Suresh v. State of Haryana
2009(3) LAW HERALD (P&H) 2499 (SC)
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Before
The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Arijit Pasayat
The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Mukundakam Sharma
Criminal Appeal No. 16 of 2007 with
Crl. Appeal No.404 of 2009 [Arising out of SLP (Crl.) No. 2007 of 2008]
Suresh
v.
State of Haryana
{Decided on 27/02/2009}
For the Appellant: Mr. Sanjay Rathi, Mr. Kapil Kr. Dagar, Mr. Jamshed Bey, Mr. Parmanand Gaur, Mr. Prem Malhotra, Advocates.
For the Respondent: T.V. George, Advocate.
Indian Penal Code, 1860, Ss.326, 307--Grievous hurt--Attempt to murder--Accused armed with an iron chain, hockey stick, and gandasas, emerged on the road from one side and stood in front of the tempo--When the tempo was stopped by the driver, all the four persons started giving blows by their respective weapons to victims--Victims sitting in tempo were mercilessly beaten--There were multiple fractures and surgical emphysema--Injures were dangerous to life--Attack was so severe that all the other passengers sitting on the tempo ran away from spot and none came forward to save the injured--In view of cogent and credible evidence of the injured witnesses there is no scope for interference in these appeals. Though false implication was pleaded, the same is without any foundation--Conviction of accused held proper.
___________
2009(3) LAW HERALD (P&H) 2502 (DB)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
(DIVISION BENCH)
Before
The Hon’ble Mr. Justice T.S. Thakur, Chief Justice
The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Hemant Gupta
CWP No. 1363 of 2007
M/s Arati Brick Co. Village Kharwan
v.
State of Haryana & Ors.
{Decided on 19/05/2009}
For the Petitioner: Mr. Harsh Bunger, Advocate.
For the Respondent No. 1, 2, 4 and 5: Mr. Randhir Singh, Addl. A.G. Haryana
For the Respondent No.3: Mr. J.P. Bhatt, Advocate and Mr. Arun Walia, Advocate.
For the Respondents No. 6 to 9: Mr. S.S.Dinarpur, Advocate.
Haryana Control of Brick Supplies Order, 1972, (as amended by Amendment) Order 1992, Para 3--Brick kiln control order require the brick kilns to be situated at least 1 Km away from the village abadi--Application by petitioner to Govt. for grant of relaxation of control order to establish Brick Kiln about 300 meters away from village abadi--Challenge to the validity of refusal order--Order of Govt. refusing the relaxation--Order upheld--Held Brick Kiln a potential source of pollution--Huge quantity of emission of gases and ash--Omitted suspended particulate material remained hanging in the environment--Kiln if allowed to be established is likely to cause nuisance for the village abadi --Refusal order upheld
----------------
2009(3) LAW HERALD (P&H) 2504 (SC)
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Before
The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Tarun Chatterjee
The Hon’ble Mr. Justice R. M. Lodha
Civil Appeal No.4334 of 2009 (Arising out of SLP© No. 987/2009)
Jagbir Singh
v.
Haryana State Agriculture Marketing Board & Anr.
{Decided on 14/07/2009}
For the Appellant: Mr. Sanjay Jain, Advocate.
For the Respondent: Mr. B.S. Banthia, Advocate.
IMPORTANT POINT
Back wages--It is not required that relief of full back wages should necessarily be granted on reinstatement--Compensation instead of reinstatement sufficient to meet the ends of justice
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, S.25F--Reinstatement--Back wages--Appellant was engaged as a daily wager --Retrenchment after about 10 months of services--Labour Court directed reinstatement with continuity of service and full back wage from the date of demand notice--Award of Labour Court set aside by High Court--Supreme Court set aside the order of High Court--High Court erred in not awarding compensation to the appellant while upsetting the award of reinstatement and back wages--It is not required that relief of full back wages should necessarily be granted on reinstatement--Compensation instead of reinstatement sufficient to meet the ends of justice--Compensation of Rs.50,000/- awarded. (P.15 & 16)
--------------
