Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 1995(3)Crimes708(SC); 1995(5)SCALE177; 1995Supp(3)SCC599; [1995]Supp3SCR115
ORDER1. As directed by the Court, the Registry issued notice to the standing counsel for the State of Himachal Pradesh, but no appearance has been entered so far. Nobody has appeared also.2. Leave granted.3. The appellants have been convicted under Sections 451, 426 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo two months imprisonment. The High Court postponed the sentence under Section 4 of Probation of Offender's Act subject to filing an undertaking of good conduct. Since the appellants had not executed the undertaking, the High Court dismissed the appeal. Thus, this appeal by special leave.4. In view of the finding of the High Court that the appellants are entitled to Probation of Offender's Act and were directed to execute a bond, and in view of the explanation given by the appellants in the form of an affidavit filed in this Court, we accept the explanation of non-receipt of the advocate's lette's They have also filed an affidavit in this Court giving an u...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1996SC85; [1995(71)FLR650]; JT1995(6)SC225; 1995LabIC2485; 1995(5)SCALE67; 1995Supp(4)SCC748; [1995]Supp2SCR96; 1996(1)SLJ103(SC); (1995)3UPLBEC1656
ORDERB.P. Jeevan Reddy, J.1. Leave granted in Special Leave Petitions.2. A common question arises in this batch of appeals. For the sake of convenience, we may state the facts in Civil Appeal No. 1102 of 1995 State of Punjab and Ors. v. Prof. Dev Dutta Kaushal, Lecturer, the facts of which case alone were placed before us as representative of the facts in other appeals.3. The respondent joined a private educational institution, M.R. College, Fazilka, as a Lecturer on November 26, 1956. After one year, his services were confirmed. His date of birth is October 29, 1931. According to the conditions of service obtaining in the said private educational institution, the age of retirement was fixed at sixty years which could be extended upto sixty five years in certain situations. The said college was taken over by the State Government on June 30, 1983 and since then is being run as a Government college. The respondent was continued in service after such take over. On October 31, 1989, he was...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1996SC206; JT1995(7)SC655; (1996)1MLJ94(SC); 1995(5)SCALE178; (1995)5SCC585; [1995]Supp3SCR110; 1995(2)LC718(SC)
1. Leave granted.2. On December 2, 1977, a notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, 'the Act') was issued acquiring 267.2675 acres of land in village Bhatotarwan for defence purposes. The award was made by the Land Acquisition Collector on October 23, 1979. Against the award, the District Judge- arbitrator by his award date February 7, 1981, enhanced the compensation and further awarded Rs. 700 per acre for loss of livelihood/profession. Dissatisfied thereof, both the State as well as the respondent writ petitions in the High Court which by judgment dated March 15, 1982 enhanced the compensation to Rs. 11,000 and 10,000 per acre respectively. Following that, respondent's R.S.A. No. 1209 of 1981, was disposed of on November 5, 1982.3. An application under Sections 151 and 152, Civil Procedure Code [for short, 'CPC'] was filed in 1986 before High Court for amendment of the decree in the cross-objections to award them 30% of the solatium 9% interest for t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1996SC332; [1995(71)FLR822]; JT1995(6)SC547; (1996)ILLJ870SC; (1996)1MLJ42(SC); 1995(5)SCALE198; (1995)5SCC653; [1995]Supp3SCR85; 1995(2)LC742(SC); (1996)1UPLBEC606
1. Leave granted.2. We have heard the counsel on both sides. The Labour Court and the High Court in the impugned judgment dated July 29, 1994 made in CWP Nos. 10033-35 of 1994 concluded that since the respondents had worked for more than 240 days in a year, they were retrenched workmen within the meaning of Section 2(oo) of Industries Dispute Act, 1947 (for short, 'the Act') Consequently, requirements of Section 25F of the Act need to be satisfied but it was not done. So, held that the retrenchment is void and consequently reinstatement of the respondents was directed. Thus, this appeal by special leave.3. When we directed the appellants to furnish the crushing seasons in which the factory worked, they filed additional affidavit and for the years 1987-88 to 1993-94, crushing seasons were given as follows :______________________________________ Crushing Year Commenced on Closed on ______________________________________ 1987-88 7.11.1987 18.4.1988 1988-89 28.11.1988 17.4.1989 1989-90 19....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1996SC133; JT1995(6)SC475; 1995(5)SCALE248; (1995)5SCC746; [1995]Supp3SCR88
1. Delay condoned. Leave granted.2. Though notice has been served on all the respondents, none appears either in person or through counsel in all the appeals.3. Notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, 'the Act') was published on December 18, 1980 acquiring large extent of lands for the purpose of irrigation dam No. 2 Project. The land owners had given their consent in writing on March 11, 1983 agreeing to accept the compensation determined by the land Acquisition Officer and 25 per cent more thereof and also agreed not to seek any reference under Section 18. The market value was determined by the Collector on March 25, 1983, and 25 per cent in addition thereto was awarded. Respondents were paid in terms of the consent agreements signed by the respondents and sanctioned by the Superintending Engineer, Rajkot. Subsequent thereto, the respondent sought for reference under Section 18 on April 26, 1986. The Assistant Judge, Morbi in Rajkot by his award ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1996SC302; 1996(1)ALD(Cri)727; 1995(3)ALT25(SC); 1996CriLJ426; [1995(71)FLR665]; JT1995(6)SC234; 1995(5)SCALE34; (1995)5SCC619; [1995]Supp3SCR64; 1996(1)SLJ87(SC); (1995
1. One D. Dasegowda, the then Superintending Engineer, a government employee on deputation to Bangalore Municipal Corporation (for short, 'the Corporation') as Chief Engineer, was appellant in Civil Appeal No. 797 of 1993. As a last resort to salvage him, the Government had revalidated the Rules but was unsalvaged. He had challenged the judgment of the Division Bench of the High Court of Karnataka but by that time he had retired from service as Chief Engineer. Though he was unsuccessful, while declining to interfere with the order of the Division Bench of the High Court, this Court directed that he would be treated as employee of the Corporation for purpose of all retiral benefits. Subsequently, the petitioner who was competing with Dasegowda and became successful, filed LA. No. 3 in this Court, apprehending that the benefits given to Dasegowda by virtue of this Court's order dated February 19, 1993 in Civil Appeal No. 797 of 1993 might be construed by the Government to mean denial of ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1996SC127; JT1995(6)SC519; (1996)1MLJ35(SC); 1995(5)SCALE220; (1995)5SCC683; [1995]Supp3SCR74; 1995(2)LC746(SC)
1. Leave granted.2. Though notice has been served on the respondent on May 23, 1995, none is appearing either through counsel or in person. Notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, 'the Act') was published on February 27, 1986 and the Collector passed the award on March 29, 1987. Dissatisfied therewith, the respondent had filed C.W.P. No 125/86 and the High Court by its order dated July 23, 1986 held that:On the amount of compensation payable to the petitioner in respect of land, interest at the rate of 12 per cent per annum shall be paid from the date of the taking over of possession till the date of payment of interim compensation and of final compensation, if there is enhancement. The interest payable accordingly is in the nature of an equitable compensation and such interest will be in addition to the compensation, solatium and interest at the statutory rate which will be paid to the petitioner under the law in respect of land, whether awarded b...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1996SC339; 1996(1)ALT(Cri)140; [1996]85CompCas465(SC); [1995(71)FLR747]; JT1995(6)SC433; 1995(5)SCALE191; (1995)5SCC767; [1995]Supp3SCR79
1. Leave granted.2. This appeal by special leave arises form the judgment and order dated April 28, 1995 by the Bombay High Court in Criminal Application No. 1222 of 1995. The appellant had joined the services of M/s. Rallis India Ltd. on march 10, 1965. He had occupied a residential flat at Morena No. 11, M.C. Dhanuka Road, Bombay. The resigned on July 15, 1986. The Rallis India Ltd., the second respondent ('the company' hereinafter), initiated proceedings in January, 1987 against the appellant under Section 408 IPC and Section 630 of the Companies Act for the continued occupation of the appellant in the said flat. The Magistrate, by his order dated October 12, 1994, found the appellant guilty of offence under Section 630 of the Companies Act and directed restitution of the flat. On appeal, the Session Judge partly allowed it by his Judgment dated March 20, 1995, altering the sentence while confirming the conviction. The High Court confirmed the same by the impugned order.3. The prima...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : JT1995(6)SC659; 1996LabIC601; 1995(5)SCALE215a; 1995Supp(3)SCC706; [1995]Supp3SCR42; 1996(2)SLJ88(SC)
ORDER1. Leave granted.2. We have heard the counsel on both sides. This appeal by special leave arises from the order of the Division Bench of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana dated August 4, 1994 made in C.W.P. No. 2558 of 1991. It is not in dispute that the respondents were appointed as Physical Training Instructors by the Central Government. At the instance of the Union of India, the respondents came to be appointed on October 14,1976 by the State Government of Haryana in N.D.S.I. Scheme. The order of appointment, which is Annexure R-V to the petition is the proceedings dated October 15, 1976 of the Director of Public Instruction (Education Department), Haryana. It would show that consequent upon the decision of the Government of Haryana to absorb the N.D.S. Instructors in the State Service with effect from 1.7.1976, they were appointed as PTI (NFC) D.P.E. on temporary basis in the pay scale of Rs. 125-5-150-250/- and Rs. 220-6-300/10-400/- respectively. Condition No. 9 specified...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 1995(5)SCALE162; 1995Supp(4)SCC99; [1995]Supp3SCR56
ORDER1. Leave granted.2. Ms, Sangeeta Kalra and Mr. Sudhir Kalra appeared on behalf of the Society. In view of the judgment of this Court in D.D.A. v. Griksthapana Cooperative Group Homing Society Ltd. : [1995]2SCR115 , the appeal is allowed and forfeiture to the extent of rupees five lakhs is upheld. The remaining amount would be refunded by the appellant within a period of four weeks from today, failing which the respondent would be entitled for interest @ 18% per annum from that date till payment in the facts and circumstances of the case, we make no order as to costs....
Tag this Judgment!