Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Oct-09-1987
Reported in : AIR1989P& H27
M.M. Punchhi, J. 1. Almost a decade ago the State of Haryana, as would be evident, went on an acquiring spree in the revenue estate of Panipat, a Sub-Divisional town in district Karnal (Haryana). Taking aid of the Land Acquisition Act. 1894. (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') it took within a span of about 10 months large tracts of urban land in three strokes by issuance of three successive notifications under Section 4 of the Act. These are referred to in the succeeding paragraphs.2. On Oct. 29, 1976, notification under Section 4 of the Act was issued to acquire 5 Acres 5 Kanals and 5 Marlas of land to build a Handloom Complex. On Nov. 4. 1976, notification under Section 4 of the Act was issued to acquire 11 Bighas 14 Biswas of land (approximately 2 Acres and 3 Kanals of land) for the purpose of building Staff Quarters for the Market Committee. Panipat. Lastly, on Aug. 30, 1977, notification tinder Section 4 of the Act was issued to acquire a large chunk of land measuring 64.50 Ac...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Jul-23-1987
Reported in : II(1987)ACC321
J.V. Gupta, J.1. This order will also dispose of F.A.O. No. 500 of 1983 as both these appeals arise out of the same judgment of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Ambala dated 8th March, 1983.2. The accident had taken place on 9th May, 1980 at 1.30 P.M. with motor cycle No. CHD-7192 driven by Satbir Singh while going from Kalka to Pinjore. Ashok Kumar deceased was sitting on the pillion seat of the motor cycle. Ashok Kumar was employed as a forest guard and Satbir Singh was Forest Range Officer, Pinjore. The truck which struck against the motor cycle was being driven by Balwant Singh who came from the opposite direction i.e. from Pinjore side. The truck was owned by Jarnail Singh. In the said accident, Ashok Kumar the pillion rider died whereas Satbir Singh received grievous injuries. The motor cycle was also damaged. Thus, two claim petitions were filed, one by Satbir Singh for compensation on account of the injuries received by him and the other by Ramesh Rani, widow of deceased Ash...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Mar-08-1987
Reported in : (1993)IIILLJ347P& H
D.S. Tewatia, J.1. The three writ petitions (C.W.P. 4384, 4857 & 4894 of 1986) filed by the Food Corporation of India (as the common petitioner in these petitions), impugning, a common Award, dated 27th March, 1986, of the Central Government, Industrial Tribunal, Chandigarh (hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal) involve common question of law and of facts and, therefore, common judgment is proposed.2. The petitioner Food Corporation of India (for snort 'the corporation ) was constituted by an Act of Parliament with the object inter alia of procurement, storage and distribution of foodgrains throughout the country. It functioned through its Head Office at Delhi and four Zonal Offices in the Eastern, Western, Southern and Northern sectors. The Corporation had two separate offices, one in Punjab region and the other in Haryana region in the Northern Zone. The Corporation employed thousands of handling Mazdoors for carrying out its activities of loading and unloading, either directly or...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Oct-20-1987
Reported in : AIR1988P&H95
D.S. Tewatia, C.J. 1. Petitioner Smt. Bimal Kaur Khalsa wife of Sardar Beant Sing deceased. has through Civil Writ Petition No. 3761 of 1986, question the vires of some of the provisions of the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1985. 2. The vires of some of the provisions of the Said Act have similarly been challenged through Civil writ Petitions Nos. 1629 and 4074 of 1986 and Criminal Writ Petitions Nos. 827, 884 and 888 of 1996. 3. The provisions of the said Act, the vires whereof had been challenged are Section 3(2)(i). S. 7, S. 8. sub-section (2) of S. 9, sub-section (2). sub-sec: (2) and sub-section (3) of S. 13, S. 16 and cls. (a) and (b) of sub-sec.(2), sub-section (3). sub-section (4) and clause (b) of sub-section (5) of S. 17 of the Act. 4. Soon after the judgment in this case was reserved. the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention Ordinance. 1987 hereinafter referred to as the Ordinance of 1987 was, promulgated, which came into force w.e.f. 24th ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : May-01-1987
Reported in : AIR1987P& H263
S.P. Goyal, J. 1. These three petitions (Civil Writ Petitions Nos. 3065, 3268 and 3435 of 1986), which are based on identical facts and involve common questions of law, have been filed for quashing the notices dated June 13, 1986, a copy of one of which is attached as Annexure P-6, issued to the petitioners by respondent 6, the Speaker of the Punjab Vidhan Sabha, requiring them to show cause as to why they be not disqualified from the membership of the Punjab Legislative Assembly in terms of Art. 191(2) read with paras 2 and 6 of the Tenth Schedule of the Constitution and his order dated July 4, 1986 (Annexure P-8) rejecting the application (Annexure P-7) of Capt. Amrinder Singh, M.L.A., wherein he claimed to be recognised as the leader of the 27 M.L.As. who were stated to have formed a separate legislative party because of the alleged split in the Shiromani Akali Dal. The attack is two prone. First, that the Constitution (Fifty-Second Amendment) Act, 1985 is ultra vires of the powers ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Jun-05-1987
Reported in : AIR1988P& H1
D.S. Tewatta, J.1. Petitioner Shri J. K. Dhir, who at the relevant time happened to be Superintending Engineer, Sutlej Yamuna Link Canal Project (for short 'SYL Canal Project'), petitioner Shri A. K. Ummat, who at the relevant time happened to be Chief Engineer (Co-ordination) of the SYL Canal Project and petitioner Shri D. P. Singla, who retired as Superintending Engineer, Public Works Department (Irrigation Branch) on 30th April, 1986, and at the relevant time was associated with 'SYL Canal Project' asExecutive Engineer and was later on (on being promoted on 9th June, 1982),as Superintending Engineer (Administration) Accounts SYL Canal Project at Chandigarh, have through separate writ petitions (C. W:P. No. 6298 of 1986, C.W.P. No. 6558 of 1986 and C.W.P. No. 6308 of 1986, respectively) have impugned the validity of the initiation of the departmental inquiry and. its continuation at the instance of the Vigilance Department of the Punjab Government on the ground of its incompetency an...
Tag this Judgment!