Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1995SC605; JT1994(6)SC632; (1994)6SCC360; [1994]Supp5SCR1
..... rama.' it may be said that 'fundamentalism and pluralism pose the two challenges that people of all religious traditions face; and 'to the fundamentalists, the borders of religious certainty are tightly guarded; to the pluralist, the borders are good fences where one meets the neighbor. to many fundamentalists, secularism, seen as the denial of religious claims, is the enemy; to plu-ralists .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : [1995]84CompCas230(Guj)
S.D. Shah, J.1. Mafatlal Industries Limited (hereinafter referred to as 'MIL' for brevity) is the transferee company, which has moved this petition for sanction of this court to the scheme of amalgamation of Mafatlal Fine Spinning and . (hereinafter referred to as 'MFL' for brevity), the transferor company under section 391(2) of the Companies Act, 1956. * * * * 2. The transferor company, MFL, is proposed to be amalgamated with the petitioner company under the following circumstances and for the following reasons : (1) The proposed amalgamation will pave the way for better, more efficient and economic control in the running of operations. (2) Economies in administrative and management costs will improve in combined profitability. (3) The amalgamated company will have the benefit of the combined reserves, manufacturing assets, manpower and cash flows of the two companies. The combined technological, managerial and financial resources are expected to enhance the capability of the amalg...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Reported in : (1995)IIMLJ367
ORDERSrinivasan, J. 1. Broadly stated, two contentions are mainly urged in this batch of writ petitions, one relating to the validity of some of the provisions of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (Act No. 68 of 1986), (hereinafter called 'the Act'), and the other relating to the applicability of the Act to imparting of education and matters connected therewith. It is only in W.P. No. 6447 of 1993, a prayer is made for declaration that Sections 10(1)(b) and (c), 13(3), (4) and (5), 14(1)(c), 16(1)(b), 20(1)(b) and 27 and other provisions of the Act as unconstitutional, ultra vires and unenforceable. In all the other Writ Petitions the prayer is for either issue of Writ of Prohibition prohibiting the Consumer Forum from dealing with the specified complaint or for issue of a Writ of Certiorari to call for the records and quash the orders passed by the Consumer Forum on specified complaints. 2. The petitions can be classified into three groups :- A. Writ Petitions filed by Educational Ins...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Reported in : (1995)2MLJ367
Srinivasan, J.1. Broadly stated, two contentions are mainly urged in this batch of writ petitions, one relating to the validity of some of the provisions of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (Act No. 68 of 1986), (hereinafter called 'the Act') and the other relating to the applicability of the Act to imparting of education and matters connected therewith. It is only in W.P. No. 6447 of 1993 a prayer is made for declaration that Sections 10(1)(b) and (c), 13(3), (4) and (5), 14(1)(c), 16(1)(b), 20(1)(b)) and 27 and other provisions of the Act as unconstitutional, ultra vires and unenforceable. In all the other writ petitions the prayer is for either issue of writ of prohibition prohibiting the Consumer Forum from dealing with the specified complaints or for issue of a writ of certiorari to call for the records and quash the orders passed by the Consumer Forum on specified complaints.2. The petitions can be classified into three Groups:A. Writ Petitions filed by Educational Institutions:...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : 1995CriLJ3751; (1996)1GLR219
..... excise, narcotic, customs, revenue, intelligence or any other department of the central government or an officer of similar superior rank of the revenue, drugs control, excise, police or any other department of a state government as is empowered in this behalf by general or special order of the state government. such officer, if he has ..... a peon, sepoy or constable) of the departments of central excise, narcotic, customs, revenue intelligence or any other department of the central government or of the border security force as is empowered in this behalf by general or special order by the central government, or any such officer (being an officer superior in rank to ..... of gazetted rank of the departments of central excise, narcotics, customs, revenue, intelligence or any other department of the central government or of the border security force as is empowered in this behalf by general or special order by the central government, or any such officer of the revenue, drugs, control, excise .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : JT1995(1)SC579; 1995LabIC405; 1995(1)SCALE261; (1995)3SCC300; [1995]1SCR419; 1995(2)SLJ205(SC); 1995(1)LC571(SC)
..... in the matter of fixation of seniority of ex-ecos who were appointed as deputy superintendents of police/company commander in the border security force, the central reserve police force, the indo-tibetan border police and the assam rifles. under the said principles the service in the army was to be counted ..... for the purpose of seniority in the manner indicated therein. respondents nos. 3 to 445 in civil appeal no. 4127 of 1985 are such ecos who were absorbed/appointed as assistant commandants in the border ..... commanders or quarter-master in battalions other than signal battalians or assistant principal central training college in the central reserve police force. on september 2, 1968, parliament enacted the border security force act, 1968 (hereinafter referred to as the 'bsf act') to provide for the constitution and .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : 1995CriLJ3683
..... the appellant, giving the benefit of doubt to the other three obscurely. in the case in hand, no immediate disclosure to any one including parents and report to police. therefore, the case cited supra is not of any assistance to prosecution. similarly, the other case of krishana lal : 1980crilj926 (cited supra) is also not applicable ..... given in chapter xxi of the code-sections 252 to 258 of the code) noticed above it is clear that in a warrant case instituted otherwise than on a police report 'discharge' or 'acquittal' of accused are distinct concepts applicable to different stages of the proceedings in court. the legal effect and incidents of 'discharge' and ..... aged 13 years to the ashram of the applicant no. 2 shri kripaluji maharaj. 4. on 10th may, 1994, shri purushottam wasudeo deshpande lodged report with the police station, dhantoli, nagpur, alleging that his two young daughters, namely hema and meera were kidnapped by the applicant no. 1 priya sharan maharaj in connivance with one .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Reported in : ILR1995Delhi768
..... , : [1950]1scr869 . 'art. 32 gives the court very wide discretion in the matter of framing their writs to suit the exigencies of particular cases'. ghulam nabi teli v. superintendent of police, baramulla, 1987 lab.i.c. 505(21). 'power to prosecute constable for absence without leave-it does not debar authority to hold departmental enquiry'. nb. sub avtar singh v. union .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : [1995(71)FLR551]; (1995)IILLJ1064Raj; 1995(2)WLC1; 1995(1)WLN300
Anshuman Singh. J. 1. Learned Single Judge at the time of admission of S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3011/90 Gopi Lal Teli v. State of Rajasthan and Ors., after hearing the counsel for the parties on the question of maintainability of the writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India on the ground of alternative remedy, referred the following question for determination by a Larger Bench of more than three Judges: 'Whether a writ petition for violation of the provisions of Chapter V-A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 or violation of the principles of natural justice, should be directly entertained as a matter of course, ignoring the statutory remedy provided by that Act? On the reference made by the learned Single Judge, Hon'ble the Chief Justice Constituted Larger Bench consisting of five senior Judges of this court and in pursuance of the said order, the question referred by the learned Single Judge came up for consideration before us. 2. Before we proceed to conside...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : AIR1996All135
ORDERV.N. Khare, J.1. Two Judges of this Court having differed in their opinion on the question of competence of State Legislature to enact U.P. Sheera Niyantran Adhiniyam 1964 (U.P. Act No. XXIV of 1964) (in short, the Adhiniyam) have referred the following point of difference to third Judge for opinion:'Whether by virtue of Section 18G of the Industrial (Development and Regulation) Act, 1951, the State Legislature stood denuded of power to legislate regulating supply, distribution and price of molasses-a product of sugar industry, and was conse-qeuntly incompetent to enact Sections 7, 8 and 10 of the Uttar Pradesh Sheera Niyantran Adhiniyam 1964 (U.P. Act No. 24 of 1964)?'Hon'ble the Chief Justice instead of referring the matter to the third Judge, constituted this Full Bench to answer the point of difference between the two Judges and that is how the matter has come up before us. It arises in the context of statement made in the Lok Sabha by the Minister of State in the Ministry of ...
Tag this Judgment!