Allahabad Court November 1972 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.
The Board of High School and Intermediate Education, U.P. and anr. Vs. ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-10-1972
Reported in: AIR1973All345
1. This and the three companion Special Appeals arise out of a judgment disposing of four writ petitions. They all raise common questions and can be conveniently disposed of together.2. On December 23, 1965 the State Government in its Education Department addressed a demi order to the Director of Education U. P. It informed the Director that the Governor has been pleased to order that with effect from July, 1966, the minimum age limit for admission to class VI in all the recognised educational institutions in the State shall be 9 years on July 1 of the year in which admission to class VI is sought. Consequently at the High School stage, the minimum age limit for all students appearing at the High School Examination of 1971 onwards, shall be 14 years on July 1 of the year in which the student appears at the High School Examination of the Board of High School and Intermediate Education. The Director was asked to take immediate action to notify this decision to all the educational officer...
Ram Pyare Vs. Deputy Director of Consolidation and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-09-1972
Reported in: AIR1973All347
Hari Swarup, J.1. Through this petition the order of the Deputy Director of Consolidation dismissing as not maintainable the application for review of the order passed in Revision is being challenged. Admittedly there in no specific provision in the U. P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, hereinafter referred to as the Act, conferring on the Deputy Director of Consolidation the power to review his judgment. Learned counsel contends that Section 41 of the Act confers such power.2. Section 41 reads as under:'Unless otherwise expressly provided by or under this Act, the provisions of Chapters IX and X of the U. P. Land Revenue Act, 1901 shall apply to all proceedings including appeal and applications under this Act.'Chapter X of the Land Revenue Act gives the power to the Board of Revenue to review its judgment There is, however, no provision therein regarding review of orders by authorities under the U. P. Consolidation of Holdings Act.3. In our opinion Section 41 of the Act only makes appl...
Business Co-operation Ltd., Ghaziabad Vs. State of U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-02-1972
Reported in: AIR1973All468
K.N. Seth, J.1. This appeal arises out of proceedings for the acquisition of about 67 bighas (1,73,677 square yards) of land situate within the Municipal limits of Ghaziabad. A resolution was passed by the Municipal Board, Ghaziabad, on 12th October. 1941 to acquire the aforesaid land for the improvement and expansion of Ghaziabad town. This resolution was not given effect to due to various conflicting forces working within the Municipal Board. The Municipal Board again passed a resolution on 15th February, 1946 for the acquisition of the aforesaid land under Sections 8 (1) (a) and 117 of the U. P. Municipalities Act and a notification dated 18th December. 1946 under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act was published in the Gazette dated 21st December, 1946. The notifications under Sections 6 and 17 were published in the Gazette dated 15th March. 1947 and possession of the land was taken on 5th February. 1948.2. The appellant society was registered under the Registration of Societies ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›