Court : Karnataka
Decided on : Feb-27-1998
Reported in : 1999(1)KarLJ603
1. Corruption in a civilised society is a disease like cancer, which if not detected in time is sure to malignise the polity of country leading to disastrous consequences. It is termed as plague which is not only contagious but if not controlled spreads like a fire in a jungle. Its virus is compared with HIV leading to AIDS, being incurable. It has also been termed as Royal thievery. The socio-political system exposed to such a dreaded communicable disease is likely to crumble under its own weight. Corruption is opposed to democracy and social order, being not only anti people, but aimed and targeted against them. It affects the economy and destroys the cultural heritage. Unless nipped in the bud at the earliest, it is likely to cause turbulence shaking of the socio- economic-political system in an otherwise healthy, wealthy, effective and vibrating society.2. The menace of corruption was found to have enormously increased by first and second world war conditions. The corruption, at th...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Decided on : Aug-12-1998
Reported in : ILR1998KAR3620; 1998(6)KarLJ667; (1999)IILLJ552Kant
K.R. Prasada Rao1. These appeals have been filed against the order passed by the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition Nos. 5517 and 5518 of 1998, dated 4-3-1998 confirming the ex parte stay order dated 24-2-1998 staying the operation of the order of transfer of respondent 2-Deputy Manager (TTC) from the Technical Training Centre to its Regional Office, Calcutta under Office Memorandum No. FPA TRF 97 384, dated 27-11-1997 issued by the appellant (Annexure-EE to the writ petitions) and rejecting the application filed by the appellant-Company for vacating the stay order dated 24-2-1998.2. The impugned order passed by the learned Single Judge has been challenged by the management of the appellant-Company on two grounds which are (1) the writ petitions filed by the respondents in the writ appeals are not maintainable, as the appellant-Company is not a 'State' or other authority within the sweep of the expression used in Article 12 of the Constitution of India and (2) the order of transfer ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Patna
Decided on : Sep-24-1998
S.K. Chattopadhyaya, J. 1. The order taking cognizance dated December 8, 1995 under Section 92 of the Factories Act, 1948 has been impugned by the petitioners by invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. 2. One Sachita Nand Singh, opposite party No. 2, being Factory Inspector of Ranchi Anchal No. 1. filed a complaint on July 5, 1995 in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ranchi. showing the petitioner Nos. 1 to 9 as the members of the Board of Directors and petitioner No. 10 as Manager of the Factory, Foundry Forge Plant of H.E.G. Ltd. Ranehi. It is alleged that though the Bihar Government issued a notification dated February 13, 1989 to the effect that 'occupier' of the Foundry Forge Plant (hereinafter referred to as 'the Plant') should employ 5 qualified Safety Officers and even this Court by its order dated February 23, 1995 passed in CWCJ No. 8387/1994 (R) directed the Chief Inspector of Factories to take steps for appointmen...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Jan-05-1998
Reported in : 1998(3)ALLMR696; 1998(3)BomCR64; [1989(79)FLR860]
ORDERR.M.S. Khandeparkar, J.1. By the present petition the petitioners are challenging the orders passed by the respondents 4 and 5 in the matter of application filed under section 15 of the Payment of Wages Act, 1936 (hereinafter called as 'the said Act') by the respondent No. 1 on 5th October 1991 and subsequently amended by application dated 14th November 1991 claiming that certain amount of wages have remained to be paid by the petitioners to the Members of Goa Trade and Commercial Workers' Union for the period from 1st January 1988 to 31st October 1991 amounting to Rs. 9,99,942/- besides an amount of Rs. 1,79,990/- towards interest.2. The facts in brief relevant for the decision are that the U.P.S.B. Corporation Limited entered into a contract with the State of Goa for construction of a bridge across River Mandovi and in the course of the said construction employed the members of the said Goa Trade and Commercial Workers' Union as its employees. It is the case of the respondent No...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Patna
Decided on : Jan-06-1998
S.N. Jha, J.1. These two revision petitions under Section 14(8) of the Bihar Buildings (Lease, Rent & Eviction) Control Act, 1982 (in short 'the Act'), arising out of the same judgment, have been heard together and are disposed of by this common order.2. The plaintiff-opposite party filed Eviction Suit No. 13 of 1989 for eviction of one Most. Tetari from the suit premises standing over 11 dhurs land of plot No. 1239 situate at Mirganj on the ground of personal necessity. According to the plaintiff, the aforesaid plot was Gairmajrua of Hathwa Raj, different portions of which were settled by it with different persons for construction of houses and shops. Butan Ram, grand father of the plaintiff and Mahendra Ram took settlement of the disputed land from Hathwa Raj on 2.3.25 on Nazrana of Rs. 22/-. No rent was fixed as the settlement was for residential purposes. Butan Ram constructed tiled-roof room thereon. He later took settlement of another piece of land adjacent west of the disputed ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Jan-06-1998
Reported in : (1998)118PLR858
Swatanter Kumar, J.1. This revision petition is directed against the order of the learned trial Court dated 4.1.1997. An application filed by the plaintiff-appellant for permission to lead secondary evidence Under Section 65 of the Indian Evidence Act was allowed and has been impugned in this revision by the defendant in the suit.2. The facts are that plaintiff and defendant are related to each other, all being heirs of late Haveli Ram. The Punjab Bhoodan Yojna Board was admittedly the owner of the land measuring 32 Kanals 18 Marlas in village Kheowal and the house located thereupon. The Board had granted tenancy rights to deceased Haveli Ram. The copy of the grant deed as well as Jamabandi for the year 1992-93 has been placed on record. During the life time Haveli Ram and sons are stated to be cultivating the entire land. Janak Raj, on the strength of an agreement dated 14.9.1990, the copy of which was annexed to the plaint, brought a suit for declaration and injunction to the effect ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Decided on : Jan-06-1998
Reported in : AIR1998Cal170,(1998)1CALLT278(HC),1998(1)CHN202,[1999]97CompCas99(Cal)
B.M. Mitra, J.1. In all these above noted revisional applications under Article 227 of the Constitution of India the impugned orders challenges are in nature of ad-interim orders passed by the Debt Recovery Tribunal. The said revisional applications are numbered as five separate applications and before dealing with them serially this court will consider the common questions of law and jurisdiction involved in the said proceedings.2. The common question which permeates the crux of the central range of controversy along with series of other pending revislonal applications is centered-round on resolution of a question raised which has an element of commonality in character as lo how far Debt Recovery Tribunal is Competent and is authorised to pass under a self-contained statute known as the Recovery of Debts due to Banks and Financial institutions Act, 1993 (Act No. 51 of 1993) which has been contended by the learned counsels appearing on behalf of series of the petitioners and attention ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Jan-07-1998
Reported in : JT1998(1)SC18a; 1998(1)SCALE34; (1998)2SCC242; [1998]1SCR4; 1998(1)LC368(SC); (1998)1UPLBEC345
ORDERM. Jagannadha Rao, J.1. This is an appeal preferred against the judgment of the Delhi High Court dated 28.8.1980 in C.W.P. No. 843 of 1980 dismissing the Writ Petition of the Petitioner. The writ petition was filed questioning the order of the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner dated 7.5.1980 passed under section 14-B of the Employees Provident Fund & Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (hereinafter called the 'Act') levying damages in a sum of Rs 44,220.00 and Rs. 1,035.50 for delay in remitting the employees provident fund contribution within the period stipulated in para 38.10 of the Employees Provident Scheme. 1952 for the period July 65, October 65 December, 65 January 66 to March 66, August 66, July 67, August 67, May 68, July 68 to November 68.2. The writ petition was dismissed by a Division Bench of the High Court on 28.8.80 by a non-speaking order merely saying 'dismissed'. It is against the said judgment that this appeal has been preferred.3. The facts of the case are a...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Jan-07-1998
Reported in : 1999(3)ALT36(SC); JT1998(1)SC256; 1998(1)SCALE181; (1998)4SCC82; [1998]1SCR23
ORDERSaghir Ahmad, J.1. By G.O (MS) M & H dated march 3, 1981, the Government of Andhra Pradesh had imposed the penalty of 20% cut in the pension of the respondent for a period of 5 year. By another order G.O. 1278 M & H dated 10.8.1981, the Government refused to treat the period cf suspension of the respondent as period spent on duty. Both the orders were challenged by the respondent before the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal, which by its Judgment dated 22nd June, 1985 allowed the petition and set aside the above orders on the ground that the Government had no jurisdiction to hold disciplinary proceedings as the disciplinary proceedings could be held only by the Tribunal constituted under the Andhra Pradesh civil Services (Disciplinary Proceedings Tribunal) Act, 1960.2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the state of Andhra Pradesh contends that the Government being the employer and the Authority which can pass final orders of punishment in disciplinary proceedings, retain...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Jan-08-1998
Reported in : 1998CriLJ3460; I(1999)DMC709
Sat Pal, J. 1. This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 1-4-1995, passed by the Sessions Judge, Hoshiarpur, in Sessions case No. 20 of 14-6-1994. By this judgment, learned Sessions Judge has convicted appellant Ajit Singh under S. 302, IPC for having committed the murder of his wife Satwinder Kaur and has sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/-; in the default of payment of amount of fine, the appellant shall undergo rigorous imprisonment for two months. 2. Facts of the case as unfolded in the prosecution story, are that deceased Satwinder Kaur was married to appellant Ajit Singh somewhere in March, 1993. After the marriage, the deceased and the appellant started living at the house of the appellant at village Attowal. No child was born out of this marriage. The appellant and his mother used to tell the deceased that they could not keep her in their house. About 5/6 dark prior to the date of the occurrence (22-1-1994) the maternal uncle ...
Tag this Judgment!