Court : Rajasthan
Decided on : Jul-06-1982
Reported in : 1982WLN321
..... , march, 1981) an act further to amend the life insurance corporation act, 1956.whereas for securing the interests of the life insurance corporation of india and its policy holders and to control the cost of administration, it is necessary that revision of the terms and conditions of service applicable to the employees and agents of the corporation should be undertaken expeditiously;be it enacted by parliament in the thirty second year of the republic of india as follows:1. (i) this act may be called the life insurance corporation (amendment) act, 1981.(2) it shall be deemed to have come into force on the 31st day of january, 1981.2. in the life insurance corporation act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as the principal act), in section 48:(a) in sub-section (2), after ..... and tire. the fire has sparked of on the ashes of 1971 tripartite agreements funeral after bunal of the 'blue order' and now the traditional fact.8. this is a bunch of 43 writ petitions (as per schedule a) filed by the development officers of the life insurance corporation of india. the life insurance corporation of india was established under the life insurance corporation act, 1956 (here in after referred to as 'the act') with effect from 1st september, 1956; due to historical nationalisation wave.9. the life insurance corporation (here in after l i c ) introduced a self-contained code of work-norms in 1976 with in-built incentives and disincentives. there were protests .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Decided on : Jan-25-1982
Reported in : 1982WLN14
..... has assailed the findings of the learned additional district judge on issue no. 4. in the first instance, he submitted that as the life insurance corporation of india has its branch office at bhilwara, the defendant will be considered to carry on business there and as such, under section 20(1)(a) cpc, the suit could be tried and heard by the additional district judge, bhilwara. in support of his contention ..... my attention to bhola nath v. empire of india life assurance co. air 1948 lah. 56 bharat insurance co. delhi v. wasudeo ramchandra air 1956 nag 203, nedungadi bank ltd. v. central bank of india ltd. : air1961ker50 , smt. kamla chopra v. life insurance corporation of india air 1975 del 15 and state bank of ..... the suit in respect of policy no. 6998127 dated january 13, 1964 as at the time of death, the deceased had left his mother as heir according to schedule i of the hindu succession act and the claim in respect of this policy deserves to be dismissed on this score alone. on this objection being raised, the learned district judge by his order dated april 15, 1977, permitted the ..... under order xliii, rule 1(a) cpc, the plaintiffs-appellants question the correctness of the order dated march 31, 1981 of the additional district judge, bhilwara, by which he directed for return of the plaint to be presented to the court in which the suit should have been instituted.2. copies of the original plaint, written statement, amended plaint amended written statement, application under order .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Decided on : Feb-18-1982
Reported in : 1982WLN(UC)43
1. Appellant Mst. Surjali Stands convicted for the offence under sections 302 and 309 I.P.C. and has been sentenced to imprisonment for life on the first count and simple imprisonment for one year on the second count. Both the sentences have been ordered to run concurrently by the learned Sessions Judge, Merta by his judgment dated January 7, 1976.2. In a nut shell the prosecution case is that the accused Mst. Surjali was married to one Laxman P.W.3. She was married some 12 years ago. There were two off springs out of the wedlock, one daughter Bhanudi aged about 6 years and a son Jhuman aged about one year. On June 27, 1975 when Laxman returned to his house, he found his son Jhuman weeping. There upon he asked his wife as to why his son is weeping, she started abusing him. He inflicted two or three blows on her. On the next morning he awakened Her at about 6 am. and asked her to take care of the children but she did not care. There after breakfast was given by him to the children and h...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Decided on : Jul-22-1982
Reported in : 1982WLN(UC)219
Guman Mal Lodha, J.1. The prayer of the petitioner is thatI. By an appropriate writ, order or direction, the respondent's may be restrained from giving effect to the Notice of change in service conditions dated 24-4-1951 (Ann. 4) and the same may be declared to be ineffective qua the petitioner.II. Further by an appropriate writ, order or direction it be declared that the Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946 and the Rules made thereunder are not applicable to the workmen of the Respondent No 1 and the respondents may be directed not to take any action in regard to the workmen of the Sangh by taking resort to the said Act.2. It is alleged that by Annexure 3, the provision's of the Rajasthan Service Rules, were made applicable to the petitioner till separate Service Rules are not framed. According to these Rules, certain leaves can be taken by the workmen. On 24th April, 1981 order (Annexure 4) supersedes the earlier leave provisions because now holidays have limited to eigh...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Decided on : Aug-05-1982
Reported in : 1982WLN417
Guman Mal Lodha, J.1. 'Enklab Zindabad, CITU Zindabad, RACU Zindabad, Project Allowance Katoti Vapasulo, Kala Adhyadesh Vapasulo' shouting these slogans, the petitioner is alleged to have led a procession & demonstration at not less than prohibited/protected place of Rajasthan Atomic Power Project, Rawatbhata Kota on 11th December, 1974. An inquiry and dismissal followed in the disciplinary proceedings initiated against him.2. Whether such a dismissal can be sustained is pivot of debate in this writ petition by a workman against bis employer. The equities are well balanced in this equitable jurisdiction. Shri Mridul's claim of fundamental right of a much more of protected workman in an Industry, of protest and agitation against Katoti in wages and allowances by peaceful method of demonstration and procession, in the new era where workers have been assured participation in the management by the enactment of Article 43A in directive principles of Constitution, cannot be brushed aside as ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Decided on : Nov-26-1982
Reported in : AIR1983Raj154
Kasliwal, J.1. In all the above three writ petitions learned single Judge by his order April 11, 1979, has made a reference to a larger Bench under Rule 59 of the Rajasthan High Court Rules for an authoritative decision, Learned single Judge formulated the following point:'Whether the consumption of the electricity energy by the petitioner electricity company in its power house and other allied premises and process of equipments for the purpose of generating conversion and/or manufacturing process of electricity for being supplied to the consumers in the city of Ajmer would bring the petitioner within the definition of 'consumer' as contemplated by Sub-section (3) of Section 2 of the Rajasthan Electricity (Duty) Act, 1962.'2. Learned single Judge further observed as it is the principal point on which all these three cases can be broadly decided, all the three writ petitions as a whole are referred to the larger Bench to avoid delay and complicacy of arguments again before this Bench.3....
Tag this Judgment!