Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1995SC2431; JT1995(6)SC33; 1995(5)SCALE600; (1995)5SCC220; [1995]Supp2SCR608
ORDER1. Though the orders we are now making are interim in nature, it is appropriate to set out briefly the circumstances leading to the present stage for a proper appreciation of the several directions we are making herein.2. In Unnikrishnan, J.P. v. State of Andhra Pradesh : [1993]1SCR594 , a Constitution Bench of this Court framed a scheme governing admission to professional colleges. This was done with a view to eliminate the evil of capitation fee and the absolute discretion which the managements of these colleges were exercising in the matter of admission of students. The main objective was to ensure that merit prevails in the matter of admissions, both in respect of what were called 'free seats' as well as in respect of 'payment seats'. This judgment was rendered on February 4, 1993. The scheme was to be effective from the Academic Year 1993-94 onwards.3. Review Petitions were filed by several institutions against the said judgment. They were dismissed by the Constitution Bench ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1995SC2472; 1995(2)ALT(Cri)483; 1996(1)BLJR454; 1995CriLJ4173; 1995(3)Crimes527(SC); JT1995(6)SC437; 1995(4)SCALE752; (1995)5SCC518; [1995]Supp2SCR629; 1995(2)LC646(SC)
ORDERA.M. Ahmadi, CJ.1. Special leave granted.2. The appellant challenges his conviction under Section 376, IPC, and the sentence and fine imposed on him. The facts leading to the conviction, briefly stated, are that the prosecutrix (PW 1) Panchbai, was working at a factory where she had reported for duty on the morning of 28.8.1987 around 8.00 a.m. Her job was to lift boulders and place them within the factory premises. While she was working inside the factory, another labourer by the name Charan was also present. The appellant and his companion Pyaru came to the factory premises, asked Charan to fetch tea and on his departure the appellant lifted her bodily and took her inside the machine room, place her on the ground, undressed her from below the waist and had sexual intercourse with her. Pyaru, since acquitted, was asked to keep a watch outside the factory. According to the prosecution after the appellant had satisfied his lust and before Pyaru could take his turn the prosecutrix r...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1996SC140; 1995(2)CTC342; JT1995(6)SC258; 1995(5)SCALE41; (1995)5SCC698; [1995]Supp2SCR658
1. Leave granted.2. Smt. Saleha Begum, the 3rd respondent had demised her property, namely, Shahensha Mahal situated on Congress Road, Governorpet, Vijayawada, A.P. to the appellant for a period of 20 years by lease deed dated January 1, 1964 and in furtherance thereof, the appellant has been running the exhibition of Cinematograph films in the said theatre. The lease, by efflux of twenty years, contracted thereunder expired on December 31, 1983. When the appellant sought renewal of the licence granted under the A.P. Cinemas (Regulation) Rules, 1970 (for short, 'the Rules'), the landlady objected to the renewal. The licensing authority and the appellate authority had granted licence but in a writ petition filed by the landlady the learned single Judge held that the appellant is not in lawful possession of the theatre and that, therefore, the grant of renewal was not justified in law. This was affirmed in W.A. Nos. 1118 and 1183 of 1992 dated September 3, 1993. Thus, these appeals by sp...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1995SC2390; 1995CriLJ4154; 1995(3)Crimes518(SC); (1995)2GLR1726; JT1995(6)SC146; 1995(4)SCALE715; (1995)5SCC302; [1995]Supp2SCR637; 1995(2)LC610(SC)
ORDERB.L. Hansaria, J.1. The two appellants are in jail being accused of having committed offences, inter alia under Sections 3 and 5 of the Terrorists and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1987 (for short 'the TADA'). Their prayer is to release them on bail, which has been denied by the Designated Court. In support of this plea, a large number of points were raised before us in course of arguments. It is not necessary to go into all these questions as, according to us, the appeal deserves to be allowed on the sole ground of wrong invocation of TADA in the case of the appellants.2. To bring home the above, we may note the prosecution case in short, which is that :.on March 15, 1995 one Jayantilal Mohanlal Vadodaria who is a son of elder brother Mohanlal Kalabhai of the complainant, was murdered by some assailants near Ashapur Dam at the distance of 3 K.M. from Gondal town. So on receiving this information, the complaint went to the scene of offence where a dead body of his nephew...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1995SC2394; 1995CriLJ4158; JT1995(6)SC81; 1995(4)SCALE705; 1995(2)LC697(SC)
ORDERG.T. Nanavati, J.1. The appellant was tried for the offence of murder of Teja Singh before the Special Court, Patiala. The Special Court has convicted him under Section 302, I.P.C. and sentenced him to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 2000/-, in default, to suffer R.I. for two months more. Challenging his conviction and the order of sentence, the appellant has filed this appeal under Section 14 of the Terrorist Affected Areas (Special Courts) Act, 1984.2. According to the prosecution, murder of Teja Singh was committed under the following circumstances. On 4-8-1984 Teja Singh of village Thaska had gone to the flour mill of Tek Chand at village Gulhari to collect wheat flour as his wheat was left there two or three days earlier for grinding. Jagdev Singh also of Thaska had reached that flour mill some time earlier for getting his wheat ground. While they were waiting there Hawa Singh of village Gulhari had also come there as he too wanted his grains to be groun...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 1996VIAD(SC)786; AIR1997SC406; [1996(74)FLR2538]; JT1996(7)SC672; 1996LabIC2178; (1997)ILLJ44SC; 1996(6)SCALE371; (1996)10SCC745; [1996]Supp4SCR536
K. Ramaswamy, J.1. Leave granted.2. We have heard learned Counsel on both sides.3. The admitted position is that the respondent Nos. 5 and 6, Gurnam Singh and Parminder Singh, were appointed on September 19, 1975 and September 25, 1975 respectively as Assistants on regular basis and ever since they have been continuously officiating as Assistants. The appellant while working as a Senior Stenographer had come to the administrative side as Assistant w.e.f. April 29, 1977 and joined the duty on the said date. In the matter of fixation of inter se seniority, since he has been drawing higher pay than the respondent Nos. 5 and 6 he claims that he is senior to them. The High Court in the impugned judgment dated 9.12.1993 in W.P. Nos. 3938 and 9791 of 1993 has upheld the claim of the respondents. Thus, these appeals.4. Shri Ashok Grover, learned Counsel, for the appellant, contended that Rule 3(1) and Rule 3(2) of the Punjab Public Works Subordinate Services (Building and Roads) Branch Rules, ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 1997(96)ELT230(SC); JT1998(8)SC27; (1998)9SCC420
ORDER1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 22-11-1994 rendered by the Customs, Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi, by which the value of the larger corrugated cartons used for packing purposes came to be included for determining tax liability. The only question which was urged before us was in relation to the tooth powder and no other part of the decision was questioned. The relevant part of the finding recorded by the Collector (Appeals) omitting the one relating to soap reads as under:'The appellant's representative first explained the manner in which their products are packed. They explained that in respect of tooth powder, their clients pack one dozen tooth powder tins in a small carton. These one dozen cartons are thereafter packed into the larger corrugated cartons. Depending upon the size of the tooth powder tin, the larger cartons contain a varied number of one dozen packages.... The appellants submitted that their clients were onl...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1995SC2400; 1995(51)ECC40; 1997(92)ELT32(SC); JT1995(6)SC418; 1996(40)KarLJ299; 1995(4)SCALE676; (1995)5SCC289; [1995]Supp2SCR575; [1995]99STC87(SC)
ORDERSuhas C. Sen, J.1. The question that falls for determination in this case is whether the 'cast iron' in the list of declared goods in the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act would include 'Cast Iron Castings'.2. The case of the appellant is that the basic raw materials for producing cast iron are pig iron, steel scrap, iron scrap, cast iron scrap etc. After melting these raw materials and adding requisite quantity of carbon, silica etc., the molten metal in the cupola furnace is poured into the moulds of different specifications to get the cast iron castings as required by the end user. The foundry owners like the appellant, manufacture rough cast iron castings according to the specifications of their customers, who in their turn manufacture manhole covers, pipes, components for automobile industry, agricultural implements, etc. For this the rough castings have to undergo machining, grinding, polishing and various other process.3. Section 14 of the Central Sales Tax Act declared cert...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 1997(89)ELT19(SC); (1997)10SCC305
ORDERA.M. Ahmadi, CJI., S.C. Sen and K.S. Paripoornan, JJ.1. Delay condoned. 2. Special leave granted in all the Special Leave Petitions. 3. By Notification No. GSR 1152, dated 24th July, 1967 issued under Section 25(1) of the Customs Act, the Government exempted iron ore fines falling under Item 29 of the Second Schedule to the Tariff Act when exported out of India from so much of the duty leviable thereon as is in excess of Rs. 3/- per metric ton, where the iron content in the iron ore fines was below 62% and where it exceeds 62% so much of the duty as is in excess of Rs. 4/- per metric ton. By another Notification dated 31st August, 1968 the Government exempted lumpy iron ore falling under Item 28 of the Second Schedule to the Tariff Act when exported out of India from so much of the duty as was in excess of the duty shown in Column (iii) depending on the iron content in the iron ore. It may here be mentioned that the duty had to be determined on the basis of weight of the commodity...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : JT1995(6)SC78; 1995(4)SCALE684; 1995Supp(4)SCC215; 1995(2)LC577(SC); 1996(1)MhLJ30
Jeevan Reddy J.1. Leave granted. Heard counsel for the parties.2. The appellant was elected as a Councillor of the Khopoli Municipal Council in December 1991. The contesting respondent Shri Sable was also elected as a Councillor. On account of a vacancy occurring in the office of the President of Municipality, an election was held to that office wherein the appellant was elected as the President. Prior to becoming the President, the appellant was the Chairman of a Committee in-charge of awarding contracts. On the basis of certain complaints pertaining to the period he was the Chairman of the said Committee, a notice was issued to the appellant by the Collector calling upon him to show cause why he should not be removed from the office of the Councillor under Section 44 of the Maharashtra Municipal Corporation Act, 1965. The appellant showed cause, whereafter the Collector removed him from the office of the councillor by his order dated 4.10.1994. The operative portion of the order read...
Tag this Judgment!