Court : US Supreme Court
Pasadena City Bd. of Ed. v. Spangler - 423 U.S. 1335 (1975) U.S. Supreme Court Pasadena City Bd. of Ed. v. Spangler, 423 U.S. 1335 (1975) Pasadena City Board of Education v. Spangler No. A-538 Decided December 22, 1975 423 U.S. 1335 ON APPLICATION FOR STAY Syllabus Application to stay, pending disposition of appeal by Court of Appeals, the District Court's order enjoining applicant school board members' creation of a "fundamental school" is granted, where certiorari has been granted in applicants' related petition presenting the issue whether the District Court still had control over the unitary school system which has been in compliance with that court's desegregation decree for four years. MR. JUSTICE REHNQUIST, Circuit Justice. Applicants, members of the Pasadena City Board of Education, have presented to me as Circuit Justice a request to stay an order entered by the United States District Court for the Central District of California pending disposition of their appeal ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1977SC69; (1976)3SCC321
ORDERM.H. Beg, J.1. This application purporting to be for review of judgment and/or for clarification and/or expunging of the observations from the judgment has been filed under Order 47 of the Supreme Court Rules which indicates the inherent powers of this Court.2. The body of the petition as well as the prayers made show that the applicant has no grievance against the common conclusions of the five learned Judges of this Court, including myself, who delivered five separate judgments in the election Civil Appeal No. 887 of 1975 and the cross appeal No. 909 of 1975, the first by Shrimati Indira Nehru Gandhi and the second by Shri Raj Narain, who were candidates at an election held in Rae Bareli constituency in Uttar Pradesh in the first week of March, 1971. This petition of the election petitioner sets out the issues framed in the Trial Court. It then states facts showing that the 39th Amendment of the Constitution as well as some amendments by the Election Laws (Amendment) Act 40 of 1...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1976SC939; (1976)1SCC863; [1976]3SCR82
P.N. Bhagwati, J.1. This appeal under Section 116-A of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 is directed against an order made by the High Court of Mysore setting aside the election of the appellant on the ground that the nomination paper of the 1st respondent was improperly rejected by the Returning Officer. This litigation does not stand in isolation. It has a history and that is necessary to be noticed in order to appreciate the arguments which have been advanced on behalf of both parties in the appeal.2. The appellant and the 1st respondent have been opponents in the electoral battle since a long time. The constituency from which they have been standing as candidates is 68 KGF Constituency for election to the Mysore Legislative Assembly. They opposed each other as candidates from this constituency in 1967 General Election to the Mysore Legislative Assembly. Now, the seat from this constituency was a seat reserved for Scheduled Castes and, therefore, only members of Scheduled c...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1976SC1121; (1976)2SCC134; [1976]3SCR75; 1976(8)LC237(SC)
P.N. Shinghal, J.1. Maguni Charan Dwivedi, the appellant, filed a title suit in the Court of Munsif, Sundargarh against the State of Orissa, for declaration of his title and recovery of possession of plot No. 99 measuring 3.80 acres in khata No. 89 of village Mahulpali claiming it as his 'ganju bhogra' land. The suit was decreed on October 14, 1958, in respect of 3.45 acres. The defendant State of Orissa, did not file an appeal and the decree became final. Decree holder Dwivedi applied for its execution. The case was transferred to the court of the Subordinate Judge of Sundargarh. An objection was taken there by the Notified Area Council, Rourkela, respondent No. 2, hereinafter referred to as the Council, under Sections 37 and 38 and Order XXI Rule 58 of the CPC on the ground that it was in actual physical possession of the land. The objection application was however rejected by the execution court on March 31, 1965. The Council applied for revision of the order of rejection, but its a...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1976SC410; (1976)4SCC124; [1976]3SCR99; [1976]37STC489(SC)
S. Murtaza Fazal Ali, J.1. This is an appeal by special leave against the judgment and order of the Madhya Pradesh High Court dated April 23, 1974, dismissing the writ petition filed by the appellant before the High Court for quashing the orders of the assessing authorities imposing tax under the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956, on the basis of a number of sales made by the appellant-company in pursuance of multifarious contracts of sale. The appellant-company was formed in pursuance of an agreement dated June 8, 1962, between the President of India and the Central Provinces Manganese Ore Company Limited. Before this agreement the said company which will be hereafter referred to as the 'C.P.M.O. C.' was a private company incorporated in the United Kingdom and carried on the business of extracting manganese ore from several mines in the erstwhile States of C. P. and Berar and Bombay. By virtue of the agreement referred to above a new company was formed under which the Government of India, t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : (1976)5CTR(SC)303
Fazal Ali, J. - This is an appeal by special leave against the judgment and order of the Madhya Pradesh High Court dated April 23, 1974 dismissing the writ petition filed by the appellant before the High Court for quashing the orders of the Assessing Authorities imposing tax under the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 on the basis of a number of sales made by the appellant company in pursuance of multifarious contracts of sale. The appellant company was formed in pursuance of an agreement dated June 8, 1962 between the President of India and the Central Provinces Manganese Ore Company Limited. Before this agreement the said Company which will be hereafter referred to as the C.P.M.O.C. was a private company incorporated in the United Kingdom and carried on the business of extracting manganese ore from several mines in the erstwhile States of C.P. & Berar and Bombay. By virtue of the agreement referred to above a new Company was formed under which the Government of India, the Government of Mah...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1976SC578; (1976)1SCC671; [1976]3SCR58
R.S. Sarkaria, J.1. Whether the proprietor of a cinema theatre holding a licence for exhibiting cinematograph films is entitled to invoke the certiorari jurisdiction ex debito justitiae to get a 'No-Objection Certificate', granted under Rule 6 of the Bombay Cinema Rules, 1954 for short, the Rules) by the District Magistrate in favour of a rival in the trade, brought up and quashed on the ground that it suffers from a defect of jurisdiction. is the principal question that falls to be determined in this appeal by special leave.2. The circumstances giving rise to this appeal are as follows: Respondents 1 and 2 are owners of a site, bearing Survey No. 98 in the town of Mehmadabad. They made an application under Rule 3 of the Rules to District Magistrate, Kaira. for the grant of a Certificate that there was no objection to the location of a cinema, theatre at this site. The District Magistrate then notified in the prescribed form, the substance of the application by publication in newspaper...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1976SC404; 1976LabIC297; (1976)ILLJ288SC; (1976)1SCC529; [1976]3SCR110
R.S. Sarkaria, J.1. Respondents 1,2 and 3 herein made an application under Article 226 of the Constitution, alleging that the decision of the Bihar State Government fixing the seniority' of Respondent 4 below Shri C.P. Singh (Respondent 5) and Shri E. Rehman (Respondent 6) and above the apply cants, in the cadre of Bihar Superior Judicial Service was illegal and ultra vires. They prayed for a writ of mans damus, direction or order quashing th9 same and directing the State Government to revise the applicant's seniority vis-a-vis the opposite parties, (Respondents 4, 5 and 6 herein).2. The applicants also challenged the upgrading of the posts of Deputy Registrar, Patna High Court and the Secretary, Bihar . Legislative Assembly with effect from June 171 1959 till the posts were held by Respondents 5 and 6, respectively. 3. A Full Bench of the High Court, partly, allowed the writ application and quashed the order of the State Government placing Respondent 4 below Respondents 5 and 6 in sen...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1976SC417; (1976)1SCC843; [1976]3SCR1; 1976(8)LC302(SC)
M.H. Beg, J.1. The appellant before us, by grant of special leave to appeal against the judgment of a Division Bench of the Allahabad High Court, Challenged the validity of a Housing Scheme, first notified on 13th March, 1965, under Section 36 of the U.P. Town Improvement Act No. VIII of 1919 (here-inafter referred to as 'the Act'), and then finally sanctioned, under Section 32(1) of the U.P. Avas Evam Vikas Parishad Adhiniyam (U.P. Act I of 1966 hereinafter referred to as 'the Adhiniyam'), and published on 3rd May, 1969 in the U. P. Gazette.2. learned Counsel for the petitioner has invited our attention to the five objections put forward and rejected by the Division Bench to the acquisition for purposes of the scheme. Out of these, he has abandoned two. He confines his objections to three which are as follows:3. Firstly, as the notification under Section 8 of the Act of 1919, indicating the commencement of the term of the office of the 1st Trustees took place only on 21st February, 19...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1976SC2198; (1976)1SCC574; [1976]3SCR55; 1976(8)LC152(SC)
R.S. Sarkaria, J.1. The following pedigree table illustrates the relationship of the parties:Hiralal : Smt. Naraini Devi (Plaintiff) (died in 1925).--------------------------------------------------------------------Kapoor Chand (died in 1954) Nemi Chand Chandra Bhan Smt. Rarrio Devi Judgment- (died in 1930) (Respondent 1) debtor (extinct). (Decree-holder)2. Smt. Ramq Devi, widow of Kapur Chand (shown in the above pedigree table) obtained a money decree against her husband's brother, Nemi Chand. In execution of her decree she got attached one half share in the double storeyed House No. 4416, situated at Agra, representing it to be of the judgment debtor. Smt. Naraini Devi, widow of Hira Lal, filed an objection-petition under Order 21, Rule 58, CPC against that attachment claiming the house to be her property. That objection was dismissed by the executing court on the 16th July, 1962. Thereafter, she filed a suit under Order 21, Rule 63, CPC to establish her claim. The suit was decreed ...
Tag this Judgment!