Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : JT1997(5)SC462; 1997(3)SCALE715; (1997)10SCC642
1. This appeal has been preferred by the Calcutta Metropolitan Development Authority (hereinafter called the 'CMDA') against the judgment of the Division Bench of the Calcutta High Court in Appeal from Original Order No. 1164 of 1988 dated 22.12.1992. Dismissing the appeal the learned Judges confirmed the judgment of the learned Single Judge dated 13th March, 1987 in Civil Order No. 466(W) of 1985. The learned Single Judge came to the conclusion that the writ petitioners who were working as Programme Officers under the CMDA and were given the scale of Rs. 470-1230 were entitled to the Scale of Rs. 660-1600. The said scale was directed to be given with effect from the respective dates of promotion of the writ petitioners. It was also held that they would be entitled to 50% of the arrears on the basis of such fixation. In this appeal filed by the CMDA, the said view of the Calcutta High Court is challenged on the ground that the Programme Officers working under the CMDA were permitted to...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1997SC2625; JT1997(5)SC580; RLW1997(2)SC305; (1997)6SCC41; [1997]3SCR1107
K. Ramaswamy, S. Saghir Ahmad and G.B. Pattanaik, JJ.1. Delay condoned.2. Substitution ordered.3. Leave granted.4. This batch of appeals relates to the acquisition of the lands of 97 acres 42 cents of land situated in the outskirts of the Tenali town of Guntur District in the State of Andhra Pradesh. The lands were acquired for the development of the colony for the weaker sections - middle income group persons - etc. The notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act was published on December 9, 1980. The Land Acquisition Officer awarded compensation @ Rs. 22,940 per acre for leveled up land and Rs. 21,700 per acre for unleveled land. On reference, the Subordinate Judge, Tenali by his award and decree, dated February 26, 1991 award uniform compensation at the rate of Rs. 1,00,000 per acre. On appeal by the appellants as well as the claimants - respondents, the High Court by judgment and decree dated March 23, 1994, further enhanced the compensation to Rs. 23.50 per sq. yar...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1997SC2678; 1997(1)ALD(Cri)873; 1997(2)BLJR1007; 1997CriLJ3395; 1997(2)Crimes38(SC); JT1997(5)SC117; 1997(3)SCALE729; (1997)5SCC360; [1997]3SCR1071; 1997(1)LC809(SC)
ORDERK.T. Thomas, J.1. The six appellants before us were among the 14 accused arrayed in the Sessions Court indicted for the murder of one Ramdeo Yadav during the wee hours on 30th October, 1975. Although the Sessions Court convicted all the thirteen accused of the offences of rioting and murder (with the aid of Section 149 IPC) the High Court confirmed the conviction only in respect of the seven appellants before us. They have been sentenced to imprisonment for life for the offence of murder and to rigorous imprisonment for two years for the offence under Section 148, Indian Penal Code. 2. Facts are simple : Deceased Ramdeo Yadav and his son Gajendra Yadav (PW 8) after their dinner at home went to a nearby field presumably for watching the crop thereon. Deceased went to sleep on a wooden plank in one field while his son (PW 8) slept in the adjoining field. Some time after midnight these appellants and few others came to this place armed with lethal weapons such as spears (bhala) and g...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1997SC2704; JT1997(5)SC627; (1998)118PLR160; 1997(4)SCALE356; (1997)6SCC59; [1997]3SCR1121; 1997(2)LC165(SC)
K. Ramaswamy, A.M. Ahmadi and G. B. Pattanaik, JJ.In CA Nos. 3816, 3818-35, 4070-4139, 3947, 4157-58, 4036-69, 4033-35, 3936-46/97 @ SLP Nos. 1013, 1545-1662, 3004-73, 19017, 8255-56/95, 2947-80, 2920-22 and 16892-902/961. Leave granted. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.2. Notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, the 'Act') was published on June 18, 1984. The Land Acquisition Collector classified the lands into four blocks, viz., A, B, C and D and awarded compensation at the rate of Rs. 60,000, Rs. 40,000, Rs. 25,000 and Rs. 15,000 respectively. The total of 3781 kanals and 2 marlas and 1138 kanals and 11 marlas of land was acquired and compensation was accordingly granted. On reference under Section 18, the Additional District Judge classified the lands as Classes 'A' and 'B' and awarded the compensation @ Rs. 1,00,000 for Class 'A' and @ Rs. 50,000 for Class 'B'. On appeal, the learned Single Judge of the High Court granted uniform rate of co...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1997SC2447; JT1997(5)SC412; 1997(4)SCALE254; (1997)5SCC478; [1997]3SCR1058; 1997(2)LC185(SC)
K. Ramaswamy and D.P. Wadhwa, JJ.1. Leave granted.2. The respondent was imputed with a charge that he demanded and accepted a sum of Rs. 3,000 as illegal gratification for refraining from registering a complaint in respect of the bribe given, against whom criminal prosecution was to be initiated. The matter was referred to the Tribunal for disciplinary proceedings which after enquiry submitted its report on July, 20, 1994, holding that the charge against the respondent had been proved and he was guilty of the charge. However, it recommended to impose the penalty of stoppage of three increments with cumulative effect. The Government after consideration of the evidence found that the recommendation was not correct proper and that major penalty was required to be given. Accordingly, show cause notice, together, with copy of the report, was issued for imposing punishment of dismissal from service and the respondent submitted his reply. The Government after considering the entire material c...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1997SC2581; JT1997(5)SC643; 1997(4)SCALE258; (1997)5SCC437; [1997]3SCR1056
K. Ramaswamy and D.P. Wadhwa, JJ.1. This application has been filed to recall the judgment giving various directions; and to substitute in their place the directions sought for in the prayer clause of the application.2. As regards the first prayer to recall the Order dated September 2, 1994 with regard to the grant of the caste certificates, we do not think that it is advisable to recall the order for the reason that this Court had deliberated upon the issue and entrusted the power to issue certificates of social status to a higher officer, namely, Sub-Divisional Officer, who is expected to objectively go into the question and grant or refuse to grant social status certificates. Accordingly, we reject prayer (a).3. As regards prayer (b) read with direction No. (iv) of the Order of this Court, we too appreciate the inconvenience caused due to vast area of the State. Therefore, instead of one committee of three officers, there will be three Scheduled Tribe Caste Scrutiny Committees compr...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1997SC2600; JT1997(5)SC362; 1997(4)SCALE154; (1997)10SCC128; [1997]3SCR1054
K. Ramaswamy and D.P. Wadhwa, JJ.1. Substitution allowed.2. Leave granted. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.3. Notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, the 'Act') was published on July 7, 1977, acquiring 14 acres 32 guntas of land of Bachiragh village near Suryapet Nalgonda District (A.P.) for the purpose of constructing a Bus Stand Complex. The Land Acquisition officer awarded compensation @ Rs. 7,500 per acre. The Sub-Court on reference awarded the considerate compensation @ Rs. 3.60 lacs per acre. The High Court reduced it to Rs. 2,25,000 per acre. It is now not in dispute that Exs. A-2, A-9 and A- 11 were relied on to enhance the compensation. Admittedly, none of the persons connected with the documents, namely, neither the vendee nor the vendor has been examined. This Court in Kumari Veeraiah and Ors. v. State of A.P. : [1995]2SCR379 held that in the absence of adduction of any evidence through the vendor or the vendee, the document per se...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1997SC2555; 1997CriLJ3122; JT1997(5)SC69; 1997(3)SCALE711; (1997)5SCC453; 1997(1)LC719(SC); (1997)2UPLBEC1169
ORDER1. The following orders adequately explain the circumstances in which a suo moto contempt notice was issued to Mrs. Sumita Kandpal, Principal Secretary of the Medical Health, Family Welfare and Medical Education Department, Government of Uttar Pradesh.Order dated 27th January, 1997:Adjourned for 2 weeks. The State of Uttar Pradesh shall file an appropriate affidavit explaining how the impugned order came to be passed and why the counsel was not appropriately instructed at that stage. The Principal Secretary of the Medical Health and Medical Education Ministry shall remain present in Court on the next date of hearing. (Emphasis supplied.)Order dated 10th February, 1997:On 27th January, 1997, this Court directed the Principal Secretary of the Medical Health and Medical Education Ministry to remain present in Court on the next date of hearing, the Contempt Petition having been adjourned for two weeks.Mr. Dhingra, learned Counsel for the State, on being asked, tells us that the said P...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : (1998)ILLJ56SC
ORDERMr. K. Ramaswamy, J.1. Leave granted.2. We have heard learned Counsel for the parties.3. These appeals by special leave arise from the order dated May 14, 1996 passed by the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal, Madras in O.A. Nos. 2345, 2477 and 6373 of 1993. The admitted facts are that the respondent was working as a doctor. He proceeded on leave and made a representation on June 27, 1987 with regard to his posting. He did not report for duty for five years from May 1, 1982. A departmental enquiry came to be conducted against the respondent, under Rule 17 of the Tamil Nadu Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules. The competent authority removed him from service on the ground that the respondent was found to be unauthorisedly absent from duty for five years. The Tribunal in its impugned order set aside the order of his removal from service and directed to pay 50% of the back wages till the date of filing of the original application and full back wages from the date of filing of the ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1997SC2324; JT1997(4)SC750; 1997(3)SCALE686; (1997)6SCC129; [1997]3SCR412
1.As per Office Report dated September 13, 1996, the notice sent to the first respondent was received back by the Registry with the postal endorsement 'No such person' indicating avoidance thereof on his part. Consequently, he was set ex parte. The second respondent was directed to file counter-affidavit. Even today the first respondent is not appearing either in person or through counsel.2. Leave granted. We have heard learned Counsel for the appellant and the second respondent.3. This appeal by special leave arises from the judgment passed by the High Court of Punjab & Haryana, Chandigarh on 22nd November, 1995 in LPA No. 351 of 1981.4. The admitted facts are that the first respondent, a general candidate, was appointed as a Junior Technical Assistant in the Department of Industries of the State of Punjab. The post of Assistant Superintendent, Quality Marking center, (Textile), i.e., in the next promotional cadre, is the single post in that cadre. The said post was reserved for Sched...
Tag this Judgment!