Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: mediation Court: rajasthan Year: 1993 Page 2 of about 29 results (0.010 seconds)

Sep 07 1993 (HC)

thekedar Mazdoor Union Vs. Judge, Industrial Tribunal and anr.

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Sep-07-1993

Reported in : (1994)IILLJ670Raj

farooq hasan, j.1. the petitioner has challenged the award of the industrial tribunal, kota, passed in a reference case no. 177/1979.2. the dispute was as to whether the removal from service of workmen - rajendra kumar, hari singh, madan lal and ram lal, by m/s. multi metals ltd. (respondent no. 2) was justified and legal, and if not, what relief the workmen were entitled to. the main objection raised by the respondent no.2 was that the workmen were employed through contractors and as per the provisions of contract labour (regulation & abolition) act, 1970, the state government could not have made a reference under the industrial disputes act.3. the learned industrial tribunal framed the following points of 'dispute:-4. the point no. 1 framed by the learned industrial tribunal, was decided in favour of the workmen.5. there is no dispute that the aforesaid four persons (rajendra kumar, hari singh, madan lal and ramlal) were employed by rajasthan traders contractors. rajasthan traders contractors had a contract with the company (respondent no. 2) for making wooden boxes for which the contractor was paid at the rate of per box. contractor, for getting his work done, employed different persons at different times. he employed the aforesaid four persons and paid their wages. register of attendance and payment of wages of the aforesaid four employees was admittedly maintained by the contractor. the final payment at the time of termination was also made by him, as claimed by the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 15 1993 (HC)

Hangami Lal and anr. Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Feb-15-1993

Reported in : 1993WLN(UC)105

rajendra saxena, j.1. heard.2. by the means of this writ petition the petitioners has prayed that the circular no. 2(4) raj./4/90/37 dated 13/12/1991. (annex. 4) issued by the dy. secretary to the government, revenue (gr. 6) department rajasthan. jaipur addressed to all the collectors be quashed and the respondents be directed not to dispossess the petitioners from the disputed land and not to restrain them from performing seva-puja of the deity of temple rikhebdeo situated in village antalia tehsil asind, district bhilwara.3. it is alleged by the petitioner that they are agriculturists by profession and are also pujaris of he deity of temply thakurji rikhebdeo and that agricultural land bearing khasra no. 603 measuring 19 bishwas and khasra no. 1242 measuring 8 bighas 3 bishwas situated in village antali has been recorded in the khatedari of the said deity and petitioner hangamilal has been shown as pujaris thereof. in jamabandis samvat 2036 to 2039 and 2041 to 2044, this land has been shown in the cultivatory possession of the deity through the pujaris. it is further alleged that the patwari by his certificate dated 19.6.1992 has testified that in kharif samvat 2049, this said land was cultivated by petitioner no. 2 prabhu dayal, who is the son of petitioner hangami lal, the pujari of the deity.4. the dy. secretary to the government, revenue (gr. 6) department by his circular letter dated 13.12.1991 (annex. 4) has impressed upon the collectors and the settlement .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 04 1993 (HC)

Prabhu Dayal Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Nov-04-1993

Reported in : 1993WLN(UC)366

g.s. singhvi, j.1. facts of the case he in a very narrow compass. petitioner was appointed as a constable in the police department with effect from 12.2.82 and he was last posted in district nagaur at police lines. in the month of september 1990 the petitioner's wife got seriously ill. he received a telegram about the illness of his wife, on 18.9.90. he sought casual leave for seven days with permission to avail three gazetted holidays and this leave was sanctioned. petitioner's wife continued to remain ill as an indoor patient at government hospital, tehsil baswa district dausa and since the petitioner had no one else to look after her, he had to stay back at baswa to look after his wife. he, therefore, sent a telegram to the superintendent of police, nagaur for extension of his leave. the telegram was addressed to the resident inspector of police lines, nagaur on 26.9.90. during the period of illness of his wife, petitioner's elder brother's daughter, who had been married recently, expired. thereafter petitioner's elder brother also died in december 1990 and his wife (petitioner's bhabhi) died in march 1991. according to the petitioner, he remained under serious mental and physical shock on account of the three consecutive deaths in his family and he could not report for duty. he submitted his joining report on 14.9.91 and also submitted medical certificate of his wife's illness which covered 239 days.2. an enquiry was initiated against the petitioner under rule 16 of the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 10 1993 (HC)

Smt. Shyamu Vs. the State of Rajasthan

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Mar-10-1993

Reported in : 1993WLN(UC)132

b.r. arora, j.1. this appeal is directed against the judgment dated may 31, 1985, passed by the sessions judge, udaipur, by which the learned sessions judge convicted and sentence the accused-appellant for the offence under section 302 i.p.c.2. the incident which led to the prosecution of the appellant smt. shyamu, took-place on 17.3.1984, at about 12.30. a.m. in the house of kachru situated in village parsola. the first information report of the incident was lodged at police station, parsola, on the same day at about 3.00 a.m. by one heera lal s/o shri ganpat - the brother of the deceased kachru. the case of the prosecution, as unfolded in the f.i.r. by heera lal is that at about 2.00 a.m. on 17.3.84, doongar teli came to his house and informed him that his elder brother kachru has been killed by someone, whereupon he alongwith doongar teli went to the house of his brother and saw the deadbody of his brother kachru lying near the door and a stone was lying on his mouth. on enquiry, his sister-in-law smt. shyamu informed him that some notorious person, after killing kachru, has ran away. thereupon he went to the house of amir mohammed - the ex-sarpanch of the village - and narrated him the incident. he, thereafter, came to the house of kachru and on enquiry, his sister-in-law smt. shyamu-the present accused appellant - informed him that some thieves came there, took away the she-buffalo as well as the box, tagari kadai, chhalni etc. the story given by the accused appellant .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 14 1993 (HC)

Aad Ram and anr. Vs. the State of Rajasthan and ors.

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Sep-14-1993

Reported in : 1994(3)WLC569; 1993WLN(UC)359

rajesh balia, j.1. the petitioners are the khatedars of lands in square no. 54 and 55 and killas no. 1, 2, 4, 9 and 10 in square no. 61 of chak 23-hmh, tehsil-hanumangarh. the collector vide his order dated november 17, 1971 (annexure/1) sanctioned a way in favour of the petitioners through the land situated at stone n. 100/291 parallel to canal for going to aabadi of chak 23-22 hmh. in pursuance of the said order the way was opened and mutation was made in the revenue-records. the land admeasuring 5 bighas situated at no. 100/291 at chak no. 23 hmh was allotted to respondents no. 3 and 4 in december 1982.2. on june 17, 1983 on behalf of respondents no. 3 and 4 an application was moved before the s.d.o. hanumangarh alleging that the present petitioners, by securing cancellation of already existing way have got a new way sanctioned in their favour through their land and has opened its way on june 12, 1983. they prayed that the newly opened way be closed.3. in reply to the said application it was stated that the petitioners had got the way opened through the land in dispute long ago vide order dated november 17, 1971 passed by the collector, sri-ganganagar, who was competent authority in this regard and the way is in existence since then. after obtaining the allotment of land, through which the way existed in his favour, the applicants-respondents no. 3 and 4 had cultivated the same partly blocking the way, therefore, on june 12, 1983, the blocked way was got opened. the .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 25 1993 (HC)

Maghraj Calla Vs. Kajodi Mal

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : May-25-1993

Reported in : AIR1994Raj11

orderrajesh balia, j.1. the revision raises an interesting issue. it arises in the following circumstances.2. the respondent has filed a suit against the petitioner, then an advocate, for damages, on allegations that he was negligent in discharge of his duties qua the plaintiff as client; as, he failed to act with due diligence and promptitude, after brief for filing an appeal to the rajasthan civil service appellate tribunal, jaipur (hereinafter referred to as 'the tribunal') was entrusted to him in respect of an order compulsorily retiring the plaintiff from the state services. according to the plaintiff, due to negligent conduct of the advocate-defendant, the appeal could not be filed in time, which was eventually dismissed as time-barred by the tribunal and, later on, a petition under article 226 of the constitution of india challenging the order of the tribunal was also dismissed by this court on 20th october, 1980. it may also be noticed here that, in the first instance, in the appeal filed by the plaintiff before the tribunal through the defendant-advocate, an application supported by an affidavit of plaintiff, under section5 of the limitation act, for condoning delay in filing the appeal was moved, in which it was alleged that the plaintiff was under a bona fide impression that appeal did not lay to the tribunal because of the controversy relating to jurisdiction of the tribunal to entertain appeals against orders of compulsory retirement. however, later on, the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 10 1993 (HC)

State of Rajasthan Vs. Pink City (Trade Articles) Khudra Vikreta Sangh ...

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Mar-10-1993

Reported in : AIR1994Raj164; 1993(2)WLC485

singhal, j.1. this special appeal has been filed against the judgment of the learned single judge dated 6th august, 1992 wherein, the writ petition submitted under article 226 of the constitution of india was allowed and it was declared that the incharge of the various depot from where the kerosene was being sold to the members of the petitioner sangh are not bound to obey the verbal instructions/ directions of the district supply officer and that the members of the petitioner sangh cannot be deprived from purchasing kerosene oil from the various godowns and to deal in them as retailers under the licenses which are still valid.2. the submission of the learned additional advocate general is two fold namely; the grant of license does not confer any right on the respondents to procure the kerosene oil and the appellants are not bound to sale the same to the respondents and that it is a policy matter in which the court should not interfere and since no mala fide has been alleged or proved the directions given by the learned single judge are not in accordance with law.3. reliance has been placed on the decision of mohd. fida karim v. state of bihar, air 1992 sc 1191 wherein, it was held that 'it is also well settled that the right of vend of excisable articles is exclusively and absolutely owned by the state government. the government realised its mistake and thus adopted a new policy to augment its revenue and to avoid monopolistic tendency. there is nothing wrong in taking such .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 22 1993 (HC)

Ramdeo Vs. State of Rajasthan

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Jul-22-1993

Reported in : 1993WLN(UC)338

n.k. jain, j.1. this special appeal under section 18 of the rajasthan high court ordinance is directed against the order of the learned single judge dt. 26.5.92 whereby he has dismissed he writ petition filed by the appellant holding that the disputed questions of fact are involved in it.2. mr. mridul, learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the learned single judge has erred in dismissing the writ petition on the ground that it involves disputed questions of fact as the pleas raised by the petitioner appellant are supported by the documents rather the court should have summoned the record. he has also submitted that the court is not precluded to decide the disputed questions of fact particularly when none of the documents produced by the petitioner has been denied but the learned single judge has not considered them. he has relied on smt. gunwant kaur and ors. v. municipal committee, bhatinda and ors. : air1970sc802 , madan mohan maharaj v. state of raj. and ors. 1978 vol. xxviii-342), sant lal bharti v. state of punjab : [1988]2scr107 and kavalappara kottarathil kochunni v. state of madras and ors. : air1959sc725 .3. on the other hand mr. vyas, learned addl. government advocate has submitted that the learned single judge has rightly dismissed the writ petition as numerous disputed questions of fact are involved and the petitioner has alternative remedy which must be availed first and, therefore, this special appeal is not maintainable. he has relied on s.k. .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 05 1993 (HC)

Khuman Singh and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Nov-05-1993

Reported in : 1994CriLJ1661; 1994(3)WLC411; 1993WLN(UC)291

jasraj chopra, j.1. this appeal is directed against the judgment of the learned sessions' judge banwara dated 21-8-1989, whereby learned sessions judge has held that accused-appellants khumanasing nawalsingh, bahadursing, mansingh, ramsingh, mansingh s/o budha tejpalsingh, kantilal, raju, abhaysingh and ramdeosingh guilty of the offences under sections 148 and 302/149 ipc and sentenced each of them to one year's rigorous imprisonment for the offence under section 148 ipc and they have been further sentenced to life imprisonment together with a fine of rs. 500/- each and in default of payment of this amount of fine, to undergo one month's rigorous imprisonment for the offence under section 302/149 ipc. both these sentences were ordered to run concurrently.2. the facts necessary to be noticed for the disposal of this appeal briefly stated are : that this occurrence took place somewhere in between the gate of banswara syntex mills and khandu gate on 24-3-1985 at about 7.10 or 7.15 a.m. the person who was seriously injured and ultimately died was shyamsingh, who was then president of the intuc union of the employees of the banswara syntex mills. it is alleged that when shyamsingh came out of the gate of the banswara syntex mills and was proceeding towards khandugate, all these 12 accused-appellants out of whom, natwarsingh, bahadursingh and ramdeosingh were armed with swords; ramshigh labana was armed with a dhariya and raju was armed with a pharsi and other accused-persons were .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 10 1993 (HC)

Smt. Nirmla Arora Vs. Joint Registrar, Cooperative Societies and ors.

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Mar-10-1993

Reported in : 1993WLN(UC)127

rajendra saxena, j.1. heard.2. the petitioner's husband late shri gopikishan arora was working as store keeper in the jodhpur sahkari up-bhokta whole-sale bhandar ltd., jodhpur (hereinafter referred as bhandar) and his services were terminated by order dated 12th june, 1987 by the liquidator of the said bhandar. shri gopikishan arora expired on 30.7.1987. on the report of respondent no. 2, the joint registrar cooperative societies, jodhpur region, jodhpur (respondent no. 1) issued notice dated 17.12.1988 (annex. 2) under section 74(1) of the rajasthan cooperative societies act, 1965 (briefly the act) asking her to appear before him and to show cause as to why enquiry be not made in respect of the embezzlement of r89,275.02 alleged to have been committed by late shri gopikishan arora. the petitioner has contended that the notice ex. 2 is clearly without jurisdiction and unauthorised and has been issued in order to harass her and prayed that the same be quashed and the respondents be restrained from taking any action against her in pursuance of the said notice.3. no reply has been filed on behalf of respondent no. 1.4. the respondents no. 2 in his counter has asserted that for fixing any liability the impugned notice has been issued against the petitioner in the interest of justice because she is the legal representative of late shri gopikishan arora. it has been further asserted that in case it is found that shri gopikishan arora had himself misappropriated the fund of the .....

Tag this Judgment!


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