SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1980 Supreme(SC) 392

A. D. KOSHAL, S. MURTAZA FAZAL ALI, Y. V. CHANDRACHUD
V. B. Raju – Appellant
Versus
State Of Gujarat – Respondent


Advocates:
A.Subhashini, J.L.Wain

JUDGMENT

KOSHAL, J.:— This appeal by certificate granted under Article 133 (1) (c) of the Constitution of India by the High Court of Gujarat is directed against its judgment dated 2-8-1973 and the sole point requiring decision therein is as to whether an order passed by the President of India under sub-section (1) of Section 29 of The Bombay Reorganisation Act, 1960 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) and determining that the appellant shall on the 1st day of May 1960 cease to be Judge of the High Court of Bombay and become a Judge of the High Court of Gujarat is to be regarded as an order of transfer under Art. 222 (1) of the Constitution.

2. The appellant was appointed an Additional Judge of the High Court of Bombay on June 29, 1959. After the Act came into force the President of India passed the said order (hereinafter referred to as the impugned order) under Section 29 (1) of the Act in respect of the appellant, who was still an Additional Judge of the High Court of Bombay (and 4 other Judges of that Court) so that with effect from the 1st of May, 1960 the appellant became an Additional Judge of the High Court of Gujarat. Claiming that the impugned order amounts to an order of

















Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top