Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1985SC218; 1984(2)SCALE769; (1985)1SCC345; [1985]2SCR72; [1986]62STC130(SC)
O. Chinnappa Reddy, J.1. The appellants, who are traders engaged in the purchase and sale of agricultural produce, appear to be a determined lot. For over a decade, they or those similarly placed have been litigating and impeding the levy and collection of market fee by the Market Committees constituted under the Punjab Agricultural Produce Markets Act. Some times they have been successful, sometimes they have not. One of the occasions when they appeared to be successful was when this Court in Kewal Kirshnan Puri v. State of Punjab : [1979]3SCR1217 declared that 'the enhancement of the fee from 2% to 3% was illegal. The court while striking down the enhancement of the fee laid down no new principle but made certain general observations which, we regret to say, have been so misunderstood and misinterpreted as to lead to some confusion and public mischief. The misunderstanding and confusion have also naturally led to more litigation. Fortunately, in Sreenivasa General Traders v. State of...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1985SC297; (1985)87BOMLR38; [1985(50)FLR16]; 1985LabIC726; (1985)ILLJ82SC; 1984(2)SCALE749; (1985)1SCC312; [1985]2SCR64; 1985(17)LC226(SC)
D.A. Desai, J.1. General Labour Union (Red Flag) Bombay filed two complaints, one against M/s. Delta Wires Pvt Ltd. and second against 'M/s. Delta Spokes Manufacturing Company, two sister concerns ('employers' for short) under Section 28 read with Items l(a), l(b), 2, 4(a), 4(f) and 6 of Schedule II of the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971 ('Act' for short). Broadly stated the complaints were that the employers were guilty of imposing and continuing a lock-out and had thus committed unfair labour practice. The employers contended that they had finally and irrevocably closed the industrial undertaking and were not guilty of any unfair labour practice. The complaints were filed in the Industrial Court, Maharashtra, Bombay.2. The fawned Judge framed an issue whether the employers had committed an unfair labour practice by imposing and continuing a lock-out as provided in Item 6 of Schedule II of the Act.3. After hearing the parties...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1985SC211; 1984(2)SCALE760; (1985)1SCC151; [1985]2SCR50; 1985(17)LC7(SC)
Sabyasacih Mukharj, J.1. This appeal a rises out of the judgment and an order of the Gauhati High Court in an election petition. The petitioner-appellant was a voter in the West Tripura Parliamentary Constituency from No. 7 Ramnagar Assembly Segment. He contested the mid-term Lok Sabha-election held in 1980 from the West Tripura Parliamentary Constituency, as a nominee of Congress (1). There were six candidates including the petitioner contesting the said election. The respondent No. 1 was a C.P.I. (M) candidate. 8th December, 1979 was the date of filing of the nominations. Nominations were scrutinised on 11th December, 1979 and the withdrawal date was 13th December, 1979; On 6th January, 1980 the polling was held and the result of the election was declared on 8th January, 1980. The main contest was between the petitioner/ appellant and the respondent No. 1, Ajoy Biswas. The respondent No. 1 had secured 1,98,335 votes as against the appellant who had secured 1,42,990 votes. The respond...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1985SC306; (1985)ILLJ511SC; 1984(2)SCALE757; 1984Supp(1)SCC530; 1985(17)LC291(SC)
R.S. Pathak, J.1. This appeal by special leave raises an interesting question respecting the recruitment of Upper Division Clerks for appointment as Accountants in the office of the Accountant General, West Bengal.2. It appears that at one time all holders of supervisory posts in the office of the Accountant General, West Bengal were required to pass the Subordinate Accounts Service Examination. The examination' consisted of two parts. Every eligible employee was entitled to five chances to pass the Part I examination and having passed that he had to pass the Part II examination before he crossed the age of 45 years. In 1966 the Comptroller and Auditor General of India considered it necessary to take measures for improving the working of the offices of the Civil Accountants General because it had been reported by the Directors of Inspection that the accounting-cum-administrative work was suffering considerably and the quality of local inspection was poor. It was also felt that some acc...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1985SC470; 1985CriLJ751; 1984(2)SCALE1015; (1985)1SCC196
P.N. Bhagwati, J.1. Leave granted.2. On the basis of a complaint lodged by one Muniyamma the police registered a case being Crime No. 90 of 1979 under Sections 302 and 307 of the Indian Penal Code and on completion of the investigation, filed a charge-sheet against the respondent for the offences under Sections 302 and 307 IPC. The Chief Judicial Magistrate took cognizance of the offences and committed the case to the Court of Sessions, Bangalore. The Sessions Judge registered the case as Sessions Case No. 15/79. It appears that the jurisdiction of the Sessions Court was transferred to the Court of City and Sessions Judge Bangalore and the High Court therefore by an order dated 30th December 1980 made in exercise of the powers conferred under Section 407 of the CrPC withdrew Sessions Case No. 15/79 from the Sessions Judge, Bangalore and transferred it to the Principal City Civil and Sessions Judge, Metropolitan area, Bangalore City for disposal in accordance with law. The Principal Cit...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1985SC136; 1985MPLJ1(SC); 1984(2)SCALE725; (1985)1SCC14; [1985]2SCR39; 1985(17)LC301(SC)
R.S. Pathak, J.1. This is a tenant's appeal, by special leave, against a decree of the High Court of Madhya Pradesh allowing the landlord's second appeal in a suit for eviction.2. The respondent, as landlord, filed a suit for the eviction of the appellant tenant on the ground that the appellant had neither paid nor tendered the arrears of rent legally recoverable from him. The plaint recited that the appellant had taken a portion of a shop and a verandah on the ground floor on rent at Rs. 1507- per month for the purpose of this cloth business, that the appellant had not paid the arrears of rent totalling Rs. 2.550/- for the period June 26, 1968 to October 11, 1969, and that he was, therefore, liable to eviction on the .ground set forth in Section 12(1)(a) of the Madhya Pradesh Accommodation Control Act, 1961.3. In this written statement the appellant pleaded that the respondent had described the tenanted premises incorrectly, 'that in fact the premises consisted of an entire shop, a ko...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1985SC87; 1984(2)SCALE723; (1984)4SCC609; [1985]2SCR19; 1985(17)LC392(SC)
ORDERO. Chinnappa Reddy, J.1. Even after thirty four years of the Constitution proclaiming equality before the law and equality of opportunity, the Chief Ministers of some States continue to regard admission to Professional Colleges and appointments to Government posts as their little private empires. So recently as on September 19, 1983, this Court had to disabuse this impression in Suman Gupta v. State of Jammu and Kashmir : [1983]3SCR985 . The question in that case arose this way : A certain number of seats in the medical colleges of one State were reserved for candidate from other States to be nominated by the Governments of the other States. Was an absolute power vested in the State Governments in the choice of candidates for nomination or was it incumbent on the State Governments to adopt definitive criteria and follow pre-defined norms? Pathak, J. speaking for himself, Chandrachud, C.J. and Sabyasachi Mukherji, J. said :After considering the matter carefully, we confess, we are ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 1984(2)SCALE753; 1984(Supp)SCC703; 1985(17)LC416(SC)
ORDERD.A. Desai, J.1. Special leave granted.2. In our anxiety to reach the heart of the problem, and not to be lost in the maze of interlocutory orders, we examined the case from various angles though we must confess that the petition for special leave to appeal was directed against an order removing the petitioner from the receivership of Poonmudi Estate of which he was the proprietor. Keeping aside the narrow question brought to this Court in the petition for special leave we ventured into wider ramifications of the problem awaiting adjudication by the High Court. Confess, we must, that we have not been able to hit the bull's eye, but at best the dreary litigative journey would be shortened.3. A brief resume of the facts leading to the present petition for special leave will illumine the contours of controversy. The first respondent-the Indian Bank ('Bank' for short) had advanced a medium term loan in the amount of Rs. 5,50,000/- to the petitioner Shri K.T. Thomas, who is the proprie...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1985SC231; (1984)86BOMLR603; 1984CriLJ1909; 1985(1)Crimes913(SC); 1984(2)SCALE697; (1985)1SCC275; [1985]2SCR8
O. Chinnappareddy, J.1. 'To be or not to be', is die question which Javed AHMED Abdul Hamid Pawala has posed us. In connection with certain cruel and multiple murders the petitioner was convicted and sentenced to death by the learned Sessions Judge of Thane, on 6-2-1981 The High curt of Maharashtra confirmed die sentence of death on 29/30-4-1981 An appeal preferred by the petitioner to this Court under Article 136 of me Constitution was dismissed by us on 20-4-1983. (Reported in : AIR1983SC594 ). The petition for review was dismissed on 12-8-1983. A petition for clemency was also rejected by the President of India. The petitioner has filed the present writ petition under Article 32 of the Constitution praying that in view of his tender age, his reformation in jail and the long lapse of time since die passing of the sentence of death on him, the execution of the sentence of death may be stopped and the sentence may be commuted to one of imprisonment for life. In his petition he has fran...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1985SC84; [1985(50)FLR77]; 1985LabIC587; (1986)IILLJ343SC; 1984(2)SCALE693; (1985)1SCC56; [1985]2SCR1; 1985(17)LC287(SC)
R.S. Pathak, J.1. This appeal by special leave is directed against the judgment and order of the Allahabad High Court dismissing the appellant's writ petition against an order terminating his services.2. The appellant, Nepal Singh, was employed in a temporary capacity as Sub-Inspector of Police. He was serving at Shahjahanpur in 196H when the Superintendent of Police. Shahjahanpur initiated disciplinary proceedings under Section 7 of the Police Act against him on the charge that while posted at Pithoragarh he had. in November, 1964. contracted a second marriage while his first wife was alive, and as this was done without obtaining the prior permission of the Government the appellant had violated Rule 29 of the U. P. Government Servants Conduct Rules, 1956. The appellant filed a reply and denied the charge. The oral testimony of about twelve witnesses for the prosecution and an almost equal number for the defence was recorded. Bui in January, 1970 the Superintendent of Police, Shahjahan...
Tag this Judgment!