Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1993SC169; 1993CriLJ43; 1993Supp(2)SCC217
1. This appeal pursuant to the Special Leave granted is directed against the Judgment of the High Court of Bombay. There are five appellants, who were the five accused in the Sessions Case and were tried for offences punishable under Sections 147, 148 and 302 read with 34 I.P.C. The case arose out of an incident that took place at Chalisgaon on 4th March, 1974 resulting in the death of Bhanudas Nathu Kumawat, the deceased in the case. All the five accused were convicted and sentenced to imprisonment for life. The appeal filed by them was dismissed by the High Court. During the pendency of the appeal before this Court Appellant No. 1, Shaikh Nabab Shaikh Babu Musalman died. The appeal in so far as he is concerned abated.2. The prosecution case is as follows. The deceased and his relatives were on inimical terms with the accused persons and their group. The relations were strained for the last many years. In an earlier double murder case the deceased was sentenced to 10 years' R.I. and h...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1992SC2130; JT1992(5)SC179; (1993)IILLJ937SC; (1992)102PLR547; 1992(2)SCALE384; (1992)4SCC118; [1992]3SCR826; 1992(3)SLJ34(SC); 1992(2)LC692(SC); (1992)2UPLBEC1353
ORDERB.P. Jeevan Reddy, J.1. This batch of Special Leave Petitions are directed against the judgment of a Division Bench of Punjab and Haryana High Court in batch of writ petitions, the first among them being Writ Petition (C) No. 72 of 1988 (Piara Singh and Anr. v. State of Haryana and Ors.). A large number of writ petitions arising from both the States of Punjab and Haryana were heard together and a common judgment delivered giving certain directions in the matter of regularisation of the adhoc/temporary employees, members of work charged establishments, daily-wagers casual labour and those engaged temporarily in temporary schemes. We have heard all the counsel appearing in this batch at quite some length.Leave granted in all the Special Leave Petitions.2. Over the last several years a large number of appointments were made to class III and IV services in the States of Punjab and Haryana on ad hoc basis i.e., without reference to Public Service Commission or the Subordinate Services ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1993SC258; [1992(65)FLR592]; JT1992(4)SC509; 1992LabIC2494; (1993)ILLJ233SC; 1992(2)SCALE186; (1992)4SCC201; [1992]3SCR800
ORDERA.M. Ahmadi, J.1. Special leave in all the matters granted.2. The appellant, D.K. Sahni, began his service career in 1966 as an Assistant Mining Engineer and rose to the position of Chief Mining Engineer on his promotion to that post in 1980. The Board of Directors of the Company at its 143rd meeting on 22nd March, 1983 resolved to upgrade three posts of Chief Mining Engineers to the level of Deputy General Managers. At that point of time amongst the Chief Mining Engineers of the Company, the appellant in the order of seniority ranked after (1) A.H. Dharmadhikari (2) S. Kumar (3) G.N. Misra and (4) T.N. Prasad. A high powered Departmental Promotion Committee (DPC) was appointed to select candidates from amongst Chief Mining Engineers for placement in the upgraded posts of Deputy General Managers. This Committee interviewed candidates and made its selection. Meanwhile A.H. Dharmadhikari was promoted to the post of Deputy General Manager in the vacancy arising on the demise of K.V. ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1993SC1620; 1992(2)BLJR1292; JT1992(4)SC481; 1992(2)SCALE159; (1992)4SCC1; [1992]3SCR817; 1992(2)LC620(SC)
ORDERP.B. Sawant, J. 1. The question involved in the present appeal is of the interpretation of Circular letter dated 19th June, 1982 issued by the Fertilizer Industry Coordination Committee, Government of India [Department of Chemicals & Fertilizers] ['FICC'] to all manufacturers of single Super Phosphate. Did the Circular letter represent to the manufacturers that they would be paid differential rate of subsidy based on the actual ex-factory price of each of the manufacturing units or did it inform them that the subsidy would be based on the ex-factory price of each of the units which would be worked out by the FICC? To appreciate the controversy, it is necessary to have a glimpse of the relevant facts.Single Super Phosphate ['SSP'] is a low nutrient phosphatic fertilizer. Its two major ingredients are Rock Phosphate and Sulphur. The consumption norms of the two items for manufacturing one metric tonne of SSP are 0.57 M.T. OF Rock Phosphate and 0.125 M.T. of Sulphur.SSP was brought u...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 1993(1)ALT(Cri)168; JT1992(5)SC575; 1992(3)SCALE76; 1993Supp(3)SCC304
ORDER1. The sole appellant before us is convicted under Section 302 IPC and sentenced to imprisonment for life. The prosecution case is that on 18.4.1978 at about 9 p.m. the accused entered the hotel of P.W. 1 and made some 'ghalata'. The deceased obviously asked him not to make 'ghalata' and a quarrel ensued. Thereupon, the accused, who was armed with a knife stabbed the deceased several times and the deceased raised hue and cry. P.W. 1 witnessed the occurrence. P.Ws. 2 and 3, who were also working in the hotel saw the occurrence. The information was sent to the police and P.W. 1 gave a complaint on the basis of which the F.I.R. was registered. The A.S.I, reached the scene of occurrence and found the deceased dead. An inquest was held and the dead body was sent for post-mortem. Doctor found seven incised wounds. The doctor opined that Injury No. 2 an oblique incised wound in front of left shoulder passing through the anterior auxiliary wall to the arm pit was the fatal injury and was ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 1993Supp(4)SCC82
ORDER1. This is a batch of appeal under the Customs Act. The question is whether the goods imported by the appellants are 'strips' or 'sheets'. The Assistant Collector, the Collector of Customs and on revision the Central Government took the view that the imported goods were 'sheets'. The orders, particularly the order in revision, are reasoned orders in which detailed findings have been given as to why this conclusion was arrived at. 2. The petitioners filed writ petitions which were allowed by the learned Single Judge of the High Court. He came to the conclusion that the appellant's contention that the goods imported were 'strips' should have been accepted. In some of the cases the applications for refund filed by the appellants were out of time according to the period of limitation prescribed under the Act. However, the learned Single Judge took the view that this plea of limitation cannot stand in the way of relief being granted under Article 226 or 227 of the Constitution. 3. The ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1993SC91; 1992CriLJ3583; 1993Supp(1)SCC467
1. The appellant is convict ed under Sections 392 and 397 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for seven years and to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/-. He is also convicted under Section 342, I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for six months. Sentences are directed to run concurrently. The appeal preferred by the convicted accused was dismissed by the High Court. The present appeal is directed against the judgment of the High Court. 2. The appellant was gunman in the Pepsu Roadways Transport Corporation at Kapurthala. P.W. 11 Raghbir Singh was working as an Assistant Cashier in the same Corporation. It is alleged that on 22-10-1976 at about 8 p.m. the appellant robbed Raghbir Singh a sum of Rs. 32,936.84 and also caused injuries to him. He confined P.W. 11 in a room bolting it from outside. Raghbir Singh raised a hue and cry after the appellant left the place. One Kartar Nath noticed Raghbir Singh and on the information given by him went a...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1993SC98; JT1992(4)SC476; 1992(2)SCALE153; 1993Supp(1)SCC496; [1992]3SCR786; 1992(2)LC604(SC)
ORDERS. Mohan, J.1 In all these appeals the common question of law which arises is the scope of Section 5(3), as amended, of Karnataka Village Offices Abolition Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). Hence the appeals are dealt with under a common judgment.2. It is enough if we note the facts briefly in Civil Appeal No.3231 of 1991. The land bearing Survey No.187/2 measuring an extent of 13.21 acres of Anigaol Village was Patilki Inam Land. The land was resumed to the Government under Section 4 of the Act with effect from 1st February, 1969. Ninganagouda Ramanagouda Patil of Anigaol was the holder of these watan lands. He filed an application dated 6.2.1968 for regrant of land. He also paid an amount equal to 3 times the assessment and health cess. The Assistant Commissioner Railhongal Division directed the regrant by an order dated 15.4.1969. Thereafter the papers were forwarded to the Tahsildar of Sampagaon for information and necessary action.3. Ninganagouda Ramanagouda Pat...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1992SC2003; [1992(65)FLR556]; JT1992(4)SC494; 1992LabIC2045; (1992)IILLJ607SC; (1993)1MLJ1(SC); 1992(2)SCALE182; (1992)4SCC8; [1992]3SCR782; 1993(1)SLJ122(SC); 1992(2)LC
ORDERLalit Mohan Sharma, J.1. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties. Special leave is granted.2. The appellant is a school teacher claiming appointment as Head Master. He has been working as a Telugu Pandit since 1975 in the school concerned. He got the degrees of Master of Arts in Telugu in 1978 and Bachelor of Education in 1983. The post of Head Master fell vacant on 1.11.1986. According to the impugned judgment of the learned single Judge of the Madras High Court, he has been held to be ineligible for the post. The decision was confirmed on appeal by a short order by a Division Bench which is under challenge in the present appeal.3. The main ground for holding that the appellant was not qualified for the post of Head Master in 1986 is based upon the minimum qualification fixed in this regard by the Special Rules For The Tamil Nadu Higher Secondary Educational Service in its annexure by requiring the candidate to have: (iii) Experience for a period of not less than ten years as B...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1993SC296; 1993CriLJ54; 1993Supp(2)SCC747
1. Criminal Appeals Nos. 592/ 80, 617-618/ 80 and 676/ 80 were taken on Board. All these appeals' arise out of the common judgment of the High Court of Madras in Criminal Appeals Nos. 546/75, 588/75, 590/75 and 591-92/75. The appellants are convicted under Section 120-B of the I.P.C. read with Sections 381, 411 and 414, I.P.C. and Section 5(2) read with 5(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 and sentenced to various periods of Rigorous Imprisonment. A-1, A-4 and A-7 were also sentenced to pay fine. In Calendar Case No. 1/1971 on the file of the Special Judge ten original accused were tried for the above-mentioned offences. The trial Court acquitted A-6 and convicted rest of them. The convicted accused have preferred the appeals before the High Court but the same were dismissed.2. All the convicted accused preferred special leave petitions and leave was granted pursuant to which these appeals before us are numbered.3. In Criminal Appeal No. 748/80 A-1 is the appellant. In Cri...
Tag this Judgment!