Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 1988Supp(1)SCC554
S. Ranganathan and; Sabyasachi Mukharji, JJ.1. The respondents are willing to pay the overtime as directed by this Court's order dated 2-9-1986. The only dispute is as to working out the method; as to at what rates and for what period the payment will be made and to what persons. It will be just and proper that the learned District Judge, Sundergarh will determine whatever materials are made available to him by either of the parties as to these points. If no material is available then he will proceed on a rough and ready basis as he considers suitable and fit. The learned District Judge will make such determination within three months from today and the payments will be made within four weeks thereafter. This will not prejudice the rights of the parties, if any, to agitate any grievances arising out of such determination.2. The CMP is disposed of accordingly....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : JT1988(1)SC502; 1988Supp(1)SCC426
ORDERA.P. Sen, J.1. Having heard Sri Asoke Sen, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners, Sri A.K. Srivastava, learned Counsel for the State Government and the District Magistrate, Varanasi, and Sri T.S. Krishnamoorthy Iyer, learned Counsel appearing for respondent No. 5, we find no reason or justification to disturb the arrangement effected by this Court's order dated March 7, 1986 as an experimental measure. The said arrangement, as directed by the said order, has to continue for a period of ten years. It is amply clear from the counter-affidavit sworn by the City Magistrate, Varanasi that the experimental measure has proved successful and has ensured peaceful performance of religious rites, rituals, practices and functions by the members of the Shia community, barring some minor incidents for which appropriate proceedings have been taken by the District Magistrate under Section 107 read with Section 110 of the CrPC, 1973 against both the rival communities i.e. Sunnis and the Sh...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1988SC420; (1988)67CTR(SC)165; [1988]170ITR137(SC); JT1987(4)SC653; 1987(2)SCALE1296; 1988Supp(1)SCC120; [1988]2SCR115
Sabyasachi Mukharji, J.1 Special leave granted.2. This is an appeal from the judgment and order of the Division Bench of the High Court of Bombay whereby the Division Bench concurred with the judgment and order of the learned Single Judge of the Court. The respondent herein had entered into an agreement on or about 5th May, 1978 with That Rayon Company Limited at Thailand (hereinafter called the foreign company). It was engaged in the business of manufacturing and selling Stapple Fibers at Bangkok in Thailand. The agreement recited that the respondent as he was described was a technician holding a Bachelor's degree from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, U.S.A. and has had several years of experience in the business of manufacturing and selling Stapple Fibres through his association with companies engaged in similar business and the foreign Company as referred to in the agreement aforesaid as the 'employer' had approached him, i.e. the technician to make available to the 'emplo...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1988SC424; [1987]169ITR510(SC); JT1987(4)SC517; 1987(2)SCALE1476; 1988Supp(1)SCC42; [1988]2SCR87
M.N. Venkatachaliah, J. 1.These assessee's appeals, by certificate, arise out of the Judgment and Order dated 2.3.1973 of the Allahabad High Court in I.T.R. No. 721 of 1970 answering certain questions of law referred for the opinion of the High Court against the assessee.2. The assessee is a Hindu Undivided Family. The assessment years are 1954-55, 1960-61 and 1961-62. The principal controversy in these appeals pertains to the allowance of and deduction for 'repairs' in respect of a house property at Delhi leased out to the Chinese Embassy under a deed of lease dated 30.5.1952.Originally assessments were completed including therein the annual letting value of this property at Rs. 36,000 and allowing a deduction of Rs.6,000 for repairs under Section 24(1)(i)(a) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (Act) or the corresponding provisions of the Act of 1922. Subsequently, the assessments were reopened on the ground that the assessee had got excess of relief. In the re-assessments the Income-tax Offi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1988SC303; JT1987(4)SC489; 1987(2)SCALE1224; (1988)1SCC267; [1988]2SCR95
ORDERE.S. Venkataramiah and K.N. Shing, JJ.1. The petitioners held permanent stage carriage permits for non-notified routes. They made applications to the competent authority under the U.R Motor Vehicles (Special Provision) Act, 1976 for grant of authorisation certificate permitting them to ply their stage carriage vehicles on Unnao-Kanpur and Lucknow-Barabanki notified routes. The competent authority rejected their applications, thereupon they filed Writ petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution challenging the validity of the order of the competent authority. A Division Bench of the High Court of Allahabad (Lucknow Bench) dismissed the writ petitions by its order dated 2.4.1987 on the ground that the petitioners were not entitled to any authorisation certificate under the U.P. Motor Vehicles (Special Provision) Act 1976 as none of them held permits for plying their vehicles on the aforesaid notified routes on the date the routes were notified. Aggrieved the petitioners have fil...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1988SC305; JT1987(4)SC491; 1987(2)SCALE1200; (1988)1SCC206; [1988]2SCR49
K.N. Singh, J.1. These petitions under Article 32 of the Constitution of India challenge the constitutional validity of the Bihar Non-Government Secondary Schools (taking over of Management and Control) Act, 1981 (Bihar Act No. 33 of 1982) on the ground that the provisions of the Act are violative of Article 30 of the Constitution.2. All Bihar Christian Schools' Association, petitioner No. 1, is a religious minority society registered under the Societies Registration Act. Petitioner No. 2, Sister Marianne S.C.N. is the Secretary-cum-Treasurer of petitioner No. 1. The aims and objects of the All Bihar Christian Schools' Association are to promote education including science, literature, fine arts and libraries according to Christian ideals in the interest of national development; to foster moral and spiritual values in education; to assist and strengthen the work of Christian schools in Bihar; to promote the welfare of teachers and other staff of the member-institutions. The petitioner ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1988SC339; JT1987(4)SC575; 1988(1)KLT104(SC); 1987(2)SCALE1311; (1988)1SCC202; [1988]2SCR81
Sabyasachi Mukharji, J.1. This appeal by special leave is directed against the order of the High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam dated the 16th October, 1981 in Civil Revision Petition No. 1927 of 1981. The appellants are the heirs of the original tenant. The original appellant died and his heirs have been substituted in his place. The landlord being the respondent herein wanted the premises in question for his own use and occupation. He accordingly applied to the Rent Controller for permission. The Rent Controller after hearing the parties granted such permission. The Appellate Authority upholding the order of the Rent Controller, maintained the order of eviction. There was a revision before the learned District Judge. The learned District Judge dismissed the revision petition holding that it was difficult interfere with the concurrent findings of facts of the Courts below on the bona fide need of the landlord for his own use and occupation.2. The tenant came up before the High Court in ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : JT1987(4)SC472; 1987(2)SCALE1226; 1987Supp(1)SCC471; [1988]68STC392(SC); 1988(1)LC376(SC)
1. These four appeals are from the common judgment of the Allahabad High Court dated 19.12.1973 in Writ Petitions Nos. 2706, 2784, 2785 and 2786 of 1973. They can be disposed of by a common order as they relate to the case of the same respondent M/s. Coal & Coke Supplies Corporation of Kanpur (hereinafter referred to as 'the assessee'. They relate to the four assessment years 1967-68, 1968-69, 1969-70 and 1970-71 and involve the same issue as to the interpretation of the provisions of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 ('the Act', for short).2. The assessee had filed the writ petitions praying for the issue of writs of certiorari to quash the assessment orders passed for the assessment years in question resulting in demands of various amounts of sales tax from the assessee.3. The assessee made the following averments in the writ petition:xx The petitioner is a Coal Agent pure and simple carrying on his business at Kanpur. He does not take actual delivery of goods. The prospective purchase...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1988SC830; JT1987(4)SC464; 1988LabIC989; 1987(2)SCALE1166; 1987Supp(1)SCC587; [1988]2SCR35; 1989(1)SLJ36(SC)
Lalit Mohan Sharma, J.1. The appellant's application for appointment as a District Munsif by the State of Andhra Pradesh in the quota reserved for Scheduled Castes was rejected by the Andhra Pradesh Public Service Commission (briefly described as the 'Commission'), respondent No. 1, which the appellant challenged before the Andhra Pradesh High Court by a writ petition. The learned single Judge allowed the prayer and directed the first respondent to consider the candidature of the appellant for the appointment in question. The respondents challenged the decision under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent in the High Court in Writ Appeal No. 22 of 1985. The appeal was allowed and the writ petition was dismissed. We have granted leave under Article 136 of the Constitution allowing the appellant to appeal against the said decision.2. The appointment of District Munsifs is regulated by Andhra Pradesh State Judicial Service Rules (hereinafter referred to as the Rules). In response to an advertise...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : JT1987(4)SC601; 1989Supp(2)SCC268
Ranganath Misra, J.1. These appeals are by special leave and are directed against the common judgment of the Division Bench in a group of writ applications filed before it challenging the termination of appointment as Legal Assistants in the State of Rajasthan.2. Three questions mainly came before the High Court for determination :- 1) Is there a distinction between making financial provision in the budget to meet the expenses for posts and creation of posts?2) What exactly was the number of vacancies available to be filled up as required by the rules? and if recommendation had been received from the State Public Service Commission in terms of rules for regularly filling up the vacancies, how would appointees under Rule 30 be dealt with? and 3) Whether the persons whose appointments under Rule 30 have been terminated and who have availed the opportunity of getting screened through the Public Service Commission in the regular way and have failed, would still be entitled to claim the ben...
Tag this Judgment!