Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : AIR1977Raj221; 1977()WLN448
ORDERRajindar Sachar, J.1. This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution seeking a direction to quash and set aside the order of respondent No. 1, State Transport Appellate Tribunal, Jaipur, dated March 7, 1977, by which it has granted a temporary permit to respondent No. 3 on Kota-Mangrole route and to quash the permit issued to it.2. A draft scheme under Section 68-C of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (hereinafter called 'the Act') for nationalisation of a number of routes was published on April 24, 1973. One of the routes published (with which we are concerned) was Kota-Kasbathana via Tater. The distance between the Kota Municipal limits and Tater is 6.5 kilometers. The objections to the draft scheme came to be considered by the Joint Legal Remembrancer, who, by order dated May 7, 1976, approved the scheme with the modifications etc. mentioned in the said order. One of the points pressed before him was that asTater is only at a distance of 6.5 kilometers from the Municipal C...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Reported in : (1978)ILLJ122Del
ORDERD.K. Kapur, J.1. The present petition has been heard Along with a number of similar petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution. The second respondent in this case, Shri Chander Pal, applied under Section 33C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, to the Labour Court, Delhi, claiming a sum of Rs. 6,200 on account of the fact that he was placed under suspension for 4 months in 1967-68, 8 months in 1972 and for one year and 12 daps from 9th January, 1974 to 21st January, 1975.2. The Delhi Transport Corporation, the petitioner in the present proceedings, contested the application, (a) on the ground that the application was not maintainable under Section 33C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 because the applicant was a 'motor transport worker' covered by the Motor Transport Workers' Act. 1961 and (b) on the ground that the laid workman was rightly paid subsistence allowance during the period of suspension, under the service regulations.3. In its decision, the Labour Court ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : AIR1977All440
K.N. Singh, J. This petition is directed against the order of the Regional Transport Authority dated 30th May, 1973, refusing to grant permit to the U. P. State Road Transport Corporation, under Section 68-F (1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act').2. At the outset of hearing, a preliminary objection was raised on behalf of the respondents that the petition stands abated tinder Section 58 (2) of the Constitution (Forty-second Amendment) Act, 1976, inasmuch as the petitioner had an alternative remedy of revision under Section 64-A of the Act before the State Transport Appellate Tribunal. Since no revision was preferred and the present writ petition was filed, the petitioner is not entitled to any relief in the present proceedings. On behalf of the petitioner, it was asserted that the remedy of appeal or revision was not available to the petitioner in view of Section 68-F (3) of the Act Section 68-F (3) lays down that no appeal shall lie against any acti...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1978AP285
S.H. Sheth, J.1. This appeal has been filed against an award made by the learned Addl. Chief judge, City Civil Court, Secunderabad acting as the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal. By his award, the Tribunal has granted to the claimant compensation of Rs. 10,000/-2. The facts of the case, briefly stated, are as under. The claimant's wife who was 21 years old died in an accident which was caused by the Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation on 15-1-1972 in the outskirts of the City of Hyderabad. The claimant-the husband of the deceased made a claim for Rs. 1,00,000/- under S. 110A of the Motor Vehicles Act. 1964 against the Corporation. The Tribunal awarded him a sum of Rs. 10,000/- Having been aggrieved by that award, the claimant has filed this appeal.3. By the impugned award the Corporation was also aggrieved. Therefore, the Corporation filed in this Court C. M. A. No. 31/75. It was dismissed by Mr. Justice Madhusudan Rao on 27-2-1976. It has been held in that decision that the ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : [1979]43STC36(AP)
B.J. Divan, C.J.1. The same question arises for determination in each of these matters. The petitioner in each of these writ petitions is the Board of Trustees of the Visakhapatnam Port Trust. The main question which arises for determination in these cases is whether the Board of Trustees can be said to be a dealer within the meaning of Section 2(1)(e) of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). The sales tax authorities have held that the Board of Trustees is a dealer and, on that footing, proceeded to assess the Board of Trustees to sales tax for the different assessment years 1969-70 to 1974-75. The sales tax authorities have assessed and proposed to assess the Board of Trustees to sales tax in respect of several commodities in which, according to those authorities, the Board of Trustees have been dealing from time to time. The commodities on which the sales tax has been assessed or proposed to be assessed are as follows :(a) supply of w...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : (1977)6CTR(AP)200
B. J. Divan, C.J. - The same question arises fir determination in each of these matters. The petitioner in each of these writ petitions is the Board of Trustees of the Visakhapatnam Port Trust. The main question which arises for determination in these cases is whether the Board of Trustees can be said to be a dealer within the meaning of Section 2(c) of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957 (Hereinafter referred to as the Act). The Sales-tax authorities have held that the Board of Trustees is a dealer and, on that footing, proceeded to assess the Board of Trustees to Sales-tax for the different assessment years 1969-70 to 1974-75. The sales-tax authorities have assessed or proposed to assessee the Board of Trustees to sales-tax in respect of several commodities in which, according to those authorities, the Board of Trustees have been dealing from time to time. The commodities on which the sales-tax has been assessed or proposed to be assessed are as follows :(a) supply of wate...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1978AP3
ORDER1. The petitioner was plying a stage carriage on the route Chagalamarri to Proddatur via Mydukur . The permit expired on 8-3-1973 . It was renewed for a period of three years , upto 12-3-1976. Meanwhile on 15-11-1972 , the Government published draft scheme to nationalise the route Allagadda to Proddatur via Chagalamarri and Medullar . That scheme was approved by the Government on 22-9-1973 In order to give effect to the approved scheme , the permit of the petitioner was cancelled by the Secretary ,State Transport Authority , Hyderabad , on 26-10-1973 . For the unexpired period of the permit , the petitioner applied to Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation for payment of compensation under S. 68G (4) of the motor Vehicles Act. The Corporation rejected the claim of the petitioner on 5-11-75 . Thereupon he has filed this writ petition . 2. Sri Adinarayana Reddy, the learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that since the permit of the petitioner was cancelled under S. 68...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : (1978)80BOMLR599; 1978MhLJ462
Deshmukh, J.1. These petitions arise out of proceedings under Section 47 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 before the State Transport Authority, Bombay, and also the appellate proceedings before the Appellate Tribunal. Since both the applications arise out of the same original proceedings, we have heard them together and this common judgment will dispose of both these petitions.2. The facts giving rise to this dispute may now be noted. The inter-State route Nagpur-Indore via Amravati and Dharni is the subject-matter of grant of regular permit for which there were four competitors. It is not in dispute that there has been inter-State agreement between the State Governments of Madhya Pradesh and Maharashtra. According to the terms of that agreement on the Nagpur-Indore inter-State route the primary permit is to be issued by the State Transport Authorities of Maharashtra and it is to be counter-signed by their counterpart in Madhya Pradesh.3. Between October 1974 and December 1974 the State...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : AIR1977Ker156
ORDERN.D.P. Namboodiripad, J. 1. In the general elections held on 19-3-1977 to the Legislative Assembly of the Kerala State, the petitioner and respondents 1 to 3 contested from No. 108 Chengannur Assembly Constituency. Poll was taken on 19-3-1977 and counting took place on 20-3-1977. On the same day the Returning Officer declared that the first respondent was duly elected to the Legislative Assembly from the concerned constituency. The petitioner, one of the defeated candidates, challenges the election essentially on the ground that the first respondent is guilty of corrupt practices. The first respondent, on acceptance of summons, entered appearance and filed a written statement traversing the allegations contained in the petition. Thereafter the first respondent filed C. M. P. No. 9642 of 1977 raising a fresh ground to the effect that the election petition is liable to be dismissed summarily for non-compliance with Section 82(b) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 (briefly...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1977MP262; 1977MPLJ716
Bajpai, J. 1. By this petition, thepetitioner, a transport operator, seeks to challenge the validity of the order passed by the State Transport Appellate Tribunal quashing the notification issued by the R.T.A. inviting applications for grant of transport permits.2. The facts relevant are that in June, 1970, two stage carriage permits were granted to certain operators by the R.T.A. for the route Tikamgarh to Bijawar. These grants of permits were challenged before the State Transport Appellate Tribunal and the State Transport Appellate Tribunal set aside the same by its order dated 25-2-75 on the ground that the invitation issued by the R.T.A. for grant of permits and the consequent grant of the permits were all illegal, because there was no previous determination of the scope as contemplated under Section 47 (3) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (hereinafter referredto as the Act). The case was, therefore, remanded to the R.T.A. for determining the scope and then to proceed further in the...
Tag this Judgment!