Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1996SC889; [1995(71)FLR1129]; JT1995(7)SC404; 1995(5)SCALE641; 1995Supp(3)SCC697; [1995]Supp4SCR138; 1996(1)LC127(SC)
ORDERK. Venkataswami, J.1. Leave granted.I.A. No. 1/95 for impleadment is allowed.2. The appellants are teachers in Government schools in the State of Haryana. The appellants were appointed as (J.B.T.) teachers in the schools as they did not possess B.T./B.Ed. qualification at the time of their appointments. However, they acquired B.T. B.ed. degree on various dates as mentioned in page 9 of the S.L.P. Paper Book and also at page 53 (so far as newly impleaded appellant No. 8 is concerned). They moved the High Count of Punjab & Haryana under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India for the issue of writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to give them the higher grade admissible to the Masters with effect from respective dales of their acquiring B.T./B.Ed. qualifications and they also prayed for issue of writ of Mandamus to the respondents to implement the decision/ direction of this Court in the case of Chaman Lal v. State of Haryana reported in : [1987]2SCR923 .3. In response to ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 1996CriLJ390; 1995(4)Crimes185(SC); JT1995(7)SC171; 1995(5)SCALE630; 1995Supp(4)SCC146
Nanavati, J.1. This appeal arises out of a common judgment of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in Criminal Appeal No. 778-DB of Haryana High Court in Criminal Appeal No. 778-Db of 1983 and Criminal Appeal No. 653-DBA of 1984. Criminal Appeal No. 778-DB of 1983 was filed by Gurmit Singh who was convicted by the Sessions Court, Amritsar for the offence punishable under Section 302 IPC and Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act. The other appeal was filed by the State against the order of acquittal of the three co-accused.2. Briefly stated, the prosecution case is that on 12.7.83 about 7.30 P.M. when Sadhu Singh (P.W. 10) and his son Parkash Singh (P.W. 12) were returning from their field to their house, Accused Gurmit Singh, Puran Singh, Joginder Singh and Kashmir Singh met them on the way. At that time, Puran Singh was carrying a Kirapan, Joginder Singh was armed with a single-barrel .12 bore gun and Kashmir Singh was carrying a gandhali. On seeing Sadhu Singh (P.W. 10) and Parkash Singh (...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1996SC717; [1995(71)FLR902]; JT1995(7)SC129; 1995(5)SCALE609; (1995)6SCC464; [1995]Supp4SCR114; (1995)3UPLBEC1798
ORDERS.C. Agrawal, J.1. Leave granted.2. The appellant was appointed as Registration Clerk on daily wage basis on September 18, 1986 in the office of District Registrar, Allahabad district, Uttar Pradesh. He had worked as Registration Clerk for various periods from time to time from September 18, 1986 till July 1, 1990. On June 30, 1988 he applied for appointment on the post of Peon which had fallen vacant on retirement of Inamul Haque and on July 2, 1990 he was appointed on the said post of Peon on the pay scale of Rs. 750-940. The appellant made a representation on February 4, 1991 for regularisation of his service and the said representation was forwarded by the District Registrar to the Inspector General of Registration on February 21, 1991 wherein the District Registrar had recommended that the service period of the appellant may be extended. Inspite of the said recommendation the appointment of the appellant was discontinued after February 28, 1991. The appellant filed a Writ pet...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : [2001]249ITR797(SC); (2002)9SCC399
ORDER1. There are two appeals before us. In Civil Appeal No. 911 of 1977, two questions were referred under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for the opinion of the High Court. The two questions are :'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that inasmuch as the assessee did not appear before the original Income-tax Officer in response to the notice asking it to show cause why penalty should not be imposed, and had made no oral submissions but had only made a reply in writing it was in order for the successor Income-tax Officer to have imposed the penalty without giving a fresh notice to the assessee or hearing the assessee ?2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that notwithstanding that the return of Income had been filed on February 6, 1961, i.e., within the period permissible under Section 139(4) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the imposition of a penalty was jus...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1996SC257; 1996(1)ALD(Cri)715; 1996CriLJ414; 1995(4)Crimes129(SC); JT1995(7)SC194; 1995(5)SCALE556; (1995)6SCC447; [1995]Supp4SCR89
ORDERA.S. Anand, J.1. Twelve accused persons were tried for offences under Sections 302 307/149 324 147 148, and Section 3 of Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1987 (hereinafter referred to as 'TADA') by the learned Designated Judge, Pune. Out of the said twelve accused, 6 accused were acquitted of all the charges while the five appellants herein, namely, Bonkya Alias Bharat Shivaji Mane (A-5), Mandu Baliba Dombe (A-8), Ashok Baloba Dombe (A-9), Ranjar Bhausaheb Dombe (A-10) and Kaka Alias Pandurang Baloba Dombe (A-11) were convicted for offences under Sections 302 307/149 IPC and Section 3 of TADA and sentenced to suffer life imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000 each for the offence under Section 302/149 IPC; 10 years RI and a fine of Rs. 5,000 each for the offence under Section 307/149 IPC; 2 years RI for the offence under Section 324/149 IPC and life imprisonment and fine of Rs. 5,000 each for the offence under Section 3 of TADA. In default of payment of f...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1996SC674; [1995(71)FLR912]; JT1995(7)SC128; 1996LabIC603; (1996)IILLJ398SC; 1995(5)SCALE624; 1995Supp(3)SCC715; [1995]Supp4SCR105; (1995)3UPLBEC1796
ORDERS.C. Agrawal, J.1. Leave granted.2. The appellant was appointed as Registration Clerk on daily wage basis by order dated February 14, 1985. He had worked as Registration Clerk on daily wage basis during various periods form February 14, 1985 to March 31, 1990. His services were not availed thereafter. The appellant filed a writ petition (W.P. No. 849/95 [8030/90]) in the Allahabad High Court wherein he claimed that he has been shown at serial No. 1 in the approved list of candidates issued by the District Registrar, District Har-doi, and that the service of Pradyumna Kumar and Maghad Prasad whose names were shown at serial Nos. 5 and 14 respectively in the said list have been regularised but the appellant has not been regularised. In the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondents in the said writ petition in the High Court, it was not denied that persons whose names were shown below the name of the appellant in the list of approved candidates had been regularised but the...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : [1995(71)FLR903]; JT1995(7)SC124; 1996LabIC602; 1995(5)SCALE611; (1996)7SCC145; [1995]Supp4SCR108; (1996)1UPLBEC1
S.C. AGRAWAL, J.: Leave granted. The appellants in this appeal were employed as Registration Clerks on daily wage basis in the office of Sub-Registrar, District Jhansi on various periods, during the years 1990 and 1991. The case of the appellants is that in response to the notice inviting applications for appointment on the post of Registration Clerks, the appellants had submitted their applications and they were required to appear before the Selection Committee constituted under relevant rules on February 24, 1991. Their claim is that other persons whose names were sponsored by the Employment Exchange were also called and that the appellants were selected by the Selection Committee and on the basis of the said selection, they were appointed as Registration Clerks by the District Registrar by order dated March 18, 1991. It is claimed that the said appointment of the appellants was approved by the Inspector General of Registration on April 15, 1991. Subsequently by order dated May 27, 1...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1996SC417; JT1995(7)SC545; 1995(6)SCALE102; 1995Supp(4)SCC182; [1995]Supp4SCR117; (1996)1UPLBEC23
ORDERS.C. Agrawal, J.Delay condoned in S.L.P. (C) No. 22726-29/95 [C.C. No. 3559/95].1. These petitions for special leave to appeal arise out of judgment dated February 8, 1995 passed by the Division Bench of the Allahabad High Court in various special appeals and writ petitions involving common questions relating to regularisation of Registration Clerks employed on daily wage basis in the Registration Department of the Government of Uttar Pradesh.2. Under the U.P. Registration Manual (hereinafter referred to as 'the Manual') provision is made in paragraph 94-A for appointment to the post of Registration Clerks in Sub-registrar's offices and in District Registrar's offices by the District Registrar. In paragraph 95 it is provided that the strength and remuneration of registration establishments shall vary according to the amount of work to be performed in each office and will undergo periodical review. Under paragraph 96 power has been conferred on the Inspector General of Registration...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1996SC318; II(1995)BC532(SC); JT1995(7)SC409; 1995(5)SCALE625; (1995)6SCC571; [1995]Supp4SCR72; 1996(1)LC353(SC)
ORDERN.P. Singh, J.1. Leave granted.2. The appellants have questioned the validity of the order, passed by the High Court, rejecting the claim of the appellants that there was no agreement between the appellants and the respondent - Delhi Development Authority (hereinafter referred to as 'the respondent') to refer the dispute between them to an Arbitrator.3. The appellant No. 4 - M/s. Jain Rolling Mills is a registered partnership firm and the appellant No. 1 (hereinafter referred to as 'the appellant') is the Managing Partner. The respondent issued a Notice inviting tenders for supply of steel bars of various diameters to the extent of 20,000 Mt. Tonnes. The appellant obtained a tender from the said respondent on 16.11.1982. The tender was submitted alongwith a covering letter dated 18.11.1982. After negotiations, the tender was accepted only for supply of 10,000 Mt. Tonnes of steel bars of various diameters. A formal agreement was executed. Thereafter some dispute arose between the p...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 1996(1)ALD(Cri)731; 1996CriLJ399; 1995(4)Crimes139(SC); JT1995(7)SC98; 1995(5)SCALE568; 1995Supp(4)SCC17
ORDERG.N. Ray, J.1. This appeal is directed against the Judgment dated April 19, 1979 passed by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana in Criminal Appeal No. 1300 of 1976. By the impugned judgment, the High Court affirmed the conviction and sentence passed against the appellants by the learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge Ludhiana on August 28, 1976 in Sessions Case No. 55/20 of 76 (Sessions Trial No. 33 of 76). Out of the four appellants before this Court, appellant No. 1 Labhu Ram died during the pendency of this appeal and the present appeal now concerns appellant Nos. 2 to 4. It may be stated here that the three appellants were sons of Labhu Ram deceased and they were convicted by the trial court for offences under Sections 302/34, 323/34 and 201/34 of the Indian Penal Code and were sentenced to suffer imprisonment for life for the offence under Section 302 read with Section 34 and a fine of Rs. 500/- in default further imprisonment for six months; sentence of six months RI under Se...
Tag this Judgment!