Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 2010(2)SCALE303
K.S. Radhakrishnan, J.1. Leave granted.2. Notice was issued on the special leave petition on the limited question of award of full back-wages on reinstatement. Labour Court, Bharatpur vide its award dated 3.4.1996 ordered reinstatement with full back wages when the service of the respondent was terminated without enquiry and without assigning any reasons. The writ petition filed by the appellant was dismissed on 11.5.1999 which was ultimately affirmed by the Division Bench of the High Court of Rajasthan vide its judgment dated 4.3.2008. The said order is challenged in this appeal. Respondent workman then filed an application under Section 33(C)(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act 1947 before the Labour Court Bharatpur as LCC 1/2005 for computation of monetary benefits. The Labour Court passed an order dated 3.9.2008 awarding a total amount of Rs. 5,16,032.01 towards back wages. Though the respondent was reinstated in service on 9.6.2005, there is serious dispute between the parties as to...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 2010(2)SCALE345
Mukundakam Sharma, J.1. The issue that falls for consideration in the present appeal is whether the show cause notice issued by the respondent is illegal and defective as the same did not provide for a time period of 15 days as prescribed in the statute and also because it did not disclose materials leading to the satisfaction of the concerned authorities justifying the issuance of such a show cause notice.2. The appellant Company was carrying on the business of manufacturing various types of papers at its paper mill situated at Village Raninagar Chakdah, District Nadia, Kolkata. In the course of its carrying on business it filed necessary returns as required under the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) Act, 1941 (for short the '1941 Act') and also paid the taxes on the basis of the said return. The Revenue also completed the assessment proceeding which was deemed to have been made under Section 11E(1) of the 1941 Act by operation of law. Subsequently, however, the appellant received a show ca...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 2010(2)SCALE309
K.G. Balakrishnan, C.J.1. The present writ petition was instituted in this Court by way of public interest litigation under Article 32 of the Constitution of India. The petitioners have levelled some allegations against the incumbent Chief Minister of the State of Sikkim who was impleaded as Respondent No. 2 herein. The crux of these allegations is that he has misused his public office to amass assets disproportionate to his known sources of income. The petitioners have also alleged that he has misappropriated a large volume of public money at the cost of the Government of India and the Government of Sikkim. The relief sought by the petitioners is the issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) to investigate the allegations that have been levelled against him.2. It may be recalled that the State of Sikkim had become a full fledged state of the Union of India, following the enactment of the Thirty-sixth Amendment to the Constitution which was give...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 2010(2)SCALE204; (2010)4SCC653
Dalveer Bhandari, J.1. Leave granted.2. This appeal is directed against the judgment of the High Court of Judicature at Patna passed in Criminal Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 553 of 2006 dated 14.08.2007.3. The appellant is aggrieved by the notification No. 184A dated 20th May, 2006 whereby the Patna High Court in exercise of administrative powers conferred under Sub-section (6) of Section 9 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Code') has been pleased to decide that the premises of the District Jail, Siwan will be the place of sitting of the Court of Sessions for the Sessions Division of Siwan for the expeditious trial of Sessions cases pending against Md. Shahabuddin.4. The appellant is also aggrieved by the two notifications bearing No. A/Act-01/2006 Part-1452/J corresponding to S.O. No. 80 dated 7.6.2006 and No. A/Act-01/2006 Part-1453/J corresponding to S.O. No. 82 dt. 7.6.2006 issued by the State of Bihar at the behest of the High Court of Patna. T...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
ORDER1. All these appeals involve similar and connected facts. Since, the legal issues that arise for our consideration are also similar, we proceed to dispose of all these appeals by this common judgment and order.2. Before we delve into the facts of the case, it would be appropriate for us to deal with the miscellaneous applications that have been filed in this Court and also the statement of the learned Counsel for the appellant in Criminal Appeal Nos. 805-806 of 2003.3. Criminal Miscellaneous Petition Nos. 6391 to 6394 of 2010 in Criminal Appeal Nos. 1515-1516 of 2003 and Criminal Miscellaneous Petition Nos. 6396-6399 of 2010 in Criminal Appeal Nos. 1527-1528 of 2003 are applications filed by the legal representatives of the accused No. 1 namely, Kumaraguru seeking for substitution of their names in place of the deceased appellant- accused No. 1. During the pendency of the appeals in this Court, appellant-accused No. 1 died on 9th April, 2007. The present applications have therefor...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 2010(2)SCALE187
Asok Kumar Ganguly, J.1. Leave granted.2. This appeal by the husband, impugns the judgment and order dated 27.07.09 of Delhi High Court which upheld the judgment and order of the Additional District Judge passed in relation to applications filed by both the parties under Section 26 of the Hindu Marriage Act (hereinafter 'the Act'). The impugned judgment permitted the respondent-wife to take the child with her to Australia.3. The material facts of the case are that the parties to the present appeal were married as per the Hindu rites on 10.12.2000. A child, Master Shivam, was born to them on 05.08.02. In view of irreconcilable differences between the parties they had agreed for a divorce by mutual consent under Section 13B of the Act and filed a petition to that effect and on 05.09.06 a decree of divorce on mutual consent was passed by the Additional District Judge, Delhi.4. As regards the custody of the child there was some settlement between the parties and according to the appellant ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 2010(2)SCALE315
K.G. Balakrishnan, C.J.1. In the city of Delhi, there were several hazardous and noxious industries, as also several large and heavy industries, causing extensive pollution. The Master Plan for Delhi - Perspective 2001, which was published in the Gazette of India on 01.08.1990, did not permit any of these industries to operate in Delhi. In a Public Interest Litigation i.e. M.C. Mehta v. Union of India and Ors. IA No. 22 in W.P. (C) No. 4677/1985 the question of shifting these polluting industries from Delhi and relocating them outside the city of Delhi and other related issues were considered and a series of orders were passed regarding shifting and relocating the industries. The polluting industries were notified through individual notices, public notices in newspapers and electronic media. This Court monitored the matter from January, 1995 and all stake holders, including Union of India, Delhi Administration, Central Pollution Control Board, National Capital Region Planning Board, De...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 2010(2)SCALE272
Asok Kumar Ganguly, J.1. Leave granted.2. In SLP (C) Nos. 6758-6759/2009, Union of India and the Secretary, Union Public Service Commission are in appeal impugning the judgment and order dated 14.11.2008 delivered by the Delhi High Court on the writ petition filed by Hemraj Singh Chauhan and Ramnawal Singh, the respondents herein.3. The respondents are members of the State Civil Service (S.C.S.) of the State of Uttar Pradesh and according to them completed eight years of service on 23.07.85 and 4.6.86 respectively. The contention of the respondents is that in terms of Regulation 5(3) of the Indian Administrative Service (Appointment by Promotion) Regulations, 1955, a member of the S.C.S., who has attained the age of 54 years on the 1st day of January of the year in which the Committee meets, shall be considered by the Committee, provided he was eligible for such consideration on the 1st day of the year or of any of the years immediately preceding the year in which such meeting is held,...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 2010(2)SCALE305
R.V. Raveendran, J.1. Second respondent was an employee of the appellant - Food Corporation of India (`FCI' for short). His date of birth was 8.2.1943. On 16.2.1998, the second respondent gave a letter seeking retirement on medical grounds and appointment of his son on compassionate grounds. The said letter is extracted below:Sub: Retirement on medical grounds and appointment of son/close relatives on compassionate grounds. I am working as H.L. in F.S.D. Chandari Depot in gang No. 15. My health is not good. Physically I face difficulty in Sarder/ Manda/ Handling Labour/ Ancillary job. I, therefore request that the management may kindly retire me on medical grounds and at the same time give appointment to my Son/close relative Shri Md. Nizamudin aged 28.2.71 years, in place as F.S.D. Chandri in this depot, because there is no other person in the family to look after us. He has promised to look after me and family after my retirement.[Emphasis supplied]2. In pursuance of it, after medica...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 2010(2)SCALE181
R.V. Raveendran, J.1. Leave granted.Survey Nos. 59/3 and 59/1 of Jolarpettai village, Tirupattur Taluk, measuring 1.43 acres and 5.07 acres belonging to the respective appellant in the two appeals (along with another 0.27 acre) were acquired for the purpose of providing house sites for weaker sections, in pursuance of preliminary notification dated 7.6.1989. The Land Acquisition Officer determined the compensation for the said agricultural lands at Rs. 30,000/- per acre by his award dated 22.4.1992.2. The Reference Court by its judgment and award dated 11.9.1995 increased the compensation to Rs. 4,17,600/- per acre. It relied on a sale deed Ex. A1 dated 23.12.1988 relating to sale of a plot of land measuring 2520 sq. ft. in nearby Survey No. 65/3 for a sale consideration of Rs. 30,870/- which works out to Rs. 12.25 per sq.ft. or Rs. 533,610/- per acre. The Reference Court however took the market value under Ex. A1 as Rs. 12 sq.ft. or Rs. 5220/- per cent and after deducting 1/4th (Rs. 1...
Tag this Judgment!