Court : Mumbai
Reported in : 2003(4)ALLMR283; 2003(5)BomCR389; 2003(2)MhLj790
R.S. Mohite, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the respective parties.2. These writ petitions impugn interim winding up orders passed under Section 102(1) of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960. The petitioners are members of the Managing Committees, who are affected by the impugned orders insofar as they have been visited by its consequences and have been required to hand over to the Liquidators appointed under the impugned orders, the custody and control of all the property, effects, actionable claims, books, records and other documents pertaining to the business of the societies, which they were managing, in accordance with Section 103(2) of the said Act.3. As the possible fall of one more bastion of old style commerce is under consideration, the history of its building and collapse would bear scrutiny.4. The problem of reducing indebtedness and of bringing credit facilities within the reach of agriculturists on reasonable terms had engaged the attention of the Government...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
A.M. Khanwilkar, J. 1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith, by consent. Counsel for the Respondents in the respective petitions waive notice. Taken up for final disposal, by consent. 2. As common questions are involved, these petitions are disposed of by this common Judgment. 3. All these petitions were proceeded together as common questions have been raised in these matters. 4. Writ Petition No.2457 of 2012 is filed by the Union representing Licensed / Approved Aircraft Maintenance Engineers employed by Respondent No.1 throughout India and abroad. 5. Writ Petition No.391 of 2013 is filed by the Union representing Licensed / Approved Aircraft Maintainance technical staff employed by Respondent No.1 throughout India and abroad. 6. Writ Petition (Lodging) No.2896 of 2012 is filed by the Union claiming to be the largest representative organisation of the Aircraft Engineers employed by Respondent No.1. 7. Lastly, Writ Petition (Lodging) No.585 of 2013 has been filed by the employees of Un...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : 1990(2)BomCR232; 1990CriLJ615; 1989MhLJ791
V.A. Mohta, J.1. Ishwarlal Gunderia, a resident of Khamgaon, District Buldana, has by this Habeas Corpus Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, challenged the order of detention passed under Section 3(1) of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 ('the COFEPOSA Act') against his son-in-law Haren Choksey - a dealer in imported cars.2. The detenu is a permanent resident of Bombay. The order of detention dated 30th January, 1989 is served on the detenu on 3rd February, 1989. This petition filed on 1st March, 1989, came up for preliminary hearing on 3rd March, 1989 on which date rule returnable on 17th April, 1989 was issued. In the return filed on behalf of respondents Nos. 1 to 3, preliminary objection has been raised - to which our attention was drawn before the hearing on merits commenced - that Nagpur Bench should not entertain this petition since neither a seat of the detaining authority - the Joint Secretary to the Government, o...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : 1996(3)BomCR658
N.P. Chapalgaonker, J.1. Rule. Taken up for hearing forthwith by consent of the parties.2. These two writ petitions have brought in challenge the provisions of the Maharashtra Ordinance No. 17 of 1995, namely, the Maharashtra Agricultural Produce Market (Regulation) (Temporary Amendment) Ordinance, 1995. By an amendment, the petitioners have also brought in challenge the provisions of the Maharashtra Act No. 9 of 1996, namely, the Maharashtra Agricultural Produce Market (Regulation) (Temporary Amendment) Act, 1996, which makes similar provisions to that of Ordinance No. 17 of 1995.3. The petitioner in Writ Petition No. 5484 of 1995 is the Chairman of Jintur Agricultural Produce Market Committee, Jintur and was the Chairman of the Bombay Agricultural Produce Market Committee, Bombay, for several years. He is also the Member of Maharashtra Legislative Assembly elected on Congress ticket and alleges that since the new Government came into power after the 1995 elections, several attempts a...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
S.C. Dharmadhikari, J. 1 These Writ Petitions raise the issue of constitutional validity of the National Investigation Agency Act, 2008 (Act 34 of 2008) (for short NIA Act). 2 Hence, RULE. The Respondents waive service. By consent, Rule is made returnable forthwith. 3 Since both Writ Petitions involve common questions, they are being decided by this common judgment. For properly appreciating the arguments of parties, the facts in Writ Petition No.4049/2012 are referred to. 4 It is stated that the Petitioner has been arraigned as an accused No.1 in C.R. No.I130/ 2008 lodged at Azad Nagar Police Station, Malegaon on 30.09.2008 for offences punishable under Sections 302, 307, 324, 326, 427, 153A, 120B of the Indian Penal Code r/w Sections 3, 4, 5, 6 of the Indian Explosive Substance Act, 1908 r/w Sections 3, 5, 25 of the Arms Act, 1959 r/w Sections 15, 16, 17, 18, 20 and 23 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 along with ten other accused in the wake of a bomb blast that took...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : [1973]91ITR566(Bom)
Kantawala, J. 1. This is a reference under section 66 (1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, and the question that is referred for our determination is : 'Whether the hiring by M/s. Pure Products and Madhu Canning Ltd. to the assessee-company of a godown belonging to and used by the former for its business purposes amounted to 'transfer' to the latter within the meaning of the phrase 'the transfer to a new business of building previously used in any other business' occurring in section 15C (2) (i) /' 2. The question that is referred to us relates to the period 1958-59 and 1959-60, corresponding to the accounting years ending 30th September of 1957 and 1958, respectively. The assessee-company was incorporated in October, 1952, with the object of carrying on the business of sale and manufacture of gelatin capsules, etc. It took on monthly lease a huge compound pertaining to and used for its business by Messers. Pure Products & Madhu Canning Ltd. on a monthly rent of Rs. 1,500. The facto...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : (1993)112CTR(Bom)356; [1994]206ITR727(Bom)
Dr. B.P. Saraf J.1. By this reference under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act'), the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has referred the following question of law to this court for opinion at the instance of the Revenue : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the claim of development rebate on the cost of meters installed by the assessee company at the residential or office premises of its consumers, was not at variance with the provisions of section 33(6) of the Act ?' 2. The assessee is an electric supply undertaking and its business is to supply electrical energy to its consumers. For the assessment year 1974-75, the Income-tax Officer determined the development rebate admissible to the assessee at Rs. 8,01,917 and allowed Rs. 5,59,744 against the total income available for the purpose. The development rebate determined by the Income-tax Officer included a sum of Rs. 61,155 relatable to the cost of me...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : AIR1989Bom111; (1988)90BOMLR219
Shah, J.1. IN Writ Pent. No. 1876 of 1984 Dr. Harihar Bhakre v. Chancellor of Nagpur University which was decided on Dec. 7 (reported in 1985 LIC 1481), by a Division Bench of this Court at Nagpur (Paunikar & Deshpande, JJ). Wherein the legality of the employment notice issued by the Nagpur University under s. 57(4) (a) of the Nagpur University Act , 1974 (hereinafter referred to as the Act ') vis--vis reservation for the backward classes was under challenge, amongst various other points involved in the said petition. The Division Bench took the classes in respect of the posts of Professors, Readers and Lecturers adverted was not necessary, but that it is enough, if the posts reserved are mentioned numerically out of the total posts to be filled in. the Division Bench further held that having regard to the provisions of S. 57 (4) (d) and (e) such reservation could be made by the Executive Council under S. 57 (4)(e) even after the selection by the Selection committee on merit under S. 5...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : (2002)4BOMLR221; 2002(3)MhLj368
J.G. Chitre, J.1. Heard. The petitioner is hereby assailing the correctness, propriety and legality of the order which has been passed by the Committee for Scrutiny and Verification of Tribe Claims, Pune, while making the scrutiny of the caste certificate produced by the petitioner Shri Balu Sonaba Bhosale. At the time of recruitment the petitioner has produced Caste Certificate showing that he belongs to tribe 'Kokani'- S. T. (Scheduled Tribe). The said Committee scrutinised the caste certificate given to the petitioner. The petitioner produced the following documents in support of his claim that he belongs to said Scheduled Tribe. Those documents can be enumerated as mentioned below.1. Xerox copy of the Primary School Leaving certificate bearing Register No. 126101 dated 3-5-1974 issued by Head Master, Poona Corporation School No. 31, Poona.2. Xerox Copy of the Primary School Leaving Certificate bearing No. 10894 dated 7-9-1979 issued by the Pune Corporation School No. 24. 3. Xerox c...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : 2008(4)ALLMR108; 2008(5)BomCR163; (2008)110BOMLR1617; 2008(5)MhLj300
S. Radhakrishnan, J.1. In all the above Petitions, the issue involved is with regard to the special responsibility cast on the Governor of the State of Maharashtra, with regard to development of Vidharbha area. The present area of Vidharbha was earlier included in the erstwhile state of Madhya Pradesh. The demand for the separate state of Vidharbha was duly endorsed by the then Madhya Pradesh Legislature.This was seen as a conflict with the demand made by the Sanyukta Maharashtra Movement in the erstwhile area of Bombay for the creation of a Marathi speaking state.2. In furtherance of the proposal of a Linguistic Marathi speaking province,the then leaders of Vidharbha and Western Maharashtra entered into an agreement known as the Akola act for formation of a federal state. Vidharbha still remained part of the erstwhile Madhya Pradesh After India gained Independence, a State Re-organization Commission was formed under Mr. Justice Fazal Ali. The leaders of the Sanyukta Maharashtra moveme...
Tag this Judgment!