Court : Gujarat
Decided on : Apr-30-2002
Reported in : (2003)4GLR154
R.K. Abichandani, Adv.1. These Letters Patent Appeals have been directed against the common judgment and Order dated 1st August 1989 passed by the learned Single Judge in a group of petitions in which the petitioners had challenged the Orders of their dismissal from service passed by the respondent Surat Municipal Corporation and the decision of the Standing Committee confirming the orders. Special Civil Application No. 7110 of 1997 was filed by the Surat Municipal Employees (Staff) Union and the other petitions were filed by individual employees amongst the members of the said Union.2. Due to the outbreak of pneumonic plague in the city of Surat, the Municipal Commissioner, after getting appropriate sanction from the State Government to take special measures, gave a call through public notices to the employees of the Municipal Corporation to report for work in view of the emergency situation created by the dangerous disease and issued a warning that defaulters will be dismissed. Some ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Decided on : Apr-29-2002
Reported in : II(2002)DMC435; 2002(4)MPHT84
ORDERSubhash Samvatsar, J.1. This revision is arising out of a matrimonial matter. The revision is filed by the plaintiff/husband, who had filed a petition for dissolution of marriage, filed under Section 12 of the Hindu Marriage Act, challenging the order refusing him the permission to examine the respondent from medical expert.2. The facts of the case are that the petitioner had filed an application under Section 12 of Hindu Marriage Act for annulment of marriage. The allegations of the plaintiff are that the petitioner and respondent married on 13-7-1994 at Ummedgarh and came to their residence at Gwalior on 15-7-1994. On that date the petitioner came to know that the respondent was carrying and was pregnant on account of her sexual relations with some third person, therefore, the petitioner did not cohabit with her and there was no physical relation between them. The petitioner immediately on 16-7-94 reported this matter to the father of respondent, who came to Gwalior on 18-7-94 a...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Decided on : Apr-26-2002
Reported in : 2002(5)ALT658
C.Y. Somayajulu, J. 1. Since the appeal and the Writ Petition are interconnected, at the request of the counsel for parties, they are being disposed of by this common Judgment.But for the sake of convenience parties would be referred to as they are arrayed in the respective proceedings i.e., petitioner and respondents in the Writ Petition and appellants and respondents in the appeal.2. As per a Notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act (the Act) made on 21-11-1980, an extent of 31 acres 11 guntas in S.Nos.24, 26, 464 and 465 of Jangaon village and Taluq, Warangal District was proposed to be acquired for the benefit of A.P.Housing Board (appellant) and on the same day a Notification under Section 6 of the Act also was issued. Notices under Sections 9(1), 9(3) and 10 of the Act were issued on 21-5-1981, and after conducting an enquiry on 18-6-1981, advance possession of those lands was taken on 27-6-1981. Some of the persons whose lands were proposed to be acquired file...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Decided on : Apr-26-2002
Reported in : (2002)2MLJ597
P.K. Misra, J.1. The present writ petition has originally been filed by G. Krishnamoorthy @ G.K. Moorthy for quashing the order passed by the respondent No.2 rejecting the application of the original petitioner for grant of Freedom Fighters Pension. Original Petitioner having expired during pendency of the petitioner, his widow has been substituted. However, in the judgment, the original petitioner shall be referred as petitioner for convenience.2. A Scheme for grant of pension to the Freedom Fighters was introduced by the respondent No.1 in G.O.Ms.No.2064, Public (General) Department, dated 28.9.66 dated 28.9.1966 with effect from 1.10.1966. As per the aforesaid Scheme, the freedom fighters who were sentenced to imprisonment for not less than three months or who were killed in action or were awarded capital punishment or died due to firing or lathi charge, on account of participation in the National Movement are eligible (In the case of a deceased freedom fighter, who was otherwise el...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Apr-24-2002
Reported in : AIR2002SC2017; 2002(2)ALT(Cri)48; 2002CriLJ2799; 2002(2)Crimes366(SC); JT2002(4)SC375; 2002(4)SCALE102; (2002)9SCC189; [2002]3SCR431
Raju, J. 1. The three accused in Sessions Case No. 11 of 1997 on the file of the Additional District and Sessions Judge, Nagai Quaide-e-Milet District in Tamil Nadu. Ezhil (A-1), Saravanan (A-2) and Mohammed Iqbal (A-3), are the appellants before us. They have been charged for offences under Sections 364,392 and 302 read with Section 34, IPC, and Section 120B of the Indian Penal Code. After trial and on consideration of the evidence and materials placed on record, the learned Trial Judge found the first accused guilty under Sections 364,302 392 and 201, IPC, the second and third accused guilty under Sections 364,302 read with Section 34 392 read with Section 34 and 201, IPC. So far as the question of sentence is concerned, the Trial Judge imposed death sentence on the first accused for the offence committed under Section 302, IPC. For theoffences committed by the accused Nos. 1 to 3 under Sections 364, a rigorous imprisonment for a period of ten years was imposed. For the offence commi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Decided on : Apr-23-2002
Tahoe-Sierra Preservation Council, Inc. v. Tahoe Regional Planning Agency - 535 U.S. 302 (2002) OCTOBER TERM, 2001 Syllabus TAHOE-SIERRA PRESERVATION COUNCIL, INC., ET AL. v. TAHOE REGIONAL PLANNING AGENCY ET AL. CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT No. 00-1167. Argued January 7, 2002-Decided April 23, 2002 Respondent Tahoe Regional Planning Agency (TRPA) imposed two moratoria, totaling 32 months, on development in the Lake Tahoe Basin while formulating a comprehensive land-use plan for the area. Petitioners, real estate owners affected by the moratoria and an association representing such owners, filed parallel suits, later consolidated, claiming that TRPA's actions constituted a taking of their property without just compensation. The District Court found that TRPA had not effected a "partial taking" under the analysis set out in Penn Central Transp. Co. v. New York City, 438 U. S. 104 ; however, it concluded that the moratoria did const...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Decided on : Apr-23-2002
Reported in : 2002(3)WLN576
Garg, J. 1. The present writ petition under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioner on 16.12.91 against the respondents with a prayer that order dated 28.2.84 passed by the Estate Officer, DevasthanDepartment (Annex. 5) at page 24 by which eviction of the petitioner from the temple in question was ordered under Section 5 of the Rajasthan Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupant) Act, 1964 (herein after referred to as the Act of 1964) and the judgment dated 3.12.91 passed by the learned District Judge, Udaipur in appeal No. 34/85 (Annex. 6) by which appeal of the petitioner was dismissed be quashed. 2. It arises in the following circumstances: (i) In the city of Udaipur, there is temple known as mandir Shri Naval Shyamji. (ii) On 15.4.83 a notice in file No. 5/83 issued by the respondent No. 2 purporting to be under Sec. 4(1) of the Act of 1964 was received by the petitioner and by that notice, the petitioner was intended to be evicte...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Decided on : Apr-23-2002
Barnes v. Gorman - 536 U.S. 181 (2002) OCTOBER TERM, 2001 Syllabus BARNES, IN HER OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS MEMBER OF THE BOARD OF POLICE COMMISSIONERS OF KANSAS CITY MISSOURI, ET AL. v. GORMAN CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT No. 01-682. Argued April 23, 2002-Decided June 17,2002 Respondent, a paraplegic, suffered serious injuries that left him unable to work full time when, after arrest, he was transported to a Kansas City police station in a van that was not equipped to accommodate the disabled. He sued petitioner police officials and officers for discriminating against him on the basis of his disability, in violation of 202 of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA) and 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, by failing to maintain appropriate policies for the arrest and transportation of persons with spinal cord injuries. A jury awarded him compensatory and punitive damages, but the District Court vacated as to punitive damages...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Apr-23-2002
Reported in : 2003(2)ALD(Cri)37; 2002BomCR(Cri)708; 2002(4)MhLj266
D.B. Bhosale, J. 1. The four appellants/original accused Nos. 2 to 5 in three connected Appeals and Suo Motu Application No. 1 of 1998, viz. (1) Rajesh Namdeo Mhatre, (2) Dilip Mahadeo Surve, (3) Ashok Prafulla Naik, and (4) Chandrakant Ganpat Patre, were convicted by the Addl. Sessions Judge, Greater Bombay, in Sessions Case No. 860 of 1994. The appellants were originally charged and tried for the offences under Sections 376(2)(g), 341 read with Section 34, Section 506 read with Section 34 and Section 366 read withSection 34 of the Indian Penal Code along with three other accused, viz. original accused Nos. 1, 6 and 7, who were acquitted of all the aforesaid offences. The appellants alleged to have committed rape on Suman Bhimrao Banpate during the intervening night of 22nd August, 1993 and 23rd August, 1993 between 12.15 a.m. and 2.30 a.m. on the terrace of the building at Koyana colony situate within the jurisdiction of R.C.F. Police Station.2. The appellants were sentenced to under...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Decided on : Apr-22-2002
Reported in : RLW2003(2)Raj1048; 2002(3)WLC408; 2003(1)WLN207
Sharma, J.1. The appellant, a security guard, was indicated before the learned Special SC & ST (Prevention of Attrocity Cases) Ajmer in Sessions Case No. 20/95 (171/1994) for having committed murder of Head Constable Ganpat Paswan and Constable Ahmed Ali. The learned trial Judge vide judgment dated May 20, 1997 convicted the appellant under Sections 302 and 307 IPC and sentenced him in each of the section to undergo imprisonment of life and fine of Rs. 1000/- in default to further suffer six months Rigorous imprisonment. The sentences were directed to run concurrently. In the instant appeal the appellant has assailed the aforesaid finding of the learned trial Judge.2. On the Tower Posts that have been constructed all round the Central Jail Ajmer, the CRPF deploys its security guards to keep 24 hours vigil on the inmates of the Jail. On the fateful day of June 30, 1994 Head Constable Ganpat Paswan and constable Ahmed Ali, after discharging their security duties were steeping on their re...
Tag this Judgment!