Court : Himachal Pradesh
Reported in : 2009(2)ShimLC434
Rajiv Sharma, J.1. This Regular Second Appeal has been directed against the judgment and decree dated 15.10.1998 passed by the learned District Judge, Kinnaur Civil Division at Rampur Bushahar in civil appeal No. 6 of 1998.2. Brief facts necessary for the adjudication of this Regular Second Appeal are that the respondent-plaintiff (hereinafter referred to as the plaintiff for convenience sake) filed a suit for declaration to the effect that he as well as other co-sharers are owners in possession of the land measuring 0-25-25 hectares comprised in Khata No. 88, Khatauni No. 273 and Khasra No. 353 situated in Chak Gasoh, Tehsil Rampur, District Shimla as the same is no more redeemable. The case set up by the plaintiff is that the suit land earlier comprised in Khasra Nos. 61 and 62 measuring 3-8 bighas shown in the jamabandi for the year 1973-74 was recorded in the ownership of Devta Sahib of Gasoh and that the plaintiff and other co-sharers were recorded as the mortgagee and the plainti...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Himachal Pradesh
Reported in : 2008(1)ShimLC270
Rajiv Sharma, J.1. The brief facts necessary for the adjudication of this petition as culled out from the pleadings of the parties are that a charge-sheet was issued to the respondent No. 3 on 4th October, 1994. The Inquiry Officer was appointed and he had submitted his report to the Disciplinary Authority dated 24.7.1997. The Board of Directors of the petitioner-federation has not agreed with the findings recorded by the Inquiry officer with regard to the charges No. 1, 2 and 12 respectively. The Board of Directors had come to the conclusion that the charges No. 1, 2 and 12 stood proved against the respondent No. 3. The inquiry report was furnished to the Disciplinary authority on 24th July, 1997. A memorandum was issued to the respondent No. 3 on 11th May, 2000 enclosing therewith the copy of the report of the Inquiry Officer dated 24th July, 1997, It has come in the memorandum that the Board of Directors had agreed with the findings of the Inquiry Officer in respect of charges No. 3...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Himachal Pradesh
Reported in : (2008)ILLJ524HP
1. This petition is filed against the judgment of H. P. State Administrative Tribunal in O.A. No. 1430/1996, dated March 11, 1997.2. The brief facts necessary for adjudication of this petition are that the petitioner was engaged as Supervisor on daily wages basis with effect from June 1, 1989. The primary duty of the petitioner was to supervise the work of daily wage labourers working in the Forests whether directly employed by the Corporation or by the contractors.3. The petitioner was issued a memo on June 21,1996 along with proforma respondents No. 4 and 5 who were working as daily wages chowkidars on the two timber lots of the Corporation. The gist of the memo dated June 21, 1996 was that due to the absence of the petitioner the timber of road depot had been, stolen on the intervening night of May 15 and 16,1996 causing huge loss to the Corporation. The petitioner by way of this memo was directed to explain his position as to why the loss caused due to the theft should not be, reco...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Himachal Pradesh
Kuldip Singh, J.1. The petitioner through this petition has prayed for quashing of order/ notification dated 5.6.2004 Annexure P-18 vide which the petitioner has been removed from service by respondent No. 2 on the basis of recommendations of respondent No. 1, quashing of enquiry proceedings including enquiry report dated 4.2.2004 and directing the respondents to reinstate the petitioner in service w.e.f. 5.6.2004 with all consequential benefits including seniority, arrears of salary alongwith interest at the rate of 12% per annum.2. The pleaded case of the petitioner is that one K.C. Sadyal was posted as Superintendent of Police at Una, who had been secretly monitoring the activities, functioning of Judicial Officers and their staff. The petitioner wrote a letter dated 3.10.1990 Annexure P-1 to K.C. Sadyal asking him on whose instance he was monitoring the functioning and supervising the Judicial Officers and their staff, who replied vide letter dated 8.10.1990 Annexure P-2 and had sh...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Himachal Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1980HP5
T.U. Mehta, C.J.1. Petitioner Shanker Dass has filed this writ petition with the prayer that the show cause notice found at Annexure A of Oct., 1978 and the action pursuant to it for disqualifying him from contesting panchayat election for five years and for dispensing with his services as the President of the Gram Panchayat Nalag be quashed.2. The short facts leading to this writ petition are that the petitioner was elected as a President of Gram Panchayat Nalag in the year 1973 and thereafter in Dec., 1978 he was re-elected as such. On 15th Jan., 1979 he took oath of his office.3. By order, dated 22nd February 1979 found at Annexure D, the Governor of Himachal Pradesh has been pleased to disqualify the petitioner from contesting panchayat election for five years and also to dispense with his services as a President of Gram Panchayat, Nalag, under Section 57 of the Himachal Pradesh Panchayati Raj Act 1968. This order is passed on the basis of an enquiry conducted and the subsequent sh...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Himachal Pradesh
Reported in : 2009(2)ShimLC260
Surjit Singh, J.1. State has appealed against the judgment, dated 2nd January, 2004, whereby respondents Khoob Ram and Subash Bhalla, who were charged with and tried for offences, under Sections 468, 471, 420, read with Section 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, have been acquitted by the trial Magistrate. 2. Case of the prosecution, as per evidence adduced during trial, is like this. Respondent Khoob Ram was posted as Patwari in Mauza Sirigarh, Tehsil Ani, District Kullu, in the year 1966. Respondent Subash Bhalla is a resident of Chanigarh. This respondent No. 2 Subash Bhalla wanted to purchase land in Solan District of Himachal Pradesh. However, he is not an agriculturist, within the meaning of Section 118 of the H.P. Tenancy and Land Reforms Act, and, therefore, cannot purchase any land in the State of Himachal Pradesh, unless he obtains permission from the Government. With a view to purchasing a big chunk of land to execute his plans, as a builder, in the area of Solan District, he e...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Himachal Pradesh
Reported in : (2009)ILLJ389HP
ORDERRajiv Sharma, J.1. Since the common questions of law and fact are involved in these petitions, the same are being disposed by a common judgment.2. A challenge has been laid by the petitioners to the award dated January 17,2006 passed in reference No. 129/2000 by the Presiding Judge, Himachal Pradesh Labour Court, Shimla.3. The brief facts necessary for the adjudications of these petitions are that the 'Kapra Mazdoor Lal Jhanda Union' (CITU), had submitted a Demand Charter to the Manager of the respondent-factory on January 31, 2000 raising as many as 15 demands. The Union had also served a notice on the management of the respondent-factory on June 10, 2000 under Sections 22 and 23 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. It appears that the matter could not be resolved amicably' between the workmen and the management and consequently the State Government has made the following reference to the Labour Court:Whether the demand raised by Kapra Mazdoor Lal Jhanda Union (CITU) (Unregister...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Himachal Pradesh
Reported in : 2007(3)ShimLC451
Kuldip Singh, J.1. The original defendant Paras Ram had filed this appeal against the judgment and decree, dated 17.6.1995, passed by learned Additional District Judge, Kullu, in Civil Appeal No. 34 of 1994. The parties are referred in this judgment, as they were referred in the trial court.2. The facts in brief are that plaintiff Roop Chand filed a suit for declaration and consequential relief of injunction that he be declared owner in possession of the suit land and defendant has got no right, title or interest over the suit land, plaintiff is not bound by the wrong revenue entries appearing in the name of Ram Chand deceased. Consequential relief of permanent prohibitory injunction has also been prayed against the defendant from causing interference in the ownership and possession of the plaintiff on the suit land.3. The further case of the plaintiff is that Ram Chand was the owner and plaintiff was tenant under said Ram Chand on the suit land. Ram Chand had died without leaving wife...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Himachal Pradesh
Reported in : 2008(3)ShimLC33
Dev Darshan Sud, J.1. The petitioners have filed this writ petition against the show-cause-notice (Annexure-PK) issued to them by the Registrar, Co-operative Societies (Respondent No. 2) and the consequential order (Annexure-PV) removing them from the Board of Directors of the Himachal Pradesh State Co-operative Bank (Respondent No. 4). The petitioners have also prayed for consequential relief flowing from the quashing of these orders.2. It is undisputed before me that the petitioners are the Directors of respondent No. 4, H.P. State Co-operative Bank Limited, constituted, incorporated and formed under the provisions of the Himachal Pradesh Co-operative Societies Act, 1968, (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'). Show-cause-notice (Annexure-PK) dated 5th February, 2008 was issued to the petitioners by the Registrar, respondent No. 2, on various grounds set out therein. The basis of the notice was the two audit reports for the financial years 2005-2006 and 2006-2007. Statutory inspectio...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Himachal Pradesh
Reported in : 2009(2)ShimLC482
Rajiv Sharma, J.1. Since common questions of law and facts are involved in these petitions, the same were taken up together for hearing and are being disposed of by a common judgment.2. CWP No. 2495/2009 has been filed by the Himachal Pradesh B.Ed. Colleges Welfare Association seeking quashing of notification dated 13.7.2009 and also for quashing the imposition of condition of 50% marks and CWP No. 2781/2009 has been filed on behalf of the students' community assailing the imposition of condition of 50% marks in qualifying examination.3. The respondent-University has issued prospectus/brochure for admission to B.Ed. course in Department of Education and Colleges of Education in Himachal Pradesh for the academic session 2009-2010. Para 2 (d) of the prospectus mentions that respondent No. 3 has approved total 100 seats, out of which 50 seats in Non-Medical Stream, 30 in Medical Stream, 15 in Arts Stream and 5 in Commerce Stream, which are to be filled up as per 100 point roster. This dis...
Tag this Judgment!