Allahabad Court February 1993 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.
Lalji Vs. Director, Bal Vikas Seva Avam Pustahar and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-04-1993
Reported in: (1993)IILLJ547All
R.A. Sharma, J.1. Petitioner, who claims to be a Junior Clerk, has filed this writ petition against the order of his suspension dated April 24, 1992. It has been stated by the learned counsel for the parties that the respondents have filed counter-affidavit but it is not on the record. However, learned counsel for the petitioner has furnished a copy of the counter-affidavit to the Court and he has also filed a rejoinder-affidavit in reply thereto, which shall be kept on record.2. In paragraphs 11 and 16of the writ petition it has been stated that no charge sheet has been given to the petitioner, although more than six months have passed when the writ petition was filed. Reply to those paragraphs are contained in paragraphs 10 and 15 of the counter-affidavits; but the allegations made in the above paragraphs of the writ petition have not been denied. There is no assertion that charge sheet has been served on the petitioner. In the rejoinder affidavit, petitioner has reiterated the alleg...
ishaq HusaIn Razvi Vs. State of U.P. and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-03-1993
Reported in: AIR1993All283; (1993)2UPLBEC1066
ORDERN.L. Ganguly, J. 1. Petitioner filed this writ petition challenging the order of the Chief Medical Officer, Pilibhit dated 31-12-91 by which the Chief Medical Officer directed the petitioner not to practice as a Medical Practitioner unless he gets himself registered as a medical practitioner by the Registrar, Indian Medicines Board, U. P. The petitioner prayed for quashing of the order of the Chief Medical Officer, Pilibhit dated 31-12-91 and also prayed for issuing a writ of mandamus directing the respondents not to interfere in the petitioner's functioning as a medical practitioner in Ayurvedic.2.The petitioner claimed to have obtained a degree in Vaidya Visharad from Hindi Sahitya Sammelan, Allahabad in the year 1987. He stated to have got himself registered vide Registration No. 72305 in Rajkiya Ayuryedic Evam Unani Chikitsa Parishad, Bihar on 9-12-88. Apparently, on the basis of the alleged degree of Vaidya Visharad, from Hindi Sahitya Sammelan, Allahabad, petitioner claimed ...
Sahkari Ganna Vikas Samiti Ltd. Vs. Controlling Authority Under Paymen ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-03-1993
Reported in: (1993)IILLJ1108All
D.S. Sinha, J. 1. Heard Sri Shashi Nandan, learned counsel appearing for M/s. Sahkari Ganna Vikas Samiti Ltd., Baitalpur, Deoria, the petitioner, and Sri. H.S.N. Tripathi, learned counsel representing the contesting respondent No. 3 in each writ petition, at length and in detail.2. Exercising powers under Sub-section (4) of Section 7 of the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 (hereinafter called the Act) the Controlling Authority passed orders dated March 30, 1988 directing the petitioning Samiti to pay certain amount to the contesting respondent No. 3 by way of gratuity. Aggrieved by the orders of the Controlling Authority Samiti has preferred appeals under Sub-section (7) of Section 7 of the Act before the Appellate Authority. Noticing non-compliance of the provisions of the second proviso to Sub-section (7) of Section 7 of the Act, the Appellate Authority passed orders dated February 13, 1989 holding the appeals of the Samiti to be not in accordance with law and directing the appeals to b...
Shri Ram Singh and Another Vs. Special Judge, E.C. Act, Additional Dis ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-02-1993
Reported in: AIR1993All236
ORDER1. Petition in hand is directed against the judgment and order dt. 5th Aug. 1992 passed by Addl. District Judge, Ballia in Misc. Appeal No. 71/1989 preferred against the judgment and order dt. 1-5-1989 passed by 8th Addl. Munsif, Ballia on the application 6C-2 filed by the plaintiffs under 0.39, R. 1, C.P.C. for ad interim injunction in original suit No. 171 of 1988, Sri Ram Singh v. Lala Ram.2. Petitioners instituted the suit it being suit No, 171 of 1989 for permanent injunction restraining the defendant set No. 1, namely Lal Ram from interfering with the plaintiffs' possession over a part of plot No. 1659/3, area 18.5 decimal and from raising any constructions over the land shown/marked by figures 3, 4, 5 and 6 and also from cutting the trees situate on the said land. The relief of mandatory injunction was also sought directing the defendant set No. 1 to close the door marked by letter 'Ka' and to remove the constructions if any, found on the land shown by figures 3, 4, 5 and 6...
Variety General Stores Vs. Income-tax Officer and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-02-1993
Reported in: [1993]202ITR660(All)
A.P. Misra, J. 1. In this case, time was granted to learned counsel for the Revenue for filing counter-affidavit as far back as on April 9, 1992, but so far no counter-affidavit has been filed. In the absence of any counter-affidavit, we proceed to decide this case. 2. The petitioner in this case seeks mandamus directing the Income-tax Officer, Ward-II, Moradabad, to release the seized books of account and other documents of the petitioner lying in his custody, further directing the Commissioner of Income-tax, Lucknow, for release of the petitioner's books of account and the documents immediately and also directing the Sales Tax Tribunal, Moradabad Bench, Moradabad, to stay the hearing of the appeals of the petitioner pending before it till the books of account are made available to him. 3. According to the case of the petitioner, a survey took place at the business premises of the petitioner on January 24, 1986, and the petitioner was issued an order under Section 131(3), dated Januar...
Sadhan Sahakari Samiti Basantpur Ltd. Vs. Presiding Officer, Labour Co ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-02-1993
Reported in: (1993)IILLJ468All
D.S. Sinha, J. 1. Heard Sri A.N. Tripathi, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri K.P. Agarwal, learned Senior Advocate representing the contesting respondent No. 2 at length and in detail.2. By means of this petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the award dated July 10, 1984, rendered by the respondent No. 1 in Adjudication Case. No. 29 of 1983, registered upon a reference by the State Government, is under challenge. The impugned award holds the termination of the service of the respondent No. 2 to be illegal and improper and directs his reinstatement with effect from June 1, 1982 on which date his services were terminated.;3. The respondent No. 2 was working as a Salesman of the petitioner since September 17, 1978 and his services were dispensed with with effect from June 1, 1982, on the basis of the charge of alleged corruption and financial irregularities. It is not disputed that before termination of his services the respondent No. 2 was neither s...
Ali Kishwar and anr. Vs. State of U.P. and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-02-1993
Reported in: I(1993)DMC251
D.K. Trivedi, J.1. The present revision bas been filed by the revisionists against the judgment and order dated 20-10-1992, passed by the Ist Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hardoi, by which he summoned the revisionists under Section 498A I.P.C. end Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act. It is not disputed that Police has submitted charge-sheet against two of the persons namely, Ali Shabbar and All Mazhar, Police also submitted a final report against the two revisionists before the court concerned and on receipt of the same the complainant moved protest application and also filed affidavits of Binte Johra, Amir Raza, Shafiful Hasan and Shafiq Raider. The learned Magistrate, after considering the Police report as well as the affidavit filled by the witnesses, mentioned above, passed the impugned order, summoning the revisionists under Section 498A I.P.C. and 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act. The main contention of the revisionists Counsel is that the learned court below committed an error i...
Smt. Sushila Pant Vs. Station House Officer and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-02-1993
Reported in: 1993CriLJ2534
Palok Basu, J.1. The petitioner is a Govt. servant and was posted as Lady Medical Officer in the Hospital where the informant's sister was admitted for delivery case. It is alleged that after she gave birth to a male child excessive blood flowed and she was yet made to go walking to the operation theatre for some proposed treatment or Operation. In spite of the repeated complaints by the informant no steps were taken by the lady doctor (petitioner Smt. Sushila Pant). It was alleged in the end of the FIR that a sum of Rs. 500/- was demanded from the informant for treatment on these facts, the argument advanced by the learned Counsel for the petitioner is that neither a case under Section 304A, IPC is made out, nor provision of Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act can be attracted in this case.2. Suffice it to say for the time being that the allegations made in the FIR prima facie indicate making out the offences. Therefore, at the stage of examining the allegations contained in...
Rakesh Kumar Alias Lal and ors. Vs. State of U.P. and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-02-1993
Reported in: 1994CriLJ289
ORDERA.B. Srivastava, J.1. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties and perused the materials placed on record.2. The applicants against whom a conditional order has been passed and notice issued for proceedings under Section 133, Cr.P.C. have sought under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. quashing thereof and also of the order passed by the Sessions Judge rejecting the applicants revision.3. On report of the police about alleged nuisance in a public way by the applicants, conditioned order was passed by the Magistrate and the applicants directed to show cause. Instead of filing objections before the Magistrate the applicants filed a revision before the Sessions Judge who rejected the same on the ground that the applicants had alternative remedy of a seeking cancellation of the notice by filing objections.4. Recourse to Section 482, Cr.P.C. is not permissible to a party who has already availed the remedy of revision before the Court of Session or the High Court, in view of the law laid down ...
Sonbhadra Coke Products and ors. Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-02-1993
Reported in: 1994CriLJ657
ORDERV. Saran, J.1. Heard Sri C.L. Pandey, learned Counsel for the petitioners and learned Standing Counsel. In the circumstances of the case it is expedient that this writ petition may be finally disposed of.2. In the night intevening 7/8-1-1993 five motor trucks carrying slack coal were intercepted by the Police of P.S. Robertsganj, district Sonbhadra. These were truck. No. USM 8487 and No. UP 85-8749 belonging to petitioner No. 6 Paras Nath Pandey, truck No. UGZ 89 belonging to Petitioner No. 7 Bechan Prasad, truck No. MP 17-7209 belonging to Rang Bahadur Singh petitioner No. 8 and truck No. UP 65B-6711 belonging to Taj Mohammad Petitioner No. 9. A First Information Report was thereafter lodged at P.S. Robertsganj, district Sonbhadra under Section 420 I.P.C. vide Crime No. 18 of 1993 against the writ petitioners. These trucks laden with slack coal are still in the custody of the Police.3. It is stated in the writ petition that M/s. Sonhadra Goke Products, M/s. Sonbhadra Fuels and M/...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »