Court : Gujarat
Reported in : AIR1962Guj88; (1962)0GLR204
Shelat, J. 1. This petition raises questions of considerable importance regarding the construction of certain provisions of the Gujarat University Act, 1949, the Impact of Articles 29 and 30 of the Constitution on those provisions and the competence of the State Legislature to enact them. The facts giving rise to this petition are few and for the most part undisputed and may be briefly stated.2. The petitioner is the father of Shrikant, at present studying in St. Xavier's College, which is affiliated to the University of Gujarat under the Gujarat University Act, 1949. Shrikant took his Secondary education in P. G. T. High School, Bombay, and M. S. N. High School, Ahmedabad, and passed his S. S. C. examination in June 1960. The medium of instruction as well as examination throughout the period of his Secondary education was Marathi. He took the S. S. C. Examination in Marathi and his mother-tongue is also Marathi. His aim was and continues to be, as stated in the petition, to gualify hi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : (1962)3GLR574
P.N. Bhagwati, J.1. This Revision Application arises out of a suit filed by the plaintiffs against the defendant to recover possession of certain premises situate on Dudheshwar Road Ahmedabad. The premises consist of a structure known as Chhagan Kishor Iron Factory. It appears that from 1931 the defendant was in possession of the premises as a tenant of the plaintiffs. A deed of lease was executed by the between the plaintiffs and the defendant on 28 the November 1942 whereby a lease of the premises was granted by the plaintiffs to be defendant for a period of five years from 1st February 1942 at the rent and on the terms and conditions contained in the deed of lease. There was some dispute between the parties as to whether the plaintiffs were the lessors under the deed of lease or whether the lessors were Dhirajlal Khushaldas and Company Agents of the plaintiffs. I shall discuss this aspect of the matter later but for the purpose of the present narration I shall proceed on the basis t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : AIR1962Guj128; (1962)0GLR269
Desai, C.J. 1. This Special Full Bench has been constituted in order to consider the question relating to the binding nature of the judicial precedents of the Bombay High Court prior to 1st May, 1960, on this High Court. This very matter was considered by a Full Bench of three Judges of this Court including the then Chief Justice in the case of Anand Municipality v. Union of India, reported in : AIR1960Guj40 . Later on, a Division Bench of this Court consisting of Mr. Justice Raju and Mr. Justice Bakshi found it difficult to accept the view expressed by the Full Bench in the aforesaid case and made a request for referring the question to another Full Bench for a re-consideration of the matter. It was held by the Full Bench of this Court in the aforesaid case of (1960) 1 Guj LR 82 : (AIR 1960 Gujarat 40) (FB) that the judicial precedents of the Bombay High Court prior to the 1st of May, 1960, i. e., the day on which the State of Gujarat came into being fell within the ambit of the words...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : AIR1963Guj6; (1962)GLR856; (1963)ILLJ648Guj
Shelat, J.12. The learned Advocate General raised three preliminary contentions :(i) that this Court has no jurisdiction to issue a writ of certiorari as against the Union of India;(2) that the order of the Commissioner merged in the final order of the President as the appellate authority, and, therefore, the order of the President rejecting the appeal of the petitioner and thereby confirming the order of the authority of the first instance was the only effective and outstanding order, and that being BO, no writ can be issued even against the Commissioner or against his order of removal,(3) that assuming that there was no merger, there would be two outstanding orders and this Court would not issue a writ against the Commissioner as that would be putting the Commissioner in an embarrassing situation, in that, he would have to commit a -breach of either the order of this Court or that of the appellate authority.Mr. Vakil, on the other hand, urged that there was no merger of the order of ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : (1962)0GLR492
Raju, J.1. This is a first appeal by the original plaintiff J. J. Mody who was appointed as regional publicity officer on 8 November, 1949. He was dismissed from service on 6 December, 1950 after having been suspended from service earlier, and a departmental inquiry was held into the allegations that he had made some defamatory aspersions against some Ministers of the Government of the Bombay State. This order of dismissal was, however, set aside in Civil Suit No. 10 of 1952 filed by the appellant. After the decision of that suit, the Government passed an order on 26 May, 1954 continuing his suspension from 6 December, 1950 and gave second notice to the appellant to show cause why he should not be removed from service. On 29 December, 1954, the Government passed an order dismissing the appellant from service. The present suit was thereupon filed by the appellant on 30 September, 1955 for a declaration that he is not guilty of any misconduct, that the second order of suspension dated 26...
Tag this Judgment!