Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 1993Supp(4)SCC481
M.N. Venkatachaliah, C.J.,; S.C. Agrawal and; A.S. Anand, JJ.1. This petition under Article 32 of the Constitution is by the “Bhopal Gas Peedit Udyog Sangathan”, an organisation said to represent a section of the victims of the Bhopal gas leak and seeks to espouse a public cause, that of the victims of the gas leak disaster.2. It is averred that a scheme for grant of interim relief to the victims of the gas disaster at the rate of Rs 200 per month was sanctioned by the Union Government and the scheme commenced from April 1, 1990. The scheme envisaged payment of interim relief to all the residents of the thirty-six severely affected wards and was to the benefit of those who were actually present in the wards on the night of the occurrence. The scheme, as initially envisaged, was to last for a period of three years which has since run out on March 31, 1993.3. A supplemental scheme for those who, though said to be eligible, had been left out from the list of beneficiaries in t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 1993Supp(4)SCC87
M.N. Venkatachaliah, C.J.,; S.C. Agrawal and; A.S. Anand, JJ.1. This pertains to the recurring grievance of the candidates successful at the competitive tests for selection for admission to the 15 per cent All India Quota 1992 for MBBS/BDS courses, — this time respecting the 1992 selection — not being provided seats.2. The candidates air a strong and serious grievance that though the requisite number of vacancies exist, owing to lack of coordination between the medical colleges in the States on the one hand and the Director General of Health Services who administers and coordinates the admission on the other, a large number of seats within the 15 per cent All India Quota, (1992-93) are allowed to be appropriated by the States for the benefit of their own students with the result the candidates wait-listed in the All India Quota are deprived of their legitimate entitlement.3. This has been a recurring theme in the administration of the 15 per cent All India Quota over the ye...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 1993(3)SCALE248; (1993)4SCC111
ORDER1. The Scheme framed by this court in its judgment dated February 4, 1993 in Writ Petition (C) No. 607 of 1992 and connected matters is modified to the following extent only:-2. It shall open to the professional college to admit Non-resident Indian students to the extent of only five per cent of their total intake for a given year. By way of illustration if the permitted intake of a professional college is 100 for a given year, 50 seats out of it will be free seats and other 50 seats will be seats on payment. The five seats for Non-resident Indian students shall be out of 50 payment seats. The Nonresident Indian students shall be admitted on the basis of merit. But in view of different backgrounds they come from it is for the management of the college concerned to judge the merit of these candidates, having regard to the relevant factOrs. The fees payable by such students shall be as may be prescribed by the Committee referred to in Clause (6) of the Scheme.3. The Non-resident Ind...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1993SC2127; 1990CriLJ2148; JT1993(3)SC342; 1993(2)SCALE933; 1993Supp(3)SCC2; [1993]3SCR891; (1993)3UPLBEC1561
ORDERP.B. Sawant, J.1. This is a petition by some freedom fighters and dependants of other freedom fighters claiming pension under the Freedom fighters Pension Scheme, 1972. The Scheme was introduced by the Government of India on the occasion of the 25th Anniversary of the Independence. It commenced on 15th August, 1972 and provided for the grant of pension to freedom fighters and if they were not alive to their families and also to the families of the martyrs. The minimum pension sanctioned to the freedom fighters was Rs. 200 per month and for their families, it varied from Rs. 100 to Rs. 200 in accordance with the size and the number of eligible dependants in the family. Till 31st July, 1980 the pension was admissible only to those whose gross annual income did not exceed Rs. 5000/- From 1st August 1980, the benefit of the Scheme was extended to all freedom fighters irrespective of their income and as a token of honour (Samman) to them. From that date, the maximum quantum of pension ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1993SC1769; 1993(65)ELT305(SC); JT1993(3)SC297; 1993(2)SCALE843; (1993)4SCC120; [1993]3SCR802
ORDERA.M. Ahmadi, J.1. We have had the benefit of the industry, erudition and exposition of the constitutional and jurisprudential aspects of law on the various questions urged before us in the judgment of our esteemed Brother K. Ramaswamy, J. But while concurring with the hereinafter mentioned conclusions recorded by him we would like to say a few words to explain our points of view. Since the facts have been set out in detail by our learned Brother we would rest content by giving an abridged preface which we consider necessary.2. It nil began with the receipt of a letter dated December 26, 1991, from Shri R.K. Jain, Editor, Excise Law Times, addressed to the then Chief Justice of India, Shri M.H. Kania, J., complaining that as the Customs, Excise and Gold Control Appellate Tribunal for, short 'the CEGAT') was without a President for the last over six months the of functioning of the Tribunal was adversely affected, in that, the Benches sit for hardly two hours or so, the sittings com...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1994SC1280; JT1993(3)SC371; 1993(2)SCALE969; (1993)3SCC182; [1993]3SCR756; (1993)2UPLBEC1185
ORDERR.M. Sahai, J.1. Why the appellants should have been forced to file these contempt applications for enforcement of the order passed by this Court as far back as on 30th April 1990 in C.A. No. 2054 of 1990, is not without reason.2. Grievance of the applicants is that despite clear findings recorded by this Court, opposite parties are going back on it and persisting the implementation of the order in a manner which frustrates the entire purpose for which the applicants approached this Court and is a clear violation of directions of this Court issued on 30th April 1990.3. Entire dispute centered round the practice of exercising option by Assistant Station Masters who were recruited directly. Were they left any choice in the matter or was it compulsory. Tt was held by this Court, that various letters issued made it clear that the option had to be exercised at the time of appointment and where no option was exercised it was deemed to have been exercised. this Court found that the appli...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1993SC2285; JT1993(3)SC520; 1993LabIC1251; (1993)IILLJ544SC; 1993(2)SCALE921; 1993Supp(3)SCC9; 1993(3)SLJ12(SC); (1993)2UPLBEC1173
ORDERK. Ramaswamy, J.1. Special leave granted.2. In response to the advertisement No. 33 dated August 19, 1989 the appellant had applied for recruitment to the post of Examiner of Personnel in the Department of Civil Aviation. He was unsuccessful in the selection. He later on challenged paras 3(i) and 3(ii) of the advertisement on the ground that the qualifications prescribed are discriminatory and were tailormade. He also contends that in 1969, for the said post the qualifications prescribed were 1st Class British or Indian Navigator or a British Flight Navigator licence with not less than 100 hours of air experience. The method of recruitment was direct recruitment and the age prescribed was 45 years relaxable to Government Servants. He claims that he is having the First Class licence with 100 hours of air navigation experience. With a view to deprive him of the chance, the offending rules have been amended in 1978 substituting 300 hours of instructional flying and experience of not ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : JT1993(3)SC452; 1993(2)SCALE938; (1993)3SCC233; [1993]3SCR903
R.M. Sahai, J.1. How far could we protect the interests of subscribers who had subscribed to a chit run by a subsidiary company of the appellant ordered to be wound up when allegedly subscriptions were made good by them not merely out of their hard savings but also of sums got by even, pledging and selling the jewelleries and ornaments of their wives, in the fond hope of getting a lumpsum amount on a future date, to meet the expenses of marriages in the family or health hazards of family members and the like, is the issue that really bothered us at the hearing of the appeals.2. About 15 years ago the subsidiary company under winding up, diverted the amount of rupees ten crores received by it by way of chit subscriptions to its holding company (the appellant) resulting in its inability to pay the subscribers, when they became entitled to get the prize amounts. When some of the subscribers approached the High Court and succeeded in getting the subsidiary company wound up, the appellant h...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : JT1993(3)SC403; 1993(2)SCALE902; (1993)3SCC564; [1993]3SCR760
R.M. Sahai, J.1. Was there any, valid justification for the appellants, the Union of India, to withhold the payment of subsidy to the respondents, the small scale manufacturers of fertiliser, is the main question that arises for consideration in this appeal directed against the judgment and order of the Delhi High Court? Two other questions that arise in this connection are if the High Court committed any error in exercise of its* extraordinary jurisdiction to interfere at the stage of show cause and if a report prepared by the Project Development India Limited (in brief 'PDIL') behind the back of the respondents could be relied for rejecting the specification of standard fertilizer produced by the respondents.2. Before adverting to these issues we consider it necessary to mention that the payment of subsidy to manufacturers of fertilizers was introduced in 1982 under scheme framed by the Government of India in pursuance of which every manufacturer was required to give a written undert...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 1993CriLJ2085; 1993(2)Crimes424(SC); JT1993(3)SC369; 1993(2)SCALE960; 1993Supp(3)SCC359; [1993]3SCR900
N.P. Singh, J.1. The appellant, was convicted under Sections 120-B, 419, 420, 468, and 471 of the Penal Code. He was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonments for different periods under the aforesaid sections. The appeal filed on behalf of the appellant was dismissed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ghaziabad. The High Court, on revision application being filed on behalf of the appellant set-aside his conviction under Section 120-B, but the conviction and sentence under other sections mentioned above passed by the Trial Court were affirmed.2. According to the prosecution case, the appellant, established a firm by the name of Seemak Industrial Corporation, at Gazhiabad. The account in the bank was opened in the name of one Vijai Kumar and the aforesaid Industrial Corporation was registered in the Sales Tax Department. The appellant applied for loan before the U.P. Small Industries Corporation and got a sum of Rs. 39,352.50, in the name of Seemak Industrial Corporation. Later...
Tag this Judgment!