Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : (2000)163CTR(SC)393
ORDERBy the CourtThe High Court answered the following question in the affirmative and in favour of the assessee ..'Whether the Tribunal is right in law and on facts in directing that the value of unquoted shares of Cadila Laboratories (P) Ltd. be worked out as per rule 1D of the Wealth Tax Rules, as interpreted by the Gujarat High Court in the case of CWT v. Ashok K. Parikh : [1981]129ITR46(Guj) ?'It relied upon its earlier judgment in the case of CWT v. Ashok K. Parikh : [1981]129ITR46(Guj) .2. The issue raised by the question was considered by this court in the case of Bharat Hari Singhania v. CWT : [1994]207ITR1(SC) and a contrary view was taken.Accordingly following the said judgment of this court, the civil appeals are allowed and the order under appeal to set aside.No order as to costs....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : [2000(87)FLR654]; (2001)ILLJ322SC; (2001)10SCC547; (2001)1UPLBEC69
ORDERS. Rajendra Babu and D.P. Mohapatra, JJ.1. A writ petition was filed by the respondent in the High Court seeking for a declaration that the contemplated action of the appellant before us in terminating the service of the respondent on January 27, 1996 or on any other subsequent date thereto is illegal and to prohibit the appellant from taking such action.The learned single Judge declined to entertain that petition observing that the appropriate course for the respondent would be to work out his rights in an alternative proceeding. Thereupon, an appeal was preferred. In the appeal while issuing notice an interim relief was granted in the following terms:Notice for April 24, 1996. Meanwhile, we direct that appellant's service be not terminated except on disciplinary proceedings or if the workload is not enough, the principle of 'last to come first to go' should be followed. The appellant should be continued only in accordance with the scheme, if any, followed by the respondent.2. Su...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : (2001)10SCC625
A.S. Anand, C.J.,; N. Santosh Hegde and; Shivaraj V. Patil, JJ.1. The appellant is a resident of Haryana and belongs to the reserved category of Other Backward Classes (OBC) as declared by the State Government. He appeared for the Common Engineering Entrance Test (CEET), 1999-2000 conducted by Regional Engineering College, Kurukshetra for admission to various engineering colleges in the State of Haryana. He sought admission against the seat reserved for OBC candidate. The father of the appellant, who admittedly is a Class II officer with the State Government, applied to Respondent 3 Deputy Commissioner, Yamuna Nagar, Haryana, for issuance of an OBC certificate. That certificate was denied to the appellant vide order of the Deputy Commissioner, Yamuna Nagar dated 24-6-1999 on the ground that “the income for the last three years of the father of the applicant is more than 3 lakhs”. The said order of the Deputy Commissioner was put in issue by the appellant through his father ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : (2003)9SCC251
S. Rajendra Babu and; D.P. Mohapatra, JJ.1. A reference was made to the Tribunal on 18-10-1988 by the Government to adjudicate upon several questions including:1. Confirmation of workers.2. Revision of wage rates.3. National and festival holidays.4. Supply of uniforms.5. Issuance of identity cards.6. Overtime wages for extra work.7. Annual bonus for 1985-86.8. Filling up of existing vacancies.2. The case put forth by the workmen is that they were engaged in Neendakara Fishing Harbour Project since the stage of investigation and were doing the work as Driver, Watchman, Seaman, Electrician and Sweeper. The Fishing Harbour was commissioned on 28-3-1987. Then the workmen concerned raised a dispute that they have become permanent employees of the Project and they are entitled to not only confirmation in the service but also other benefits. The Tribunal on consideration of the matter made an award stating that the workmen concerned are entitled to get confirmation in various categories and t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR2000SC3131; JT2000(10)SC607; 2000(6)SCALE440; (2000)7SCC679; [2000]Supp3SCR357
M.B. Shah, J.1. The question involved in this group of special leave petitions is -- Whether the employees of Municipal Corporation can claim any right for transfer of municipal quarters to them on the basis of the resolutions passed by the Municipal Corporation, which are not initiated or moved but objected to by the Municipal Commissioner? It is the contention of the petitioners that once the Corporation passes the resolution for such transfers, the Commissioner has to abide by it and on objection being taken by him the resolution cannot be nullified. The submission, in our view, is without any substance because of the specific statutory provisions under the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, 1957 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act').2. Facts of the present case reveal that since 1970 the Municipal Corporation had been passing resolutions, one after another, for transferring the quarters to its employees. The said resolutions are objected to by the Municipal Commissioner on one groun...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : (2002)10SCC254
G.B. Pattanaik and; M.B. Shah, JJ.1. This is an appeal by the Maharashtra State Electricity Board assailing the judgment of the Bombay High Court dated 16-4-1996.2. The short question that arises for consideration in this appeal is, whether a Sub-Engineer who seeks transfer from one cadre to the other and gets such a transfer, would be entitled to claim seniority in the transferred cadre by reckoning the past services rendered in the earlier cadre into account.3. It is not disputed that under the Maharashtra State Electricity Board the Sub-Engineers were in different Circles and Sub-Engineers of each Circle constitute a cadre by itself. It is also not disputed that prior to 21-10-1980 the seniority of such Sub-Engineers was on Circle level which fact has also been stated in the impugned judgment of the High Court. The two respondents while seeking transfer from their original Circle to Akola Circle, themselves indicated to the employer that they are ready and willing to lose their seni...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : (2003)IIILLJ1077SC; (2003)9SCC228
G.B. Pattanaik and; M.B. Shah, JJ.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment of the Allahabad High Court allowing the writ petition filed by the respondent and quashing the order of dismissal from service of the respondent and directing his reinstatement and continuity of service. The respondent who had been initially appointed as a Junior Clerk was promoted as Senior Clerk and then had been deputed to the Secretariat to the Department of Area Development. While continuing on deputation he was repatriated to his parent organisation on 28-9-1988 and he was relieved on 28-12-1988. But since he did not join his parent organisation, the appropriate authority placed him under suspension vide order dated 1-8-1990. A regular disciplinary proceeding was initiated and certain charges were levelled against him. The respondent did not participate in the enquiry proceedings and ultimately the enquiry officer found him guilty of the charges levelled against him. On the basis of the finding of ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : [2000(87)FLR797]; (2002)9SCC662
S. Rajendra Babu and; D.P. Mohapatra, JJ.1. This appeal is directed against the order made by the High Court by which the respondent is ordered to be regularised in the services of the appellant as Junior Office Assistant-cum-Typist. She had been appointed on 22-10-1990 in the said post for a term and her services were extended from time to time till January 1995. In January 1995 when her services were sought to be terminated, she approached the High Court seeking relief of regularisation of her services on the basis that she had continued from the year 1990 to 1995; that her services were for over five years; that the post was vacant; that there was absolutely no basis to terminate her services. Learned Single Judge gave the relief on that basis after examining some of the decisions of this Court in relation to regularisation of services. On appeal, the Division Bench affirmed that order, of course, after examining certain larger issues which really do not arise for consideration in t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : (2002)10SCC485
V.N. Khare and; S.N. Phukan, JJ.1. The appellant herein is a trust which alleges that “Masthan Oorani” is its private property. According to the appellant, the said oorani is a separate oorani and it is used for drawing water for drinking to all the community irrespective of any caste or religion. In the year 1968 certain persons tried to interfere with the possession of the appellant and, therefore, the appellant was compelled to file a suit before the District Munsif, Paramakudi for declaration and permanent injunction. The said suit was decreed.2. In the said suit, the State of Tamil Nadu was one of the defendants. Subsequently, the Tamil Nadu Legislature by amending Act 49 of 1974 inserted Section 14-A in the Tamil Nadu Estates (Abolition and Conversion into Ryotwari) Act (T.N. Act 26 of 1948) (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”).3. On the basis of the aforesaid amendment, Panchayat Anaiyur sent a notice restraining the appellant from cutting trees grown a...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : (2003)9SCC182
V.N. Khare and; S.N. Phukan, JJ.1. Leave granted.2. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 21-11-1996 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Patna, dismissing the revision filed by the appellant herein summarily. The Government of Bihar issued a notification under sub-section (1) of Section 3 of the Bihar Consolidation of Holdings and Prevention of Fragmentation Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) declaring its intention to bring a certain specified area under the consolidation operations. The said notification was issued as far back as 26-11-1970. The said notification also included the area falling within the limits of Hajipur, which was to be brought under the consolidation operations. It is alleged by the appellant that the area falling within the limits of Hajipur included the plots of land situated in Village Purba, Thana No. 109, Anchal Hajipur, District Vaishali, Village Kuari, Khurd Thana and Anchal Hajipur, District Vaishali, ...
Tag this Judgment!