Allahabad Lucknow Court January 2015 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Sohan Lal and Another Vs. Addl. District and Sessions Judge Court No.9 ...
Court: Allahabad Lucknow
Decided on: Jan-27-2015
Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya, J. It is true today, as it was ever before, that no person can look after the welfare of the children in a better way than parents. Destiny, however, has its own ways to mould the course of life of a person. The present case concerns itself with the welfare of a child who appears to be deprived of the natural care and protection of his parents for the reasons beyond his control. The State, the Society and its Institutions, must, therefore, work in tandem to salvage the situation so that the luckless child is empowered to swim through the rough tides, where destiny has left him unattended. These proceedings instituted under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seek to assail the validity of the judgement dated 22.10.2014, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.9, Lucknow in Misc. Case No.138 of 2014, whereby application made by the applicants seeking court's permission to give Master Ansh in adoption as required under Section 9 (4) and (5...
Chawali Vs. State of U.P. and Others
Court: Allahabad Lucknow
Decided on: Jan-16-2015
Ajai Lamba, J. 1. I had the privilege of going through the judgment prepared by Hon'ble Justice Devi Prasad Singh and Hon'ble Justice A.P.Sahi. 2. I fully agree with the answers given by my brother Justice A.P.Sahi to issues (A),(B),(C),(D),(E),(G) and (H), as encased in the judgment. 3. With all humility, however, I differ on the answer recorded in context of Issue (F). I would like to record my separate reasons and findings on the issue. 4. For ready reference, Issue (F) reads as under: "The status of final judgment unsigned by one of the Judges of the Bench and the conflict of opinion and its reference by Hon'ble the Chief Justice." 5. The issue has been framed in context of Questions 9, 11, 14, 16, 17 and 18, as they are related. Before making an endeavour to address the issue, the sequence of events is required to be reiterated in brief. 6. The relevant facts to be noted in this context are that the Bench constituted of Hon'ble Justice Amar Saran and Hon'ble Justice Shri Narayan S...
Praveen Kumar Sharma Vs. Union of India Thorugh Its Secy. Dept. of Hom ...
Court: Allahabad Lucknow
Decided on: Jan-07-2015
Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya, J. Heard Shri Amit Bose, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Neerav Chitrawanshi, learned counsel for the respondents. These proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution of India have been instituted by the petitioner, who was appointed as Constable (Bigular) in the Central Reserve Police Force (hereinafter referred to as 'CRPF') assailing the order dated 16.11.2009, whereby he has been inflicted with the punishment of removal from service. The petitioner has also challenged the orders dated 04.03.2010 and 24.11.2010 passed respectively by the appellate and revisional authorities, whereby the appeal and revision preferred by the petitioner against the punishment order dated 16.11.2009 have also been rejected. As submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner was appointed in the Central Reserve Police Force on 16.09.2003. The petitioner applied for Earned Leave which was granted to him for the period commencing on 12.03.2008 a...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›