Court : Kerala
Reported in : AIR1959Ker182
Varadaraja Iyengar, J.1. These nine Original Petitions arise out of nine separate assessments of the respective Petitioners for the financial year 1957-58 under the Travancore-Cochin Agricultural Income-tax Act, 22 of 1950 as amended by Act 8 of 1957. By virtue of the amendment, the principal Act had been extended on 6-8-1957 to the whole of Kerala including the former Malabar District but with effect from. 1-4-1957. The Income-tax Officers concerned required the various Petitioners to include in their returns their agricultural income derived from land situated in Malabar and received by them during their previous year, i.e. the year ending on 31-3-1957 or on any day anterior to it but within that year as the case may be.Now the former Malabar District was dis-integrated from the Madras State and became part of Kerala only as and from 1-11-1956. The income of the 'previous year' directed to be returned as above and sought to be made liable comprised therefore to major extent or in who...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : AIR1958Ker96
ORDERM.S. Menon, J.1. The petitioner challenges the validity of Ext. C, a notification of the Government of Kerala dated 14-6-1957 and published in the Kerala Government Gazette dated 18-6-1957, Part 1, page 1327. The opening words of the notification read as follows:'Under Section 120 of the States Reorganization-Act, 1956 the Government of Kerala hereby order that the undernoted notification is made applicable to the Districts of Kozhikode, Palghat, Can-nanore and other areas in the former Malabar District which have been transferred to the Tri-chur District with effect from 18-6-1957.'2. The 'undernoted' notification is a notification of the Government of Travancore-Cochin dated 20-3-1952 and published in the Travoncore-Cochin Government Gazette dated 25-3-1952, Part 1, page 315:'In exercise of the powers conferred by Clause (a) of Sub-section (1) of Section 3 of the Minimum Wages Act, 1948 (Central Act XI or 1948), Government are hereby pleased to fix the minimum rates of wages pay...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : ILR1991KAR1899; 1991(2)KarLJ116
Rama Jois, J.1. This Appeal presented under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act by the Special Land Acquisition Officer, Hidkal Dam Project. Hidkal, is glaring example as to how even when no application seeking reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act was made and the award of the Land Acquisition Officer have become final, the claimants manage to get references on applications made after long lapse of time with the connivance of Land Acquisition Officers and how on such time barred reference applications, awards are being passed overlooking long lapse of time after which reference were received, which on the face of it disclose that the reference applications were barred by time.2. Brief facts of the case, are these: 8 acres 3 guntas of land in Survey No. 66 of Majli village of Hukeri Taluk, was acquired pursuant to a Preliminary Notification issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act on 3-5-1963. After the Final Notification, the Land Acquisition, Officer mad...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1968AP364
ORDER1. It is now a matter of history that the erstwhile State of Hyderabad ceased to exist and a part of its territory, popularly known as Telangana was transferred to the State of Andhra to form the State of Andhra Pradesh from 1-11 56.Owing to reasons--social, economic, political and historical reasons, with which we are not now concerned it was thought desirable that the people of the Telangana region including the services, should have certain safeguards. Section 115 (5) and the proviso to Section 115 (7) and Section 117 of the State, lie-organisation Act are three such provisions intended to protect the interests of the 'Telangana Service Personnel'. Section 115 (5) and (7) are as follows: --'(5) The Central Government may by order establish one or more Advisory Committees for the purpose of assisting it in regard to- (a) the division and integration of the services among the new States and the States of Andhra Pradesh and Madras; and (b) the ensuring of fair and equitable treat...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1973SC2102; (1973)IILLJ84SC; (1973)4SCC183; [1973]3SCR714; 1973(1)SLJ542(SC)
C.A. Vaidialingam, J.1. These two appeals, by special leave, are directed against the judgment and order dated 25/26th February. 1969, of the Bombay High Court in Miscellaneous Petition No. 75 of 1967, quashing the orders of the Central Government as well as certain other orders equating the post of Sales Tax Officer of old Madhya Pradesh with the post of Sales Tax Officer, Grade II, of old Bombay. Civil Appeal No. 2303 of 1969 is by the Union of India and Civil Appeal No. 2304 of 1969 is by some of the Sales Tax Officers of the old Madhya Pradesh State. They are also respondents in the Union's appeal. The appellants, in the latter appeal, support the Union Government in all respects. In the course of the judgment, we will refer to the array of parties as in Civil Appeal No. 2303 of 1969.2. Respondents 8 to 13 and 15, along with six others, were serving as Sales Tax Officers in the State of Madhya Pradesh. On the reorganisation of states as from November 1, 1956, these 13 officers were...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1963SC375; (1964)ILLJ24SC; [1963]2SCR943
Venkatarama Aiyar, J.1. This is an appeal by special leave against the judgment of the High Court of Mysore in a Writ Petition filed by respondent challenging the validity of an order of dismissal dated July 5, 1956 made by the Deputy Inspector General of Police, Belgaum. The respondent entered service in the Police Department as a constable in the District of Bharwar in 1940 and was at the material dates a sub-inspector of Police. On a complaint preferred by one Machwe of Kurdiwadi against him, Mr. Majumdar, Inspector, C.I.D. made a preliminary investigation, examined a number of witnesses and recorded their statements, and submitted his report recommending further action. On that the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Belgaum, started proceedings against the respondent, framed six charges against him, and called for his explanation. The respondent denied the charges and then a regular inquiry was held on November 4, 1954. Clause (8) of s. 545 of the Bombay Police Manual which lays down...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1977SC161; (1977)ILLJ294SC; (1976)4SCC412; [1977]1SCR827; 1977(1)SLJ17(SC); 1976(8)LC908(SC)
M.H. Beg, J.1.The judgment under appeal after certificate of fitness of the case under Article 133(1)(c) of the Constitution of India, is very short as it purports to follow the ratio decidendi of Union of India v. G.M. Shankariah and Ors. etc. S.L.R. 1969 p. 1 (C. As. Nos. 1439 & 1446 of 1967-decided on 16-10-1968) where this Court had field, upon a concession by the Attorney General, that a list prepared under Section 115 of the States Reorganisation Act, 1956, (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), was provisional. Therefore, it was held that the writ petition was pre-mature as the final list of officers on an integrated seniority list was still to be prepared after hearing objections.2. The High Court of Mysore seems to have been under the misapprehension that the case now before us is also governed by what was held by this Court in Shankariah's case (supra) with reference to an entirely different and provisional list of Forest Officers. The case now before us pertains to Animal H...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1966SC1485; [1966]3SCR427
Shah, J. 1. Ramgopal - respondent in this appeal - was a tenant of certain Inam land situate in village Nanda Panth in Indore Tahsil. The appellant Rao Nihalkaran - holder of the Inam - served a notice terminating the tenancy on the ground that he needed the land for personal cultivation, and commenced an action in the Court of the Civil Judge, Class II, Indore, on July 21, 1950, against Ramgopal for ejectment. The Trial Court decreed the suit. During the pendency of the appeal to the District Court, Indore, by Ramgopal against the decree, Madhya Bharat Muafi & Inam Tenants and Sub-tenants Protection Act 32 of 1954 was enacted, and pursuant to the provisions thereof hearing of the appeal remained stayed till 1960. In the mean time the Madhya Pradesh Land Revenue Code (Act 20 of 1959) was brought into force. Ramgopal urged before the District Court that he had by virtue of s. 185 of the Code acquired rights of an occupancy tenant and the appellant's right to obtain an order in ejectment...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1965AP272
Narasimham, J. (1) This is a petition filed by the appellant in C. C. C. A. No. 30 of 1959, an appeal against the judgment of the Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, in O. S. No. 92 of 1958.(2) The petition raises the question whether the Advocates' fees have to be taxed under the Rules made by the Hyderabad High court under Sec. 27 of the Legal Practitioners Act, 1879 (No. XVIII of 1879) or the rules framed under the said provision of the Act by the High Court of Andhra Pradesh.(3) It is an undisputed fact that the suit was filed on 23-11-1953 and court-fee was paid under the Hyderabad Court-Fees Act, 1324 Fasli (No. VI of 1324 Fasli). The suit was decreed in part, and the defendant preferred the appeal to the High Court on 1959 and paid court-fee on the memorandum of appeal under the Hyderabad Court-fees Act. The appeal was disposed by us on 8-11-1962 allowing the appeal and remanding the suit for fresh disposal, allowing an amendment of the additional written statem...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Reported in : AIR1968P& H47
ORDERR.S. Narula, J. 1. This writ petition is mainly based on a complaint about the alleged failure of the respondents to effectively implement the directive of the Central Government dated April 18, 1965 under Section 117 of the States Reorganisation Act, 37 of 1956 (hereinafter called the Act), relating to pay and other matters concerning officers included in the final joint seniority list of the group of services consisting of Superintendents Deputy Superintendents, Assistants-in-charge and Assistants of the Punjab Civil Secretariat consequent on the merger of the erstwhile Popsu State with that of the State of Punjab.2. At the time of the merger of the two States of October 31, 1956 the petitioner was holding the post of Assistant in the Civil Secretariat of the Patiala and East Punjab States Union (commonly known as PEPSU) in a substantive permanent capacity in the time-scale of pay of Rs. 150--10--300. He was consequently integrated with effect from November 1, 1958, in the joint...
Tag this Judgment!