Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1991SC494; JT1991(1)SC234; 1990(2)SCALE1157; 1992Supp(1)SCC298; [1990]Supp3SCR392; 1991(1)LC298(SC)
ORDERK. Ramaswamy, J.1. This appeal under Article 136 is against the judgment in S.C.A. No. 655 of 1975 of the Gujarat High Court dated January 24, 1977 wherein the appellants questioned the power to levy octroi on brown coconut (watery coconut) and the High Court dismissed the writ petition holding that the brown coconut is not an exempted green fruit but would attract general item No. 55 of Rule 14 of the Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation Octroi Rules (for short 'the Rules'), The admitted facts are that the appellants import and sell the brown coconut in the city of Ahmedabad as their trading activity. The respondent levied octroi on brown coconurs at the rate of Re. 1 per 100 kilograms at the point of import into the octroi limits of the respondent corporation. By an amendment to the rules, with effect from April 6, 1975 the rate of levy was increased to Rs. 5 per 100 kilograms. The appellants challenged its legality contending that the brown coconuts are green fruits within the meani...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1991SC1026; (1991)1SCC446; 1991(1)LC176(SC)
ORDERLalit Mohan Sharma, J.1. This appeal by the State of Orissa against the judgment of the High Court arises out of a proceeding for making an award of an arbitrator the rule of the court. The respondent was allotted by the State certain contract work for execution and a dispute arose between the parties, the appellant denying the claim of the contractor to me tune of Rs. 6,33,424/-. The mailer was referred to the arbitration of a sole arbitrator, who made a non-speaking award for a sum of Rs. 4,45,448.66 paise in favour of the respondent. The award indicated that out of the aforesaid amount, the contract was held entitled to a sum of Rs. 2,50,487.25 paise towards his claim for the work executed, and to the remaining sum of Rs. 1,94,961.41 paise as interest from 01.06.1975 to 25.11.1981. It was also directed that on the failure of the payment of the amount within a period of two months, the respondent would get future interest at the rate of 12% per annum on Rs. 2,50,487.25 paise.2. ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1991SC710; (1991)2SCC321
ORDER1. The Indian Medical Council has moved this application for the modification of the order dated 8-2-1990 of this Court. This application is made in the context of certain directions issued by this Court in W.P.No. 1253 of 1989 on an application moved by the State of Maharashtra.2. It is relevant to recall that the State of Maharashtra filled-up with some of the State's candidates certain seats in its Medical College which were otherwise unavailable to it having been earmarked for the All-India quota. That arrangement having been found to be in conflict with the directions issued by this Court on 20-12-1989 in the matter of allotment of seats to the candidates in waitlist in the All-India quota, some seats so allotted by the State in favour of its own local students came to exceed the permitted in-take in the concerned medical colleges. if was observed by this Court in the course of its order dated 8-2-1990 that the State Government may absorb those admissions by an appropriate an...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1991SC1971; 1991LabIC2043; 1991Supp(2)SCC636
ORDER1. This petition for special leave arises out of the order dated 23-8-1990 of the High Court of Bombay made in C.A. No. 2635 of 1990 in Writ Petition No. 1568 of 1985. The matter before the High Court arose out of a request made by the appellants, who are about 235 former employees of the Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited, (Corporation) for a clarification of the terms of the settlement dated 14-2-1989 entered into by them with the Corporation; in terms of which the W.P. No. 757/84 before the High Court came to be disposed of.2. Pursuant to the settlement, a lump sum of Rs. 50,000/- became payable by the Corporation to each of the appellants in lieu and final settlement of certain disputes which culminated in an award respecting their claims for H.R.A., Gratuity, Duty-Allowances, interest etc. In respect of these payments, the Corporation made certain deductions of income-tax at source as enjoined by Section 192 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, on the premise that the payments cons...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 1992(3)SCALE237; 1993Supp(4)SCC446; [1992]Supp3SCR257
Anand, J. Permissiveness Of the judicial system which enabled the contemner to file innumerable petitions claiming the same relief arising out of the same cause of action undeterred by its refusal, on various occasions by this Court coupled with the indulgence and sympathy shown by this Court, appears to have emboldened the respondent - contemnor to cast unfounded and unwarranted aspersions and make scurrilous and indecent attacks against this Court and its Judges in wild, intemperate and even abusive language. Narration of facts to point out the extent to which the contemnor has abused the process of the Court and how indulgence and sympathy shown by this Court has been 'exploited' by him is not only desirable but necessary to appreciate how and why contempt proceedings have been initiated against him.2. Shri Roshan Lal Ahuja (hereinafter referred to as the 'contemnor') was appointed as a Draftsman Grade II in the pay scale of Rs. 205-7-240-8-280 in 1964 with the Defence Research and ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : (1992)ILLJ775SC; 1993Supp(1)SCC610
ORDER1. The petitioner which is a Union of employees seeks to espouse the cause of one of its members, the concerned employee, whose service had been terminated by the 2nd respondent, the Management, on January 20, 1979. According to the Management, the service of the employee had been terminated in terms of the Standing Orders which provide for automatic termination by reason of unauthorised absence from duty. The Union contended that the order of termination was void for the rules of natural justice had been violated as no notice had been issued to the employee and no inquiry was conducted.2. It is, of course, the case of the Management that a notice had been issued, but it was returned unserved. Whatever it be, it cannot be gainsaid that the termination of the employee was without an inquiry.3. The respondent Government declined to make a reference of the dispute concerning the employee to the appropriate Labour Court. Challenging the said order of the Government, the Union approach...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1991SC382; 71(1991)CLT669; [1991(62)FLR116]; JT1990(4)SC726; 1992Supp(1)SCC187; [1990]Supp3SCR348; 1991(1)LC273(SC)
ORDERK.N. Singh, J.1. The Orissa Judicial Services Association has filed this petition under Article 32 of the Constitution challenging the constitutional validity of Rule 7 of the Orissa Superior Judicial Service Rules, 1963 and for quashing Notification dated 24.2.1987 inviting applications from members of the Bar for direct recruitment to the Orissa Superior Judicial Service.2. The petitioner-Association, which represents the members of the Judicial Service of the State of Orissa has raised grievance that the Subordinate Judicial Service in the State continues to be in a pitiable condition and most of the judicial officers have been stagnating for many years for lack of promotional avenues. Though the members of the Subordinate Judicial Service have avenue of promotion to the Superior Judicial Service but since the Orissa Superior Judicial Service Rules, 1963(hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules') provide for direct recruitment to the Superior Judicial Service from members of the B...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1991SC1028; 1991(31)ECC351; 1991LC11(SC); 1991(51)ELT165(SC); JT1990(4)SC763; 1990(2)SCALE1109; 1991Supp(1)SCC125; [1990]Supp3SCR329; 1991(1)LC302(SC)
ORDERRanganathan, J.1. These three appeals can be disposed of by a common order. The appellant is a manufacturer of pipes, tubes and poles made of iron and steel. These products are generally used by the telephone and telegraph departments of the Government of India but can also be used for purposes of transmission and lighting. The question is whether these goods are liable to excise duty under item 26AA or under item 68, in the First Schedule to the Central Excises & Salt Act, 1944(hereinafter referred to as 'the Act').2. Tariff Item No. 26AA was introduced w.e.f. 24.4.1962 in the First Schedule to the Act. Item 26AA reads thus:'Description of goodsRate of duty 26AA. Iron or Steel Products, The Following Namely : (i) Semi-finished steel including blooms, billets,slabs, sheet bars, tin-bars and hoe bars.Three hundred and fifty rupees(i-a) Bars, rods, coils, wires, joists, girders, angles other than slotted angles, channels other than slotted channels, tees, fiats, beams, zeds, trough,...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : (1991)94CTR(SC)162; [1991]187ITR585(SC)
ORDER1. The following question was referred by the Tribunal for the opinion of the High Court (See : [1975]99ITR54(Guj) ) :Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal erred in law in holding that Rs. 1,83,000 paid by the assessee on March 26, 1965, should be treated as valid advance tax and should be deducted from 75 per cent, of the tax determined for arriving at the basis for imposing the penalty under Section 273(b) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 2. We have heard Mr. B.B. Ahuja, learned Counsel for the Revenue. He has taken us through the judgment of the High Court (CIT v. Kohinoor Flour Mills : [1975]99ITR54(Guj) ) and various other documents on the record. The High Court, in a detailed discussion of various provisions of the Income-tax Act, has come to the conclusion that the assessee was entitled to claim the deduction of payment of tax of Rs. 1,83,000 made on March 26, 1965, for arriving at the basis for imposing penalty. The question was answered in th...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : (1991)93BOMLR25; 1991(1)Crimes120(SC); 1991(I)OLR(SC)1; 1990(2)SCALE1099; (1991)1SCC550; [1990]Supp3SCR340; 1991(1)LC337(SC)
K. Jagannatha Shetty, J.1. We grant special leave and proceed to dispose of the appeal.2. The point raised in the appeal is a very short one, but nevertheless of general importance. It is with respect to the powers of the Special Executive Magistrates appointed under Section 21 of the CrPC, 1973 ('the Code').3. Before narrating the facts, we may set out the relevant statutory provisions bearing on the question. Sections 20 and 21 of the Code provide power to the State Government to appoint Executive Magistrates and Special Executive Magistrates.4. Section 20 so far as material reads:20. Executive Magistrates (1) In every district and in every metropolitan area, the State Government may appoint as many persons as it thinks fit to be Executive Magistrates and shall appoint one of them to be the District Magistrate.(2) The State Government may appoint any Executive Magistrate to be an Additional District Magistrate, and such Magistrate shall have (such) of the powers of a District Magistr...
Tag this Judgment!