlement or award of both the workmen and the management. The employee shall automatically retire from the service of the Company on attaining the age as provided herein before to be calculated in accordance with the date of birth given by him at the time of appointm...
Tag this Judgment!