Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1998SC2896; 1998(1)ALD(Cri)12; 1998(4)ALLMR(SC)113; 1998CriLJ3293; JT1997(9)SC221; (1998)9SCC343
M. Srinivasan, J.1. The appellant married one Asha Devi in 1976. He used to beat his wife off and on and was threatening to throw acid on her face. Once he tied a dhoti around her neck and hanged her. When her tongue protruded out, he put her down. On 17-10-1979 she requested him to get fuel wood from the tend (rack) so that she could cook food for the family. He refused to do so. She had herself taken the wood and started preparing food in the oven at about 8.00 a.m. Apparently being annoyed with the delay in the preparation of the food he took a burning piece of wood and touched her cheek with it. He took her to the adjoining room and poured kerosene over her and set her on fire. He also prevented her from running out of the room whereby he incurred burn injuries in some parts of his body. She ran out when her brother-in-law extinguished the fire by placing a blanket around her and tearing the saree. Her mother-in-law wrapped her with a wet cloth to extinguish the fire. She was taken...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : JT1998(8)SC137; (1998)9SCC474
ORDER1. Special Leave Petition No. 2078 of 1992 has been preferred by the Union of India. Special Leave Petition No. 6279 of 1993 has been preferred by the State of Maharashtra and Special Leave Petition No. 13491 of 1992 has been preferred by M.B. Nankare and Another. All the said special leave petitions are directed against the order dated 30-8-1991 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, New Bombay Bench in OA No. 189 of 1988. The inter se seniority between the direct recruits and the promotees in the Indian Forest Service, Maharashtra Cadre was the subject-matter of challenge before the said Administrative Tribunal. It, however, appears to us that the question of year of allotment for the direct recruits and also for the promotees to the Indian Forest Service are regulated by the statutory rules of all-India Services relating to the Indian Forest Service. The Central Government is the statutory authority to determine such year of allotment. Therefore, before such determinati...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : JT1997(9)SC213; (1998)118PLR729; 1997(6)SCALE56; (1997)8SCC770; [1997]Supp5SCR307; 1998(1)LC282(SC)
ORDER1. One of the aspects covered by this writ petition relates to proper management and control of the traffic in the National Capital Region (NCR) and the National Capital Territory (NCT), Delhi to ensure the maximum possible safeguards which are necessary for public safety. The problem is too obvious to require elaboration and the need for urgent measures to prevent any further delay in enforcement at least of the existing provisions of law is imperative. The need is accentuated by the alarming rise in the number of road accidents and the resulting deaths and bodily injuries caused thereby. The most recent tragedy in which a school bus broke the parapet of a bridge and fell into the river a couple of days back does not permit any further delay in taking urgent measures in this behalf. For this reason, in addition to the assistance we have been given by the learned amicus curiae, the Additional Solicitor General and the Bar in general. We considered it appropriate to also require th...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1998SC1477; 1998(1)BLJR419; JT1998(4)SC490; (1998)9SCC71; [1997]Supp5SCR314; 1998(1)LC290(SC); (1998)2UPLBEC835
1. Leave granted.2. Heard learned counsel for the parties. This appeal is directed against the order dated 23.9.1994 passed by the Patna High Court in CWJC No. 13043 of 1993. The writ petition filed by the appellants, 20 in number, claiming regularisation in the Health Department of the Government of Bihar was dismissed by the impugned judgment All the said 20 appellants were appointed on 1st of January 1980 by the Civil Surgeon, Dumka in Class 111 and Class IV posts as daily wager. On 30th March 1989 the appointments of the appellants were regularised on the recommendation of the Appointment Committee. On 25.8.1993 the District Level Establishment Committee issued show cause notices to the appellants asking them to show cause why their appointments should not be cancelled in view of the fact that they got irregular appointments Ultimately on 14.10.93 the services of the appellants were terminated. It has been found as a matter of fact that at the time of initial appointment, no advert...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : [1999(81)FLR97]; JT1998(8)SC207; (1998)9SCC450
ORDER1. This appeal relates to the promotion granted to Respondent 4-Narain Devi as Headmistress of Junior High School on 25-4-1978. By the same order the appellant-Qamar Jahan was appointed as Assistant Teacher in Junior High School. The appellant challenged this order before the U.P. Public Services Tribunal. The Tribunal allowed the application of the appellant holding that she should have been appointed as Headmistress, Junior High School, instead of Respondent 4. The High Court, however, set aside the order of the Tribunal and has upheld the order of 25-4-1978. Hence the present appeal is filed by Qamar Jahan.2. According to the appellant she was senior to Respondent 4 and hence she was entitled to be appointed Headmistress of Junior High School under the order of 25-4-1978.3. As far as we can gather from the record, the appellant was appointed as Assistant Teacher in Primary School on 12-10-1962. Respondent 4 was appointed as Assistant Teacher of Primary School prior to the appel...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1998SC1467; JT1997(9)SC224; 1997(7)SCALE118; (1998)2SCC198; [1997]Supp5SCR295; (1997)3UPLBEC2188
Sujata v. Manohar, J. 1. These appeals arise from the order dated 30.4.1991 of the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal in O.A. Nos. 1969, 3631, 3975, 3976, all of 1990 and O.A. No. 192 of 1991. All these applications had been filed by persons who were working as Superintendents in the office of the Director of Urban Land Ceiling and Urban Land Tax. They Challenged G.O.Ms. No. 145 (Revenue) dated 29.1.1990 issued by the appellant-State of Tamil Nadu increasing the quota of Superintendents working in various specified offices for deputation as Tehsildars in the Tamil Nadu Revenue Subordinate Service since they were not satisfied with the quota for which they were eligible. The Tribunal has set aside G.O.Ms. No. 145 (Revenue) dated 29.1.1990 and has directed the appellants to review their scheme as far as the Secretariat staff is concerned and has directed them to evolve a different scheme which would give the staff a wider perspective in all aspects of executive works, which, according to...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : JT1998(9)SC43; (1998)9SCC587
1. Leave granted in all these matters.2. The Nagarpalika, Mussoorie built twelve flats out of which six were transferred by it to Doordarshan. The remaining six were meant to be transferred to people who were in the middle-income group. By a certain method and process, these were allotted to six persons, five of whom are separately the appellants before us in these five matters. The sixth one has not approached this Court. These five appellants challenge the order of the Division Bench of the High Court whereby their challenge to individual orders of cancellation of allotment of flats passed by the Administrator-cum-Collector, has been negatived. As is plain from the order of the High Court and otherwise undenied, the orders of the Collector were passed in the purported exercise of executive or administrative power, not amenable to any appellate jurisdiction. The High Court on that premise entered into the arena of facts in order to determine whether the allotments were well merited an...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1998SC2901; JT1997(9)SC230; (1998)IMLJ45(SC); 1998(1)MPLJ382; 1997(7)SCALE101; (1998)1SCC451; 1998(1)LC144(SC); (1997)3UPLBEC2122
Sujata V. Manohar, J.1. This is an appeal from the judgment of the High Court of Madhya Pradesh in Second Appeal No. 28 of 1987.2. On 11-12-1947 the respondent was appointed as a clerk in the Court of the District Judge, Shivpuri. On 30-1-1948 the respondent was confirmed in the post of clerk with effect from 11-12-1947. After completion of 25 years of service on 10-8-1973 the respondent was served with a notice compulsorily retiring him from service after three months from the receipt of the notice. On 15-11-1973 the respondent was compulsorily retired from service in public interest under the provisions of the new Pension Rules of 1951.3. The respondent challenged his compulsory retirement by filing a writ petition being Miscellaneous Petition No. 304 of 1975 before the High Court of Madhya Pradesh. The High Court by its order dated 25-11-1975 dismissed the petition. On 12-11-1976 the respondent filed Civil Suit No. 264-A of 1976 challenging his compulsory retirement on the same grou...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 1998(98)ELT582(SC); JT1998(8)SC163; (1998)9SCC447
ORDER1. We find no ground to interfere with the Tribunal's order. The respondent was granted exemption from payment of duty for the goods on the ground that it was a variety of cement known as 'sagol'. Later, the matter was reopened by the Department on the ground that the exemption had wrongly been granted because the commodity manufactured by the respondent was 'Portland cement'. The Tribunal, on the basis of the report of chemical analysis, has rejected the Department's claim. There is no error in the Tribunal's decision requiring interference in this appeal. 2. The appeal is dismissed. ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : (1998)9SCC395
ORDER1. Leave granted in Special Leave Petition (C) No. 19775 of 1995.2. The four appellants in these two appeals had applied for appointment as sub-teachers pursuant to an advertisement which was issued in the year 1985. After written test and interview, the appellants were included in the select list of candidates selected as sub-teachers. The merit list of candidates so selected which was published had three categories, General category, Scheduled Caste category and Scheduled Tribe category. The names of the appellants were shown under Scheduled Tribe category. None of the appellants, however, belong to a Scheduled Tribe. The appellants were appointed as sub-teachers in the year 1986 because they were on the select list of Scheduled Tribe candidates. They were also regularised with effect from 8-4-1987. On 29-6-1987, a show-cause notice was issued to the appellants by the respondents stating inter alia that on account of the mistake in feeding the data to the computer, their names w...
Tag this Judgment!