Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1985SC1718; (1985)87BOMLR485; [1985(51)FLR284]; 1985LabIC1892; (1985)IILLJ409SC; 1985(2)SCALE90; (1985)3SCC682; 1985(17)LC835(SC)
O. Chinnappa Reddy, J.1. The All India Voltas & Volkart Employees Federation are the appellants before us. The very limited question with which we are concerned is whether the amount paid by the company during years 1964-65 and 1965-66 under a scheme styled as 'Super-annuation scheme-Special Retiring Gratuity scheme' is to be added back as 'bonus to employees' as mentioned in Item 2(a) or 'bonus paid to employees in respect of previous accounting years' as mentioned in Item 3(a) of the Second Schedule to the Payment of Bonus Act, 1965 for the purpose of computing the gross profits Under Section 4(b) of the Act The question has been answered in the negative by the National Industrial Tribunal on a reference Under Section 10(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act and by the High Court of Bombay in an application under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution. The workmen have preferred this appeal on a certificate by the High Court of Bombay under Article 133 of the Constitution.2. The releva...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1985SC1678; 1985CriLJ1862; 1985(2)Crimes604(SC); 1985(2)SCALE76; (1985)4SCC26; [1985]Supp2SCR319
S. Murtaza Fazal Ali, J.1. These appeals are directed against a judgment of the Madhya Pradesh High Court convicting the appellants under Sections 148 and 302 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing them to imprisonment for life.2. By our Order dated 12th July 1985, we had dismissed the appeals. We now proceed to give reasons for our Order.3. The facts of the case have been detailed in the Judgments of the Sessions Judge and the High Court and it is not necessary for us to repeat the same all over again. It appears that there was a chronic land dispute between Bhojraj (deceased) and the appellants so much so that Bhojraj had to enlist the services of one Abbas (PW 11) to accompany him wherever he went so as to guard him against assault. This means that the deceased expected serious threat to his life from the appellants due to the aforesaid enmity. On October 5, 1971 at about 2.30 p.m. while Bhojraj was proceeding towards his village, accompanied by PW 11, the app...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1985SC1681; 1986LabIC48; 1985(2)SCALE87; (1985)1SCC398; 1985Supp(1)SCC398; 1986(1)LC415(SC)
O. Chinnappa Reddy, J.1. We grant special leave and having heard the learned counsel for the parties proceed to dispose of the appeals.2. The appeals arise out of a judgment of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana which is an aftermath of two earlier judgments of that court. The appeal preferred to this Court against one of the earlier decision was dismissed by this Court by a speaking order while a special leave petition filed against the other decision was dismissed by non-speaking order, It appears that the Govt. of Punjab by its memorandum dated July 23, 1957 decided to reserve a quota of 25% of posts of Masters for a category of teachers already in service familiarly known in their service parlance as 'unadjusted B.A., B.T./ B.Ed. teachers'. Notwithstanding the memorandum, these teachers were not given the benefits flowing from the reservation and therefore, a large number of them filed a writ petition in the High Court of Punjab and Haryana claiming the status and emoluments of M...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1985SC1646; (1985)87BOMLR456; 1985(2)SCALE94; (1985)4SCC162; [1985]Supp2SCR308; 1986(1)LC402(SC)
E.S. Venkataramiah, J.1. This appeal by special leave arises out of a suit for redemption. Krishna Babaji Patil (Plaintiff No. 1) and his brother Bandu Babaji Patil were holding a half share in the lands bearing Survey Nos. 221/1, 222/2, 226/8 and 226/12 in all measuring 22 Acres and 13 Gunthas situated at Mouje Shirsi, Peta Shirola, District Sangli as permanent Mirasi tenants and were in actual possession of their share in the said lands. The lands in question were Paragana Watan Inam lands and the Watandars belonged to the family of Kokrudkar Deshmukhs. On May 20, 1947 Krishna Babaji Patil (Plaintiff No. 1) and Bandu Babaji Patil executed a mortgage deed in favour of two persons by name Dnyanu Krishna Mhoprekar and Ananda Santu Mhoprekar (Defendant No. 2) mortgaging their share in the above lands with possession by way of security for a loan of Rs. 1000 which they borrowed under the mortgage deed. The mortgage was for five years. The mortgagees were entitled to appropriate the income...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1985SC1391; [1985(51)FLR256]; 1985LabIC1634; (1985)IILLJ412SC; 1985(2)SCALE56; (1985)3SCC594; [1985]Supp2SCR302; 1986(1)LC464(SC)
O. Chinnappa Reddy, J.1. On October 16, 1968 the Government of India, Ministry of Labour, Employment and Rehabilitation, issued a notification, in exercise of their powers under Section 5(1)(a) and 9 of the Minimum Wages Act, appointing a Committee 'to hold enquiries and advise the Central Government regarding-(a) the fixation of minimum rates of wages for the first time under the said Act, and(b) the revision of minimum rates of wages already fixed by the Central Government under the said Act,in respect of the Employment in Manganese, Gypsum, Berytes and Bauxite Mines, Shri D. Venkatachalam, Chief Labour Commissioner (Central), New Delhi and Shri K.K. Bhatia, Director, Labour Bureau, Simla were appointed as independent members of the Committee while (i) Shri K.S. Mahaptra, Controller of Indian Bureau of Mines, Nagpur, (ii) Shri Dev Coomer Singhi, The Jhagrakhand Collieries Private Ltd., 14/4, Gariaghat Road, Calcutta-19, (iii) Dr. S.K. Das Gupta, Indian Aluminium Co. Ltd., 1, Middleto...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1985SC1359; 1985(2)SCALE78; (1985)4SCC85; [1985]Supp2SCR122; 1985(17)LC1075(SC)
E.S. Venkataramiah, J.1. There was one K. Vasudeva Pai who was carrying on business at Quilon, which is now in the State of Kerala. Padmavathi Ammal was his wife. They had a son by name V. Sreenivasa Pai and a daughter by name S. Lakshmi Ammal (Defendant No. 2). Saraswathi Ammal alias G. Kamala Bai (Plaintiff) was the wife of V. Sreenivasa Pai. S. Lakshmi Ammal had been given in marriage to A. Sreenivasa Pai (Defendant No. 1). K. Vasudeva Pai was adjudged insolvent in the year 1923 by the District Court at Quilon and consequently the properties belonging to him vested in the Official Receiver. The Official Receiver conveyed some of the said properties under a sale deed in favour of one S.A.S. Ayyavu Iyer in or about the year 1926. These properties were two plots of land with some buildings and out-houses at Quilon. Later on, in the year 1930 Ayyavu Iyer conveyed the properties purchased by him in favour of A. Sreenivasa Pai, the son-in-law of K. Vasudeva Pai, under whom A. Sreenivasa P...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1985SC1416; (1985)87BOMLR563; (1985)3CompLJ45(SC); [1985(51)FLR362]; (1985)IILLJ206SC; 1985(2)SCALE133; (1985)3SCC398; [1985]Supp2SCR131; 1985(2)SLJ145(SC)
D.P. Madon, J.1. The above Appeals by Special Leave granted by this Court and the above Writ Petitions filed either in this Court under Article 32 of the Constitution of India or in different High Courts under Article 226 and transferred to this Court raise a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of Articles 309, 310 and 311 of the Constitution and in particular of what is now, after the amendment of Clause (2) of Article 311 by the Constitution (Forty-second Amendment) Act, 1976, the second proviso to that clause.The Genesis of the Appeals and Writ Petitions2. To understand what questions fall for determination by this Court in these Appeals and Writ Petitions, it is first necessary to sketch briefly how they have come to be heard by this Constitution Bench.3. Article 311 of the Constitution confers certain safeguards upon persons employed in civil capacities under the Union of India or a State. The first safeguard (which is given by Clause (1) of Article 311) is that s...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1986SC204; 1985(2)SCALE31; (1985)3SCC536; [1985]Supp2SCR100; 1986(1)LC98(SC)
Y.V. Chandrachud, J. 1. By these two writ petitions, the petitioners ask for a writ of mandamus restraining the respondents from evicting the slum dwellers and pavement dwellers in the city of Madras, without providing alternative accommodation to them. They also pray that the respondents should provide basic amenities. like water, drainage and electricity to the slum dwellers.2. The State of Tamil Nadu enacted the Tamil Nadu Slum Areas (Improvement and Clearance) Act, 1971 in order to eradicate slums which are likely to become a source of danger to public health or sanitation. It is alleged by the petitioners that, acting in pursuance of the provisions of the said Act, about 450 huts situated on the Canal Bank Road adjoining the Loyola College were demolished or November 17, 1981. On the following day, the Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu made a statement that the Government had decided to demolish slums which had come into existence after June 1977. On November 19, 1981 the Chairman of t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1986SC180; 1985(2)SCALE5; (1985)3SCC545; [1985]Supp2SCR51
Y.V. Chandrachud, C.J.1. These Writ Petitions portray the plight of lakhs of persons who live on pavements and in slums in the city of Bombay. They constitute nearly half the population of the city. The first group of petitions relates to pavement dwellers while the second group relates to both pavement and Basti or Slum dwellers. Those who have made pavements their homes exist in the midst of filth and squalor, which has to be seen to be believed. Rabid dogs in search of stinking meat and cats in search of hungry rats keep them company. They cook and sleep where they ease, for no conveniences are available to them. Their daughters, come of age, bathe under the nosy gaze of passers by, unmindful of the feminine sense of bashfulness. The cooking and washing over, women pick lice from each other's hair. The boys beg. Menfolk, without occupation, snatch chains with the connivance of the defenders of law and order; when caught, if at all, they say : 'Who doesn't commit crimes in this city?...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1985SC1582; 1985(2)SCALE293; (1985)4SCC133; [1985]Supp2SCR115; 1986(1)LC423(SC)
V. Balakrishna Eradi, J. 1. This is an appeal by special leave against a judgment of a Division Bench of the Allahabad High Court dated March 22, 1966 dismissing Special Appeal No. 647 of 1961 and confirming the judgment of a learned Single Judge of the said High Court rejecting Civil Misc. Writ No. 809 of 1958 filed by the appellant herein.2. The appellant claims to be the descendant and successor in interest of one Dewan Krishna Kant Nandy in whose favour a jagir of 41 villages situated in the district of Ballia had been conferred by Raja Mahip Narayan Singh of Banaras. This jagir grant was recognised by the East India Co and in token thereof the Governor General, by a fresh Sanad dated January 10, 1785 assigned the said 41 villages as 'Altamga Jagir' in favour of Dewan Krishna Kant Nandy. The Sanad mentioned that the grant was being made for purposes of defraying the expenses of worship etc. of the deity in a temple. Subsequently, by a document of the year 1793, Dewan Krishna Kant N...
Tag this Judgment!