Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: mediation Court: rajasthan Year: 1974 Page 1 of about 38 results (0.016 seconds)

Sep 30 1974 (HC)

Firoj Jal Moti Shaw Vs. Jagdish Prasad

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Sep-30-1974

Reported in : 1974WLN823

s.n. modi, j.1. appellant firoj jal moti shaw and respondent jagdish prasad were candidates for the general seat from ward no. 6 for election as members to the mount abumunicipality. mount abu, hereinafter to be referred to as the municipality from the same ward. bala was candidate for the reserved seat, the elections took place on 26-10-70 and the appellant and bala were declared duly elected from ward no. 6 for the respondent who general election and reserved seats respetively. the secured less votes than the appellant, presented an election petition under section 34 of therajasthan municipality act, 1959, hereinafter to be referred as the act, calling in question the election of the appellant as also of bala on the ground that both of them were guilty of corrupt practices. an additional ground was also taken by the respondent that the appellant was disqualified for being elected as member by reason of clause (xii) of section 26 of the act. it was contended that the appellant on account of his being 'sarvesarva' (all-in-all) employee of the mount abu electric supply company, mt. abu, hereinafter described as the company, had direct or in-direct interest in the contract for the supply of electricity entered into between the company and the municipality. the election petition was opposed by the appellant as also by bala. the learned civil judge who tried the election petition, framed the following issues:1. whether the non-applicant no. 1 was disqualified to stand for the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 12 1974 (HC)

Chatru and ors. Vs. the State of Rajasthan

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Jul-12-1974

Reported in : 1974WLN(UC)353

b.p. bert, j.1. chatru was convicted under section 148 of the indian penal code and sentenced to 9 month's rigorous imprisonment and was also convicted under section 307 ipc. and awarded 3 years' rigorous imprisonment by the learned assistant sessions judge, alwar. the rest or the applicants were also convicted under sections 148 and 307 read with section 149 i.p.c. & each one of them was sentenced to 9 months' rigorous imprisonment under section 148 and 3 years' rigorous imprisonment under section 307/149 of the indian penal code these sentences were ordered to run concurrently. they preferred an unsuccessful appeal before the learned assistant sessions judge. still dissatisfied the nine application are before me seeking a revision of the judgment of the learned sessions judge, alwar.2. this is one of those usual cases where the dispute arose about an agricultural parcel of land. the prosecution says that one the moring of may 23, 1966 sultan and his brothers gangaram, kanhaiya and harchand and his another relation surtaram went to khasra no. 564 situate in viilage pehal. in the one fourth share where of they had sown the crop of jawar only a few days ago, chatru (sheonarain, bodan and chandgi applicants before me were found ploughing the aforesaid field and thereby destroying the crop. pirabh umarao, durga, bishambhar and harnarain were sitting on the wall nearby when sultan questioned as to why they were destroying the crop which they had sown, the accused asserted that it .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 02 1974 (HC)

Babulal and anr. Vs. Kishna Ram and ors.

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Jan-02-1974

Reported in : 1974WLN(UC)50

d.p. gupta, j.1. babulal and shriniwas filed an application under section 145, cr. p.c. in the court of sub-divisional magistrate, churu on october 7, 1969, alleging that the respondents ki hnaram, jeetaram and others were illegally trying to interfere with the possession of the applicants over khasra nos. 602, 604 and 606 (new) corresponding to 'khasra' no. 207 (old) in village ghanghoo, measuring 7 big has' 15 biswas', which the applicants claimed to be in their possession on the basis of a registered sale deed dated november 8 1968, executed by mularam in favour of mohanlal brother of the applicants. it was alleged that the respondents were trying to take over unlawful possession of the aforesaid land and there was imminent danger of breach of peace. the learned sub-divisional magistrate. churu, passed a preliminary order on october 7, 1969, and issued notices to the opposite parties directing them to me their written statement, affidavits and d cuments. the learned sub-divisional magistrate by his order dated october 9, 1969. attached the land in dispute & appointed the (sic) tehsldar as the receiver thereof. on november 4, 1969, the applicants filed two affidavits including one of jeetaram, response-dent no. 4, in which he stated that he was growing vegetables on the land in dispute for the last eight years on behalf of the villagers of ghanghoo, but during the previous year he grew vegetables in the disputed land after obtaining the permission of babulal and shriniwas .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 19 1974 (HC)

Chander Singh Vs. the Collector, Sikar and ors.

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Mar-19-1974

Reported in : AIR1975Raj200; 1974(7)WLN282

orderc.m. lodha, j. 1. by this writ application under article 226 of the constitution of india, the petitioner, who was sarpanch of gram panchayat, bibipur chhota, district sikar, has challenged the motion of no-confidence passed against him on 27-9-1972. the validity of no-confidence motion is being challenged on the following grounds:-- (1) it has not been passed by 1/4th of the total number of members of the panchayat including sarpanch as provided by section 19(2) of the rajasthan panchayat act, 1953 (which will hereinafter for the sake of brevity be referred to as 'the act.') (2) that the notice of no-confidence motion dated 12-9-1972 marked ex. 1a is bad because,-- (a) it does not set out the proposed motion of no-confidence in extenso as required by rule 14 (2) of the rajasthan panchayat and nyaya panchayat (general) rules, 1961 (which will hereinafter be called 'the rules'); (b) the notice is not addressed to the deputy district development officer as required by rule 14 (1) of the rules; (c) the proceedings for calling a special meeting of the panchayat for consideration of the motion were conducted not by the deputy district development officer as required by rule 15 (1) of the rules, but were conducted by the additional district development officer, who had no authority to do so; (d) the signatures of the mover of the no-confidence motion in the notice has not been attested by an official of the state government or of a panchayat samiti propose to take up these .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 23 1974 (HC)

Ramchandra Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Aug-23-1974

Reported in : 1974WLN753

c.m. lodha, j.1. the petitioner ram chandra, surpanch, gram panchayat, shivbari, tehsil bikaner has filed this writ petition praying that the orders passed by additional district development officer, bikaner, dated 291-1973 and 3-2-1973 marked annexure 3 and 3 respectively holding that nonconfidence motion against the petitioner has been carried out, be set aside. the relevant facts necessary for the purpose of disposing of this writ petition may be briefly stated as follows.2. the petitioner was elected as sarpanch of gram panchayat, shivbari in the year 1 65 on 29-12-1972 the nonpetitioner no. 4 delivered a notice of motion nonconfidence against the petitioner to the additional district development officer, bikaner on which the additional district development officer, bikaner (who will hereinafter be referred to as the non petitioner no. 2) called a special meeting of the panchayat to be held on 12-1-1973 for consideration of the motion and authorised the tehsildar, bikaner nonpetitioner no. 3 to preside at the meeting. on 9.1.1973 haji khan made an application to the non-petitioner no. 2 that he wanted to withdraw the notice of non confidence moved by him. the petitioner's case is that inspite of hajikhan's desire to withdraw the notice, the meeting was held on 12.1.1973 it may be stated here that the number of panchas fixed by the state government under section 4 of the rajasthan panchayat act, 1953 (which will hereinafter be called 'the panchayat act') is 13 but 4 seats .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 16 1974 (HC)

Brij Vallabh Singh Mehta Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Apr-16-1974

Reported in : 1974WLN419

kan singh, j.1. shri brij vallabh singh mehta, who is a member of the rajasthan administrative service to be shortly described as r.a.s. seeks an appropriate writ, direction or order (i) for quashing the appointment of respondent shri brahma dutt sharma to the selection of the r.a.s. made with effect from 26.12.70, (ii) to ordain the state government to appoint the petitioner to the selection scale of the r.a.s. vide shri brahma dutt sharma with effect from 26 12 70, (ii) in the alternative the respondents be directed to get the case of the petitioner reconsidered for appointment to the selection scale by the departmental promotion committee, as there would be one vacancy in the selection grade from 26 12 70 consequential reliefs are prayed for if any of the above prayers are allowed for directing the union of india and the state of rajasthan restraining them from giving effect to the orders of appointments by promotion to respondents nos. 3 to 32 to the selection grade.2. further, if in the meantime any of the respondents nos. 3 to 32 i' found to have been appointed to the indian administrative service then such order or orders of the appointment be quashed and the union of india and the state of rajasthan be directed to reconsider the case of the petitioner for appointment by promotion to the indian administrative service against the vacancy or vacancies existing upto july, 1973. the r.a.s. comprises three scales of pay one is ordinary time scale rs. 375 850, the next one .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 11 1974 (HC)

Om Prakash Mathur Vs. the State

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Feb-11-1974

Reported in : 1974WLN324

k.d. sharma, j.1. the appellant, who was a sub-inspector of railway protection force, jaipur, has been convicted under section 161, i.p.c. and section 5(2) read with section 5(1)(d) of the prevention of corruption act by the learned special judge, jaipur, and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of rs. 500/-, in default of payment of fine to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for three months.2. the prosecution case against the appellant, shortly, stated, is that om prakash appellant was functioning as a sub-inspector in charge of railway protection force post attached to western railway, jaipur, in the beginning of april, 1969. as sub-inspector of railway protection force, it was one of his duties to make an investigation of a crime of unlawful possession of railway property punishable under section 3 of the railway property (unlawful possession) act, 1966. while investigating a case of unlawful possession of railway property (cr. no. 9 of 1969) he required the attendance of one r.k. malik, who was posted as shunter, 'a' great locoshed, jaipur, and who was temporarily working in that capacity at loco-shed phulera. the appellant, therefore, sent a telegram to loco foreman, loco-shed, phulera, on 20th april, 1969, to spare shri r.k. malik and to send him to jaipur for interrogation in the said case. in response to that r.k. malik came to jaipur on 22nd april, 1969, in the forenoon. the appellant informed shri r.k. malik that there was a .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 11 1974 (HC)

State of Rajasthan Vs. Masits

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Oct-11-1974

Reported in : 1974WLN895

kalyan dutta sharma, j.1. this is an appeal filed by the state against a judgment of special excise magistrate, first class, jaipur, dated 6th february, 1971, acquitting masita respondent of an offence punishable under section 54 of the rajasthan excise act, 1950.2. the prosecution case against the respondent was that on 19.10.1968 at about 8.15 a.m. he was seen near nawab crossing, ghat-gate, jaipur; carrying illicit liquor in a gunny bag on the carrier of his cycle by head constable radha gopal and two other constables who were patrolling the area. the head constable asked the respondent to stop out the latter ran away after leaving the cycle, the gunny-bag containing 8 bottles of illicit wipe and his chhappals the head constable seized all these articles in the presence of motbirs after taking a sample of illicit wine for chemical analysis. the articles seized were properly sealed there and then the head constable thereafter made a written report to the station house officer; ramganj police station, who registered a criminal case on its basis and deputed the informant to make an investigation into the case. radria gopal conducted the usual investigation and sent the sample to the chemical analyser for analysis, who later on gave a report that the sample of wine contained 12 54 percent v/v ethyl alcohol. after collecting other necessary evidence, radha gopal head constable submitted the papers to madan lal, station house officer, police station, ramganj, who, eventually .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 09 1974 (HC)

State of Rajasthan Vs. Balmukand

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : May-09-1974

Reported in : 1974WLN367

1. this appeal and 107 other appeals detailed in annexure a' and the 10 writ petitions detailed in annexure! 'b' to this judgment, raise common questions of law relating to the rajasthan excise act, 1950 (hereinafter railed 'the act') and can be conveniently disposed of together. the respondents in these appeals were the petitioners before the learned single judge who had licences from the excise department for the retail sale of country liquor and we shall call them for the sake of convenience 'liquor contractor'. they challenged by their petitions under article 226 of the constitution that the state of rajasthan was unjustified in law in demanding from them moneys which amounted to the excise duty in respect of the liquor which they had not drawn. the state of rajasthan filed no written answer but it was contended on their behalf that the liquor contractors had to pay certain guarantee amount of money and if they failed to perform their obligations in terms of their licences the state was entitled to recover that amount. it was contended by mr. kasliwal, former advocate general, appearing before the learned single judge, that what was being collected from the liquor con- tractors had a component of excise duty but what was being realised from the liquor contractors was the licence-fee. accepting the reasoning, given in kanniya lal bhatia & co. v. the state of haryana and ors. writ petition no. 343 of 1969--decided on 23rd july, 1969 by the high court of punjab and other .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 07 1974 (HC)

Rewat Dan and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : May-07-1974

Reported in : 1975CriLJ691; 1974(7)WLN414

orderk.d. sharma, j.1. this is an application for anticipatory bail on behalf of rewat dan and four others namely, ber dan, ridkaran, bhayaria and budiya, who stand involved in a criminal case under section 395 of the indian penal code which is pending in the court of munsif and judicial magistrate, district jodhpur.2. the case of dacoity against the five petitioners has been instituted upon a complaint filed by smt. madan kan-war in the court of the said magistrate on 28-'8i69. the allegations in the complaint were that all the five petitioners made a concerted attack on the complainant and forcibly snatched a box containing ornaments from her hand while she was proceeding towards her house after getting down from train at mathania railway station on 2-6-69 at about 11-15 p.m. according to the complainant, she was taken to police station mathania by her mother-in-law soon after the occurrence,, but the police did not record her first information report for reasons best known to it. she was then brought by her husband's sister to jodhpur where she was medically examined as to her injuries at mahatma gandhi hospital on 3-6^69. she was admitted in the hospital for treatment of her injuries. in the evening her husband came to know from her about the occurrence. the husband of smt. madan kanwar made an application to the superintendent of police which was forwarded to the station house officer, mathania for necessary action. the station house officer, however, did not care to .....

Tag this Judgment!


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //