Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : AIR2006Raj19; IV(2005)BC475; RLW2005(2)Raj1336; 2005(3)WLC341
Dinesh Maheshwari, J.1. The appellants State of Rajasthan and others have submitted this appeal against the order dated 28.11.1995 passed in Writ Petition No. 86/1986 whereby the learned Single Judge allowed the writ petition, quashed the demand notice-Annex. 13 and directed the State Government to deposit the amount of Rs. 29,627/- received from the petitioner in the welfare fund at the disposal of the Chief Minister.2. The matter pertains to the attempted recovery towards alleged breach of contract by the writ petitioner-Nathulal. Brief facts leading to the present appeal are that the appellants issued a notice inviting offers for the contract of collection of Tendu leaves in different forest areas. The invitation was issued on 30.1.1973 (Annex.R/1) fixing the date of auction as 22.2.1973. It is not in dispute that the petitioner was one of the bidders for the area of erstwhile Bijoliya Jagir falling in Mandalgarh range of Forest Division, Chittorgarh for the season of 1973. The peti...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : RLW2004(1)Raj60; 2004(1)WLC132
Goyal, J.1. Facts giving rise to this second appeal under Section 100 C.P.C. briefly narrated are that respondent plaintiff filed a civil suit against the original tenant Mohd. Adam Kureshi, on 1.8.1975, for eviction and arrears of rent with the averments that the tenant committed default in payment of rent from 1,2.1973 and the suit shop was required by the plaintiff. The defendant in his written statement while admitting his tenancy denied the ground of eviction. Issues were framed and after recording the evidence of the parties, decree of eviction videjudgment dated 10.9.1997 was passed on the ground that requirement of plaintiff was reasonable and bonafide and comparative hardship would be caused to the plaintiff in case decree of eviction is not passed.2. First regular Appeal No. 40/97, filed by the original Mohd. Adam Kureshi was dismissed by learned Additional District Judge No. 1, Kota, vide impugned judgment dated 8.7. 2002, on the ground that the appellant-tenant died during ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : (1974)IILLJ328Raj; 1973()WLN686
..... body-fitters, mechanic, helper & cleaner in the central workshop are not concerned directly with the transport service of the corporation which is used for the carriage of passengers or goods. and there is on evidence on record to show that these six workmen, according to the conditions of service, could be called upon to work, ..... cotton weaving mill when required. the language used in the first schedule and the relevant notification, denotes that it is the transport service used for the carriage of passengers or goods which was declared a public utility service under sub-clause (vi) of clause (n) of section 2 of the act. obviously the employees working ..... service and the rajasthan rajpatras extraordinary dated 23-10-1968 and 23-6-69. according to him transport service (other than roadways) for the carriage of passengers or goods has been declared to be the public utility service by the state government by the notifications published in the aforesaid rajpatras. the answer to this contention .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : 1998(1)WLC560; 1997(2)WLN484
M.A.A. Khan, J.1. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties.2. This petition Under Section 482 Cr.P.C. challenges the order dated 22.5.1996 whereby the learned Special Judge (E.G. Act) Cases at Jaipur stated the particulars of the offences under Clauses 8 and 10 of the Rajasthan Controlled Cloth (Sales & Distribution Control) Order, 1975, (the Order of 1975) and Section 9 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 (the Act) punishable Under Section 7 of the Act.3. Being of the opinion that is was necessary and expedient so to do for maintaining supplies of controlled cloth and securing its equal distribution and availability at fair prices the State Government, vide G.S.R. 87 dated 6.11.1975, made the order of 1975. Clause 3 of the said Order empowered the Commissioner, Food and Supplies, Rajasthan or an Authorised Officer, to authorise any person or body of persons to be an authorised wholesaler or a Control Cloth holder in respect of controlled cloth for purposes of the Order. The wholes...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : 2002(2)WLC720; 2002(5)WLN577
Madan, J. 1. In second inning of his legal battle the petitioner has challenged impugned orders dt.13.1.94 (Annex.4) dismissing him from service for the misconduct and which has been affirmed in his appeal by order dt.29.7.94 (Annex,6). 2. Facts relevant for disposal of this petition, in brief, are that the petitioner was initially appointed as Constable on 1.12.1973 by the Superintendent of Police (S.P.) Jaipur and later on was transferred to the office of S.P. Sikar in January, 1987. During his posting as Constable in Treasury Guard, Sikar on 12.5.91; as per charge sheet dated 21.8.91, the petitioner is alleged to have left place of his duty (Treasury Guard) alongwith a register but in a drunkard condition had proceeded to the office of S.P. Sikar alongwith his rifle, inasmuch as he ill-behaved with officials deployed in election duty in his drunkard state on the way and thereafter entered in the chambers of the S.P. The charge-sheet is said to have been served on 24.8.91 and where a...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : 1975(8)WLN825
Kan Singh, J.1. These are two writ petitions by a Sarpanch under Article 226 of the Constitution and as they raise common questions, they were heard together. They can conveniently be disposed of by on judgment.2. On 31-8-70 two orders were passed by the Government removing Shri Rewat Dan Sarpanch, from the Office of the Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat, Mathama. In writ petition No. 2027 of 1970, the order of removal is Ex. 4 and in the other writ petition it is Ex. 8. The orders were passed in consequence of the inquiries held against the Sarpanch. I may narrate the facts of the writ petition No. 2027 of 1970 for appreciating the points arising for consideration.3. The petitioner was elected as Sarpanch of the Gram panchayat, Mathura in the year 1960 for the first time. He was again elected as a Sarpanch at the next elections held in the year 1965. He states that as he belonged to Praja Socialist Party and as he had contested the Assembly elections against a Congress candidate, he incurred...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : 1988(1)WLN191
ORDER AGAINST TN 3010 FOR SUPPLY OF ACSR PANTHER CONDUCTOR (.) DEPUTE YOUR FULLY AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE FOR DISCUSSION ON DECEMBER 29, 1982.3. It was followed by another telegram, dated January 3, 1983, thereafter another telegram on January 17, 1983, fixing January 24, 1983, but instead of sending a representative, the petitioner's case is that respondent sent a notice, dated February 22, 1983, through their counsel re-pudiating the contract calling upon to refer all disputes and differences to arbitrators and further informed about nominating Shri S. Rangarajan, Sr. Advocate, Supreme Court, as their arbitrator and requested to nominate the arbitrator by the Board. On March 8, 1983, the petitioner wrote to respondent No. 1 inter alia stating that the delivery schedule for supply needs revision and re-fixation by mutual negotiations and that the reference to arbitration and appointment of Shri S. Rangarajan is premature. It was further mentioned that if the petitioners were not agre...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : 1974WLN736
V.P. Tyagi, J.1. All these three matters-D.B. Criminal Murder Reference No. 2 of 1974-the State of Rajasthan v. Badri D.B. Criminal (Jail) Appeal No. 99 of 1974-Badri v. The State of Rajasthan and D.B. Criminal Appeal No. 67 of 1974-Badri and Anr. v. The State of Rajasthan arise from the judgment of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Gangapur City dated 18th of January, 1974, whereby the learned Judge has convicted Badri appellant under Section 302 Indian Penal Code for causing the murder of Mst Somoti and sentenced hem to death. He has also convicted Badri under Section 307 Indian Penal Code for causing gun shot injury to Sanwalia and sentenced him to 10 years rigorous imprisonment. Along with Badri his nephew Bhambal has also been convicted with the aid of Section 34 for offences under Section 302 and 307 Indian Penal Code and under the former offences he has been sentenced to imprisonment for life while 10 vears rigorous imprisonment has been awarded under the latter offence. Th...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : 1981WLN(UC)457
S.K. Mal Lodha, J.1 This special appeal under s. 18 of the Rajasthan High Court Ordinance has been filed by Amritlal, who was the petitioner in the petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution, against the order of the learned Single Judge, who dismissed the petition by his order dated August 30, 1971. The petitioner had prayed in the writ petition that the order, (Ex. 6) dated. April 18, 1969, by which he was dismissed from service and the order (Ex. 7) dated May 4, 1971, by which his appeal against that order was dismissed, may be quashed and that he may be re-instated with all emoluments and benefits arising out of it. The writ petition was filed on July 5, 1971.2. The petitioner-appellant at the relevant time was working as substantive Compositor (Gr. 1) in the Government Press, Jodhpur. The memo, charge sheet and the statement of allegations are Ex. 3, 4 and 5 respectively. The charge against the petitioner was that he travelled by railway on government business in Clas...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : 1974WLN785
J.P. Jain, J.1. Sentence of death passed on Sahab Ram for having committed triple murder, by the Sessions Judge, Sriganganagar, has given rise to the murder reference No 1/74 Sahab ram was also held liable for attempt to murder three more persons and convicted Under Section 307 IPC. with a sentence of 10 years, rigorous imprisonment By his appeals, one from jail and the o her through his counsel, he has challenged his conviction and sentence This judgment will dispose of all the three matters.2. In village Khedhasri under police station Rawatsar, District Ganganagar, Het Ram (P.W. 2) had 20 Big has of land under temporary allotment for (sic), Bhiya Ram jat had also 20 Bighas, and Mslloo Ram Harijan had another 15 bighas of land for cultivation on similar terms from the Government. Out of this land Sahab Ram accused was allotted some land in exchange of his original land which was acquired by the Government. Het Ram, Bhiya Ram and Malloo Ram challenged the allotment in favour of Sahab R...
Tag this Judgment!