Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : 1991CriLJ125; 1990(1)WLN201
M.B. Sharma, J.1. Ordinarily we would not have liked to go in this appeal into the question to legality of the order 1987 Raj Cri C 72 dated February 6, 1987, of the learned single Judge made in Writ Petition No. 2386/86 as after the aforesaid order was made, investigation was taken over by the CBI and the investigation is said to be almost complete but because a larger issue about the powers of this court to interfere at the stage of investigation or transfer of the case from the local police to CBI, is involved we will proceed to examine the issue.2. We may at the outset State that we would not like to go into the question whether the death of Praksah Chand Garg was as a result of the accident as alleged by the prosecution or was a murder as alleged by Phool Chand Garg, his brother. This is a matter which depends on the collection of evidence and is to be adjudged by the court. All that we may state in this Special appeal is that one Damodar Prasad who is said to be the nephew of Pho...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : 1990(1)WLN210
J.S. Verma, C.J.1. The point involved for decision in both these petitions is the effect of the amendment made in the Rajasthan Forest Service Rules, 1962 by the Rajasthan Forest Service (Amendment) Rules, 1985. These amendments were made in exercise of the powers conferred by Proviso to Article 309 of the Constitution of India by Notification dated June 22, 1985 published in the Rajasthan Gazette (Extraordinary) dated June 26, 1985. According to clause 1 (ii) of these amendments they came into force on the date of their publication in the Rajasthan Gazette. The contention of the petitioners is that these amendments are merely declatory and must be deemed to declare the position existing under the Rajasthan Forest Service Rules, 1962 even prior to these amendments. The question is, whether this contention can be accepted?2. The petitioners in both these petitions applied for selection for the Diploma Course in Forestry and after being so selected and getting the Diploma, were appointed...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : 1990ACJ542; 1989(2)WLN98
N.C. Sharma, J.1. This is an appeal under Section 30 of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923, by M/s. Mehta Printing Industries against the judgment dated May 5, 1987 passed by the Workmen's Compensation Commissioner, Pali.2. Facts in brief are that on November 29, 1984, respondent Lila Devi filed an application before the Workmen's Compensation Commissioner, Pali, for grant of compensation on account of the personal loss sustained by her due to the death of her husband Balkishan in the course of his employment with the appellant. It was alleged by Lila Devi that her husband Balkishan was a workman employed by the appellant on October 6, 1984. Balkishan died on that day as he fell in the well during the course of his employment with the appellant as his duty was to maintain the pipe connecting the well. The monthly wages of the deceased were stated to be Rs. 900/- and he was 26 years of age at the time of his death.3. The claim of Lila Devi was contested by the appellant who denied the...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : 1989WLN(UC)457
Navin Chandra Sharma, J.1. This is a second appeal by the defendants against the appellate decree of the District Judge, Pratapgarh dated January 30, 1976 affirming the preliminary decree of the Additional Civil Judge, Pratapgarh dated May 1, 1971 whereby the latter had decreed Civil Suit No. 64 of 1966 instituted by the plaintiffs for possession of their portion in a 'haveli' and shop situated in Sadar Bazar, Mochi Para, Chhittorgarh after taking accounts of the income derived by the appellants from the share of the plaintiffs' property.2. Facts leading to the filling of this second appeal are that on April 4, 1966, the plaintiffs-respondents instituted Civil Suit No 64 of 1966 against Chhaganlal and his son Niranjan Lal Chhaganlal died during the pendency of the suit. His son Niranjan Lal was already on record and his widow Smt. Alil Bai was also substituted as his legal representative. The plaintiffs-respondents alleged in the plaint that the parties alongwith Udailal and Bhanwar La...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : AIR1990Raj3
ORDERNavin Chandra Sharma, J. 1. This is a revision by Ashwani Kumar against the order of the District Judge, Sri Ganganagar dt. May 23, 1987 allowing certain amendments sought to be made by non-petitioners Nos. 4 and 5 in their application for setting aside the award filed on Feb. 19,1985. 2. Facts lending to the filing of this revision petition are that the petitioner and non-petitioners Nos. 4 and 5 had entered into an agreement dt. June 18, 1984 for settlement of dispute regarding properties specified in the agreement. Non-petitioners Nos. 1 to 3 were appointed arbitrators who gave their award on August 25, 1984. The arbitrators moved an application under Section 14(2) of the Arbitration Act, 1940 (for short, hereinafter, 'the Act') before the District Judge Shri Ganganagar along with the award and prayed that theaward may be made the Rule of the Court. Notices of the filing of the award were served by the Court upon the petitioner as well as non-petitioners Nos. 4 and 5. Non-petit...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : 1988(2)WLN446
Farooq Hasan, J.1. K.C. Goyal (Petitioner), a Diploma Holder in Mechanical Engineer (Year 1965) & then, A.M.I.E. passed on 8th August, 1976, assails, through this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the constitutional validity of the Amendments in the Rajasthan Service of Engineering (Public Health Branch) Rules, 1968 (for short, 'the Principal Service Rules') and the Rajasthan Engineering Subordinate Service (Public Health Branch) Rules), 1967, for brevity, 'the Subordinate Engineering Service Rules') made vide notifications dated 30th May, 1977 (Anx.7), 28th July, 1978 (Ann, 8),. 22nd June, 1976 (Ann. 5) and 18th June, 1977 (Anx.6) as violative of & ultra vires Articles 14 and 16(1) of the India.2. the facts, simple enough as they are 'have copiously been averred by the petitioner. Shorn of all unnecessary detail, a broad brush factual backdrop will help delineate the controversy.3. Initially, vide order dated 2nd July, 1965, the petitioner, on his having fo...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : [1989]72STC437(Raj)
S.C. Agrawal, J.1. These writ petitions raise common questions for consideration and, therefore, they are being disposed of by a common order.2. In Sub-section (2) of Section 4 of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1954, it has been provided that where the State Government is of the opinion that it is necessary or expedient in the public interest so to do, the State Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette, exempt, whether prospectively or retrospectively, from tax the sale or purchase of any goods or class of goods or any person or class of persons on such conditions and on payment of such fee as may be specified in the notification. Similar provision with regard to grant of exemption from Central sales tax is contained in Sub-section (5) of Section 8 of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956. In exercise of the aforesaid power conferred by Sub-section (2) of Section 4 of the Act and Sub-section (5) of Section 8 of the Central Sales Tax Act, the State Government issued two notificat...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : 1988(2)WLN553
M.B. Sharma, J.1. An identical question of law is involved in these writ petitions and it is as to whether even those who are having medical qualifications which include Ayurvedic qualifications although not included in the Second, Third or Fourth Schedule to the Indian Medical Central Council Act, 1970 (for short, the Central Act), have right to registration in grade 'A' or 'B' or have a right to practice Ayurvedic Indian System of Medicine? Item No. 25 of list III (Concurrent List) deals with Education, including technical education, medical education and universities, subject to the provisions of Entries 63, 64, 65 and 66 of List-I, vocational and technical training of labour. It will therefore be clear from the perusal of the aforesaid item 25 of List-Ill of the Constitution that the powers of the State Legislature and Parliament are concurrent but in case the Parliament has jurisdiction to legislate in accordance with entries 63, 64, 65 and 66 of List-I, and any legislature has be...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : 1988WLN(UC)515
G.K. Sharma, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment dt. 21-11-1987 passed by the Addl. Sessions Judge, Gangapur City where by, convicting the accused-appellant 376 IPC and sentenced him for 10 years R.I. and a fine of Rs. 1000/- in default of payment of fine, to further undergo 6 month's RI.2. On the Parcha Bayan of Mst. Kaveri recorded by the Police dated 15-11-1986 a rate 376 IPC was registered. In this statement she has stated that on 15-11-1986 at 330 p.m. she took her bull for drinking water and when she was returning the bull got freed and ran away. She chased and the bull entered into the field of Ram Prasad Meena. In that field Shiv Ram s/o Ram Prasad Meena was standing and he forcibly dragged her and committed rape on her.3. After completing the usual investigation the Police submitted challan against the accused 376 IPC. After concluding trial the learned Sessions Judge found him guilty of this offence and sentenced him as mentioned above. The case has not been arg...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : [1989(58)FLR408]; (1993)IIILLJ567Raj; 1988(2)WLN250
Verma, C.J.1. This writ petition is by an employer against the award (Annexure 13), dated 18th September, 1982, by which the Industrial Tribunal-cum Labour Court, Kota, has decided the reference made to it under Section 10(1)(c) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, by holding that the termination of service of the workman, Girraj Prasad, by the employer was unjustified and instead of this punishment, the punishment of stoppage of two annual grade increments with cumulative effect has been imposed. By the award, the workman, Girraj Prasad, has consequently been ordered to be reinstated with full back-wages. The employer is aggrieved by the interference made in this manner by the award. Hence, this petition to quash the award. 2. The material facts are a few only. The aforesaid workman, Girraj Prasad, whose cause has been espoused by respondent 1-union, was employed as maintenance fitter in the carbide plant of the petitioner's factory and was later on transferred in the same capacity t...
Tag this Judgment!