Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 1984(2)SCALE427; (1984)4SCC607
ORDER1. Since the ensuing Muharram festival this year shall commence from 6th October, 1984 and little time is left for undertaking and completing the shifting operation qua the two graves of Lal Mohd. and Smt. Sakina before that date and also as an experimental measure we give the following directions that will be operative during the 58 days of ensuing festival with a view to ensure the peaceful performance of their religious rites, rituals and observances by members of Shia community over the remaining 8 plots in question and the structures standing thereon without any hindrance or obstruction from any one belonging to the Sunni community :(1) That the grave of Hakim Badruddin shall be cordoned off by barbed fencing on three sides with access thereto only from the road lying on its west and members of Sunni community will be permitted to perform two rituals, namely, recitation of Fathia and laying Chaddar at that grave on specified dates only, such dates to be fixed by the District ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1984SC1911; 1984(2)SCALE441; (1985)1SCC21; 1985(17)LC180(SC)
Order1. Transferred Writ Petitions Nos. 365 to 382 of 1984 challenge the validity of the elections to the Assam Legislative Assembly held in February 1983. The principal ground on which the validity of the elections has been challenged is that the electoral rolls were not revised before the elections in contravention of the provisions of Section 21 Sub-section (2)(a) of the Representation of people Act 1950 and the elections were held on the basis of the electoral rolls of 1979. Now it is undoubtedly true that the electoral rolls were not revised before the impugned elections were held but the Election Commission dispensed with the revision of the electoral rolls by an order dated 1 7th January, 1983 made under the opening part of Section 21 Sub-section (2) and this order has not been challenged in any of the Writ Petitions. Hence the impugned elections cannot be challenged on the ground that they were held on the basis of the electoral rolls of 1979 without revision of the electoral r...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1984SC1855; 1985LabIC401; 1984(2)SCALE561; 1984Supp(1)SCC467; [1984]1SCR908; 1984(2)SLJ516(SC); 1985(17)LC155(SC)
ORDER AND IN THE NAME OF THE GOVERNOR OF ANDHRA PRADESH)P.R. KALE,Joint Secretary to GovernmentIn order to appreciate the challenge to the said Notification, it is necessary to reproduce the relevant provisions of Section 115 of the States Reorganization Act, 1956, namely, Sub-sections (2), (3), (4) and (7) thereof. These Sub-sections are as follows :(2) Every person who immediately before the appointed day is serving in connection with the affairs of an existing State part of whose territories is transferred to another State by the provisions of Part II shall as from that day, provisionally continue to serve in connection with the affairs of the principal successor State to that existing State, unless he is required by general or special order of the Central Government to serve provisionally in connection with the affairs of any other successor State(3) As soon as may be after the appointed day, the Central Government shall, by general or special order, determine the successor State t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1984SC1910; 1984LabIC1742; 1984(2)SCALE573; 1985(17)LC200a(SC)
ORDER1. The points which arise in this Appeal are the same as those which have been decided today by this Court in Civil Appeal No. 2627 of 1977-Ahmed Hussain Khan v. State Andhra Pradesh heard along with Civil Appeal No. 2628 of 1977-S. Gopalan v. State of Andhra Pradsh. In view of our judgment in those two Appeals, we allow this Appeal also and reverse the judgment of the Division Bench of the Andhra Pradesh High Court and set aside the order appealed against. We direct the State of Andhra Pradesh to fix within one month from today the pension payable to the Appellant from the date on which he became eligible for payment of pension, that is, from the date on which he retired from Government service, on the basis that the maximum pension admissible under Clause (b) of Sub-rule (1) of Rule 299 of the Hyderabad Civil Services Rules is Rs. 1,000 per month in the Government of India currency. We further direct the State of Andhra Pradesh to pay the Appellant the balance of the amount of p...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1984SC1901; (1985)IILLJ332SC; 1984(2)SCALE557; [1985]1SCR882; 1985(17)LC243(SC)
R.S. Pathak, J.1. The appellants, in these appeals by special leave, are aggrieved by the judgment of a Division Bench of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana affirming the dismissal of their writ petitions by a learned Single Judge of that Court.2. The appellants are teachers in the service of the State of Punjab. They claim the grades prescribed in paragraph 2 of the Government Circular letter No. 2036-ED-I-67/2167 dated July 29, 1967, and in that regard seek the benefit of the Circular letter No. 9/9/79-FR(2)/143 dated February 19, 1979 and its clarification by Circular letter No. 8937-5 ED. 1179/2659 dated September 20, 1979.3. The Circular letter dated July 29, 1967 gave effect to the recommendations of the Kothari Commission with effect from November 1, 1966 in respect of teachers in Government Schools. Paragraph 2 of the Circular letter provided :-2. Lecturers in Higher Secondary Schools, Punjab Institute of English and Masters/Mistresses with Post-Graduate qualifications in Hig...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1984SC1850; [1984(49)FLR412]; 1984(2)SCALE513; (1985)1SCC122; 1984(2)SLJ477(SC); 1985(17)LC73(SC)
R.B. Misra, J.1. The main question for consideration in this appeal by special leave is whether a person selected by the Subordinate Service Selection Board for direct appointment to the post of Assistant Sub-Inspector of Police has got an unfettered right to be appointed on the basis of the recommendation made by the said Board.2. The material facts to bring out the point in controversy are as follows. On 31st of March, 1978 the Inspector General of Police, Punjab, respondent No. 2, sent a requisition to the Subordinate Service Selection Board (for short, the Board), respondent No. 3, to select and recommend 7 suitable persons for the post of Assistant Sub-Inspectors of Police. While the matter was pending consideration 50 more posts of Assistant Sub-Inspectors of Police became available and, therefore, the Board was requested to recommend 57 suitable persons for these posts. The appellants along with many others were interviewed and physically tested on various dates ranging from 24t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1985SC141; [1985(50)FLR89]; (1985)ILLJ36SC; 1984(2)SCALE586; 1984Supp(1)SCC534; 1985(17)LC69(SC)
ORDERD.A. Desai, J.1. Deceased Shambhu Nath Mukherjee ('workman' for short) was serving with the appellant-The Delhi Cloth & General Mills Ltd. ('employer' for short). By its letter dated January 19, 1966 the employer informed the workman that his name has been struck off the rolls under the provisions of the relevant Standing Order with effect from August 24, 1965. There commenced the tragic tale of the unmerited suffering and paralysing woes of the workman who ultimately in his quest of illusory justice paid the supreme sacrifice of life and alas he is no more.2. The workman raised an industrial dispute questioning the termination of his services in the manner done by the employer. Conciliation proceedings having failed, an industrial dispute was referred to the Labour Court for its resolution. Worn out stalling tactics to tire out an employed workman surfaced in the initial stages of the proceedings before the Labour Court. On an contention raised by the employer, an issue was frame...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1984SC1905; [1985(50)FLR83]; 1984LabIC1738; 1984(2)SCALE573a; [1985]1SCR930; 1984(2)SLJ471(SC); 1985(17)LC216(SC)
D.P. Madon, J.1. The appellant joined the service of the former Indian State of Hyderabad prior to the coming into force of the Constitution of India. On the coming into force of the Constitution of India on January 26, 1950, the former Indian State of Hyderabad became a part of the territory of India as a Part B State and the Appellant continued in the service of that State. He retired from service on January 21, 1956, as Secretary to the Government of Hyderabad, Legal Department. The Appellant claimed that he was entitled to be paid the salary of a High Court Judge from October 1, 1947, being the date from which the recommendations of a Pay and Service Commission which had been set up had been implemented up to the date of his retirement from service. The Appellant also claimed that he was entitled to receive a pension of Rs. 1,000 a month in the Government of India currency being the maximum pension admissible under the rules in that behalf. Bath the aforesaid claims were negatived ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1985SC131; 1985CriLJ511; 1984(2)Crimes761(SC); 1984(2)SCALE602; 1984Supp(1)SCC482
V.D. Tulzapurkar, J.1. On the night between the 27th and 28th March, 1972 (around mid-night) at the house of Bindra Singh in Village Shah Jalalpur, Police Station Kamlapur, District Sitapur, an incident of dacoity took place during the course of which about 30-32 miscreants variously armed with lathis, dandas, gun, ballam, country made pistols, 'kanta' etc. indulged in arson, loot, violence and murderous assaults on the inmates of the house. The incident lasted for quite some time but before the miscreants left the place two inmates of the house Phoolan Maharaj (a Brahmin Pandit of the family) and Gautam (the minor son aged 11 of Bindra Singh) were murdered, the former by gun shots and the latter by being roasted alive in the fire while Bindra Singh (P.W. 2) himself survived a murderous assault on him; in addition the other members including females in family received injuries. Among the said miscreants, the prosecution alleged, were the three respondents Gokarna, Prahalad and Sunder, ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1984SC1880; 1984(2)SCALE538; (1984)4SCC434; [1985]1SCR889; 1985(17)LC33(SC)
R.B. Misra, J.1. The present appeal by special leave against the judgment of the Allahabad High Court dated 27th of March, 1979 centers round a shop No. 270 situate in Grouceganj, Bulandshahr. This shop was owned by Ratan Lal and Naubat Singh was a tenant of the shop. Naubat Singh died on 31st of August, 1974. He had no male issue but had four daughters, all of whom were married and were residing with their husbands outside Bulandshahr. He also left behind his widow who was residing in village Rampur, district Bulandshahr. He was carrying on some business in the disputed shop during his lifetime. On his death Ratan Lal, the landlord, filed an application under Section 12 read with Section 16 of the U.P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 (for short, referred to hereinafter as 'the U.P. Act No. 13 of 1972') for a declaration that the shop was vacant and he required the same for his personal need.2. The application was resisted by Jaspal Singh, the prese...
Tag this Judgment!