Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : (1997)10SCC528
ORDER 1. Leave granted. 2. Under the order of this Court dated 7-2-1997, notice was issued to the respondent for final disposal of the special leave petition in view of the receipt dated 23-10-1993 given by the respondent to the appellants. Accordingly, we have heard both the sides. 3. The appellants had entered into a contract dated 8-8-1988 with the respondent for construction of their building at Dehradun on the terms and conditions set out in that contract. According to the appellants, several extensions were granted to the respondent for completion of the building. Ultimately, the contract was terminated by them on 28-7-1992. According to the appellants, they have paid a total amount of Rs 2.63 lakhs (approximately) to the respondent under the said contract. The final payment has been made under a receipt dated 23-10-1993 which is signed by the Project Manager for and on behalf of the respondent. It states: “Received a sum of Rs 2,19,245 vide Cheque No. 952...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1997SC2663; JT1997(5)SC611; (1997)IILLJ698SC; 1997(4)SCALE304; (1997)5SCC434; [1997]Supp1SCR46
1. Leave granted.2. The respondent was appointed on daily wages in a project taken up by the appellant on July 25, 1986. The respondent was discharged from the work on its closure on January 15, 1989. Thereafter, he approached the Labour Court under Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act. On a reference, the Labour Court held that the respondent is entitled to continuity of service with back wages since it amounts to dismissal. The order was confirmed by the learned single Judge of the High Court subject to payment of 50% of the back wages. Writ Appeal No. 878/96 was dismissed by the Division Bench. Thus, this appeal by special leave.3. It is now well settled legal position that the Irrigation Department and Tele-communication Department are not an 'Industry' within the meaning of definition under the Industrial Disputes Act as held in Union of India v. Jai Narayan Singh : (1996)IILLJ750SC and in State of H.P. v. Suresh Kumar Verma : [1996]1SCR972 . The function of public welfare of...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1997SC2431; JT1997(5)SC551; (1997)IILLJ770SC; 1997(3)SCALE762; (1997)5SCC1; [1997]Supp1SCR1
ORDERS.P. Bharucha, J.1. These civil appeals arise upon identical facts and may be disposed of by a common judgment. The principle judgment under appeal is that of a Full Bench of the High Court at Allahabad, in Civil Appeal No. 10568 of 1996. The Full Bench judgment was followed by a Division Bench of the High Court and that order is impugned in Civil Appeal No. 10596 of 1996.2. The facts that we state relate to Civil Appeal No. 10568 of 1996. The first respondent was appointed a Lower Division Assistant in the High Court at Allahabad on 1st June, 1957. He was given, on the orders of the Chief Justice in office at the relevant time, one premature (or advance) increment in the year 1989, two premature increments in the year 1990 and one premature increment in the year 1991. He retired from service on 31st July, 1994. For the purposes of calculating his pensionary benefits, the appellants did not take into account these premature increments. They acted upon the basis of a letter dated 2...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1997SC3687; JT1997(5)SC313; 1997(4)SCALE75; (1997)6SCC283; 1997(2)LC74(SC)
ORDERK.Ramaswamy, J.1. Leave granted.2. These appeals and the writ petition arise out of the common cause relating to recruitment to the post of Assistant Professors in various faculties in the appellant Post Graduate Institute, Chandigarh and admission into specialities and super-specialties. Advertisement No. 6/90 dated November 16, 1990 relates to recruitment to the post of Assistant Professor; out of 12 posts, 8 posts were reserved for Scheduled Castes (for short, 'Dalits') and 4 posts were reserved for Scheduled Tribes (for short, 'Tribes'), in the pay scale of Rs. 3500-4500/ -. Essential qualifications were prescribed for the said posts; there being no dispute, vis-a-vis qualifications, it is not necessary to elaborate them except to state that these are backlog vacancies. Through advertisement No. 15/90 dated November 25, 1990, the appellants had called for applications for appointment to the said posts and admission to Doctoral Courses and Ph.D. programme for the academic sessi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1997SC2298; JT1997(5)SC151; 1997(3)SCALE782; (1997)5SCC10; [1997]Supp1SCR14; 1997(2)LC127(SC)
ORDERG.B. Pattanaik, J.1. On the basis of a letter by one Dr. Ashok addressed to the Chief Justice of India indicating therein that several insecticides, colour additives, food additives are in widespread use in this country which have already been banned in several advanced countries as it has been found that those insecticides are carcinogenus, this Court treated the letter as a Petition under Article 32 of the Constitution and took up the matter as a Public Interest Litigation. Notices were issued to the Union of India through the Secretary. Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, through the Secretary, Ministry of Environment and Forest, through the Secretary, Ministry of Agriculture, through Secretary, Ministry of Industry & Chemicals as well to Pesticides Association of India through its Secretary Shri H.S. Bahl and the Asbestos Cement Products Manufacturers Association. The Annexure to the said letter contained 21 chemicals and additives and a prayer was made that the respondent ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1997SC2444; 1997(2)BLJR1212; 1997CriLJ2981; 1997(2)Crimes74(SC); JT1997(5)SC140; RLW1997(2)SC338; 1997(3)SCALE777
ORDER1. Rohtas and his father Ram Mehar, the two appellants before us, and three others were placed on trial before the 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Meerut to answer common charges under Sections 148, 302/149 and 307/149 IPC. Against Ram Mehar an alternative charge under Section 302 IPC was also framed. The trial ended in conviction of Rohtas under Sections 307 and 302/34 IPC and of Ram Mehar under Section 302 and 307/34 IPC and acquittal of the other three. As the appeal filed them against their convictions was dismissed by the High Court the appellants have preferred this appeal after obtaining special leave.2. Briefly stated the prosecution case is as under:(a) In the year 1981 Mangat Singh (P.W. 2) was the agent of Northern Railways for Fakharpur (Halt) Railway Station and he was authorised to sell railway tickets to passengers entertaining at that station and check passengers alighting there and collect their tickets. On April 22, 1981 at or about 1.45 P.M. when a passenger trai...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1997SC2622; 1997(2)ALD(Cri)53; 1997CriLJ3182; 1997(2)Crimes69(SC); JT1997(5)SC134; 1997(3)SCALE769; (1997)10SCC130; 1997(2)LC59(SC)
ORDERM.K. Mukherjee, J.1. Mukund @ Kundu Mishra and Deva @ Dev Kumar, the appellants before us, were put up for trial before the IIIrd Additional Sessions Judge, Bilaspur, to answer charges under Sections 449 394/397 and 302/34 IPC. The charges were based on the allegations that in the night intervening January 17 and 18, 1994 they trespassed into the residential house of Anuj Prasad Dubey, committed murders of his wife and their two children and looted their ornaments, other valuable articles and cash. On conclusion of the trial the learned Judge found them guilty of all the above charges and accordingly convicted them. For the conviction under Section 302/34 IPC both of them were sentenced to death and, for the other convictions, to different terms of rigorous imprisonment. Against their convictions and sentences they preferred individual appeals which were heard by the High Court alongwith the reference made by the learned Judge under Section 366 Cr.P.C. In disposing of them by a co...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 1997(2)ALD(Cri)150; 1997(2)BLJR1042; 1997(2)Crimes62(SC); JT1997(5)SC120; 1997(3)SCALE761; (1997)5SCC346; 1997(1)LC736(SC)
ORDER1. This case arises of alleged ill-treatment of Mrs. Anamika Chawla by her husband and her father. The case is going on since 29th July, 1995. Smt. Anamika Chawla came up against the order passed by the Metropolitan Magistrate on 29th July, 1995 ordering to be admitted to Delhi Psychiatry center, 35, Defence Enclave, Vikas Marg, New Delhi, for observation and treatment. This Order was passed with undue haste even without seeing the alleged patient. Medical certificates were produced from Dr. Sunil Mittal and Dr. S.C. Malik. The case of the petitioner, Mrs. Chawla, is that neither of the two doctors had ever met her or examined her. The allegation appears to be true.2. When the application was moved by Mrs. Anamika Chawla, she was staying in Guild of Service Hostel in New Delhi. The warden of the Hostel appeared in person and stated that she found Mrs. Chawla's behavior normal. She was on friendly terms with the other inmates of the hostel. It was also recorded in the Order of this...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1997SC2387; JT1997(5)SC415; 1997(4)SCALE242; (1997)10SCC99; [1997]3SCR1169
K. Ramaswamy, S. Saghir Ahmad and G.B. Pattanaik, JJ.1. Leave granted. 2. Application for impleadment allowed. 3. These appeals by special leave, arise from the judgment and order of the Division Bench of the Allahabad High Court, made on February 27, 1997 and March 2, 1997 in CM. Application No. 1255(W)/97 in Writ Petition No. 775(MB)/97 and Writ Petition No. 775/MB/97. 4. It is not necessary to reiterate all the factual details. Suffice it to state that the appellant had used the sugarcane supplied by the cane growers individually or through the societies. As a consequence, we are informed, around Rs. 29 crores are in arrears for payment to the cane-growers. The Collector exercising the power of recovery proceedings had attached the sugar stock-in- hand; against that, the appellant filed a writ petition. Pending writ petition, the High Court has granted certain directions, which ultimately could not be complied with. Consequently, the interim directions stood vacated. Thus, these app...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1997SC2708; JT1997(5)SC615; 1997(4)SCALE347; (1997)6SCC365; [1997]3SCR1175; 1997(2)LC147(SC); (1997)3UPLBEC1573
Leave granted. Intervention application is dismissed. Here is aclassiccase ofdelay defeats justice".This appeal by special leave arises from the order of the Division Bench of the AllahabadHigh Court, made on November 28, 1994 in writ petition No. 38070/94. Itis notnecessary to give in detail all the facts. Sufficeit to state that pursuant toan advertisement on March 14, 1978 for selection to the post of Professor, AncientHistory, Mr. K.K. Sharma, the 3rd respondent had appliedfor selection. While the selection was to bemade by a committeeconsisting of Vice-Chancellor,the dean and three experts on the subject,of whomone wasfrom outside the University and two from outside thestate were comprised therein. On the day when the committeemet forselection of the teacher, two of the experts form outside the State did not attend themeeting. They appear to have acted upon the telegram sent by the Vice-Chancellor asking them to abstain from the selection panel. The Vic e-chancellor, theDean and t...
Tag this Judgment!