Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : JT1994(4)SC628; 1994(3)SCALE371; 1994Supp(3)SCC109; [1994]Supp1SCR762; [1994]95STC80(SC)
Kuldip Singh, J.1. The Sales Tax Tribunal, Orissa referred the following question under Section 24(1) of the Orissa Sales tax Act 1947 (the Act) for the opinion of the High Court of Orissa, Cuttack:(1) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is correct in holding that there has been no contravention of the declaration given under Rules 27(2) of the Orissa Sales Tax Rules thus attracting the proviso to Section 5(2)(A)(a)(ii) of the Orissa Sales Tax Act?(2) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned Tribunal having held that there was no contravention of Section 5(2)(A)(a)(ii) of the Act acted within its jurisdiction in remanding the appeal?(3) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the sale by the petitioner-Company to the Japanese Buyer comes within the ambit and scope of Article 286(1)(b) of the Constitution of India read with Section 5 of the Central Sales Tax Act?2. A three Judge-Bench of the High Court by its judgmen...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 1995Supp(3)SCC521
A.S. Anand and; Faizan Uddin, JJ.1. Leave granted.2. In respect of an occurrence which took place on 26-5-1984, the trial court convicted the appellant for an offence under Section 302 IPC vides judgment dated 21-12-1985. The appellant has also been convicted for an offence under Sections 25/27 of the Arms Act and sentenced to suffer one year's imprisonment. His conviction and sentence was put in issue before the High Court in appeal. On 4-9-1987 the Division Bench of the High Court dismissed the appeal.3. We have gone through the judgment of the High Court and we find that after reproducing a part of the material from the judgment of the learned Sessions Judge, the only observations made by the High Court while dealing with the first appeal are as follows:“We have examined the entire prosecution evidence and also have gone through the judgment of the learned Sessions Judge.In our opinion, the learned Sessions Judge was right and justified in convicting the accused appellant unde...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 1995(1)SCALE521; 1995Supp(1)SCC529
ORDER1. Special leave granted.2. Heard counsel on both sides.3. The appellant moved an application before the Principal Bench of the Central Administrative Tribunal complaining that the Tribunal's judgment in O.A. No. 1095 of 1987 dated 6.9.91 has not been complied with. The Tribunal in the aforesaid matter had given the following direction:He shall also be considered for promotion as Assistant Sub-Inspector and Sub-Inspector from the date, his next junior was promoted.Thus, according to the aforesaid direction of the appellant was found fit for promotion to the post of Assistant Sub-Inspector and Sub-Inspector he had to be promoted from the date his next junior was promoted. If so promoted, he would also be entitled to arrears of pay and allowances as well as pensionary benefits. Therefore, if the appellant was confirmed as head constable, the authorities had to consider whether or not he was fit for promotion to the next higher post and if yes he was to be promoted from the date his ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 1995(1)SCALE213; 1995Supp(3)SCC741
ORDER1. We have heard Sri Ranjit Kumar, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Sri Yogeshwar Prasad, learned senior Counsel for the respondent.2. The Crime Branch of the C.I.D. of the State of Uttar Pradesh has submitted its report. The report establishes in a substantial measure, the allegations in the writ petition of illegal detention of Ram Chander and Sher Pal. The report also recommends that the concerned officers should be prosecuted and that one Deputy Superintendent of Police be proceeded against departmentally.3. This is yet another instance of brazen high handedness of the police and of arbitrary exercise of authority. It is quite possible - and we do not rule out such possibility - that the two persons concerned might have been privy to or guilty of criminal acts, though we are told that no prosecution for any offence is yet under contemplation, but the fact remains that during the investigation police have totally abandoned the rules of the game and have resorted to the im...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 1995Supp(3)SCC600
ORDER 1. One of the recommendations made by the Pay Commission was that the scales of pay of Rs 1400-2000 and Rs 2000-3200 should be treated as functional grades requiring promotion as per normal procedure for the staff in the IA and AD and other Accounts Organisations. The number of posts to be placed in these two scales were to be decided by the Government. 2. Accordingly, the Government examined the position and identified the posts and issued office memo that the appointments to the extent of the number of posts identified should be made with effect from 1-4-1987. It, therefore, follows that the revised pay scales as recommended by the Pay Commission could be paid to the holders of the posts so identified in the Accounts wing only with effect from 1-4-1987. 3. The Full Bench of the Central Administrative Tribunal by its decision dated 26-4-1991 in OA No. 12 of 1988 which was impugned in the present case, held as follows: “Accordingly, we direct that the resp...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : [1996]85CompCas176(SC); 1995(1)SCALE210; 1995Supp(1)SCC530
ORDER1. We have heard Sri G. Ramaswamy, learned senior Counsel for the petitioners and Sri K.K. Venugopal and Sri Ashok Desai, learned senior Counsel for the respondents. Petitioners claim to be a minority shareholder in the company and respondents are the company and its other directors and shareholders.2. The petitioners seek special leave to appeal to this Court from the order dated 8th December, 1993 in writ petition No. nil of 1993 of the High Court of Calcutta, which, in turn, partially stayed the operation of an interlocutory order dated 20th October, 1993 of the Company Law Board in a petition under Sections 397 and 398 of the Companies Act brought before it by petitioners-shareholders of the Company, 'Harbans Lal Malhotra & Sons Ltd.' complaining of suppression of the minority.3. It was urged before the Board by the petitioners that the collaboration arrangement embarked upon by the said company with M/s. Gillette was illegal and operated as oppression of the minority. The Com...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 1994(72)ELT797(SC); JT1994(4)SC528; 1994(3)SCALE292; 1994Supp(3)SCC40; 1994(2)LC493(SC)
1. These appeals are directed against the common judgment of the High Court of Delhi dated October 29, 1979 in the writ petitions assailing the amendments] introduced in the Export (Control) Order, 1977 on February 20, 1979 whereby a ban on the export of silver was imposed by the Government of India.2. Import and export of goods is controlled by the Imports and Exports (Control) Act, 1947. Section 3 of the said Act empowers the Central Government to make a provision for prohibiting, restricting or otherwise controlling, in all cases or in specified classes of cases, and subject to such exceptions, if any, as may be made by or under the order the import, export, carriage coastwise or shipment as ship stores of goods of any specified description. In exercise of the said power, the Central Government has been controlling the export of goods from the country. Insofar as silver is concerned its export was completely prohibited till 1974. The said ban was lifted in February 1974. By notifica...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1994SC2550; JT1994(4)SC376; (1995)109PLR338; 1994(3)SCALE296; (1994)5SCC709; [1994]Supp1SCR693
ORDERP.B. Sawant, J.1. This is a group of appeals and a writ petition. Although the facts differ, they raise a common question of law, viz., whether the provisions of Section 192(1)(c) of the Punjab Municipal Act, 1911 and the corresponding provisions of Section 203(1)(c) of the Haryana Municipal Act, 1973 for compulsory transfer of the land to the Municipal Committees without payment of compensation, are valid.2. For the purpose of this common judgment, we propose to narrate the facts in Civil Appeal No. 818 of 1986. That appeal is directed against the decision dated 12th April, 1985 of the Division Bench of the Punjab & Haryana High Court in a group of five writ petitions.3. On 17th November, 1969, the State Government, under Section 3(18)(b) of the Punjab Municipal Act, 1911 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') declared an area admeasuring 22.23 acres as inbuilt. The said area was described in the Notification as pocket No. 6. Thereafter, on 11th May, 1976, the State Government un...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : JT1994(5)SC432; 1994(3)SCALE285; (1994)5SCC328; [1994]Supp1SCR590
Kuldip Singh, J.1. Chander Bhan Gill (Gill) joined Central Government Service on January 25, 1985. The Central Civil Services (revised pay) Rules, 1986 (the rules) came into force on January 1, 1986. On completion of one year's service Gill was granted annual increment in the existing scale (unrevised) His claim for grant of annual increment in the revised pay scale was rejected by the Government. Gill challenged the action of the Government by way of an application before the Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi (the tribunal). The tribunal by its judgment date April 13, 1992 dismissed the application. This appeal by Gill is against the judgment of the tribunal.2. We may notice the necessary facts. Gill was selected for appointment as Assistant (Legal) in the Department of Legal Affairs, Ministry of Law and Justice, Government of India. He joined the Ministry as such on January 25, 1985 in the pay scale of 425-15-500-EB-15-560-20-700-EB-25-800. One S.S. Dhaiya w...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 1994(3)SCALE315; 1994Supp(3)SCC298b
ORDER1. We have today delivered judgment in Civil Appeal No. 4770 of 1994 arising out of S.L.P. (c) No. 1513 of 1991 titled Rollatainers Ltd. and Anr. V. Union of India and Ors. For the reasons and the conclusions reached by us in the said appeal, this Civil Appeal is dismissed and the Order dated March 27, 1984 of the Central Excise & Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi. We further set aside the Order dated December 5, 19(sic) of the Appellate Collector of Central Excise, Madras. We restore the Order of the Assistant Collector. No costs....
Tag this Judgment!