Court : Himachal Pradesh
Reported in : 2007(2)ShimLC371
Rajiv Sharma, J.1. By way of this petition, the petitioner has challenged orders dated 21st January, 2004, 9th February, 2004 and appellate order dated 23rd July, 2004.Shorn of the unnecessary details, the bare facts for the adjudication of this petition are that the disciplinary proceedings were initiated against the petitioner. The copy of the inquiry report dated 22.8.2003 has been placed on record and marked as Annexure P-5. The Inquiry Officer has recorded the following findings against the petitioner as reproduced below:Findings:Charge A - That the customer had given a cheque for Rs. 30,000 to Shri Sita Ram for taking payment on her behalf.ProvedCharge B - Shri Sita Ram received the payment of the Cheque dated 13.1.2003 for Rs. 30,000/-.ProvedCharge C - Shri Sita Ram did not hand over the payment to the customer.Proved.2. As a sequel to the inquiry report dated 22.8.2003, the petitioner was served with show-cause (punishment) notice by the disciplinary authority on 21st January, ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Himachal Pradesh
Reported in : 2007(3)ShimLC96
Rajiv Sharma, J.1. This petition is filed against the award passed by the Labour Court-cum-Industrial Tribunal, Dharamshala in reference No. 284 of 2003 dated 23.4.2005.2. The brief facts necessary for adjudication of this petition are that the appropriate Government has made the following reference to the Labour Court-cum-Industrial Tribunal, Dharamshala:-Whether the termination of services of Shri Rajinder Kumar S/o Shri Manohar Lal, Ex. Conductor by the Managing Director, H.R.T.C. Shimla, 2. The Divisional Manager, H.R.T.C, Dharamshala, Distt. Kangra, H.P., 3. The Regional Manager, H.R.T.C, Pathankot w.e.f. 18.2.1998 on the basis of enquiry report is proper and justified? If not, what relief of back wages, seniority, service benefits and amount of compensation the aggrieved workman is entitled to3. The respondent (hereinafter for convenience will be referred to as workman) filed claim petition before the Labour Court vide Annexure P-2. The petitioner-Corporation had filed reply to w...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Himachal Pradesh
Reported in : 2007(2)ShimLC340
V.K. Ahuja, J.1. This is an appeal filed by the appellant against the judgment of the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court, Shimla, dated 30th August, 2006, vide which the appellant was held guilty under Sections 342 and 376 I.P.C. and was sentenced as under:(i) 376 IPC Imprisonment for 7 years and fine of Rs. 1,000/-. Indefault of payment of fine, to suffer imprisonment for3 months.(ii) 342 IPC Imprisonment for 6 months.2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that a report was lodged with the police on 12.5.2004 at about 12.10 p.m. by one X (name not mentioned) that she is living with her parents near Sankat Mochan and her father is serving at Shimla. The prosecutrix alleged she was a student of 10th class studying at Lakkar Bazar, Shimla and on the night intervening 28/ 29.4.2004, she had gone to the marriage of sister of her friend where one boy met her about whom she learnt that he was bua's son of her friend. The said boy named Naresh took her phone num...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Himachal Pradesh
Reported in : (2008)ILLJ794HP
ORDERRajiv Sharma, J.1. This petition is directed against the award passed by the H.P. Labour Court, Shimla on January 16, 2002.2. The necessary facts for the adjudication of this petition are that the petitioners-corporation had entered into an agreement with respondent No. 16 on July 29, 1995 forfeiting, conversion and carriage to road side depot, Khudan and stacking of 805.314 M3 converted timber. The copy of the agreement was supplied to the Court during the course of hearing, which is taken on record. The relevant paras of the agreement necessary for the adjudication of this petition are reproduced below:14. That the Contractor(s)/Labour Supply Mate(s) will maintain a roll call register to mark daily attendance of the Labour force present on the works and would produce the same on demand to the Divisional Manager or the Official incharge of the work, as and when required to do so.24. That the Divisional Manager shall be entitled to pay the labour from the unpaid bill (bills) of th...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Himachal Pradesh
Reported in : 2007(2)ShimLC93
Surinder Singh, J.1. The Petitioner Society has assailed the award passed against it in Reference No. 52 of 1999 (RBT 368 of 2004) passed on 17-12-2004 by the Labour Court-cum-Industrial Tribunal Dharamshala, camp at Mandi on the following reference received for adjudication from the appropriate Government:Whether the termination of services of Shri Jagdish Chand, Sales-Man by the Sachiv, The Joginder Nagar Tehsil Co-operative Marketing and Consumer Union Ltd., Joginder Nagar, District Mandi, H.P. w.e.f. 31.1.95 without any notice, charge-sheet, enquiry and without compliance of Section 25(F) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, is legal and justified. If not, to what relief of consequential benefits including back wages, seniority and amount of compensation, Shri Jagdish Chand is entitled?2. The admitted facts are that the respondent No. 2 herein, was appointed as Salesman in the Essential Commodities Depot of the Petitioner Society in August, 1986. He remained posted as a Salesman i...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Himachal Pradesh
Reported in : (2007)IIILLJ1084HP
Surinder Singh, J.1. The petitioner Society has assailed the award passed against it in Reference No. 52/1999 (RBT 368 of 2004) passed on December 17, 2004 by the Labour Court-cum-Industrial Tribunal Dharamshala, camp at Mandi on the following reference received for adjudication from the appropriate Government:Whether the termination of services of Shri Jagdish Chand, Salesman by the Sachiv, The Joginder Nagar Tehsil Co-operative Marketing and Consumer Union Ltd., Joginder Nagar, District Mandi, H.P. w.e.f. January 31, 1995 without any notice, charge-sheet, enquiry and without compliance of Section 25-F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, is legal and justified. If not, to what relief of consequential benefits including back wages, seniority and amount of compensation, Shri Jagdish Chand is entitled?2. The admitted facts are that the respondent No. 2 herein, was appointed as Salesman in the Essential Commodities Depot of the Petitioner Society in August, 1986. He remained posted as a...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Himachal Pradesh
Reported in : 2007(2)ShimLC428
Surjit Singh, J.1. This regular second appeal was admitted on the following substantial questions of law:1. When the predecessor in interest of plaintiff-appellant_ is shown in possession over the land in question in the Jamabandi for the year 1954-55, in the absence of any legal order to negative the earlier entries showing ownership and possession whether the presumption attached to them or the earlier entries would take precedence over the latter entries?2. Whether the Lower Appellate Court was justified in refusing the appointment of Local Commissioner and rejecting the prayer for inspecting the spot merely on the ground that the case remained pending for six years.3. Whether it is always essential for a person claiming adverse possession to show that his possession was notorious and was in the knowledge of the person claiming title thereof?4. When there is a dispute regarding the title whether the Court of limited jurisdiction i.e. Revenue Officers have the jurisdiction to initiat...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Himachal Pradesh
Reported in : 2007CriLJ3029,2007(3)ShimLC415
V.K. Ahuja, J.1. This is an appeal filed by the appellants against the conviction and sentence imposed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Solan vide his judgment dated 24-7-2006 and the appellants were convicted to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years each and were further sentenced to pay fine of Rs. 20.000/- each for the offence punishable under Section 307 read with Section 34, IPC. In default of payment of fine both the appellants were ordered to further suffer simple imprisonment for one year each. It was further directed that the amount of fine on reasliazation from the appellants to be paid to the injured.2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that on 12-5-2005 at about 2 a.m. a statement under Section 154, Cr.P.C. was made by Sunil Kumar P.W. 1 before a police officer. He stated that on 11-5-2005 at about 10-30 p.m. he along with Raman Kumar P.W. 2 came to the tea shop of Bish Ram after doing agriculture work and Bish Ram and one Gopal Singh were already si...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Himachal Pradesh
Reported in : 2007(1)ShimLC224
ORDERIn pursuance of Sub-rule (1) 5 of the Central Civil Services (Temporary Services) Rules, 1965, I hereby give notice to Sh. Ram Singh, Volunteer Teacher, Government Primary School Chawai, (Block Deha) Tehsil Theog, District Shimla that his services shall stand terminated with effect from the date of expiry of a period of one month from the date on which this notice is served on him.Sd/-Distt. Primary Education Officer Shimla, District Shimla-171002Endst. No. even Dated: Shimla-2 the Sept. 1999Copy forwarded to:1. The Director of Primary Education, H.P. Shimla-1 w.r.t this letter No. EDN- H(Pry)(II)6/98 (Comp) dated 9.9.99 for information.2. The Block Primary Education Officer, Deha, with the direction that the salary of Sh. Ram Singh, V.T. up to date of service rendered by the said teacher may be released and paid to him accordingly.3. Sh. Ram Singh, V T GPD Chowai, through Block Primary Education Officer, Deha.4. Guard file.Sd/-Distt. Primary Education Officer, Shimla, District Sh...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Himachal Pradesh
Reported in : 2007ACJ1874,AIR2007HP34,2007(1)ShimLC258
ORDERDeepak Gupta, J.1. The only question which arises for decision in this appeal is whether the amount deposited by the appellant-owner from time to time in pursuance to an award passed by a Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (MACT) has first to be adjusted towards interest or costs or to the principal amount as awarded by the Tribunal.2. The law is well settled that under the provisions of Order 21 of the Code of Civil Procedure the payments, if any, made by the JD have first to be adjusted towards the amount of costs and interest and only thereafter towards the principal amount due unless the parties have agreed and specified to the contrary, This position of law has been settled by the Apex Court in Meghraj v. Mst. Bayabai : [1970]1SCR523 wherein has been held as follows:The normal rule in the case of a debt due with interest is that any payment made by the debtor is in the first instance to be applied towards satisfaction of interest and thereafter to the principal.3. In the present ...
Tag this Judgment!