Allahabad Court September 1993 Judgments
Ankur Tripathi Alias Tinnu Vs. Sri Radhey Shyam Pandey and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-29-1993
Reported in: AIR1994All250; I(1995)DMC388
ORDER1. By means of this habeas corpus writ petition the parents of minor child Ankur Tripathi alias Tinnu, who is aged about 9 years, have sought custody of the minor child from opposite parties.2. At the outset it will be relevant to mention that opposite party No. 1, Radhey Shyam Pandey, is the maternal grandfather of the child and is aged about 57 years, opposite party No. 2, Srimati Rama Pandey is the maternal grandmother and is aged about 55 years and opposite party No. 3 Srimati Kamlesh who is maternal aunt of the minor is aged about 30 years. The parents of the minor reside at Lucknow while the opposite parties reside at Kanpur. According to the averments made in the petition the marriage between the parents of the minor took place on 16th May, 1977 and two sons were born, the elder one is Gaurav Tripathi who is aged about 11 years of age, the younger one is Saurabh Tripathi alias Tinku who has been renamed by the opposite parties as Ankur Tripathi, was born on 7th July, 1983 a...
Tag this Judgment!Indian Veterinary Research Institute and anr. Vs. Central Govt. Indust ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-29-1993
Reported in: [1994(68)FLR380]; (1994)IILLJ1102All
R.R.K. Trivedi, J. 1. Petitioner's case is that the impugned award is liable to be quashed as Tribunal has failed to consider the implication of Section 2(oo)(bb) of the Industrial Disputes Act. It is stated that the respondent No. 2 was a probationer and for his unsatisfactory work, he could be discharged from the service which could not attract provisions of Section 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act. Tribunal is said to have acted beyond his jurisdiction. It is further contended that the Tribunal has no jurisdiction to proceed with the case, same was to be transferred to the Central Administrative Tribunal under Section 29 of the Act. The industrial Tribunal ceased to have its jurisdiction w.e.f. May 15, 1987 on the matter.The respondent No. 2 had no right to hold the post. His services could be terminated without any notice. The respondent No. 2 is not entitled to get any protection under the Constitution or under the Industrial Disputes Act. Termination of service of respondent No...
Tag this Judgment!U.P. State Electricity Board Vs. Prescribed Authority and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-28-1993
Reported in: [1994(68)FLR480]; (1994)IILLJ421All
M. Katju, J.1. This is an application for review of my judgment dated January 11, 1993. It appears that against the aforesaid judgment the petitioner approached the Supreme Court and contended that the Division Bench Judgment of Allahabad High Court reported in 1977 LIC 993 was placed before the High Court but has not been referred to. Accordingly the Supreme Court directed the petitioner to file a review petition in this Court.2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has urged that the award of the U.P. Industrial Tribunal dated October 10, 1985 ceased to be operative after one year in view of Section 6-C of the U.P. Industrial Disputes Act. Learned Counsel for the petitioner has placed before me the decision of this Court in U.P. Cinema Exhibitions Federation v. State of U.P. 1977-LIC-993 and has invited my attention to paras 30 to 32 of the aforesaid Division Bench decision and on that basis submitted that the award had ceased to be operative after one year. Learned counsel for the pet...
Tag this Judgment!Gopal Das Rawat Vs. U.P. State Road Transport Corporations and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-27-1993
Reported in: [1994(68)FLR291]; (1994)IILLJ1173All
V.N. Khare, J. 1. This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution is directed against an award dated 12th August, 1986 given by the Presiding Officer of Labour Court U.P. Bareilly in Adjudication Case No. 11/84.2. Petitioner was appointed as a Conductor in the Uttar Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation (hereinafter referred to as the U.P.S.R.T.C.) in March, 1973. It is alleged that on 22nd November, 1980 the petitioner along with his friend in drunken state entered in the office of bus station, Rampur and twisted the arm of one Shiv Daual and further abused another employee of the U.P.S.R.T.C. Accordingly, the petitioner was placed under suspension and was served with a charge-sheet dated 29th November, 1980. Subsequently by an order dated 13th July, 1981 the Assistant Regional Manager, Moradabad dismissed the petitioner from service. He further directed that the suspension allowance which has not been paid to the petitioner shall be forfeited. Since a dispute arose between the...
Tag this Judgment!Bitanni and anr. Vs. State of U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-23-1993
Reported in: I(1995)DMC129
Virendra Saran, J.1. Smt. Bitanni and Sunil have filed this application challenging the order dated 12.8.1994 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate Sitapur directing the applicant Bitanni to be detained in Nari Niketan.2. According to the allegations made in the application, the two applicants, namely Smt. Bitanni and Sunil fell in love with each other and they decided to get married, but Ram Devi, mother of applicant Bitanni was opposed to the love marriage and hence applicant No. 1 Smt. Bitanni left her parental roof; got married to applicant Sunil and both of them started living with each other as husband and wife. However, their happy living together was interrupted on the lodging of First Information Report by Smt. Ram Devi under Sections 363, 366 120B I.P.C. and Section 3(1) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act at Police Station Kotwali, Sitapur. A case was registered as crime No. 202 of 1994 and on the strength of the First Information Re...
Tag this Judgment!Vinod Kumar Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-22-1993
Reported in: [1994(68)FLR384]; (1996)IILLJ482All
D.S. Sinha, J. 1. Heard Sri Shailendra, holding brief of Sri R.K. Nigam, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri C.P. Gupta, learned Special Counsel representing the respondents. 2. Upon joint request and agreement of the learned counsel for the parties, this petition is being disposed of finally at the admission stage under second proviso to Sub-rule (1) of Rule 2 of Chapter XXII of Rules of Court, 1952, as the facts are clear and no useful purpose would be served by calling for a return.3. The father of the petitioner, Dr. Ram Lal Gangwar, a 'Government Servant' within the meaning assigned to the expression in the U.P. Recruitment of Dependents of Government Servants Dying in Harness Rules, 1974, hereinafter called the Rules, died in harness.4. By means of an order dated April 27, 1993 passed by the Director, Ayurvedic and Unani Sewa Nideshalaya, Uttar Pradesh, Lucknow, the respondent No. 2, the petitioner was given appointment on the post of Junior Clerk, under Kshettriya Ayurved...
Tag this Judgment!Manju Gupta Vs. National Insurance Co. Ltd. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-22-1993
Reported in: I(1994)ACC242; 1994ACJ1036
R.R.K. Trivedi, J.1. Notice of this case was taken on 25.3.1992 by this court in exercise of suo motu powers under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, on the basis of a news item published in English daily newspaper, 'The Times of India', Lucknow, of the date 13.3.1992 with the heading 'All for 30,000 pieces of silver'. By order dated 17.4.1992 the learned District Judge, Hamirpur, was directed to submit his report to this court along with the record of the case. In pursuance of this order, learned District Judge submitted his report dated 12.5.1992 along with the record of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal Case No. 42/70 of 1990.2. From a perusal of the record, the facts giving rise to this case are that one Manju Gupta, aged about 3 years, met with an accident on 19.3.1985, at 4.30 p.m. in front of her house near Mandi Barrier, Sumerpur. In this accident, she lost both of her legs. She was treated at District Hospital, Hamirpur and ultimately at Lala Lajpat Rai Hospit...
Tag this Judgment!L. Kant Paper Mills Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-22-1993
Reported in: 1994LC42(Allahabad); 1994(71)ELT900(All)
Anshuman Singh, J.1. Heard Shri Rakesh Ranjan Agarwal, Counsel for the petitioner and Shri Umesh Narain Sharma, learned Senior Standing Counsel appearing for the Union of India. It is alleged that the petitioner is a holder of L-4 licence who is engaged in the manufacture of Duplex Board falling under Chapter sub-heading 4805.30 of the Excise Tariff Schedule in its factory premises at Rania, Kanpur Dehat. It is alleged that the factory of the petitioner was visited by the Preventive Officers, Central Excise Kanpur on 14-9-1991 and various records were seized by the aforesaid authorities. After the seizure of the documents show cause notice was issued to the petitioner on 15-8-1991. In pursuance of the aforesaid show cause notice, the petitioner submitted a detailed reply and the Collector, Central Excise, Kanpur Dehat, after considering the reply submitted by the petitioner passed an order on 14-10-1992 confirming the demand of central excise amounting to Rs. 22,67,723/- against the pe...
Tag this Judgment!Swamiji (indra Prasad Gupta) Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-17-1993
Reported in: (1994)122CTR(All)374; [1994]209ITR446(All)
R.K. Gulati, J.1. This petition is directed against the assessment orders for the assessment years 1978-79, 1979-80 and 1981-82 which are all dated March 26, 1993. Admittedly, the petitioner has filed appeals against the above assessment orders which are pending for decision before the Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), Varanasi. It may be observed that the above assessment orders came to be made in consequence of a common order under Section 263 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, dated February 24, 1991, passed by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Central), Kanpur, by which he had set aside the assessment orders that had been made earlier for the aforesaid assessment years with the direction to make fresh assessments in the light of the directions contained in the order under Section 263 of the Act. The complaint is that the assessments now made are liable to be quashed inasmuch as there were no justification for the Commissioner of Income-tax (Central) to have set aside the earlier...
Tag this Judgment!iqbal Badi Khan Vs. Adhishasi Abhiyanta
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-17-1993
Reported in: [1994(68)FLR390]; (1994)IILLJ882All
M. Katju, J.1. This writ petition has been filed against the impugned termination order dated October 29, 1992. In this case one month's time had been granted to file counter-affidavit but no counter-affidavit has been filed. In the circumstances I am treating the allegation in the petition to be correct and am disposing off the petition finally.2. I have heard Shri Manoj Misra and learned standing counsel.3. The impugned order shows that the petitioner is implicated in a case under Section 307/302 I.P.C. which is still pending against him and his service has been terminated for that reason. In my opinion if a person is implicated in a criminal case he should be suspended pending the criminal trial. If the criminal trial ends in conviction his services can be terminated and if he is acquitted he should be reinstated. Hence 1 direct that the impugned order dated October 29, 1992 is set aside and the petitioner will remain suspended until the pendency of the criminal case. If the petitio...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »