Allahabad Court October 1997 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 Kushwaha Vs. Superintending Engineer and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-28-1997
Reported in: (1998)1UPLBEC216
O.P. Garg, J.1. These are two writ petitions in which common questions of law and facts have been raised. They are, therefore, proposed to be decided by this common judgment. Counter and rejoinder affidavits have been exchanged. Heard Sri Tribhuvan Upadhyaya, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Sri K.B. Mathur as well as learned Standing Counsel for the respondents.2. The petitioner-Lalji Kushwaha was appointed as Pump Operator on daily wage basis on 1.2.1977 in the office of the respondent No. 1-Superintending Engineer, Mechanical Division II, U.P. Jal Nigam, Allahabad. His status was upgraded as work charge Employee w.e.f. 1.6.1978 and by order dated 22.2.1985, the services of the petitioner were regularised w.e.f. 1.4.1984, on the post of Pump Operator in the pay scale of Rs. 320-460. The petitioner was placed at serial number 10 of the list of the employees who were regularised. The petitioner was transferred from Allahabad to Kausambi in Dharmpur Pey Jal Yojna. It is alleged th...
Modi Rubber Limited Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-28-1997
Reported in: 1998(74)LC492(Allahabad)
1. Heard counsel for the parties.2. The petitioner seeks quashing of impugned order dated 20.10.1997, an-nexure-1 to the writ petition, passed by the Assistant Commissioner, respondent No. 3.3. The petitioner addressed a letter dated 17.10.1997, annexure-6 to the writ petition, stating that the Superintendent (Tech.) advised the petitioner not to utilise the MODVAT credit of Additional Excise Duty (AED) lying in RC 23A Part II towards the payment of Basic Excise Duty (BED). Feeling aggrieved of such direction of the Superintendent, the petitioner requested respondent No. 3 in the letter dated 17.10.1997 as follows:.you will kindly appreciate that we have already given you a detailed legal opinion on the subject. In case you do not concur with our stand, you may issue the necessary show cause notice and thereafter giving us an opportunity for personal hearing and adjudicate the matter which is the normal procedure.4. The grievance of the petitioner is that without giving an opportunity ...
Maharaj Singh Vs. Addl. City Magistrate (1st), Prescribed Authority, A ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-27-1997
Reported in: 1998(1)AWC502
ORDERR.R.K. Trivedi and M. Katju, JJ. 1. Heard counsel for the petitioner and learned standing counsel. Both the learned counsel agree that this petition may he decided finally at this stage.2. The facts giving rise to this petition are that proceeding under Section 13 (2) of the U. P. Roadside Land Control Act, 1945 were initiated against the petitioner with the allegation that he has encroached upon the road to the extentof an area 5.19 x 19.50 meter and has raised unauthorised construction. In response to the notice, the petitioner appeared. However, on 25.2.1997 he could not appear before the competent authority and the order was passed against the petitioner on the same day for demolishing the construction and removing the encroachment. Against this order the petitioner filed an application on 15.3.1997 for setting aside the ex parte order. The reason stated in the application was that on 25.2.1997 in the morning the nephew of the petitioner Maharaj Singh had died and for this rea...
Ramesh Jogi (Yogi) Vs. State of U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-27-1997
Reported in: 1998CriLJ3861
ORDER1. Ramesh Yogi, accused has filed this appeal against the judgment and order dated 4-6-81 passed in S. T. No. 131/76, State v. Ramesh Yogi, holding him guilty on chargesunder Sections 302/149, 307/149, 147, I.P.C. and sentencing him to various terms of imprisonment, including life imprisonment on a chargeunder Section, 302/149.2. The prosecution case started on the basis of the F.I.R. dated 19-3-78 recorded at 11.45 p.m. The date of incident is said to be 19-3-78 at about 11.45 p.m. The distance of the P. S. is about 7 furlongs. The accused named are, Kurine @ Karsan Kumar, Suresh Kariyal and again another Suresh Kariyal, all residents of Mohalla Antapara, distt. Mathura along with three other persons (one of which is the accused appellant before us). P.W. 5 Sri Uttam Chand is the complainant. The deceased are Mohan and Shiv Kumar, his sons.3. It is alleged' that on 19-3-78 at about 11 p.m. the complainant along with his sons Mohan and Shiv Kumar (deceased) and Tulsi, injured, (P....
Committee of Management of Rashtriya Kissan College, Shyamli, Muzaffar ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-24-1997
Reported in: 1998(2)AWC1249
R. H. Zaidi, J.1. Since counter-affidavit and rejoinder-affidavit in this case were filed by the parties and the case was ready for hearing, as desired by the learned counsel for the parties. I have heard this petition finally and the same is being disposed of at this stage.2. By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, petitioners pray for issuance of a writ, order or direction quashing the order dated 24/29.9.1997 passed by the Vice-Chancellor, Chaudhary Charan Singh University, Meerut (for short 'the University') recognising the Committee of Management of which respondent No, 2 as the Secretary/Manager as duly constituted Committee of the College and also for a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to treat the petitioner No. 1 to be validly elected Committee of Management of Rashtriya Kissan College,Shamli, district Muzaffarnagar (for the short 'the College') and not to interfere in its working in any manner whatsoever.3....
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Durga Bansal Cold Storage and Ice Facto ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-24-1997
Reported in: (1998)149CTR(All)160; [1999]235ITR479(All)
1. At the instance of the Revenue, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal referred the following question relating to the assessment year 1975-76 under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (briefly, the Act), for the opinion of this court :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the assessee was entitled to the deduction under Section 80J on the capital employed in the two new chambers added to the existing cold storage ?'2. The facts, as found by the Appellate Tribunal, are that the assessee, a registered firm, constructed additional chambers to its existing cold storage and claimed before the Income-tax Officer that the said additional chambers constituted 'new industrial undertaking' and, therefore, on the capital employed in the new industrial undertaking, deduction as envisaged under Section 80J of the Act, be allowed.3. The Income-tax Officer, however, took the view that there was only one electric connection for bo...
Ram Raj Pandey and ors. Vs. Upper Zila Adhikari Prashasan and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-24-1997
Reported in: (1998)1UPLBEC229
O.P. Garg, J.1. Counter and rejoinder affidavits have been exchanged. Heard Sri S.K. Chaubey, learned Counsel for the petitioners and Sri R.S. Maurya, as well as, learned Standing Counsel for the respondents.2. The petitioners who are 4 in number, were appointed on ad hoc basis in Town Area Khamariya, district Varanasi. The petitioner No. 1 Ram Raj Pandey, petitioner No. 2 Rajendra Prasad Pandey, petitioner No. 3 Vijay Bahadur Patel and petitioner No. 4 Amar Bahadur Yadav were respectively appointed on the posts of Safai Naik, Water Tax Collection Amin, Lineman and Clerk. They are alleged to be working continuously on their respective posts right from the date of appointment. It is alleged that by an order dated 20.7.1991, the services of the petitioners have been dispensed with and they are not allowed to perform their duties. By means of the present writ petition, it is prayed that the order dated 20.7.1991, terminating the services of the petitioners, as orally stated by respondent ...
Deshraj Singh Vs. District Magistrate and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-24-1997
Reported in: (1998)1UPLBEC32
O.P. Garg, J.1. These are two connected writ petitions. Counter affidavit has been filed in the Civil Misc. Writ No. 35360, of 1995. The controversy involved in these two writ petition is almost identical. Both these writ petitions are therefore being disposal of by this common judgment. Heard Sri P.S. Baghel learned Counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Standing Counsel for the respondents.2. In the leave vacancy of one Bachhu Lal Rahi, a teacher in L.T. grade in Vinobha Inter College, Kamasin, district Banda for the period 1.11.1994 to 30.10.95, the petitioner-Deshraj Singh was appointed after adopting the procedure required under the law by invoking the provisions of Second Removal of Difficulties Order, 1981. His appointment was duly approved by the District Inspector of Schools on 23.1.1995. In pursuance of the order of appointment dated 10.2.1995, the petitioner joined on 11.2.1995. One Shiv Bhusan, made a complaint to the District Magistrate Banda on 8.3.1995 alleging th...
Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd., Allahabad Vs. Smt. Prakashwati and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-23-1997
Reported in: 1999ACJ869; 1998(1)AWC799
Binod Kumar Roy and M.L. Singhal, JJ.1. This is Insurance Company's appeal against an order granting compensation to the tune of Rs. 1,02,000 only with interest @ 14% per annum. Shri Ashok Kumar, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant contended that issue No. 3 had been wrongly decided, and accordingly, this appeal is fit to be admitted.Issue No. 3 reads thus :'Whether the driver of the said bus had a valid driving licence at that time?'2. This issue has been discussed and answered as follows :Issue No. 3. The owner of the vehicle involved in the accident O.P. No. 1 did not appear despite sufficient service. He was the only person who was in a position to say whether the driver of the Bus had a valid driving licence at the time of accident. However, the burden lies on the Insurance Company to prove that the driver of the Bus had no valid driving licence at the time of accident. This burden has not been discharged by O. P. No. 3. I, therefore, hold that the driver of the B...
Smt. Pratima Sen Gupta Vs. Sajal Sen Gupta
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-22-1997
Reported in: 1998(1)AWC227; II(1998)DMC553
Binod Kumar Roy and M.L. Singhal, JJ. 1. This is a wife's appeal under Section 19 of the Family Courts Act, 1984 assailing the validity of order dated 13.5.1997 passed by the Judge. Family Court. Allahabad in Case No. 216 of 1991 filed by the husband-respondent seeking divorce of the appellant under the provisions of Section 13 of Hindu Marriage Act. By the impugned order the Judge, Family Courts has directed the husband-respondent to pay in all a sum of Rs. 1,000 towards litigation expenses within seven days therefrom. By another part of the same order, the husband-respondent was directed to pay to the appellant, from the date of the order, a sum of Rs. 400 per month to the appellant by way of interim maintenance. By another part of the same order, the husband-respondent was also directed to pay to the wife-appellant a sum of Rs. 300 each towards interim maintenance to their minor children Prashant Sen Gupta and Pallavi Sen Gupta during the pendency of the case.2. Sri Amit Kumar learn...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »