Allahabad Court May 1993 Judgments
Dr. Ram Kumar and Others Vs. State of U.P. and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-24-1993
Reported in: AIR1994All91
ORDER1. All the four writ petitions are directed against the allotment of Colleges and specialties to candidates selected for admission to post Graduates Medical Courses in the State of U. P. They involve interpretation of common documents and thus with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties they were clubbed together and have been heard for final disposal. This common judgment will govern all the four petitions.2. The first two writ petitions are by general candidates while writ petitions at serial Nos. 3 and 4 above have been filed by students belonging to Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes. In the first two writ petitions which were filed earlier by an interim order admissions to Post-Graduate Courses in M.S. and M. D. and diploma in all the Medical Colleges of the State were stayed. Hearing in the said writ petitions hadcommenced. Thereafter the last two writ petitions were filed. The opposite parties were granted time to file counter-affidavit but no counter-affidav...
Tag this Judgment!Balbir Singh Vs. Pushpa Singh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-21-1993
Reported in: 2(1993)ACC525
R.R.K. Trivedi, J.1. Facts giving rise to this petition are that petitioner is owner of bus No USY 2375 which met an accident on 12.9.1984, at about 6.30 p.m., in which Kailash Nath Singh, husband of respondent No. 1 and father of respondents 2 to 4, died. Kailash Nath Singh was employed as a primary school teacher at the relevant date and time and was coming back from the school alongwith a fellow teacher Raj Bahadur Singh.2. Motor Accident Claim Petition No. 38 of 1984 was filed by respondent Nos. 1 to 4 claiming damages on 19.10.1984. It may be mentioned here that petitioner did not appear before the Claims Tribunal in spite of notice by Court, though all the modes including publication on 24.3.1985 were resorted to. The claim petition was ultimately allowed and an award was passed on 6.9.1986 which followed an application under Order 9, Rule 13, C.P.C. by petitioner. The application of petitioner was allowed by the learned Tribunal vide its order dated 1.8.1987 on the condition tha...
Tag this Judgment!Nutan Kumar and Others Vs. Iind Additional District Judge, Banda and O ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-20-1993
Reported in: AIR1994All298
ORDERD.S. Sinha, J.1. On a reference by a learned single Judge the following two questions are up for consideration and answer :1. Whether an agreement of lease between the landlord and the tenant for letting and occupation of a building in contravention of the provisions of the U.P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 is void? 2. Whether the said agreement is enforceable in law and a decree for ejectment of the tenant can be passed in favour of the landlord on the basis thereof 2. In our country, except so far as specifically provided for and covered by any other legislation, the matter relating to all agreements constituting subsratum Of a valid contract are subject to and governting by the Indian Contract Act, 1872, hereinafter called the Contract Act.3. Clauses (h) and (g) of Section 2 of the Contract Act declare that all agreement which are enforceable by law are contracts and those which are not enforceable by law are void.4. Essential components ...
Tag this Judgment!Wahid Ullah Khan Vs. District Magistrate, Nainital and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-20-1993
Reported in: AIR1993All249; (1993)2UPLBEC1107
ORDERA.P. Misra 1. This is a petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India.2. The facts giving rise to the present petition are as follows :--By means of the present petition petitioner Wahid Ullah Khan had challenged the resolution dated 22nd December, 1990, by which no confidence motion had been passed against the petitioner who was the elected President of the Municipal Board, Khatima, district Nainital. It is not disputed that the total strength of the members of the Board is 15. It is also not disputed that ihe petitioner was elected as President of the Board. Respondents Nos. 4 to 11 served a notice under S. 87-A of the U. P. Municipalities Act, hereinafter referred to as the Act, expressing their intention to move a motion of no confidence against the petitioner before the District Magistrate, Nainital. This notice was given on 19th November, 1990.3. On 4-12-1990 the District Magistrate issued a notice to the members of the Municipal Board which was despatched from Nainit...
Tag this Judgment!Midlands (Pvt.) Ltd. Vs. Regional P.F. Commissioner and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-20-1993
Reported in: (1994)ILLJ1230All; (1993)3UPLBEC2050
B.L. Yadav, J.1. Whether the petitioner (the employer) was entitled to the benefit of the principles of natural justice before passing an order under Section 7A of the Employees Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (compendiously 'the Act') to ascertain as to whether the provisions of the Act were applicable to the establishment and whether the petitioner must appear and co-operate in the enquiry held for that purpose, are short questions that fall for determination in the present petition filed by the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, with a prayer to quash the impugned order dated April 6, 1993 (Annexure No. 8 to this writ petition) whereby the petitioner was directed by the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner to produce records in an enquiry under Section 7A(1) of the Act and also directing the employees of the establishment to produce their evidence on the next date of hearing i.e. May 5, 1993 and for direction to quash the proceedings un...
Tag this Judgment!Kisan Sahkari Chini Mills Ltd. and ors. Vs. Awadhesh Singh
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-20-1993
Reported in: (1994)IILLJ1067All; (1993)2UPLBEC1313
R.A. Sharma, J.1. Respondent was appointed on daily wages basis, as Sheet-Writer/Weighment Clerk in the appellants' sugar mill(hereinafter referred to as the mill)in crushing season 1988- 89 and it is claimed that he continued to work in that capacity in subsequent Seasons upto 1990-91, but when the mill re-opened in the next crushing season on November 8, 1991 he was not called to join his duties. Accordingly he filed the writ petition for writ of mandamus directing the appellants, who are arrayed therein as respondents, to permit him to resume his duties as permanent Seasonal Sheet-Writer/Weighment Clerk in the mill. Prayer for payment of wages/salary from November 8, 1991, was also made. The appellants filed counter-affidavit in the above mentioned writ petition and in reply thereto the respondent has filed rejoinder affidavit. Supplementary counter and rejoinder affidavits were also exchanged between the parties,2. Writ petition of the respondent was allowed by learned single Judge...
Tag this Judgment!Krishna Kumar and ors. Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-20-1993
Reported in: 1993CriLJ3825
ORDER1. This writ petition by Krishna Kumar and three others in which Rachana Agarwal petitioner No. 2 is with a prayer for quashing of the F.I.R. in case Crime No. 109 of 1993 under Section 363/366, I.P.C. P. S. Khurja Nagar Distt. Bulandshahr. The petitioners though have not specifically prayed in the writ petition for quashing of the investigation proceedings, prayed that the Court may pass suitable orders or direction which may be fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. The F.I.R. in the above crime was lodged on 3-3-93 by Ram Autar Agarwal. The F.I.R. disclosed that Rachana Agarwal is a student of M. A. Prev. Economics of N.R.E.C. College and used to return from College regularly by 12 O'clock. On 22nd February, 1993 she did not return from her College and her whereabouts were not known. The informant made enquiries from his relations but no thereabouts could be found out. The informant learnt that Krishna Kumar, petitioner No. 1 is a student in B.A. IInd year in N.R.E.C....
Tag this Judgment!Dharmanand Alias Mahato Vs. the State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-20-1993
Reported in: 1994CriLJ730
ORDERK.C. Bhargava, J.1. In the bail application moved by Dharmanand alias Mahato who has been charged u/S. 302/307 of the Indian Penal Code, Police Station Cantt, Lucknow I have been called upon to reconsider my decision on bail application in Criminal Misc. Case No. 3496(B) of 1992 (Amar Singh v. State) which was decided on 24-11-1992, which has now been reported in 1992 LLJ 373.2. Brief facts relating to the present application for bail are that one Kallu lodged a first information report on 8-9-1992 against the applicant at Police Station Cannt, Lucknow on the basis of which a case crime No. 281 of 1992 under Section 302/307 of the Indian Penal Code was registered against him. Along with him two other persons were also shown as accused in the case. The applicant was, there after, arrested.3. Learned counsel for the applicant and the learned Counsel for the State have been heard. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that in the present case a charge-sheet has been filed in t...
Tag this Judgment!Gorakhnath Upadhyaya Vs. State of U.P. and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-19-1993
Reported in: AIR1994All283; (1993)2UPLBEC1191
ORDERR.A. Sharma, J.1. Executive Engineerof Public Works Department, Deoria, published a notice in local HINDI Newspapernamed 'GRAM SWARAJYA' on 23-10-1992, inviting tenders for collection of toll atBhagalpur and Narampur Ghats for a periodof three years. Tenders were required to besubmitted on 2-11-1992. According to theconditions of the tender notice the tenderswere to be submitted in two parts, part one ofwhich was to contain the amount offered andpart two to consist of all necessary papers. Itwas further mentioned therein that if part twoof the tender, which consists of necessarypapers, is not found in order, part one, whichcontains the amount offered will not beopened.2. According to the terms and conditions of the tender and the proforma of its first part, which is reproduced below, price was required to be mentioned by the intending purchaser for the first year only. Price of the second year would be the amount offered for the first year plus 10% thereof and the price of the thi...
Tag this Judgment!Hemanshu Kumar Chaturvedi Vs. University of Gorakhpur and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-19-1993
Reported in: (1994)ILLJ1188All; (1993)2UPLBEC1433
R.A. Sharma, J.1. Petitioner was appointed on September 25, 1986 as part-time Lecturer in the Department of Medieval and Modern History of University of Gorakhpur (hereinafter referred to as the University) by the Vice Chancellor, in exercise of his power under Section 13 (6) and (8) of the State Universities Act, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) for a period of six months or till regularly selected candidate joins, whichever was earlier. This appointment was extended from tune to time by the Vice-Chancellor. On July 19, 1987 the Executive Council of the University granted House Allowance to the part-time teachers and also allowed them to continue in service in future. In view of the above decision of the Executive Council the appointments of the petitioner as well as other parttime-teachers, were extended by the Vice-Chancellor from time to time up to November 2, 1989. On October 7, 1989 the Executive Council resolved that all part-time Lecturers to be treated as ad hoc Lectu...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »