Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1966SC1842; [1968(16)FLR29]; (1967)ILLJ70SC; (1967)ILLJ708SC; [1966]3SCR821
Shah, J.1. The respondent Akbar Ali Khan was appointed in July 1942 a Naib Tahsildar in the United Provinces Civil Service and was confirmed in that post on November 1, 1943. In April, 1951, the respondent was selected for permanent promotion to the post of Tahsildar and was placed, in accordance with r. 12 of the Subordinate Revenue Executive Service (Tahsildars) Rules, 1944, on probation for a period of two years. On a report dated April 29, 1953 from the Accountant General of U.P. that the respondent had drawn excess travelling allowance in respect of certain journeys, the State Government directed the Deputy Commissioner, Hardoi to hold an inquiry after taking into consideration the explanation of the respondent. On September 27, 1956 the Government of U.P. directed that the respondent be apprised of the grounds for holding an inquiry and that he be given an opportunity to show cause why his probation be not terminated. The explanation submitted by the respondent with the comments ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1967SC212; 1967CriLJ265; [1966]3SCR830
Hidayatullah, J. 1. There are appeals by the State of Nagaland against the judgment and order of the High Court of Assam and Nagaland, August 26, 1965, by which the High Court, allowing certain writ petitions filed by the respondents, issued a writ of mandamus directing the Additional Deputy Commissioner, Kohima and the State of Nagaland, not to proceed with the trial of the respondents. The High Court has certified the case as fit for appeal to this court. The facts are these : The respondents are members of the 7th Battalion of the Central Reserve Police (shortly called in this judgment the C.R.P.) who, under the command of the 8th Mountain Division Infantry Brigade, were engaged in operations in the State of Nagaland. On receipt of information that on or about August 3, 1964, seven hostile Nagas, who were captured and kept prisoners with the C.R.P. at Pfutser Camp, were murdered and their dead bodies secretly disposed of, the police, after investigating the report, arrested 44 perso...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1966SC1635; 1966CriLJ1228; [1966]3SCR811; [1966]18STC9(SC)
Mudholkar, J. 1. This judgment will also govern Criminal Appeals Nos. 151 and 152 of 1965. The respondent was at the relevant time a dealer at Bijapur in groundnuts, cotton seed and other commodities and was registered as a dealer under the Mysore Sales Tax Act, 1957. For the period between November 12, 1958 and October 31, 1959 he was assessed to sales tax amounting to Rs. 9,864.31 ps. by the Commercial Tax Officer, Bijapur in his order dated December 4, 1963. On January 3, 1964 the Commercial Tax Officer served on him a notice of payment requiring him to pay the tax assessed on him within 21 days. He was similarly assessed to pay tax for two subsequent periods by two separate orders passed by the commercial Tax Officer. Two separate notices of demand were served on him to pay the tax assessed within 21 days. It is common ground that the respondent did not comply with any of the three notices. Three separate complaints were, therefore, preferred against him by the Commercial Tax Offic...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1966SC1974; [1966]3SCR815
Mudholkar, J. 1. Both these appeals arise out of a suit instituted by Himatrao, appellant in C.A. 1034 of 1963 for declaration that he is owner of 1 anna 5 pies share in the village Mozara, District Yeotmal and for partition and separate possession of the property that would fall to the aforesaid share. Certain other reliefs were also prayed for by him; but it is not necessary to refer to them for the purpose of deciding these appeals. To this suit he joined other co-sharers in the village as alienees from some of the co-sharers. This suit was instituted by him on December 7, 1939 and was partially decreed on July 31, 1944 by the Court of Sub-Judge, second class, Darwha. He preferred an appeal from the decree of the trial court. So also Pusaram one of the defendants to the partition suit preferred an appeal from the decree of the trial court and some other defendants preferred a cross-objection against that decree. The appeal of Himatrao was allowed while that of Pusaram was dismissed....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1967SC1; [1966]3SCR744
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION : W.Ps. Nos. 5 and 7 to 9 of 1965. Petition under Art. 32 of the Constitution of India for the enforcement of Fundamental Rights. M. C. Setalvad, R. K. Garg, R. C. Agarwal, D. P. Singh and M. K. Ramamurthi, for petitioner (in W.P. No. 5 of 1965). A.K. Sen, R. K. Garg, S. C. Agrawal, D. P. Singh and M. K. Ramamurthi, for the petitioner (in W.P. No. 7 of 1965). V.K. Krishna Menon, R. K. Garg, S. C. Agrawal, D. P. Singh and M. K. Ramamurthi, for the petitioner (in W.P. No. 8 of 1965). N. C. Chatterjee, R. K. Garg, S. C. Agrawal, D. P. Singh, and M. K. Ramamurthi, for the petitioners (in W. P. No. 9 of 1965). C. K. Daphtary, Attorney-General, B. R. L. Iyengar and B. R. G. K. Achar, for the respondents (in all the petitions). The Judgment of GAJFNDRAGADKAR C.J., WANCHOO, MUDHOL- KAR, SIKRI and RAMASWAMI, JJ. was delivered by GAJENDRA-GADKAR C.J. SARKAR, SHAH and BACHAWAT JJ. delivered separate Opinions. HIDAYATULLAH, J. delivered a dissenting Opinion. Gajendragadkar, C...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1966SC1762; [1966]3SCR736
Ramaswami, J. 1. The appellant was tried for offences under s. 161, Indian Penal Code and s. 5(2) read with s. 5(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act by special Judge, Anti-Corruption, Lucknow who by his judgment dated January 8, 1962 convicted the appellant and sentenced him to three years' rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 2,000/-. In default for payment of fine the appellant was further ordered to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year. The appellant preferred an appeal to the Allahabad High Court, Lucknow Bench, which dismissed the appeal by its judgment dated March 20, 1964 and affirmed the conviction and sentence imposed by the Special Judge upon the appellant. This appeal is brought, by special leave, from the judgment of the Allahabad High Court, Lucknow Bench. 2. The appellant was employed as Assistant Director Enforcement, Government of India, Ministry of Commerce at Kanpur and used to deal with matters regarding the cancellation of licences of cloth dealers at...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1966SC1614; 1966CriLJ1217; [1966]3SCR706
The Judgment of GAJENDRAGADKAR, C.J., WANCHOO, SIKRI AND RAMASWAMI, JJ. was delivered by WANCHOO J., HIDAYATULLAH AND SHAH, JJ. delivered separate opinions. Wanchoo, J. 1. The main question that arises in this appeal on a certificate granted by the High Court of Kerala is the interpretation of the word 'migrated' in Art. 7 of the Constitution. Aboobacker on whose behalf the writ petition from which this appeal has arisen was filed in the High Court was born on March 5, 1936 in the district of Kozhikode of parents who were both Indian citizens. Aboobacker left India sometime in 1948 and went to Karachi in Pakistan when he was a boy of 12 years of age. He remained in Pakistan till 1954. On March 10, 1954, he obtained a Pakistani passport and came to district Kozhikode in India on visa granted to him in September 1954. On November 1, 1954, he again left for Pakistan. In 1956 he came to India again with the same passport but on a fresh visa obtained in April 1956. He remained in India till...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1966SC1980; [1966]3SCR724
Shah, J. 1. Two questions fall to be determined in these appeals : (1) Whether the Travancore-Cochin Kanam Tenancy Act 24 of 1955 governs lands held from Devaswoms (religious institutions) in the Cochin region of the State of Kerala; and (2) Whether the Act infringes the guarantee of equal protection of the laws and is on that account void 2. Kanam tenure has a feudal origin. Broadly stated it is a customary transfer which partakes of the character of a mortgage and of a lease : it cannot be redeemed before a fixed number of years - normally twelve - and the (Kanamdar) mortgagee-lessee is entitled on redemption to compensation for improvements. The annual payments to be (Jenmi) mortgagor-lessor are regulated by what remains of the fixed share of the produce after deducting interest. If the land is not redeemed on the expiry of 12 years, a renewal fee becomes payable to the jenmi. The Cochin State Manual contains the following description of the kanam tenure in the Cochin region : 'The...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1966SC1827
P.B. Gajendragadkar, C.J.1. The respondent, A.R. Srinivasan, entered Government service in the State of Madras and was first appointed as Supervisor in the Public Works Department. After about 21 years of service, he rose to the rank of an Executive Engineer and was appointed as the Project Engineer in charge of, the Manimuthar Project in the Tirunelveli district. He was holding this post from 1st August 1951 to the 30th September, 1954. It appears that certain complaints of corruption were received against the respondent by the appellant, the State of Madras, and were investigated by the C.I.D. As a result of these investigations, a reference was made to the Tribunal for Disciplinary Proceedings, Madras, which framed two charges against the respondent on the 3rd September, 1954. On the 30th September, 1954, the respondent was transferred to Madras. On a further reference by the appellant, the said Tribunal framed three additional charges against the respondent on the 31st December, 19...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1966SC1942; [1967(15)FLR332]; (1967)ILLJ698SC; [1966]3SCR682
Sikri, J. 1. These appeals, by special leave, are directed against the judgment of the High Court of Mysore at Bangalore in 16 Writ Petitions filed before it, quashing the notification of the Government bearing No. P.W. 10 SAG 59 dated October 31, 1961, and the appointments made thereunder of 88 Assistant Engineers in the Public Works Department of the State Government. 2. To appreciate the arguments addressed to us on behalf of the appellants and the respondents, it is necessary to give, in chronological order, the events, leading up to the filing of the above writ petitions and their significance. On December 12, 1957, the Governor of Mysore made rules called the Mysore Public Service Commission (Functions) Rules, 1957, hereinafter called the Functions Rules, relating to the functions of the Mysore Public Service Commission. Rule 3 of these rules provides for recruitment by examination and r. 4 with which we are primarily concerned provides for recruitment by selection. Rule 4 is as ...
Tag this Judgment!