Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : JT1994(3)SC559; (1995)ILLJ1047SC; 1994(2)SCALE866; 1994Supp(2)SCC591; [1994]3SCR983; 1994(3)SLJ5(SC)
R.M. Sahai, J.1. Seniority and quota violation between promotees and direct recruits, that too amongst engineers, keeps on coming to this Court every now and then. But the dispute which has come by way of this appeal, directed against the judgment and order of the Gujarat High Court, is slightly different from the beaten path. Although the issue primarily relates to construction of a circular issued by the State Government on 4th April, 1979 providing for that, 'the waiting lists which are prepared on the basis of the result of the competitive examination by the Commission, such waiting lists shall remain in force till the date of result of the subsequent examinations are declared', the real issue that arises is if such waiting list could remain alive for 10 years and could furnish source of recruitment. Equally important, rather of far reaching consequence, is the issue whether the High Court could issue a direction to appoint candidates from the waiting list to future vacancies as th...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1994SC2393; 1994LC329(SC); JT1994(3)SC671; 1994(2)SCALE1044; (1994)4SCC276; [1994]3SCR964; [1994]94STC422(SC)
ORDERA.M. Ahmadi, J.1. These appeals by special leave are directed against certain assessment orders made by the Commercial Taxes Officer relating to the Assessment Years 1975-76,1976-77 and 1977-78 under the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1954 (hereinafter called 'the Act') and the Central Sales Tax Act, 1965 (hereinafter called 'the Central Act'). The question relates to payment of interest on tax on the amount of freight charged in respect of sale of cement under the relevant Cement Control Order. The returns were filed by the appellant on the promise that the amount of freight charged in respect of sale of cement under the said Control Order did not form part of the sale price for the payment of sales tax. The appellant contends that it had raised the contention bona fide but the same was rejected by this Court by its judgment and order dated August 22, 1978 in the case of Hindustan Sugar Mills Ltd. v. State of Rajasthan and J.K. Synthetics Ltd. v. C.T.O., Kota, 43 STC 13. By the said de...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1994SC2759; (1994)119CTR(SC)169; [1994]209ITR101(SC); JT1994(4)SC16; 1994(2)SCALE976; (1994)4SCC308; [1994]3SCR942
S.P. Bharucha, J.1. An interesting question arises in these appeals. It is this: has the Revenue an option to assess and recover tax from either the trustees or the beneficiaries of a discretionary trust when the income thereof is distributed and received by the beneficiaries in the accounting year? The appeals have been heard together and may be disposed of by a common judgment, taking as illustrative, the facts of the lead appeal (Civil Appeal No. 2145 of 1978, CIT Gujarat, Ahmedabad v. Mrs. Kamalini Khatau)2. The relevant Assessment Year is 1969-70, the previous year being the calender year 1968. The assessee was the beneficiary of 9 trusts. In respect of three of these she was the sole beneficiary, and there is no dispute about their income. In regard to the other six trusts, the assessee was one of the beneficiaries thereunder. In each of these six trust . deeds the clause relevant for our purpose read thus:From and after the date hereof (i.e., the date of the Trust Deed) and duri...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 1994(2)Crimes318(SC); JT1994(4)SC216; 1994(2)SCALE857; 1994Supp(2)SCC287; 1994(1)LC685(SC)
1. 30th January, which is an inauspicious day for the people of India, turned an ominous day for the family of Krishnareddy also as it was on that day of the year 1980 at about noon that he met his end in Annapurna Hotel belonging to PW4. Krishnareddy was not expected to be at the hotel at that time, but per chance he happened to be there, so also the accused persons, who belong to a different faction. Prosecution case is that Krishnareddy was belaboured by as many as 21 persons causing large number of injuries resulting in his spot death. The FIR, however, came to be lodged after two and a half hours after the matter had been discussed in detail by PW1 with one Loyashayya, which set the police in action resulting in booking of 21 persons for trial under various sections of law including 302/149. During the course of the trial, A 11 died and 15 accused were acquitted. The remaining 5 came to be convicted, of whom, A5 and 14 under Section 302; and A1, 10 and 11 under Section 326. For th...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 1995Supp(4)SCC69
J.S. Verma and; S.P. Bharucha, JJ.1. Leave granted. Heard.2. The respondent Pradeep Kumar Saxena was engaged as a Typist on daily wages on 5-8-1987 in the North Eastern Railway at Lucknow and was discontinued on 11-3-1988. The respondent made certain representations against the discontinuance of his engagement, on 17-1-1989 and 10-4-1989. It was only in July 1992 that the respondent made an application before the Central Administrative Tribunal, Lucknow Bench making a grievance against the discontinuance of his engagement as a Typist placing reliance on a decision of the Tribunal in Inder Pal Yadav v. Union of India1. The Tribunal accepted the respondent's claim and following its decision in Inder Pal Yadav1 allowed the respondent's application directing his regularisation together with consequential benefits. Hence, this appeal by special by the Union of India.3. It is obvious that the Tribunal's decision in Inder Pal Yadav1 has no application in the present case and that decision can...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 1994(2)SCALE1114; (1994)4SCC391; [1994]3SCR934; 1995(1)SLJ29(SC)
ORDER1. Leave granted.2. The A.P. Public Service Commission had issued an advertisement on April 20, 1992 calling for applications for recruitment to the posts of Asstt Motor Vehicles Inspectors in Andhra Pradesh Transport Subordinate Service. Though appellants had applied for the said posts, since they possessed only the qualification of diploma in Mechanical Engineering, they were not called for interview. The appellants, therefore, filed O.A. Nos. 2757/92 and batch in the A.P. Administrative Tribunal questioning the competence of the State Govt. in prescribing the qualification of degree in Mechanical Engineering or Degree in Automobile Engineering or diploma in Automobile Engineering or any equivalent qualification as conditions for recruitment, contending that it was the Central Government which had been conferred with the power under Section 213(4) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, for short 'the Act', of prescribing the qualifications for appointment to any office or class of off...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 1995Supp(4)SCC110
A.M. Ahmadi and; Yogeshwar Dayal, JJ.1. Heard the learned counsel for the parties. We find that the litigation has been spread over in four States, namely, Madras, Andhra Pradesh, Karnataka and Bombay. That would cause considerable hardship to the parties who would be required to visit different places where the litigation presently stands lodged. It is, therefore, desirable for the convenience of the parties also that the litigation should be in one court. On an earlier occasion in SLP (C) No. 2986 of 1993 this Court had passed an order transferring the matters therein to a Division Bench of the Madras High Court. As the original jurisdiction is with the Madras High Court, it would be desirable to have all the matters transferred to the Madras High Court so that the Court can take a comprehensive view of the nature of disputes between the parties. Mr Bobde, however, states that the writ petition filed in the Andhra Pradesh High Court may not be delayed on that account. We would permit...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : [1994]81CompCas551(SC); JT1994(3)SC570; 1994(2)SCALE854; (1994)4SCC246; 1994(1)LC767(SC); (1994)3UPLBEC1457
1. M/s. Kudremukh Iron Ore Company Limited, a Government company, prefers this appeal under Section 10 of the Special Court [Trial of Offences Relating to Transactions in Securities] Act, 1992 (for short 'the Act') against the order dated 26th August, 1993 made by the Special Court at Bombay in Miscellaneous Petition No. 58/1993. By the said order the Special Court held that in relation to the transactions referred to and relied on by the appellant, it had no jurisdiction to exercise powers under the 'Act'.2. The appellant on various dates in July, 1992 deposited with the Andhra Bank Financial Services Ltd. under what are called inter-corporate deposits aggregating to about Rs. 55 crores. The deposits were to carry interest ranging from 21% to 22%. It would appear that the Andhra Bank Financial Services Ltd. had, in turn, invested large sums of money said to be in the order of Rs. 240 crores, with a company called the Fair growth Financial Services Ltd. When the appellant's deposits wi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 1995Supp(2)SCC722
K. Ramaswamy and; N. Venkatachala, JJ.1. Leave granted.2. The respondents had applied for the direct recruitment posts of Assistant Executive Engineers. They admittedly belonged to reserved ‘B’ category of backward classes. When they applied for direct recruitment as in-service candidates, as per government order in vogue, at the relevant time, income limit was Rs 10,000 from all sources including the income drawn by the respondents. Since the applicants' parents were also in service, their income from all sources and of the applicants exceeded Rs 10,000. But on 12-12-1986, Government issued another GO, realising that imposition of the condition relating to income from all sources to in-service candidates belonging to backward classes would, in fact, amount to depriving them of the right to apply for direct recruitment posts. Consequently, they issued the order deleting the pay and allowances drawn by an in-service candidate, in computation of annual income of Rs 10,000. Co...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 1994Supp(3)SCC566
A.M. Ahmadi and; Yogeshwar Dayal, JJ.1. On 26-3-1993 in Writ Petition (C) No. 250 of 1987 we made an order, the operative portion whereof reads as under :“It would, therefore, appear that the State Government conceded the fact that because of its failure to apply the revised rules to this category of employees a disparity has entered in the matter of determination and payment of pension to such employees. Since the State Government has failed to take a decision in the matter, although more than reasonable time has elapsed, we are, as stated earlier, left with no alternative but to issue a mandamus to the State Government to consider the grievance made by the teachers not included in the revised pension scheme within a period of three months from today. It is needless to point out that since considerable time has already been taken by the State Government in this behalf, there will be no question of extension of time. If the Education Department in the State Government does not ta...
Tag this Judgment!