Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : 1998(3)ALD220a; 1998(4)ALT76
ORDER1. Both the writ petitions are being disposed of by a common order. The point involved in both the writ petitions is the same. In fact the petitioner in W.P.No. 11903 of 1988 is one of the petitioners in W.P.No. 6440 of 1998.2. The facts in W.P.No. 6440 of 1998 are stated for purposes of understanding the nature of the point involved. Petitioners were recruited as Assistants in the Life Insurance Corporation of India (hereinafter referred to as the 'L.I.C') on various dates between 1961 to 1967. Promotional post for such assistants is Higher Grade Assistants (H.G.As). A selection list for promotion to the category of H.G.A. was released by the 4th respondent on 29-9-1982 and the names of die petitioners were shown at Sl. Nos. 1, 3, 4, 9, 13, 14 and 17. This ranking was based on aggregate marks secured by each of the candidates in the list, considering factors like seniority, qualifications, appraisal of Confidential Reports and interview. From the post of H.G.A. the next promotion...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : AIR1968All270; (1969)IILLJ607All
ORDERSatish Chandra, J. 1. This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution. It prays for prohibition commending the Munsif, Meerut, not to proceed with a suit filed by the second respondent against the petitioner and for quashing the proceedings. 2. The petitioners are the officers of Life Insurance Corporation of India. On 6th July, 1964 a charge sheet was served on R. C. Anand, an assistant in the Stores and Stationery Department of the Divisional Office, Life Insurance Corporation of India at Meerut, Sri Anand was charged with acts of fraud, criminal misappropriation and criminal breach of trust in respect of goods and articles of the Life Insurance Corporation. He was afforded an opportunity of explanation. The Inquiring Officer commenced the enquiry on 9th February, 1965. Sri Krish--nadeo Sharma, Advocate, Meerut requested the Inquiring Officer for permission to appear before him and represent the case of Sri R. C. Anand. The Inquiring Officer refused permission on the gr...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : 2001(5)MPHT425
ORDERDipak Misra, J.1. The factual matrix and the question of law being similar in these writ petitions they were heard analogously and are disposed of by this common order. For the sake of clarity and convenience the facts in W.P. No. 6905/2000 are herein depicted.2. The petitioner, Life Insurance Corporation of India (hereinafter referred to as 'the Corporation') was established by notification dated 1st September 1956 under Section 3 of the Life Insurance Corporation Act, 1956. The affairs of the Corporation are governed by the aforesaid Act and the Rules framed thereunder as well as under the Insurance Act, 1938. The central office of the Corporation is located at Jeevan Bima Marg, Bombay and under the Central Office there are Zonal Offices. The Central Zonal Office is located at Bhopal controlling the Divisional and Branch Offices in the entire State of Madhya Pradesh. There is a Divisional Office at Raipur and under the said Divisional Office there are a number of Branch Offices....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1993SC171; 1993(41)BLJR431; (1993)1GLR497; JT1992(4)SC181; 1992(2)SCALE60; (1992)3SCC637; [1992]3SCR595; 1992(2)LC481(SC); (1992)2UPLBEC1144
ORDER1. Special leave granted in SLP(C)No. 339 of 1991.2. These two appeals though arising out of different circumstances and concerning different parties, relate to the scope of our constitutional policy of freedom of speech and expression guaranteed by Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution. The importance of the constitutional question prompted this Court to grant special leave to appeal under Article 136 of the Constitution. We may properly begin the discussion of this judgment by stating the factual background of the two cases in the light of which we are required to examine the scope of the constitutional liberty of speech and expression.3. Civil Appeal No. 1254/80 arises out of the decision of the Gujarat High Court in Special Civil Application No. 2711 of 1979 decided by a Division Bench on 17th June, 1980. The respondent, the executive trustee of the Consumer Education & Research center (CERC), Ahmedabad, after undertaking research into the working of the Life Insurance Corporat...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1978SC1447; 1978(26)BLJR586; [1979]49CompCas70(SC); (1978)3SCC244; [1979]1SCR11; 1978(10)LC570(SC)
Fazal Ali, J.1. This appeal by certificate is directed against the judgment of the High Court of Madhya Pradesh dated 20th April, 1967 affirming the decree passed by the Additional District Judge, Indore decreeing the plaintiff's suit.2. The facts of the case are detailed in the judgment of the High Court and that of the District Judge and it is not necessary for us to repeat the same all over again.3. Briefly, the present action was brought by the plaintiff for recovery of a sum of Rs. 2,00,000 invested by the plaintiff in the Adarsh Bima Company being defendant No. 1 and the predecessor of the appellant, who is defendant No. 3 (Life Insurance Corporation of India). The action was brought on the basis that the Managing Director of the Adarsh Bima Company by practising fraud and misrepresentation on the plaintiff induced him to part with a sum of Rs. 2,00,000 by purchasing 2000 shares of Rs. 100/- each. The courts below have recorded clear findings of fact that the fraud alleged by the...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
1. The Petitioner challenges the letter dated 27th October 2005 of the Executive Director (Personnel) of the Respondent, Life Insurance Corporation of India (`LIC) ordering that the Petitioner not be promoted to the cadre of Assistant Administrative Officer (`AAO) along with Mr. N.K. Sharma.2. The Petitioner was appointed to the post of Assistant (Class III) in the LIC in March 1962. The promotion of the Petitioner was governed by the Life Insurance Corporation of India Class III and Class IV Employees (Promotion) Rules, 1976 [`Rules] made under Section 48 of the Life Insurance Corporation Act, 1956 (`Act). According to the Petitioner, he became eligible for the post of Higher Grade Assistant (`HGA) in terms of the aforementioned Rules in the year 1968 after completing the required service of five years in the post of Assistant. He also passed the required technical qualification, i.e., Associateship Examination of Insurance Institute of India, Mumbai. However he was in fact promoted a...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1967SC1286; [1967(14)FLR345]; (1967)IILLJ1SC; [1967]2SCR596
Mitter, J.1. This is an appeal by special leave from the award of the Industrial Tribunal, Dhanbad dated April 25, 1964. No less than 13 issues were referred to the Tribunal under section 10(1)(d) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 for adjudication. Before this Court, however, the company which has come up in appeal limited its grievance against the award on only a very few of them. These are :- 1. Scales of pay 2. Dearness allowance 3. Adjustment in the scales 4. Privilege and sick leave, and 5. Gratuity. 2. In order to appreciate to proper scope of the dispute between the parties and the extent to which amelioration of the conditions of service of the workmen with regard to the matters mentioned above was justified, it is necessary to refer, in brief, to the past history of the company and its prospects as they have come to light before us. This is all the more necessary because learned counsel for the appellant made a very strong comment on the Tribunal having fixed the scales of ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Reported in : 1983RLR642
Prakash Narain, J.(1) As the main plank of the arguments, addressed on behalf of the petitioners, is the decision of the Supreme Court in Lic v. D.J. Bahadur : (1981)ILLJ1SC , we may first consider that case. A writ petition u/Art 226 of the Constitution had been filed in the Allahabad High Court challenging a notice dt. 6.5.78 issued by Lic u/s 9A of the Industrial Disputes Act and a notification dt. 26.5.78, issued u/s 11(2) of the Act by the Central Gov. The writ petition was allowed by the High Court resulting in an appeal being filed by Lic in the Supreme Court. Another similar petition was pending in the Calcutta High Court which was transferred to the S.C. Both these matters were disposed of together. The challenge before the Allahabad and the Calcutta High Court, was preferred by Class Iii and Class Iv employees who had contended that the impugned order and notification amounted to changing their conditions of service to their detriment vis-a-vis payment to them of bonus to whi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 1996IAD(SC)774; AIR1996SC646; [1996]85CompCas920(SC); JT1996(1)SC8; 1996(1)SCALE13; (1996)1SCC642; [1996]1SCR58
ORDER1. Special Leave granted.2. This appeal directed against the judgment of the Calcutta High Court dated May 3, 1995, is in the third round of the litigation between the Peerless General Finance & Investment Company Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as 'Peerless') and the Reserve Bank of India (hereinafter referred to as 'the Bank').3. Peerless was incorporated in 1932 as a limited company under the provisions of the Indian Companies Act, 1913 with the name Peerless General Insurance and Investment Company Ltd. It was carrying on life insurance business. After the enactment of the life Insurance Corporation Act, 1956 Peerless could not carry on life insurance business and if changed its name to 'Peerless General Finance and Investment Co. Ltd.' and is now carrying on finance and investment business. It offers small saving schemes to the public at large wherein the subscribers are required to pay a fixed amount as subscription on yearly, half-yearly or quarterly basis for a fixed number ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
This writ petition is preferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issue of a writ of mandamus to direct the respondent to publish the petitioner's rejoinder sent through a letter dated 16.3.2012 and acknowledged by the respondent in the earliest issue of the respondent's Students' Monthly Journal "THE CHARTERED ACCOUNTANT STUDENT" as per the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court reported in AIR 1993 SC 171 = 1993 (3) SCC 637.ORDER1. Whether at the instance of the petitioner, a direction can be issued to the respondent Institute of Chartered Accountants of India (for short ICAI) for publishing the petitioner s rejoinder sent via letter dated 16.03.2012 in their Students Monthly Journal known as the Chartered Accountants Student? is the question to be decided in this writ petition.2. Heard the petitioner in person. It is brought to the notice by the Registry that the petitioner had already filed a writ petition in the form of a Public Interest Litigation in W...
Tag this Judgment!