Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1992SC38; JT1991(3)SC408; 1991(1)SCALE295; (1991)4SCC174; [1991]3SCR524
ORDERRanganath Misra, CJI M.M. Punchhi and S.C. Agrawal, JJ.1. A letter addressed to this Court complaining about prevalence of bonded labour system in Cutton, Anangpur and Lakkarpur areas of Faridabad District in Haryana State wherein the stone quarries workers are living in most inhuman conditions, was treated as a writ petition under Article 32 of the Constitution. this Court appointed two Advocates as Commissioners to inquire into the working conditions of the stone quarry workers with particular reference to the cases mentioned in the writ petition. this Court finding the necessity of an in-depth investigation into social and legal aspects of the problem also appointed Dr. S.B. Patwardan and Mr. Krishan Mahajan to study the working conditions prevailing in the various quarries within the Faridabad district with particular reference to violation of provisions of the Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act of 1976 and Inter-State Migrant Workmen (Regulation of Employment & Conditions o...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1991SC2027; JT1991(6)SC105; 1991(2)SCALE332; (1991)4SCC8; [1991]3SCR548; 1991(2)LC606(SC)
ORDERK. Ramaswamy, J.1. This appeal by special leave is against the judgment and decree of the Kerala High Court dated June 11, 1975 made in A.S. No. 764 of 1972. The notification under Section 3 of the Kerala Land Acquisition Act, 1961 (Act 21 of 1962) was published in the Gazette on February 28, 1967 acquiring six acres of land in the city of Calicut to construct staff quarters of P & T of Govt. of India. The Land Acquisition Officer by award dated February 29, 1969 awarded compensation @ Rs. 230 per cent and also the value of the trees by capitalisation method in a sum of Rs. 2,69,421.55 p. towards the land improvement together with 15 per cent solatium and 4 per cent interest. On reference, the Civil Court enhanced the market value by judgment and award dated February 9, 1972 at Rs. 500 per cent i.e., in total Rs. 3,00,000 towards land value and confirmed the award of the Land Acquisition Officer of 2,69,421.55 p. towards land improvement making in all 5,69,421.55 p. with solatium ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1992SC122; 1992(40)BLJR714; 1992CriLJ106; 1992Supp(2)SCC499
1. Special leave granted. 2. Heard counsel on both sides. The appellants were convicted by the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Tellicherry for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 447 and 448 read with Section 149, I.P.C. and were ordered to pay a fine of Rs. 250/- under each count. The appellants filed an appeal against the said order of conviction and sentence but the same was dismissed. Thereupon they filed a revision application and when the said revision application came up for admission, the High Court issued notice suo motu for enhancement of sentence. The notices issued for enhancement of sentence were not served on the appellants and were returned with the endorsement that the appellants have gone to Ooty for excursion. Thereupon the High Court directed substituted service of the notices and fixed date of hearing as August 16, 1988. Even at the time of service of the notices it was reported that the appellants had gone to Ernakulam in connection wit...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 1992Supp(1)SCC715
1. We have heard counsel for the parties. We have also listened to the statements made to us by Mohd. Usman and Mehnaz Jahan. Parents of the girl who are present, have also been heard. We devoted about 20 minutes in the open court and about half an hour in our chambers in this process. 2. The petitioner, Mehnaz Jahan had stated that they have been married and the marriage is also registered in court. She has been living with her husband Mohd. Usman for about eight months now, and she is carrying for seven months. She tells us that the husband is looking after her well during all this period and she is being fed properly by Mohd. Usman. It seems Mohd. Usman has shifted over along with the petitioner to Delhi. Earlier, he was working as an ironsmith but apprehending trouble from the father-in-law and others he has given up the job for some time past. He is agreeable to revive his work provided some police protection is given....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 1992Supp(2)SCC94
Ranganath Misra, C.J.,; M.H. Kania and; Kuldip Singh, JJ.1. A letter from the Principal of Acharya Narendra Dev University, Babnan, Distt. Gonda, (U.P.) was treated as an application under Article 32 of the Constitution. Grievance had been made by the educational institution through its Principal alleging pollution to the locality by respondent 3, a sugar factory by discharge of polluted effluent as also the ash component from the boiler.2. We have heard counsel for the parties. Counsel for respondent 3 agrees that effluent treatment instruments shall be fixed so as to meet the requirement before the factory is commissioned again some time in October 1991. Sugar manufacturing is a seasonal business depending upon the availability of sugarcane and the cane production is carried on for about five months period between October and March every year. On the basis of the representation made on behalf of the factory that effluent treatment would be completed before the manufacturing process i...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 1992Supp(3)SCC93
ORDER 1. We have heard Mr Sharma in person, learned Additional Solicitor General for Union of India and counsel for the States of Gujarat, Madhya Pradesh and Maharashtra. Mr Bagla, the present Commissioner who is present in Court has also been heard. 2. A letter received from Mr Sharma, while he was in Office as Commissioner of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes has been treated as a writ petition under Article 32 of the Constitution. His letter essentially raised questions with reference to the relationship between the Commissioner and the Union of India as also the State Governments, the effective nature of the Reports made from time to time by the Commissioner; implementation and non-implementation of the recommendations and the consequences arising out of the same and the constitutional methods which should have been generated for the purpose of treating the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes for the purpose of monitoring their welfare. That letter apparently appe...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 1993Supp(1)SCC454
ORDER 1. The appellant is owner and landlady of House No. III-E/9, Lajpat Nagar, New Delhi. Girdhari Lal Mehra, Advocate, was tenant of the aforesaid premises. He had been residing in the premises but in one portion of the same he had set up his office. The appellant filed eviction suit against the respondent-tenant under Section 14(1)(e) read with Section 14(1)(h) of the Rent Control Act on the ground that the premises in dispute was bona fide required by the appellant for her residence and that the respondent had a residential house in the name of his wife in Jangpura which could meet his need. The Rent Controller decreed the eviction suit in favour of the appellant. On appeal by the respondent the Rent Control Tribunal, Delhi set aside the findings of the Rent Controller holding that the demised premises had been let out for residential-cum-commericial purposes, therefore, the appellant could not evict the respondent for the purpose of her residence. The appellant challenged t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1992SC485; [1991(63)FLR613]; JT1991(3)SC579; 1991(2)SCALE304; (1991)4SCC132; [1991]3SCR460a; 1991(2)LC546(SC); (1991)2UPLBEC1336
ORDERM.H. Kania, J.1. Special leave granted. Counsel heard.2. This is an appeal filed by the Reserve Bank of India, by special leave. The contesting respondent, being respondent No. 1, is an association of its officers at its Gauhati unit. The respondent association (referred to hereinafter as 'the respondent') represents the interests of 45 officers belonging to Grades A to C employed in the appellant bank at its unit at Gauhati. It appears from the affidavit filed op behalf of the appellant that there was difficulty in persuading officers of the appellant posted outside the North-Eastern region to accept transfers to the unit of the appellant in the North-Eastern part of the country which unit was located at Gauhati in Assam. It also emerges from the record that the Gauhati station was regarded as a hardship station by the officers who were transferred to the Gauhati unit from other regions of the country. The Government of India found a similar difficulty in persuading its officers ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1991SC1983; 1991CriLJ2713; 1991(3)Crimes275(SC); JT1991(3)SC367; 1991(2)SCALE277; (1991)4SCC39; [1991]3SCR443
ORDERA.M. Ahmadi, J.1. Special leave granted. 2. The events leading to the filing of these two appeals, briefly stated, are that on the afternoon of March 25, 1990, the officers of the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence being in possession of information intercepted a motor car at about 3.45 p.m. driven by the appellant Amir Shad Khan with the appellant Aziz Ahmad Khan as his companion. On search of the vehicle 1400 gold bars were recovered. The statements of the two appellants were recorded and thereafter they were formally arrested on March 28, 1990 and produced before the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate. Bombay. The Chief Metropolitan Magistrate granted remand. While the matter was under investigation a proposal was made to the first respondent. Secretary (Preventive Detention), Government of Maharashtra for invoking the powers conferred on him by Section 3 of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 (hereinafter called 'the Act'). On the ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1992SC488; 1991(2)SCALE288; [1991]3SCR492; 1991(2)LC478(SC)
ORDERK. Ramaswamy, J.1. In this writ petition under Article 32 of the Constitution, the petitioner, a partnership firm seeks reliefs of mandamus to direct the State Government and the Commissioner of Excise of M.P. to allow the petitioner to set up a distillery pursuant to the cabinet policy dated December 30, 1984 and to grant D-2 licence; to declare the letter dated February 8, 1982 as unconstitutional, illegal and of no effect in law and to direct the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 to grant a licence to manufacture potable Alcohol within the state of Madhya Pradesh and to grant D-1 licence to supply country made liquor, etc. This case has behind it chequered history which is necessary to adumbrate.2. In the State of M.P. v. Nandlal Jaiswal and Ors. : [1987]1SCR1 this Court considered the legality of the policy, the subject matter in the writ petition. It was held therein that nine distilleries in the State of Madhya Pradesh including the one at Ujjain were set up on the lands and buildings...
Tag this Judgment!