Skip to content


Supreme Court of India Court April 1990 Judgments Home Cases Supreme Court of India 1990 Page 7 of about 85 results (0.077 seconds)

Apr 10 1990 (SC)

State of Haryana and Another Vs. Ram Diya

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : AIR1990SC1336; 1990CriLJ1327; 1990(3)Crimes35(SC); JT1990(2)SC434; 1990(1)SCALE760; (1990)2SCC701; [1990]2SCR431

ORDER1. Leave granted in Special Leave Petition (Criminal) No. 1158 of 1985.2. The State of Haryana has preferred these two appeals against the Judgment and Order of the Punjab & Haryana High Court dated 21.12.1984 in Writ Petition Nos. 399/83 and 251/83 respectively passing similar orders directing the State Government to consider the cases of the respondents for premature release.3. The facts which lie in a very narrow compass may be stated thus:4. The respondents were convicted under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to death by the Additional Sessions Judge, Karnal which sentence inflicted on each of them was subsequently commuted to life imprisonment on mercy petitions.5. It seems that the State Government issued various executive instructions from time to time either altering or amending the existing instructions by fresh executive instructions specifying the minimum period of actual detention to be undergone by a convict sentenced to life imprisonment before his...

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 10 1990 (SC)

Scientific Adviser to the Ministry of Defence and ors. Vs. S. Daniel a ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : JT1990(2)SC544; (1990)IILLJ295SC; 1990(1)SCALE731; 1990Supp(1)SCC374; [1990]2SCR440; 1991(3)SLJ29(SC); (1990)1UPLBEC617

S. Ranganathan, J.1. In the Special Leave Petitions, we grant leave and proceed to dispose of all these appeals by a common orderIt may be noted that, except in C.A. 3044/89, the Union of India is the appellant.2. The short common question arising in this large batch of appeals is : who is the authority competent to initiate disciplinary proceedings against the Government Servants who are the parties here (hereinafter referred to, for convenience, as 'the respondents')? There are two sets of appeals before us, one arising out of proceedings in the Ministry of Defence, and the other in the Ministry of Railways. The rules governing the former are the Central Civil Services (Classification, Control & Appeal) Rules (hereinafter referred to as 'the Civil Service Rules') and those governing the latter are the Railway Servant (Discipline and Appeal) Rules (hereinafter referred to as 'the Railway Rules').3. S/Shri G.B. Pai, Anil Dev Singh, P.A. Choudhury, Madhava Reddy, B. Kanta Rao, A. Subba ...

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 10 1990 (SC)

Mallikarjuna Rao and ors. Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : AIR1990SC1251; JT1990(3)SC34; (1990)2SCC707; [1990]2SCR418

Kuldip Singh, J.1. The questions arising for our consideration in these appeals are as under:(1) Can the High Court/Administrative Tribunal direct the State Government to frame or amend the existing statutory rules to alter the conditions of service of the civil servants in terms of the directions ?(2) When there are specialised posts in a feeder cadre and also in the higher cadre, can the Government restrict the promotions from feeder cadre to the higher cadre only speciality wise irrespective of the seniority ?2. The conditions of service of the Andhra Pradesh Animal Husbandry Department were initially governed by the Andhra Pradesh Animal Husbandry Service Rules, 1961 (hereinafter called 1961 Rules). Under these Rules Veterinary Assistant Surgeons were eligible for promotion to three different categories of posts called Class IV posts and R. 6 provided special eligibility qualifications for those posts. Only those Veterinary Assistant Surgeons were considered for promotion to Class ...

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 09 1990 (SC)

Kisan Dayanu Mano Vs. Vithal Vishnu Mohandalo

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : 1990Supp(1)SCC654

K. Jagannatha Shetty Shetty and; V. Ramaswami, JJ.1. Special leave granted.2. The petitioner is a barber by profession. He is occupying a shop premises measuring 10 ft. × 18 ft. in which he has been carrying on hair cutting saloon. The monthly rent payable in respect of the premises is Rs 17 and it appears to be the standard rent. The landlord brought an action for eviction of the petitioner for not paying rent for six months and also on account of change in use of the premises. It was alleged that the tenant stopped using it as a barber shop and started using it for the purpose of only residence. The trial Judge ordered eviction. On appeal, however, the District Judge, Kohlapur set aside the eviction decree. But the High Court on a revision agreed with the trial Judge on the question of change of user. It has been held that the tenant has joined the service in State Transport Undertaking as a driver and ceased to carry on his business and used the premises for residence.3. It is...

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 09 1990 (SC)

Bajiban Salambhai Chauhan and ors. Vs. U.P. State Road Transport Corpo ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : 1990Supp(1)SCC769

ORDER  It appears that the petitioners are very poor staying in the State of Gujarat and are not able to prosecute their claim case, arising out of a motor accident on account of their extreme poverty. They have made an application for restoration of the cases in the past by post and it is stated on behalf of the respondent that the restoration application has also been dismissed on default. We are of the view that the petitioners should not be left without any remedy in this matter and should be provided with legal aid. Let a request be made to the District Judge, Saharanpur or if the case has been sent to Hardwar on bifurcation of the district, to the District Judge, Hardwar to take appropriate step, so that legal aid may be available to the petitioners. Application for restoration of the claim cases should be renewed. We are at this stage adjourning the case till after the summer vacation. The office shall list the case alongwith a report in the above matter from the District J...

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 09 1990 (SC)

Vimla Sharma Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : 1990Supp(1)SCC770

K. Jagannatha Shetty Shetty and; S.C. Agrawal, JJ.1. Delay condoned.2. Special leave granted. Office report says that the notice issued to respondents 5 to 7 have not yet been returned nor the A/D cards. Taking into consideration the time taken hitherto, we declare that the service is sufficient.3. Smt. Vimla Sharma was a primary school teacher but with effect from August 1973 she was posted in the Junior High School for teaching Geography. By communication dated November 10, 1975, Regional Inspectress of Girls School recommended her case for regular appointment but unfortunately no action has been taken by the management. On the contrary, somebody is sought to be appointed displacing her. At that stage, she approached the High Court by way of writ petition under Article 226 for relief. The High Court dismissed the writ petition on the ground of laches.4. We have examined the case and perused the material on record. We are of the opinion that the High Court appears to be in error in di...

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 09 1990 (SC)

V. Subramanian Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and anr.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : 1990Supp(1)SCC775

Ranganath Misra,; V. Ramaswamy and; P.B. Sawant, JJ.1. This petition has been received by post by way of public interest litigation on the basis of a news item appearing in the Tribune relating to the agonies of the Vrindaban Widows. We are of the view that this petition should be transferred to the Allahabad High Court for disposal in accordance with law by treating the same under Article 226 of the Constitution. The High Court do well to issue notice and on the basis of the counter-affidavit from the respondent, the matter shall be dealt with....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 09 1990 (SC)

Kasturi Lal Sharma Vs. State of U.P.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : 1990Supp(1)SCC784

Ranganath Misra,; V. Ramaswamy and; P.B. Sawant, JJ.1. This petition has been received by post by way of public interest litigation on the basis of a news item appearing in the Tribune relating to the agonies of the Vrindaban Widows. We are of the view that this petition should be transferred to the Allahabad High Court for disposal in accordance with law by treating the same under Article 226 of the Constitution. The High Court do well to issue notice and on the basis of the counter-affidavit from the respondent, the matter shall be dealt with....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 09 1990 (SC)

Sarda Plywood Ltd. and anr. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : 1991(33)ECC29; JT1991(5)SC197; 1991(1)SCALE468; 1991Supp(1)SCC225; [1990]Supp3SCR6; 1991(2)LC256(SC)

ORDER1. The question raised before the High Court, and reiterated here, was whether certain logs of timber imported by the petitioners from Korea, Burma, Malaysia etc. for use in the manufacture of plywood were amenable to Quarantine regulations under the statutory notification dated 27.10.1989 issued under the provisions of an agricultural quarantine law viz., the Destructive Insects and Pests Act, 1914 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act')- It was contended before the High Court that the quarantine regulations for the detention, inspection, fumigation, etc of the logs of timber imported for the specific purpose of manufacture of plywood can have no nexus to the object of the Act which was to prevent the introduction into India and prevent the transport from one State to another insects, fungus or other pests destructive of crops. The High Court dismissed the Writ Petition in limine.2. Section 3 of the Act, as amended by Act 6 of 1938, envisages that Government may, by notification i...

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 06 1990 (SC)

Government of Andhra Pradesh and anr. Vs. M. Hayagreev Sarma

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : JT1990(2)SC138; (1990)IILLJ158SC; 1990(1)SCALE746; (1990)2SCC682; [1990]2SCR366; 1990(1)LC731(SC)

K.N. Singh, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order of the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad dated October 18, 1985 declaring Rule 5 of the Andhra Pradesh Public Employment (Recording and alteration of date of birth) Rules 1984 (hereinafter referred to as '1984 Rules') void and directing the appellants to consider the respondent's application for alteration of his date of birth in the service records in accordance with the extracts from birth register maintained under the Births, Deaths and Marriages Registration Act, 1886.2. The respondent was appointed as Audit Clerk in the Department of Examiner of Accounts, Local Fund Accounts, through a competitive examination held in the year 1956. After his selection and appointment he commenced his training with effect from 12-11-1956. On completion of his training he was posted as Audit Clerk on 26-1-1957. Subsequently, he was promoted to the post of District Inspector of Local Fund Accounts. At the time of ...

Tag this Judgment!


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organize Client Files //