Skip to content

Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: rationale Court: rajasthan Year: 1981 Page 1 of about 23 results (0.041 seconds)

Jul 31 1981 (HC)

Dr. (Mrs.) Rukmani Vaish and 5 ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan and 10 ors.

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Jul-31-1981

Reported in : 1981WLN701

..... the fixation of date of 25-6-75 as the dead line for eligibility of teachers for taking benefit of the ordinance, is wholly unintelligible and not based on any rationale logical or intelligible criteria.70. i am impressed by submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners that the discrimination against post emergency teachers, appears to be a 'brain child ..... centered round the question whether fixation of '25-6-75' was arbitrary, discriminatory and violative of articles 14 and 16 of the constitution of india. in order to appreciate the rationale or justification for fixing of 25-6-75, as the crucial date, the court enquired from the learned advocate general, who appeared on behalf of the state to defend the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 11 1981 (HC)

Atmadeo Vs. the Union of India and ors.

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Sep-11-1981

Reported in : 1981WLN584

dwarka prasad gupta, actg. c.j.1. the petitioner entered the railway service as a clerk on june 10, 1941 in the office of the chief traffiic manager of the erstwhile jodhpur state railway. on integration of the railway system he was continued to be employed as a clerk in the northern railway and was subsequently promoted as a head clerk. by an order issued on september 20, 1977 the railway authorities informed the petitioner that he would retire from railway service with effect from june 1, 1974 on attaining the age of 58 years, in terms of rule 2046 (b) of the railway establishment code, volume ii.2. the petitioner has challenged the validity of rule 2046 (b) of the railway establishment code, volume ii on the ground that it was discriminatory and was violative of the guarantee of equality enshrined in articles 14, and 16 of the constitution, as it makes an unreasonable classification between ministerial servants of the railway appointed there after. learned counsel placed reliance upon the decision of their lordships of the supreme court in the case of railway board and anr. v. a. pitchumani : (1972)illj112sc . in pitchumani's case (supra), their lordships of the supreme court had struck down the note appended to rule 2046 (2) 1972 lab. & ind cases 1462 (a), wherein a distinction was made between employees of ex-state railways and other railway employees. ex-state railway employees were excluded from the benefit of rule 2046 (2) (a) and even though they might have entered .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 31 1981 (HC)

Shiv NaraIn and ors. Vs. Mst. Raji and ors.

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Mar-31-1981

Reported in : AIR1982Raj119

dwarka prasad, j.1. this second appeal has been filed against the judgment and decree passed by the learned district judge, jodhpur on mar. 30, 1968 and arises in the following circumstances.2. one chaturbhuj had four sons, sitaram, ramlal, kriparam and daya-ram. sitaram had a son chhotu, while dayaram had a son salehraj and ramlal died issueless. kriparam had two sons nenji and bastiram. shivnarain and laxminarayan plaintiffs are the sons of nenji, while their third brother ganeshlal is said to have gone in adoption to ramlal. bastiram left his widow smt. gauri, a son arjunsingh and five daughters including omkumari and smt raji defendants. arjunsingh who was unmarried, died on july 17, 1952, leaving two houses situated in mohalla khanda falsa at jodhpur. after the death of arjunsingh, the plaintiffs shivnarain and laxminarain asserted their claims in, respect of the estate of arjunsingh deceased on the ground of being his nearest heir, as they were arjunsingh's uncle's sons. in one of the houses, the upper storey was in possession of the plaintiffs, while the lower portion of the said house was in the possession of the defendants smt. omkumari and smt. raji, sisters of arjunsingh. it was alleged in the plaint that after the death of arjunsingh, the defendants occupied the lower portion of the house. the plaintiffs also obtained a letter of administration in respect of the property of arjunsingh deceased from the court of district judge, jodh-pur. but as the defendants .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 28 1981 (HC)

State of Rajasthan and anr. Vs. Chirag Enterprises and ors.

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Apr-28-1981

Reported in : AIR1982Raj169; 1981()WLN112

jain, j.1. this is an appeal under section 18 of the rajasthan high court ordinance against the order of the learned single judge dated feb. 12, 1981, whereby the petitioner-respondent's writ petition was allowed and the appellants were directed to immediately convene a meeting of the central stores purchase committee (hereinafter referred to as 'the cspc') and decide the matter afresh on the basis of the tenders received for the year 1980-81 within a period of three weeks from the date of the order,2. the facts of the case lie within a narrow compass. they may be recalled as hereunder :the deputy secretary (administration) and the stores purchase officer (administration), secretariat, jaipur, issued a tender notice no. 2/80 on behalf of the cspo of the government of rajasthan inviting tenders for the supply inter alia of hose pipes (pvc and rubber). the said tender notice was published in the rajasthan patrika. by this tender a rate contract for purchase of pvc hose pipes was to be entered between the supplier on the one part and the stores purchase officer, finance department, government of rajasthan, on the other to supply to the government departments, local authorities and other organisations. the petitioner-respondents and others submitted their tenders in the prescribed tender form within time. the tenders were opened on july 21, 1980. the tenders were processed and were sent for technical opinion. the additional chief engineer (mech.)/public health engineering .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 16 1981 (HC)

inder Dev Arya Vs. University of Rajasthan and anr.

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Apr-16-1981

Reported in : AIR1981Raj269; 1981()WLN354

orders.c. agrawal, j. 1. in this writ petition filed under article 226 of the constitution of india, the petitioner, shri inder dev arya, has prayed for an appropriate writ, order or direction against the non-petitioners, namely, the university of rajasthan (hereinafter referred to as the university) and the state of rajasthan, directing them to give admission to the petitioner in the m.b.b.s. course of 1980-81,2. this writ petition has been filed in the following circumstances:--3. in the state of rajasthan, there are five medical colleges at jaipur, bikaner udaipur, jodhpur and ajmer. all the five medical colleges are run by the state government. admissions to the aforesaid medical colleges are made after making a joint selection through a selection committee (admission board). for the guidance of the selection committee in the matter of admissions to the said colleges, the state government has issued instructions which have been described as rules for admission to medical colleges in rajasthan for the year 1980 (hereinafter referred to as 'the rules'). according to rule 1 of the rules, the total number of admissions to the various medical colleges in rajasthan will not be more than 550 per year. rule 2 provides for reservation of certain number of seats for students belonging to certain categories. clause (a) of rule 2 provides that 15 seats (three seats each in the medical colleges of rajasthan) should be reserved for students from abroad/other states nominated by .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 15 1981 (HC)

Sanwal Ram and Etc. Vs. Additional District Magistrate, Sri Ganganagar ...

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Oct-15-1981

Reported in : AIR1982Raj139

order1. a number of writ petitions have been filed challenging the validity of section 15 of the rajasthan imposition of ceiling on agricultural holdings act, 1973 (act no. 11 of 1973) (hereinafter referred to as 'the act'). arguments hare been heard in the above two writ petitions. the above two writ petitions raise some common questions, so i think it convenient to dispose them of by this order.2. in s. b. civil writ petition no. 481 of 1980 filed by sanwalram, the sub-divisional officer, raisinghnagar by his order dated july 23, 1971 (ex. 1) decided his ceiling case holding that he has no land in the excess of the ceiling area. the petitioner sanwalram's case was decided under chapter iii-b of the rajasthan tenancy act (hereinafter referred to as 'the old ceiling law') and the proceedings were also taken against the petitioner sanwalram under the act and the authorised officer (ceiling) raisinghnagar by his order, dated july 11, 1975 (exhibit 2) dropped the proceedings of ceiling holding that the petitioner or his major son indraj has no land in excess of the ceiling area. sanwalram's case under the old ceiling law was reopened and the deputy secretary revenue (ceiling) by his order dated june 6, 1979 (ex. 3/2) directed the additional collector, sri ganganagar under section 15 (2) of the act to re-open his case and decide his case afresh in the light of that order in accordance with law after giving him an opportunity of hearing. his ceiling case under the act was also .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 12 1981 (HC)

Bhopal Mining Works and anr. Vs. Jai Mica Supply Co. and ors.

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : May-12-1981

Reported in : 1981WLN238

s.k. mal lodha, j.1. this revision by the defendants under section 115, cpc is directed against the order dated october 9, 1980, passed by the district judge, bhilwara in civil original case no. 51 of 19792. the plaintiff-non-petitioner instituted a suit for rs. 66250/- consisting of rs. 50,000/-as principal and rs. 16250/- as interest. the suit was instituted under order xxxvii, rule 2 cpc. summons for judgment in form iv-a in appendix b, were issued on march 20, 1980, which were served on march 26, 1980. the defendants applied to defend the suit unconditionally under order xxxvii, rule 3(5), cpc.3. the defendant-company was under the receiver-ship of bokaro steel ltd. from october 8, 1973 to july 26, 1978. a compromise was entered into between the parties on may 4, 1976. in pursuance of that, payment of rs. 10,000/- was made by the receiver and the plaintiff, vide the receiver's letter dated july 12, 1976, was informed that the balance of instalments would be paid by the receiver. it was averred that in april, 1979, the plaintiff showed his willingness to re-fix the instalments afresh. the case of the defendants further is that until the date of the institution of the suit only rs. 25,000/- have become due against them and that they may be permitted to deposit the same by instalments. it was stated that there was no contract for payment of interest and hence, the claim of the plaintiff for rs. 16250/- is wholly unsustainable. an objection has also been taken that the suit .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 01 1981 (HC)

Dr. R.N. Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : May-01-1981

Reported in : 1981WLN(UC)41

g.m. lodha, j.1. dr. r.n. singh professor of paediatrics (umed hospital) in s.n medical college jodhpur has filed this special appeal under section 18 of the rajasthan high court ordinance 1949 against the judgment of hon'ble single judge of this court dated 23rd april, 1981 in s.b. civil writ petition no. 366 of 1980 whereby the judgment of rajasthan civil appellate tribunal was set aside and the following writ was issued:as the tribunal committed an error apparent on the face of the record in holding in its impugned judgment marked annexure 9 that by appointing the petitioner as superintendent, the state government has enhanced her status and thereby adversely affected the right of the con-petitioner no. 3's seniority and varied his service conditions to his detriment in violation of the provisions of article 14 and article 16, the writ petition filed by dr. chandra kiran is accepted and the impugned decision of the tribunal marked annexure 9 is set aside and the non-petitioner no. 3 is restrained from working as superintendent, umaid hospital. jodhpur. in the circumstances of the case, the parties are left to bear their own costs. 2. the of erative portion of the judgment of the service tribunal which was quashed by hon'ble single judge reads as under:we however, feel that in professional posts like these, at the highest level of service much of the controversy could have been saved if a discreet action was taken by administrative action, either by arranging posting or by .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 11 1981 (HC)

Daleepsingh Vs. the State of Rajasthan and ors.

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Mar-11-1981

Reported in : 1981WLN(UC)159

s.n. deedwaniya, j.1. these three writ petitions involving common questions of law and fact are disposed of by this order. petitioners and respondents no. 3 to 41 belonged to the cadre of inspectors gr. ii (audit or executive) in the co-operative department and are governed by the rajasthan cooperative societies rules, 1954 (hereinafter referred to as 'the rules').2. petitioner daleepsingh was confirmed on the post of inspector cr. ii (executive) in the co-operative department with effect from 1-7-1959 vide order no. f(sic)cdr/estt(b)/65 dated june 3, 1965. thereafter, the petitioner was promoted temporarily as inspector gr. i on 23-2-1960 and further promoted as assistant registrar from 18-4-1968 on ad hoc basis.3. petitioner rampal borwal was appointed as substantive inspector (audit) gr. 11 in the co-operative department on 1-7.1959 and temporily promoted as inspector gr. i vide order dated november 13, 1961 and further promoted on ad hoc basis as officiating assistant registrar vide order dated 18/20-4-1967.4. petitioner mangilal shiarma was confirmed as inspector (audit) gr. ii in the co-operative department with effect from 1-7-1959. he was temporarily promoted as inspector gr. i on 14-11-1960 and further promoted as additional assistant registrar on ad hoc basis vide order dated 18/20-4-1967.5. on 8-10-1973, final seniority list of inspectors (audit) gr. ii was issued as on 20-9-1973 and seniority list of inspectors (executive) gr. it was issued on 1-7-1973. prior to .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 14 1981 (HC)

Dilip Kumar and anr. Vs. Board of Revenue and 2 ors.

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Apr-14-1981

Reported in : 1981WLN516

1. by this writ petition under article 226 of the constitution of india, the petitioners, dilip kumar and jugal kishore, have challenged the validity of the order, dated june 23, 1978, ex, 9, passed by the government of rajasthan for reopening the ceiling proceedings under section 15(2) of the rajasthan imposition of ceiling on agricultural holdings act, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as 'the act'). in the same petition the order of the additional collector, dated september 6, 1979 and the order of the board of revenue, dated 27th august, 1980, upholding the order of the additional collector, have also been challenged.2. the facts giving rise to this writ petition are that one raghunath died in the year 1962, leaving behind him dilip kumar and his widow mst. nathi. this is an admitted case of the petitioner that at the time of the death of raghunath he left 199 bighas and 7 biswas of agricultural land. this land was entered in the revenue record in the joint khatedari with mst. nathi and dilip kumar, adopted son of righunath, half to half. accordingly, dilip kumar was eight years' old at the time of his adoptive father's death. keeping in view the fact that the policy of the state was to give land to the tillers of the soil, certain revenue laws were introduced and chapter lit-3 was inserted in the rajasthan tenancy, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as `the act of 1955'). proceedings under chapter hi-b of the act of 1955 were instituted and a notice was served on mst. nathi. the .....

Tag this Judgment!

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