Court : Mumbai
Reported in : 2007(4)ALLMR281; 2007(3)BomCR527; 2007(3)MhLJ753
V.C. Daga, J.1. This Reference has been made on account of conflict of views expressed by the Division Benches of this Court regarding the powers of the School Tribunal constituted under the provisions of the Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Service) Regulation Act, 1977 (hereinafter referred to as 'Act'/'MEPS ACT' for short).Conflict of Views:2. In Writ Petition filed by the Children's Education Uplift Society against Shri Narayan H. Sukhaja bearing W.P.No.463 of 1983, decided on 12.8.1987 (unreported), the Division Bench has taken the view, that it is open for the School Management to lead evidence before the School Tribunal to prove misconduct of the employee, in the following words:5. However, the Tribunal has erred in setting aside the order of termination of the services and granting reinstatement only on that ground. Once the Tribunal came to the conclusion that the constitution of the committee was improper, the correct course was either to order a fresh ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : 1998(2)ALLMR703; 1998(3)BomCR36
ORDERR.M. Lodha, J.1. The group of eight writ petitions was taken up together for hearing and is disposed of by this common judgment since in all the writ petitions the petitioners have challenged the constitutionality of Goa, Daman and Diu Mundkars (Protection from Eviction) (Amendment) Act, 1985, whereby section 2(i) of Goa, Daman and Diu Mundkars (Protection from Eviction) Act, 1975 has been amended.2. We propose to take the common question relating to constitutional validity of Goa, Daman and Diu Mundkars (Protection from Eviction) (Amendment) Act, 1985 (for short 'Amendment Act') first.3. Some aspects of tradition and modern trends of the society in Goa have been dealt with by Mr. S.R. Phal in his book 'Society in Goa'. Chapter 3 in the said book deals with the Mundkars of Goa. According to the author, Mundkar is a Konkani term applied to a person in Goa who resides in a house built in the property of landlord, for watching and protecting the property of the landlord. The house is...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : AIR1981Bom283; 1981(83)ARBLR312(Bom); 1982(1)BomCR80
1. This is an appeal filed by the original complainant, the first wife, challenging the order of acquittal dated May 28, 1979 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Baramati, acquitting both the respondents for having committed offences punishable under Section 494 read with Section 109 of the Indian Penal Code in Criminal Case No. 834 of 1976.2. The appeal raises a question of considerable importance affecting a large section of the Indian Society, that is, members of the Scheduled Castes who have chosen to convert themselves into the Buddhist faith. It involves a question of recognition in law of the customary form of marriage different from the form of marriage generally recognised under the Hindu Law.2-A. Since this appeal involves recognition of a different form of marriage widely followed and recognised amongst the members of the Buddhist community (converted from Scheduled Castes), it is necessary to refer to the averments in the complaint of the complainant as ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : 1998(5)BomCR178
ORDERD.D. Sinha, J.1. The present Criminal Appeal is preferred by the appellants original accused Nos. 1, 2 and 4 against the judgment and order dated 18-11-1994 passed by the II Additional Sessions Judge, Parbhani, in Sessions Case No. 1 of 1992, whereby the present appellants are convicted for the offence punishable under section 304-B and 498-A read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for seven years each and further directed to pay fine of Rs. 500/- each, in default rigorous imprisonment for one month each.2. In order to consider the complicity of the appellants in the crime in question,in our opinion, it will be appropriate to consider few facts leading to the prosecution ofthe appellants for the offence charged.3. In the instant case it is alleged by the prosecution that the present case fallswithin the category of cases of dowry death. It is therefore necessary to consider thefacts of the prosecution case. That the deceased by n...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : AIR1978Bom119; (1977)79BOMLR499
Tulzapurkar, Ag. C.J.1. These petitions raise common questions as to constitutional validity of the Maharashtra Private Forests (Acquisition) Act, 1975, being Act No. 29 of 1975, as amended by Act No. 72 of 1975. The constitutional validity of the said Act has been mainly challenged on three grounds: (a) that the State Legislature of Maharashtra lacks legislative competence to enact the measure, particularly Section 3 thereof, to the extent to which it purports to vest in the State Government the 'forest produce' while acquiring all private forests in the State, (b) that the said enactment, particularly Sections 3 and 5 thereof, contravene the freedom of trade, commerce and intercourse guaranteed under Article 301 of the Constitution and (c) that the enactment, particularly Section 3 thereof, which purports to acquire not merely of mines and minerals, major as well as minor but also mining leases, licences and other rights in mines and minerals conflicts with and trenches upon the occu...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : AIR1966Bom36; (1965)67BOMLR85
Kotval, J.(1) The petitioner claims to be the owner of a piece of land and measuring 2 Gunthas 5 annas, out of S. No. 29A at Juhu. The land originally belonged to her husband, and after his death she claim to have succeeded to it be virtue of a will. The respondents have not admitted her title but the questions is hardly material of the points raised in the present petition.(2) On 2nd May 1942, this piece of land was requisitioned for a purposes of the Union under R. 75A (1) of the then existing Defense of India Rules. The notifications (Ex.1) stated that it was required for military purposes, and it has down now been explained that it was required by for the constructions of a road leadings to the military aerodrome at juhu during the to period of the emergency occasioned by the last war. The owner of the plot was receiving the usual compensation for requisitioning until 29-12-1952, when a notifications was issued under S. 7 of the Requisitioning and Acquistion of Immovable property A...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : 2006(2)MhLj323
R.M.S. Khandeparkar, J.1. Since both the appeals arise out of the common judgment and award passed by the reference Court, they were heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.2. The First Appeal No. 870 of 1991 has been filed by the State of Maharashtra whereas the First Appeal No. 817 of 1991 has been filed by the claimants.3. The claimants' land bearing Survey Nos. 40, 44/1, 39/1, 37/4C, 7/2/7/A, 37/1/A, 36/8, 37/40/68/8, 37/18 and 36/7 situated in village Taloja, Taluka Panvel, District of Thane, were sought to be acquired by a notification issued under section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act 1894, hereinafter called as 'the said Act', and published in Government Gazette on 4th February, 1970. The award in exercise of powers under section 11 of the said Act was declared on 6th December 1985 thereby awarding compensation for the land of the claimants at the rate of Rs. 37- and Rs. 4/- per sq.metre. Being; dissatisfied, the claimants preferred reference applicatio...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : AIR1965Bom92; (1964)66BOMLR807; ILR1965Bom200; 1965MhLJ577
Tambe, J.(1) All these applications can be disposed of together as one of the questions released in these applications is common and that question relates to the legality and validity of sub-section (4) of Section 3 of the Bombay Commissioners of Divisions Act, 1957, (Bombay Act No. VIII of 1958). It is the contention of the petitioners in all the three cases that Sub-section (4) of Section 3 of the aforesaid Act suffers from the vice of excessive delegation of legislative power or authority. The facts in all legislative power or authority. The facts in all these three cases are similar. It would be sufficient if facts in one case are fully stated, and we proceed to state facts in special Civil Application No. 62 of 1963 inasmuch as that was the case is which arguments were advanced by Mr. D.T. Managalmurti and which had been adopted by Mr.Kukday and Mr. Mandiekar, Counsel appearing for the petitioners in the other two cases. Mr. Kukday also had supplemented the argument of Mr. Mangalm...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : 2000(4)BomCR448
ORDERR.K. Batta, J.1. The issues involved in all these petitions are similar and as such the petitions are heard together and are being disposed off by common judgment.2. The petitioner in Writ Petition No. 330/91 is a plot holder in Machados Cove surveyed under No. 792 (old) and the challenges in this petition are four fold. The first challenge relates to the agreement dated 26-10-1983 between the President of India and Fomento Hotels and Resorts Limited formerly called Gomantak Land Development Pvt. Ltd. (hereinafter called the hotel), the second challenge relates to the access through the land surveyed under No. 246/1 (old 787), which is also the subject matter in Writ Petition No. 284/91 and 37/92, and the third challenge is that the said Survey No. 787 and 803 (246/2 new) fall within C.R.Z. Regulation and as such no development can be carried out therein. In so far as the third challenge is concerned the learned Advocate for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner does no...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : AIR1958Bom300; (1958)60BOMLR596; ILR1958Bom645
S.P. Kotwal, J. 1. This petition raises important questions as to the applicability and scope of Section 214 of the Madhya Pradesh Land Revenue Code, 1954 (Act II of 1955), and as to its constitutional validity.2. The facts upon which the petition is based are simple. The first petitioner is an association known as the ''Berar Provincial Patels and Patwaris Association, of which the petitioner Nagorao son of Haribhau Gaopande is the authorised representative. Nagorao also was at the material time the malik watan-dar patwari of several villages in Akola Taluq and the petitioners Nos. 2 and 3 were the malik watan-dar patels of several villages in Akola faluq, district Akola and in Malkapur taluq of Buldhana district respectively. The petitioners were appointed to their respective offices under the Berar Patels and Patwaris Law, 1900. To the provisions of this law and the circumstances in which it came to be passed we shall presently advert.3. After the abolition of malguzaris and other p...
Tag this Judgment!