Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1994SC2163; JT1994(4)SC206; 1994(2)SCALE1136; (1994)4SCC474; 1994(2)LC103(SC)
ORDER1. Geological Survey of India (GSI) as an All India Service consists of six independent disciplines (cadres) namely, Geology, Geophysics, Geophysics (Instrumentation), Geochemistry, Drilling and Mechanical Engineering. Promotions, upto the rank of Deputy Director General, are confined to the respective disciplines; Above the Deputy Director General are two other ranks, Senior Deputy Director General and the Director General. Entry into the service as Group-A officer is through one of the disciplines. The seniority of the officers is maintained within their respective disciplines. The feeder post for the Deputy Director General, in each of the discipline, is that of Director. Since the upward journey within the discipline ends at the post of Deputy Director General, the post of Senior Deputy Director General is filled by considering the Deputy Director Generals from all the disciplines. The Government of India maintains a seniority list of Deputy Director Generals based on continuo...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 1995Supp(4)SCC81
ORDER 1. Special leave granted. 2. Heard. Interim stay of the implementation of the impugned order of the High Court. 3. The question which arises in this appeal is whether sub-clause (1-A) of clause 8 in Chapter II of the Nationalised Banks (Management and Miscellaneous Provisions) Scheme, 1970, (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Scheme’), which is applicable to Directors on the Boards of various nationalised banks, is ultra vires Article 14 of the Constitution or not. 4. The relevant part of clause 8 of the Scheme reads as follows: “8. Term of office and remuneration of a whole-time Director including Managing Director.— (1) A whole-time Director including the Managing Director, shall devote his whole time to the affairs of the nationalised bank and shall hold office for such term not exceeding five years as the Central Government may after consultation with the Reserve Bank specify and shall be eligible for reappointment. (1-A) Notwithst...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : (1994)96BOMLR933; (1995)1CALLT18(SC); [1994]81CompCas318(SC); JT1994(3)SC654; 1994(2)SCALE1121; (1994)4SCC225; [1994]Supp1SCR136
S. Mohan, J. 1. Leave granted.2. The appellant is a domestic mutual fund registered with Securities and Exchange Board of India (hereinafter referred to as 'SEBI') under Registration No. MF/005/93/1, dated 5.11.93. The appellant is managed by a Board of Trustees. Pursuant to the SEBI (Mutual Fund) Regulations, the investment management company of the appellant, Morgan Stanley Asset Management India Private Limited was registered with SEBI on 5.11.93. Under such registration Morgan Stanley Asset Management India Private Limited is constituted as the asset management company of the appellant. Morgan Stanley Asset Management India Private Limited is a subsidiary of Morgan Stanley Group Inc. which holds 75% of equity, the balance being held by Indian shareholders such as Housing Development Finance Corporation (HDFC), Stock Holding Corporation of India etc. Morgan Stanley Asset Management India Private Limited was granted certificate of incorporation on 18th October, 1993 by the Registrar ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 1995Supp(2)SCC145
M.N. Venkatachaliah, C.J. and; S. Mohan, J.1. We have heard learned counsel on both sides. Delay condoned. Special leave granted.2. The respondent was at the relevant point of time and continues to be the Principal of B.R.D. Medical College, Gorakhpur. By an order dated 12-10-1993, the State Government sought to place him under suspension in anticipation of an inquiry into certain charges of misconduct against him. The High Court, in the writ petition moved by the respondent, has stayed the order of suspension. The relevant part of the order reads :“The counsel for the petitioner has vehemently contended before us that the petitioner has been placed under suspension only just to keep him out of the office on the frivolous and malicious charges and there is no material to bring the case under the mischief of ‘misconduct’.After hearing the counsel for the parties and after careful perusal of the record, without expressing any final opinion of the merits of the submissio...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 1994(3)SCALE1; 1994Supp(3)SCC448
ORDER1. We have heard learned Counsel for the parties.2. On behalf of the petitioners it is urged that the High Court had drastically reduced the number of animals to be slaughtered to 2,500 per day. As a matter of fact, there are about 10,000 workers who are employed in slaughtering. With this number of 2,500 animals to be slaughtered many of them will be thrown out of employment. It will only lead to illegal and unhygienic slaughter. Having regard to the fact that the Municipal Corporation of Delhi is stated to have spent Rs. 70 lacs for the improvement of the Slaughter House at Idgah, this Court must permit more number of animals to be slaughtered. The further submission is, at least, by shifts the slaughtering could be permitted. In such a case more number of animals could be slaughtered. That may ease out the problem in a way.3. On behalf of the respondents it is urged that no increase in the animals to be slaughtered is permissible since all the relevant considerations were borne...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : JT1994(4)SC184; (1995)IILLJ108SC; 1994(2)SCALE1105; (1994)4SCC448; 1994(2)LC226(SC)
1. Leave granted.2. This appeal by special leave is directed against the judgment dated 21.7.93 of the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh in C.W.P. No. 15366 of 1992.3. The State of Haryana is the first appellant. The father of the respondent was employed as a Constable in the officer of the Superintendent of Police at Ambala. He died in harness on 14th March, 1976. There are instructions issued by the appellant dated 22.12.1970 containing a scheme under which the widow of the deceased employee could sponsor the name of any one member of the family for service to any post in any department of the Government. This is subject to the qualifications held by the persons whose names were forwarded for appointment. In accordance with this scheme the widow of the deceased employee was issued an intimation that she could sponsor a name. Accordingly she forwarded the name of her son, Naresh Kumar Bali, the respondent herein. Oh 3.8.88 the mother of the respondent wrote a letter to the ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 1994(2)ARBLR139(SC); JT1994(4)SC146; 1994(2)SCALE1101; 1994Supp(2)SCC337; 1994(2)LC293(SC)
1. Leave granted.2. The matter arises under the Arbitration Act of 1940 (hereinafter referred to as the Act).3. The parties herein are shareholders of M/s. Emery (India) Pvt. Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the Company).4. Appellant No. 1 is the husband of the Appellant No. 2 Smt. Pushpa Swamp. The respondent No. 1 Krishna Swarup is the father of the Appellant No. 1 Virendra Swarup and the respondent No. 2 Girish Kumar Swarup is the brother of the Appellant No. 1 Virendra Swarup.5. Messrs. Emery (India) Private Ltd. is a Private limited Company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 on or about 17th September, 1963 at Bombay. The registered office and factory of the said company is at present situated at Krishna Kunj, Bedeshwar, Jamnagar, Gujarat.6. The objects for which the Company was established are inter alia as follows:(i) To manufacture, refine, produce, buy, sell, import, export and to deal in synthetic Emery, abrasive stones, abrasive powder, coated abrasives, bonded abras...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 1995Supp(3)SCC332
P.B. Sawant and; N.P. Singh, JJ.1. Leave granted. Heard parties.2. The Tribunal has dismissed the appellant's application only on the ground that the appellant had acquired the working experience of one year prior to acquisition of the basic qualifications which in this case is diploma in Automobile Engineering. For this purpose, the Tribunal relied upon the circular issued by the Government. The rules, namely, the Motor Vehicles Department (Recruitment) Rules, 1991 framed under Article 309 of the Constitution show that a mere possession of the working experience of at least one year in a reputed Automobile Workshop as mentioned under Rule 3(e) is enough. The rule does not make any difference between acquisition of such experience prior to or after the acquisition of the basic qualification. What is further, the record shows that even after the acquisition of the basic qualification as mentioned in Rule 3(c), the appellant has acquired the additional experience of one year in a reputed...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : (1995)ILLJ259SC; (1994)5SCC116
ORDERJ.S. Verma, J.1. We have heard Mr Kapil Sibal, Senior Advocate who appears at our request as amicus curiae in this matter, as well as the other learned Counsel appearing in this case. It does not appear to us that no significant progress has been made by the authorities concerned and it is not unlikely that the attitude of the authorities concerned is not enthusiastic as one would expect in a matter of such significance. In these circumstances, we consider it appropriate to make certain directions for the prompt compliance of all the State Governments through their administrative machinery. Thus, the directions which are hereby given are as under-(1) To identify the bonded labourers and update the existing list of such bonded labourers as well as to identify the villages where this practice is prevalent.(2) To identify the employers exploiting the bonded labourers and to initiate appropriate criminal proceedings against such employers.(3) To extinguish/discharge any existing debt ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : JT1994(7)SC58; (1995)IILLJ585SC; 1994(2)SCALE993; 1994Supp(2)SCC222; [1994]Supp1SCR84; 1995(1)SLJ233(SC); 1995(1)LC741(SC)
Yogeshwar Dayal, J.1. This Order will dispose of above said 58 matters. However, we are taking the facts from Special Leave Petition No. 16698 of 1992. This petition is directed against the judgment dated 29th June, 1992 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi in Review application No. 195 of 1992 in OA No. 2667 of 1991. This decision was rendered by the Principal Bench over a conflict of decision on two basic issues which arose for consideration, namely - (1) whether the applicants and persons similar to them are entitled to promotion from the grade of Jr. Engineers to the next higher grade in the Telegraph Engineering Service Group B (Assistant Engineers and equivalent post) on the basis of the year of passing the qualifying Departmental Examination envisaged in para 206 of the P & T Manual and not on the basis of their respective seniority as had been adopted and followed by the respondents; and (2) whether in the facts and circumstances, they are e...
Tag this Judgment!