This consideration is highlighted when one examines the decision of this Court in the Udipi Mutt case H. –This appeal by special leave is directed against the judgment of the Top Revenue Lawyers Chandigarh High Court Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow, Bench Lucknow setting aside that of the Special Judge (West), Lucknow, who convicted the accused-respondent and sentenced him to one year’s rigorous imprisonment Under s. 708 carried on by an educational institution can be said to be work carried on by it with the assistance of labour or co- operation of teachers.
What is true about this provision under s. , and maintain the sentence of Rs. The charge against him was of incitement of other workers to slow down work. The main function of educational institutions is to impart education to students and if it is held that the impartings education’ is industry Civil Lawyers in Chandigarh High Court reference to which the educational institution is the employer, it must follow that the teachers who co-operate with the institution and assist it with their labour in imparting education are the employees of the institution, and so, normally, one would expect that the teachers would be employees who would be entitled to the benefits of the Act.
If the legislature thought it necessary to provide for the management of the temple properties for such a short period on an ad hoc basis, the provision cannot be seriously challenged. 10 contemplates that if a Board is dissolved for the reasons specified in it. Sarkar told the Managing Director that he was quite willing to remove his letter from the Notice Board and he gave him an account of 605 the work which he had assigned to himself between December 16 to December 31, 1957.
Threats made by a person holding an Offensive weapon in his hand must be taken to be just as much an obstruction as that caused by a pet-son actually blocking Civil Lawyers Chandigarh a gateway or handling, a public servant in a manner calculated to prevent him from executing his duty,” Top Civil Advocates in Chandigarh view of the facts of the present case, the appellant’s conduct in giving threats to Hukam Chand, the guard, at the station does not amount to an 73 offence under s.
The State of Madhya Pradesh ( 3 ) . Though the concept of a fee as a quid pro quo for particular services rendered to the fee payer as explained in the Shirur Mutt case are also repeated in these two decisions, it is worth noticing that the service to be rendered to the Religious Endowment or public trust by the Orissa and the Bombay Acts were exactly similar to the service which was by way of supervision, regulation and control over the way in which the management by the trustees was conducted under the Madras Act.
It will be noticed that s. II of 1947), hereinafter called the Act. the Government is required to direct the immediate reconstitution of another Board and that postulates that the interval between the dissolution of one Board and the constitution of a fresh Board would be of a very short duration. First, there is Pandit Benarsi Das Bhanot v. The validity of a contribution levied under the Orissa Hindu Religious Endowments Act was considered by this Court in Mahant Sri Jagannath Ramanuj Das and Anr.
506 fees charged on religious endowments under other enactments which were heard along with the Shirur Mutt case,(1) already referred to, though in them the validity of the levy was upheld. 121 of the Act to one under s. 10, is equally true about the transitional provision in s. Sarkar on December 31, 1957, calling upon him to how cause why action should not be taken against him for his gross misconduct and subversive conduct. I would therefore alter the conviction of the appellant for an offence under s.
The State of Bombay and Ors. Sections 10 and 35 have been attacked on the ground that they empower the State Government to leave the administration of the temple property to a non-Hindu. True to the threat held out by him in his letter, Mr. 6(1) provided that no tax would be payable on any sale of goods specified in a schedule to it. Sudhundra, Thirtha Swamiar v. 5 (2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act (No. When this matter was brought to the notice of the Managing Director, he wrote a letter to Mr.
(1) and of a similar levy under the Bombay Public Trust Act (Ratial Panchand Gandhi v. 121 of the Act but makes out an offence under s. 76(1)of the Madras Act which was struck down in the Shirur Mutt case was distinguished was, that under the other two enactments, a special fund was created to which the collections were to be credited and that the expenses of the administration of the Act were directed to be met out of this fund. The ground on which s. Sarkar appeared to ignore the assignments allotted to him by the Acting Chief Reporter, Mr.
Next we come to Mangroo. The State of Orissa and Anr. That case was concerned with a Sales Tax Act which by s. In these two cases, the validity of the contribution levied under their respective charging provisions was, as stated already, upheld. In his case also the evidence was that he went round in the weaving-shed asking the weavers to work two looms instead of four looms.