Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : JT2006(9)SC442; (2007)145PLR252; 2006(11)SCALE54; (2007)1SCC341
S.B. Sinha, J.1. Leave granted.2. An election for the post of Sarpanch and Panches of the Gram Panchayat, Village Ranish Khurd, District Moga was held on 29.6.2003. Total votes polled in both the elections were shown to be 836. The Returning Officer found that both Appellant and Respondent No. 1 had polled 412 votes each. Respondent No. 2 herein is said to have got 4 votes. 8 votes were rejected. Allegedly, a recounting was done. The result of recounting was same as that of the first one. Returning Officer recorded the said statement in the statutory Form No. IX prescribed in terms of Rule 33(2)(e) of the Punjab Panchayati Election Rules, 1994. The total number of votes polled was found to be 836 even in the election of the Panches. Indisputably, election was held under the Punjab Panchayati Raj Act, 1994. The State of Punjab in exercise of its power conferred upon it under the said Act, framed rules known as Punjab Panchayat Election Rules, 1994 (for short, 'the Rules'). The relevant ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : [2006(111)FLR908]; JT2006(9)SC302; (2007)ILLJ236SC; 2006(10)SCALE417; (2006)8SCC508; 2007(2)SLJ59(SC)
S.B. Sinha, J.1. Leave granted. 2. The State of Rajasthan made a Scheme for supply of water in the villages known as 'Jal Pradyot Yojna'. The State was to contribute 50% of the total costs whereas the rest 50% was to be borne by the Gram Panchayat. Pursuant to or in furtherance of the Scheme, the Gram Panchayat of Indragarh employed several persons including Respondent No. 1 herein as a pump driver. He was initially appointed for a period of six months. The term of his appointment was extended from time to time. The total period during which Respondent No. 1 remained employed was from 19.9.1996 to 7.11.1997. The Scheme was to be completed upto 7.11.1997. As the Scheme came to an end, the services of Respondent No. 1 were terminated. He filed an application for his regularization of his services as a pump driver before the Labour Welfare and Conciliation Officer, Hanumagarh. In reply to the notice issued by the said authority, the Public Health & Engineering Department of the State inte...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Company Law Board CLB
1. The petitioners collectively holding 22.96 per cent of the issued share capital of M/s Ashok Iron Works Private Limited ("the Company"), aggrieved on account of certain alleged acts of oppression and mismanagement in the affairs of the Company namely, (a) non-declaration of dividends; (b) increase of the authorised share capital; (c) exclusion of the petitioners from the management of the Company; (d) siphoning of funds by the respondents; (e) illegal expansion programme of the Company; (t) refusal to increase the salary of the first petitioner while increasing the salary of the respondents 3 & 4; (g) payment of commission to the respondents 3 & 4 before finalisation of accounts; and (h) amendment of articles curbing the rights of the petitioners, have invoked in the present petition, the provisions of Section 397/398 of the Companies Act, 1956 ("the Act") seeking various reliefs claimed therein.2. Sri Udaya Holla, learned senior Counsel while initiating his arguments submi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 2006(2)CTLJ225(SC); JT2006(9)SC612; 2006(11)SCALE166; (2007)1SCC477
G.P. Mathur, J.1. Leave granted.2. This appeal, by special leave, has been filed challenging the judgments and orders dated 4.8.2004 of a learned single Judge of Rajasthan High Court by which the writ petition filed by respondent No. 1 M/s. G.S. Investments was disposed of with certain directions and also the order dated 23.9.2004 passed by the Division Bench by which the special appeal preferred by the appellants against the said order was dismissed at the admission stage. The appellants have also challenged the order dated 4.4.2005 which was passed in the contempt petition initiated by the respondent No. 1.3. The appellant No. 1 Rajasthan Housing Board published an auction notice on 3.2.2002 for auction of 50 commercial plots in the Mansarovar Scheme, which was followed by another auction notice dated 19.2.2002. The auction was conducted on 20.2.2002 in which M/s. G.S. Investments (respondent No. 1) made the highest bid @ Rs. 5750/- per square meter. A news item was published in some...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : 2006(6)KarLJ623; 2007(1)AIRKarR283; AIR2007NOC264
ORDERB.S. Patil, J.1. Petitioners are the members of the Zilla Panchayat, Shimoga. They have filed this writ petition challenging the guidelines dated 18.07.2006 issued by the 3rd Respondent-Director of Rural Infrastructure & Ex-Officio Deputy Secretary to the Government, Department of Rural Development & Panchayathraj.2. As per the impugned guidelines, the Chief Executive Officers of all the Zilla Panchayats in the State have been informed of a further amendment to the guidelines dated 01.04.2006 as amended on 11.05.2006 and 26.05.2006. The amendment now proposed by the impugned guidelines dated 18.07.2006 states that while preparing the priority list for the purpose of taking up road and bridge works, the Zilla Panchayats shall accept the priority list submitted by the Members of Legislative Assembly (for short the 'MLAs').3. It is necessary to note here that the Government issued guidelines dated 01.04.2006 informing the Zilla Panchayats to receive the list of works of roads and bri...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : ILR2007(1)Kar239; 2007(3)KLJ1; 2007(1)KCCR71; 2007(1)AIRKarR606(DB)
H.L. Datu, J.1. Since the parties are common in these appeals, they are clubbed, heard and disposed of by this common order.2. W.A.No. 6677/03 is filed by the Secretary. Nagawala Gram Panchayath, Nagawala, Mysore Taluk and District.W.A.No. 5936/03 is filed by one Sri B.N. Mahadeva, who was arrayed as 5th respondent in the writ petition filed by the one Sri Shankarappa in No. 35893/2001.3. In these appeals, the Secretary, Nagawala Gram Panchayath as well as Sri Mahadeva, are calling in question the correctness or otherwise of the orders passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.No. 35893/01 dated 8.7.2003 By the said order, the Learned Single Judge has allowed the writ petition and in that, has quashed the order passed by the Zilla Panchayat, Mysore, dated 10.9.2001, resolution dated 18.9.2001 passed by the 4th respondent-Gram Panchayat granting site and licence in favour of respondents No. 54. The facts in nutshell are, that one Sri Shankarappa claims that he is the owner of a vacant s...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
1. This writ appeal is directed against the order passed by the learned Single Judge in WP No. 15237/2005(C) wherein he has declined to grant the relief of a writ of certiorari to quash the order impugned dt.2/4/2005 and notice dt. 28/5/2005 by recording reasons with observation that the respondents 1 & 2 are clothed with power to issue the impugned directions and also refused to issue a writ of mandamus as prayed by the Company, urging various legal contentions. Further the appellant has prayed to set aside the order of the learned Single Judge and to quash the impugned order and notice by allowing this writ appeal.2. Certain relevant brief facts are stated in this Judgment for the purpose of appreciating the rival legal contentions urged in this case and to answer the same.The appellant is a Company incorporated under the provisions of the Companies Act 1956, hereinafter called 'the Company' in short, carrying on with a commercial undertaking business of exhibiting movies at various ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : [2007(113)FLR37]
Mohammad Rafiq, J.1. The petitioner have prayed for setting aside the award dated 13th October, 1998 passed by the Labour Court, Bikaner and its consequential notification dated 18th August, 1999. The case set up by the petitioners in the memo of writ petition is that the respondent-workman was engaged as a part time worker during Famine Relief Works on fixed monthly payment of Rs. 75. A copy of the resolution of the Gram Panchayat has been placed on record to substantiate this. Apart from working with the petitioner, the respondent-workman was also running a Grocery Shop in his village and, therefore, ho on his own accord, stopped working in Famine Relief Works from the year 1987. The petitioners have placed on record resolution of the Gram Panchayat, Gulpura passed on 7th December, 1997 to show that the respondent was running a Kirana Shop for the last 15 years. This according to the petitioners was the reason for his absence from duty. The respondent submitted an application before ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : ILR2007KAR191; 2007(1)KLJ671; 2007(1)AIRKarR611
ORDERB.S. Patil, J.1. Learned Government Pleader is directed to take notice for the respondents.Petitioner is challenging the notice dated 03.11.2006 issued by the Assistant Commissioner, Koppal Sub Division, Koppal, notifying the date of meeting of the Grama Panchayat convened for the purpose of considering the no confidence motion. The meeting is fixed on 29.11.2005 at 11 a.m. in the premises of the Grama Panchayat. The impugned notice is issued by the Assistant Commissioner upon a requisition submitted in this regard by the requisite number of members of the Grama Panchayat expressing their no confidence in the petitioner as Adhyaksha of the Grama Panchayat and requesting the authority to convene the meeting.2. Learned Counsel for the petitioner contends that the members have executed a bond in Rs. 50 stamp paper stating that they will not support any no confidence motion against the petitioner. Contrary to the said assurance given, the members are moving the no confidence motion wh...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR2007SC903; 2006(12)SCALE571; 2007AIRSCW602
S.B. Sinha, J.1. Leave granted.2. Constitution of India is suprema lex. Part IX of the Constitution of India was inserted by Constitution (Seventy-third Amendment) Act, 1992. Article 243B mandates that there shall be constituted in every State, Panchayats at the village, intermediate and district levels in accordance with the provisions of the said Part. Part IX speaks of composition of panchayats (Article 243C), reservation of seats (Article 243D), and duration of panchayats (Article 243E). It also provides for disqualifications for membership in terms of Article 243F stating:243F. Disqualifications for membership.--(1) A person shall be disqualified for being chosen as, and for being, a member of a Panchayat--(a) if he is so disqualified by or under any law for the time being in force for the purposes of elections to the Legislature of the State concerned: Provided that no person shall be disqualified on the ground that be is less than twenty-five years of age, if he has attained the...
Tag this Judgment!