Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1990SC2072; JT1990(2)SC448; 1990(1)SCALE342; (1990)2SCC562; [1990]1SCR614
ORDERRanganath Misra, J.1. I have the benefit of reading the judgment prepared by my esteemed brethren Sawant and K. Ramaswamy, JJ. Brother Sawant has taken the view that Section 20 of the Karnataka Act has not become void with the enforcement of the ''Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, while Brother K. Ramaswamy has come to the contrary conclusion. Agreeing with the conclusion of Sawant, J., I have not found it possible to concur with Ramaswamy, J. Since an interesting question has arisen and in looking to the two judgments I have found additional reasons to support the conclusion of Sawant, J., I proceed to indicate the same in my separate judgment.2. These applications under Article 32 of the Constitution by a group of disgruntled applicants for contract carriage permits call in question action of the concerned transport authorities in not entertaining their applications under the provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.3. Motor Vehicles Act (4 of 1939) made provision for grant of contrac...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1990SC851; JT1990(1)SC359; 1990(1)SCALE433; (1990)2SCC352; [1990]1SCR588; 1990(1)LC647(SC); (1990)1UPLBEC603
ORDERSabyasachi Mukharji, CJ.1. This is an application under Article 32 of the Constitution of India for issue of a writ of mandamus directing the Central Government to hold-pre-medical and pre-dental entrance examinations in Hindi and other regional languages as, according to the petitioners, mandated by Article 29(2) of the Constitution of India. The petition is by nine petitioners. Petitioner No. 1 is Hindi Hitrakshak Samiti which is stated to be a society formed with the aim and object of propagating and ensuring the propagation of the national language Hindi and other regional languages; and to further the cause of the citizens of India who are educated in any one or more of the languages and who face difficulty in competitive examinations in which the medium of examination is English only.2. Petitioners Nos. 3 to 10 are the students who allege that they wish to appear in the coming PMT/PDT examinations in Hindi or other regional languages and are being adversely affected and disc...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1990SC1176; [1990(60)FLR494]; JT1990(1)SC286; 1990LabIC942; (1990)IILLJ1SC; (1990)2SCC653; [1990]1SCR535; 1990(2)LC23(SC)
ORDERK. Ramaswamy, J.1. Since common questions of facts and law arise for decision in these two appeals, they are disposed of by a common judgment. Civil Appeal No. 3221/82 and Civil Appeal No. 3524/83 arise out of the common judgment in Civil Writ Petition Nos. 677/79 and 97/79 and a few other petitions dated May 2, 1980, on the file of High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh. The writ petitions were dismissed and the appellants had leave of this Court under Article 136 of the Constitution. The facts lie on a short compass and reference to the facts on record in Civil Writ No. 97 of 1979 are sufficient for disposal of these appeals. Writ Petition No. 97 of 1979 relates to Punjab service while Civil Writ Petition No. 677/79 relates to Haryana.2. The appellants were direct recruits to the ministerial services in the subordinate offices of the Directorates of Agriculture of the respective states. Admittedly all are governed by Punjab Subordinate Agricultural Service Rules 1933, fo...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1990SC883; JT1990(1)SC343; 1990LabIC625; (1990)IILLJ318SC; 1990(1)SCALE288; (1990)2SCC396; [1990]1SCR544; (1990)3UPLBEC2151
ORDERRanganath Misra, J.1. These are five writ petitions under Article 32 of the Constitution by two trade unions, a society formed by Law students of the University College and two individuals asking for quashing of the Karnataka Government's Notification of 12th March, 1982, and for directions to confirm the daily rated and monthly rated employees as regular government servants and for payment of normal salary at the rates prescribed for the appropriate categories of the Government servants and other service benefits. It has been pleaded that about 50,000 such workers are employed in the different Government establishments and though many of them have put in 15 to 20 years of continuous service--which is proof of the fact that there is permanent need for the jobs they perform--they have not been regularised in their service and are not being paid equal pay for equal work as has been mandated by this Court by way of implementation of the Directive Principles of State Policy.2. A two J...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1990SC991; JT1990(2)SC27; 1990LabIC707; 1990Supp(1)SCC220; [1990]1SCR576; 1990(2)LC16(SC)
ORDERRanganath Misra, J.1. This appeal by special leave calls in question the judgment of the Guwahati High Court dated March 18, 1985, dismissing the appellant's writ petition. The appellant is a resident of Tripura State. In his application in a representative capacity before the High court he maintained that he belonged to the Laskar community which had always been treated in the erstwhile State of Tripura as a Scheduled Tribe and on that basis in the State records was included in the Deshi Tripura community long before integration of the Ruler's State of Tripura with the Union of India. Members of the Laskar community freely enjoyed all the benefits available to members of the Schedule Tribes until in 1976 the State Government decided to treat members of that community as not belonging to the Scheduled Tribes and issued instructions to the State authorities to implement the Government decision. That led to the filing of the petition before the High Court. In the writ petition appel...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1990SC997; JT1990(3)SC40; 1990(1)SCALE456; (1990)2SCC259; [1990]1SCR561
ORDERK. Ramaswamy, J.1. Special leave granted.This appeal under Article 136 is against the order dated October 6, 1989 made in R.P. No. 2403 of 1987. The facts are as under:2. The respondents Nos. 4 & 5, B. Kumara Swamy and G. Amarender, in this appeal filed R.P. No. 1615 of 1984 before the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad, contending for promotion from Senior Assistant to Assistant Commercial Taxes Officer, zonal seniority of Warangal local area comprising of Warangal, Khammam, Karimnagar and Adilabad is the criteria. The Adilabad division consisting of Adilabad and Karimnagar Districts of the Commercial Taxes Division cannot be treated to be a zone and the divisional seniority prepared by the department is bad in law. It was held by the Tribunal by order dated February 18, 1986, that the zonal seniority is the criteria. Though, for the administrative convenience a division consisting of the revenue districts of Adilabad and Karimnagar may be treated as one division a...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1990SC854; JT1990(1)SC253; 1990(1)SCALE276; (1990)3SCC517; 1990(1)LC341(SC)
ORDERP.B. Sawant, J.1. The admitted facts are that respondent Harjinder Singh and his sister Bibi Nasib Kaur owned some properties, namely, (i) two pieces of land in village Dhora measuring 26 kanals and six marlas, and 33 kanals respectively (ii) a vacant site in village Bighan measuring one kanal, (iii) a kachcha house in village Urapur, and (iv) a Bara in village Urapur measuring about 8 marlas. There is no dispute that the respondent and his sister had each half share in all the said properties. The respondent for himself and on behalf of his sister entered into a written agreement with the appellant Kartar Singh on February 28, 1965, for the sale of all the said properties for a consideration of Rs. 20,000/-. He received a sum of Rs. 20.000/- as earnest amount and agreed to execute the sale deed and get the same registered between May 15 and July 15, 1965. It was specifically mentioned in the agreement that he had agreed to sell not only his entire share in the property but also t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1990SC913; (1990)2CompLJ119(SC); JT1990(1)SC324; 1990(1)KLT825(SC); 1990(1)SCALE252; (1990)2SCC502; [1990]1SCR516; [1990]77STC253(SC); 1990(1)LC754(SC)
ORDERJ.S. Verma, J.1. These civil appeals and the connected writ petition involve decision of the substantially common question arising out of the conflicting decisions of the High Courts of Kerala and Madras regarding constitutional validity of similar provisions in the States of Kerala and Tamil Nadu which result in imposition of sales tax in the two States on cooked food sold to the affluent in the luxury hotels while exempting the same from sales tax in the modest eating houses patronised by the lesser mortals. In both these States the exigibility to sales tax of cooked food sold only in luxury hotels was challenged on the ground that it amounted to hostile discrimination. The Kerala High Court rejected the challenge while the Madras High Court has upheld it. This has led to filing of Civil Appeal Nos. 912-20 of 1988 against the Kerala High Court's decision and Writ Petition (Civil) No. 281 of 1988 under Article 32 of the Constitution by the unsuccessful hoteliers of Kerala while C...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1990SC968; [1990(60)FLR503]; JT1990(1)SC293; 1990(1)SCALE247; 1990Supp(1)SCC306; 1990(1)LC355(SC); (1990)3UPLBEC1563
ORDERS.C. Agrawal, J.1. By this application, the applicants are seeking implementation of the directions given by this Court in judgment dated July 28, 1988 in Civil Appeals Nos. 2366-67 of 1988 and Writ Petitions No. 91-92 and 551-561 of 1986. The appellants and the petitioners in these cases were teachers employed in various Government aided private schools in the State of Haryana who had approached this Court with the claim that teachers employed in Government aided private schools are entitled to parity with the teachers employed in Government schools in the matter of pay scales and other emoluments, such as, Dearness Allowance, House Rent Allowance, City Compensatory Allowance, Medical Reimbursement and Gratuity, etc.2. In judgment dated July 28, 1988 this Court, while considering the said claim, has taken note that prior to 1967 there was considerable disparity in the emoluments of teachers employed in the same State and the Kothari Commission was appointed by the Government of I...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1990SC1069; [1990(60)FLR514]; JT1990(1)SC290; 1990LabIC836; (1990)IILLJ144SC; 1990(1)SCALE234; (1990)2SCC199; [1990]1SCR464; 1990(2)LC171(SC)
ORDERK.N. Singh, J1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order of a Division Bench of the Punjab and Haryana High Court dated 11th August, 1980 dismissing the appellants' writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution challenging validity of the appointment of Bhagwan Das Sardana, respondent No. 3 to the post of Executive Engineer in Public Works Department (Public Health Branch).2. The post of Executive Engineer in Public Works Department (Public Health Branch) in the State of Haryana is borne on Class I Engineering Service, recruitment to which is made by direct recruitment and promotion under the provisions of the Haryana Service of Engineers Class I PWD (Public Health Branch) Rules, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules'). Under Rule 5, 50% of the posts of Executive Engineers in Class I are required to be filled by direct recruits while the remaining 50% posts are to be filled by promotion from members belonging to Class II service. Rule 8 provides for Const...
Tag this Judgment!