Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 1987(2)Crimes902(SC); JT1987(3)SC10; 1987(2)SCALE10; (1987)3SCC447; 1987(2)LC480(SC)
ORDER1. Special leave granted.2. In these appeals by special leave the appellant is aggrieved by the detention of her husband, Kotha Das, under the National Security Act, 1980, and prays for his release.3. Kotha Das was arrested on 16 February, 1986. On 17 February, 1986 an order of detention in respect of him was made under Sub-section (3) of Section 3 of the National Security Act 1980 by the Commissioner of Police, Hyderabad City directing that Kotha Das be detained under Sub-section (2) of Section 3 of the Act. It appears that after the case was referred by the State Government to the Advisory Board the Advisory Board reported that there was sufficient cause for the detention, and the State Government thereafter made an order on 11 April, 1986 directing the detention of the detenue for one year from the date of the detention order. Two successive writ petitions were filed by the appellant in the High Court of Andhra Pradesh challenging the detention of the detenue. A number of conte...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : JT1987(3)SC11; 1987(2)SCALE11; (1987)3SCC505
ORDER1. The application prays that contempt proceedings be taken against the Commissioner, Department of Health, in the Government of Bihar for failing to comply with the directions of the Patna High Court contained in its judgment dated 14 June 1983, passed in a writ petition filed by the petitioners, whereby the High Court directed that the vacant positions occupied by ad hoc appointees of the years 1979 and 1981 as well as posts which might have fallen vacant or be otherwise available should be filled up on a regular basis through the Public Service Commission by open advertisement, and that the vacancies should be so filled within six months from the date of the judgment. This was subject to the proviso that the Government could make ad hoc appointments during the interim period if it considered it absolutely urgent and necessary as a stop gap measure. It was made specially clear by the High Court that all the ad hoc appointments made in the years 1979 and 1981 subsisting then or t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1987SC1878; 1987CriLJ1912; JT1987(3)SC12; 1987(2)SCALE12; (1987)3SCC490; [1987]3SCR456; 1987(2)LC362(SC)
1. Special Leave is granted.2. The respondent Major S.K. Sharma addressed a letter dated 21 December 1985 to Brigadier S.S. Randhawa, Commander, HQ 41 Sub Area alleging that on 15 December, 1985 he was manhandled by Col. Mir Usman Ali in the HQ 41 Sub Area Officers Mess at Jorhat. It was stated that the incident took place in the presence of Major M.M. Subbaiah. Major Sharma was attached to B Camp. Signal Regiment while Col. Ali belonged to HQ 41 Sub Area. Brigadier Randhawa wrote to the Officer Commanding, B. Comp. Signal Regiment on 14 January 1986 seeking clarification from Major Sharma on some of the allegations. It appears that correspondence was exchanged in the matter but apparently Major Sharma, having met with no satisfactory response, filed a complaint 21 January 1986 in the Court of the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jorhat alleging that Col. Ali had criminally assaulted him and further that Brigadier Randhawa did not report the matter to the higher authorities and wa...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1987SC1871; JT1987(3)SC24; 1987LabIC1603; 1987(2)SCALE3; (1987)3SCC513; 1987(2)LC327(SC)
1. This petition has been filed by the petitioner for quashing the order dated 25 June, 1986 passed by the Madhya Pradesh Government compulsorily retiring him from service.2. The petitioner joined the Judicial Service in Madhya Pradesh in January, 1962 as a Civil Judge Class II. He was promoted as a Civil Judge Class I and thereafter assumed the post of Additional District and Sessions Judge. In 1981, upon the creation of the Madhya Pradesh Higher Judicial Service the petitioner was absorbed in that service and posted as Additional Judge to the Court of the District Judge and Additional Sessions Judge.3. When he attained the age of 57 years the question whether the petitioner should be continued in service was considered in a Full Court meeting of the Madhya Pradesh High Court. In May, 1986 the Full Court of twenty five Judges unanimously resolved that the petitioner should be retired in the public interest even before attaining the age of superannuation. The recommendation of the High...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1987SC1877; 1987CriLJ1910; 1987(2)Crimes892(SC); JT1987(3)SC22; 1987(2)SCALE1; (1987)3SCC502; [1987]3SCR471
1. The petitioners Fazal Ghosi and Wahid in the two writ petitions before us and the appellants Ayaz Ahmad and Riaz Ahmad in the two Criminal Appeals are aggrieved by the orders of detention made respectively in respect of them under Sub-section (2) of Section 3 of the National Security Act, 1980. The petitioners Fazal Ghosi and Wahid filed writ petitions in the High Court of Allahabad against the detention orders concerning them and those writ petitions were dismissed. They have now filed the present petitions under Article 32 of the Constitution. The appellants Ayaz Ahmad and Riaz Ahmad filed writ petitions in the High Court of Allahabad against the detention orders concerning them, and those writ petitions having been dismissed they have appealed here by special leave. All the four cases have been heard together. It is agreed between the parties that although separate orders of detention were made under Sub-section (2) of Section 3 of the National Security Act against the various pe...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1987SC1874; JT1987(3)SC61; 1987(2)SCALE23; (1987)3SCC648
1. Special leave is granted in the Special Leave Petition directed against the judgment and order dated 22 August, 1985 of the High Court of Andhra Pradesh allowing Writ Appeal No. 256 of 1978.2. The question which arises in this appeal is whether the High Court of Andhra Pradesh is right in quashing the Seniority List of 1976 in respect of Divisional Medical Officers of the Indian Railways.3. In 1976, the Railway Board published a Seniority List of Divisional Medical Officers. The appellants, who figured in that list, were promoted as Medical Superintendents. Some of the promote officers were dissatisfied with the seniority assigned to them and filed a writ petition in the High Court of Andhra Pradesh for quashing the Seniority List of 1976. The appellants were impleaded as respondents to that writ petition. The writ petition was dismissed by a learned Single Judge, of the High Court. The aggrieved promote officers filed an appeal before the High Court, the appeal being numbered as Wr...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1987SC1869; (1987)1CALLT33(SC); JT1987(3)SC19; (1987)IILLJ337SC; 1987(2)SCALE5; (1987)3SCC507; [1987]3SCR475; 1987(3)SLJ228(SC); 1987(2)LC385(SC)
1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order of a Division Bench of the Calcutta High Court affirming on appeal the judgment and order of a learned Single Judge of the High Court declaring that the reference made by the Government of West Bengal in the dispute raised by the appellant is incompetent and invalid.2. The appellant is a working journalist employed by the respondents, Messrs. Bennett Coleman and Company Limited. The registered office of the company is at Bombay and its press is located in Calcutta. The sales office of the company is situated in Calcutta. On 1 November, 1961 the appellant was appointed a staff correspondent in the Calcutta office of the company. The letter of appointment dated y November, 1961 was issued by the company from its registered office at Bombay. Subsequently, the appellant was promoted to the post of Industrial Correspondent, Pune and was transferred from Calcutta to Pune from 16 February, 1976. Upon transfer to Pune the appellant rece...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1987SC1676; JT1987(2)SC606; 1987LabIC1307; 1987(1)SCALE1283; (1987)3SCC622; [1987]3SCR427; 1987(3)SLJ113(SC)
B.C. Ray, J.1. I These appeals by special leave are against the common judgment and order dated 14.1.1982 quashing the seniority list in the cadre of Assistant Engineers in the United Provinces (Buildings & Roads Branch) Class II prepared on 29.7.1980 and 18.12.1980 with 19.12.1980. A writ of mandamus was also issued to the State Government for preparation of fresh seniority list in respect of Assistant Engineers in the Civil Engineering Wing and Electrical and Mechanical Wing respectively in accordance with the guidelines mentioned in the said judgment. The facts giving rise to these writ petitions are in brief as fallows:2. Previously Public Health Department as well as the Irrigation Department of the Government of Uttar Pradesh were integrated into Public Works Department comprising both these two branches. In 1922 Irrigation branch was separated into a different independent department. Similarly, in 1927 Public Health Department was separated. In 1936 U.P. Service of Engineers Cla...
Tag this Judgment!