Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1994SC777; JT1993(3)SC455; 1993(2)SCALE961; (1993)3SCC184; [1993]3SCR787; (1993)2UPLBEC1207
ORDERS. Mohan, J.1. Leave granted in SLP filed by Indian Medical Council, Jabalpur.2. All these appeals are dealt with under a common judgment since they arise out of the same judgment passed in Misc. Petition No. 4420 of 1991 by the Madhya Pradesh Court, Jabalpur Bench.3. One'Dr. S.K. Nelson, father of respondent 1 was serving in Madhya Pradesh State Public Health in the Department of Surgery in the Medical College at Jabalpur. His wife, Dr. (Mrs) ShobhaNelson was also working as a Lecturer in the Department of'Obstetrics and Gynccology in Medical College, in a purely temporary capacity.4. Dr. Nelson applied for foreign assignment. He was selected for the same. Therefore, a request was made by the Government of India (Department of Personnel and Administrative Reforms) vide its letter dated 2nd of January, 1975 requesting the State Government to spare the services of Dr. S.K. Nelson for foreign assignment with Zanzibar Government. The Under Secretary to the Government of Madhya Prades...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1993SC2264; JT1993(3)SC515; 1993(2)SCALE985; 1993Supp(3)SCC400; (1993)2UPLBEC1186
1. Special leave granted.2. The controversy in the present case is whether the appellant was qualified to appear for the M.D. (General Medicine) Examination as a teacher candidate. The High Court by the impugned order has taken the view that he was not, on the ground that he had not completed 3 years training period including one year of the house-job, prior to qualifying himself for appearing for the examination.3. The respondents, P.G. Medical Students Association had challenged the permission given to the appellant to appear for the said examination on two grounds. The first ground was that he was not a teacher and the second ground was that he had not undergone the necessary training for 2 years and had also not done house man ship in General Medicine for one year. The requirement of the relevant regulation is that the candidate must have done one year's housemanship prior to the admission to the Post graduate degree in the same subject in which he wants to appear for the examinati...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1993SC2295; 1994(1)BLJR221; 1993CriLJ3233; 1993(2)Crimes481(SC); II(1993)DMC162SC; JT1993(3)SC443; 1993(2)SCALE994; (1993)3SCC418; [1993]3SCR917
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Criminal Appeal No. 443 of 1993.From the Judgment and Order dated 22.4.92 of the Calcutta High Court in Crl. Revision No. 800/92. A.K. Sen, S.C. Ghosh, Rajiv K. Dutta and B.B. Tawakley for the Appellant.Amlan Ghosh and Ranjan Mukherjee for the Respondents. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by MOHAN, J. leave granted.The appellant herein was, married to second respondent on 16th January, 1990 according to Hindu Rites and Customs. They lived together for sometime until second respondent left the matrimonial home to reside with her parents in order to prepare for Higher Secondary Examination which commenced on 5.4.90920and continued upto 10.5.90. In the month of April, 1990 she conceived, on coming to know that she was pregnant, the appellant and the family members did not want her to beget a child. Therefore she was forced to undergo abortion which was refused by the second respondent. During the stay She was meted out cruetreatment both physically ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : (1993)3SCC400
P.B. Sawant and; Yogeshwar Dayal, JJ.1. Special leave granted.2. The controversy in the present case is whether the appellant was qualified to appear for the M.D. (General Medicine) Examination as a teacher candidate. The High Court by the impugned order has taken the view that he was not, on the ground that he had not completed 3 years' training period including one year of the house-job, prior to qualifying himself for appearing for the examination.3. The respondents, P.G. Medical Students' Association had challenged the permission given to the appellant to appear for the said examination on two grounds. The first ground was that he was not a teacher and the second ground was that he had not undergone the necessary training for 2 years and had also not done housemanship in General Medicine for one year. The requirement of the relevant regulation is that the candidate must have done one year's housemanship prior to the admission to the Post-graduate degree in the same subject in which...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1993SC2155; JT1993(3)SC487; 1993LabIC1808; (1993)IILLJ549SC; 1993(2)SCALE924; (1993)4SCC10; [1993]3SCR863; (1993)2UPLBEC1460
ORDERG.N. Ray, J.1. Special leave granted. Heard learned Counsels for the parties.2. On the application for special leave to appeal notice was issued by this Court on the respondents indicating therein that the said application for special leave to appeal will be disposed of finally at the notice stage itself on the short question as to why the disciplinary proceedings and the order passed therein should not be set aside and a fresh enquiry should be ordered on the ground that one of the participants of the enquiry committee was biased. Such notice was served on the respondents and the respondent Nos. l and 4 have entered appearance through a learned Counsel and also filed counter affidavit to the special leave petition.3. The appellant was appointed as Principal of Dr. Hari Ram (Co-education) Higher Secondary School, Datarpur in Tehsil of Dasuya in the District of Hoshiarpur. He was placed under suspension by the Managing Committee of the said School and charge sheet containing 12 cha...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1993SC2164; 1993(2)BLJR1403; 1993CriLJ2239; 1993(2)Crimes473(SC); I(1993)DMC550SC; JT1993(4)SC475; 1993(2)SCALE941; (1993)3SCC573; [1993]3SCR878
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Criminal Appeal No. 738 of 1992.From the Judgment and Order dated 16.11.1992 of the Bombay High Court in Crl. A. No. 148 of 1989.A.N. Mulla, Ms. Shefali Khanna and J.M. Khanna for the Appellant.S.B. Bhasme, S.M. Jadhav and A.S. Bhasme for the Respondents.The Judgment of the Court was delivered by YOGESHWAR DAYAL, J.This is an appeal by the four accused persons against the judgment of the Bombay High Court dated 16th November. 1992. Appellant No. 1 who was accused No. 1 was tried for the offence of having880committed the murder of his daughter-in-law Sangita, wife of appellant No. 2 who was accused No.2, during the night between 14th September, 1984 and 15th September, 1984 at the residential house of the appellants at Murtizapur with common intention and also for having treated her with cruelty on account of dowry amount. In the alternative the appellants were also charged for the offence of having abetted the deceased Sangita in commission of suicide b...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : JT1993(3)SC412; 1993(2)SCALE971; 1993Supp(3)SCC651
N. Venkatachala, J.1. We grant Special Leave. Since we heard learned Counsel for parties on the merits of the appeal, we are finally deciding it.2. An extent of 4 acres and another extent of 6 acres 26 guntas are agricultural lands comprised in Survey No. 24/2A and Survey No. 34/2B of Kubihal Village in Kundgol Taluk of Dharwad District. They are the disputed lands in/this appeal. The disputed lands were Watans appertaining to hereditary village offices under the Bombay Hereditary Offices, Act, 1874 knows as Watan Act. Basappa Bheemappa, who was the Watandar of the disputed lands, leased them in the year 1950 in favour of appellant - 1 and father of appellant-2, for their personal cultivation. With the coming into force on 25th January, 1951 of the Bombay Paragana and Kulkarni Watans (Abolition) Act, 1950, known as the Watan (Abolition) Act, all the Watans were resumed by the State of Bombay resulting in extinguishment of all the rights held by Watandars in such Watans. But, there was ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
The Text below is only a summarized version of the order pronouncedAppeal was filed against the order of the Election Commissioner by which the election to the Meerut Parliamentary Constituency was countermanded. It was held that if any infirmity or illegality is found in the electoral process then the same should be stopped to remove illegality and the electoral process should be restarted and should be completed expeditiously. Thus, the Election Commissioner after countermanding the polls u/s 58A(2)(b) of Representation of the People Act, 1951 should have also issued a fresh polling programme. Thus, the Election Commissioner was directed to complete the electoral process and to hold a re-poll expeditiously....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1993SC2086; 1999(4)SCALE415; (1993)3SCC584; [1993]3SCR742
ORDERR.M. Sahai, J.1. Imams, 'incharge of religious activities of the mosque'(1) have approached this Court by way of this, representative, petition under Article 32 of the Constitution for enforcement of fundamental right against their exploitation by Wakf Boards. Relief sought is direction to Central and State Wakf Boards to treat the petitioner as employees of the Board and to pay them basic wages to enable them to survive. Basis of claim is glaring disparity between the nature of work and amount of remuneration. Higher pay scale is claimed for degree holders.2. Imams perform the duty of offering prayer (Namaz) for congregation in mosques. 'Essentially the mosque is a center of community worship where muslims perform ritual prayers and where historically they have also gathered for political, social and cultural functions'. (2) The functions of the mosque is summarised by the 13th Century jurist Ibn Taymiyah 'as a place gathering where prayer was celebrated and where public affairs ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 1993(66)ELT31(SC); JT1993(3)SC416; 1993(2)SCALE884; 1993Supp(3)SCC97; [1993]3SCR719; [1993]90STC100(SC)
Yogeshwar Dayal, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment of the Single Judge of the Allahabad High Court passed in Sales Tax Revision No. 214 of '1979 dated 14th December, 1979. By the impugned judgment the High Court set aside the order of the Judge (Revisions), Sales Tax, U.P. Lucknow holding that the Phosphorous Bronze which the assessee/appellant herein have been manufacturing, fell within the ambit of Notification No.ST-II333/X-1012-1971 dated the 15th November, 1971 issued in exercise of the powers under the second proviso to Sub-section (2) of Section 3-A of the U.P. Sales Tax Act, 1948 (U.P. Act No.XV of 1948), and took the view that the relevant entry at serial No. 2(a) of the said Notification did not cover the goods prepared by the appellant herein and was thus liable to be taxed as an unclassified commodity at the rate of 3.5%. The relevant entry reads as under:______________________________________________________________________ SI. No. Description of goods Rate...
Tag this Judgment!