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.
Shiv Pratap Singh and Others Vs. Chairman, Town Area Committee, Kishni ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-22-1997
Reported in: 1998(1)AWC533
O.P. Garg, J.1. Counter and rejoinder-affidavits have been filed, and therefore, this writ petition is being disposed of finally with the consent of learned counsel for the parties at the admission stage. Heard Sri Devendra Dahma, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri R.P. Goel for the respondents.2. The petitioners, three in number, along with others were appointed by the Chairman. Town Area Committee. Kishni, district Mainpuri by order dated 24.9.1993, w.e.f. 1.10.1993 vide Annexure 1. Shiv Pratap Singh, petitioner No. 1 and Brijendra Kumar Singh, petitioner No. 2 were appointed as Clerks while Surendra Singh, petitioner No. 3 was appointed as Chaukidar. Subsequently, by order dated 25.3.1994, Annexure 2 to the writ petition, the Sub-Divisional Magistrate/Officer Incharge Town Area Committee cancelled the order of appointment dated 24.9.1993 in respect of alt the appointees on the ground that the order was illegal and without jurisdiction. Learned counsel for the petitioner urge...
Sir Shadi Lal Enterprises Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-22-1997
Reported in: AIR1998All135
D.P. Mohapatra, C.J. 1. These writ petitions involve common fact situations and common questions of law. The controversy raised in all the cases relates to claim of refund of the amounts stated to have been paid by the petitioners as water cess under the provisions of the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Cess Act, 1977 (Act No. 36 of 1977) (hereinafter referred to the Act). Therefore, with the consent of learned counsel for parties, they were heard together and they are being disposed of by this common judgment. For the purpose of convenience Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 13701 of 1993 is taken as the leading case. 2. The petitioners in all the cases are owners of industrial units manufacturing sugar from sugarcane and liquor/alcohol from molasses, which is a by product in the process of manufacture of sugar. On the demand made by the State Government through the Cess Officer/Assessing Authority of the U.P. Pollution Control Board, Lucknow (hereinafter referred to as the Boa...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Saraya Sugar Mills (P.) Ltd.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-22-1997
Reported in: [1998]230ITR810(All); [1998]100TAXMAN31(All)
1. Pursuant to the direction of the High Court under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (briefly, 'the Act'), the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal referred the following question for the opinion of this court :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was in law justified in cancelling the penalty imposed by the Income-tax Officer under Section 273(c) of the Income-tax Act ?'2. The facts as found by the Appellate Tribunal are that the assessee filed its return of income declaring income of Rs. 31,25,628. The tax payable thereon came to Rs. 19,58,710. The income finally assessed, however, was Rs. 57,59,840 on which tax liability came to be Rs. 36,15,632. The difference between the returned income and the finally assessed income was mainly due to the following two items :Rs.(1)Rebates of Central excise on the excess production of sugar22,85,656(2)Remission of the tax payable by the sugar factory under the U.P. Sugarcane (Purchase Tax) Act2,71,923 25,2...
U.P. Financial Corporation and ors. Vs. V.P. Sharma and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-22-1997
Reported in: (1999)IIILLJ538All; (1998)1UPLBEC304
D.P. Mohapatra, C.J.1. This appeal filed under Chapter VIII, Rule 5 of the Allahabad High Court Rules by the U. P. Financial Corporation through its Chairman, the Managing Director of the Corporation and the Board of Directors of the Corporation through its Chairman is directed against the judgment dated August 1, 1994 of Civil Miscellaneous Writ Petition No. 8472 of 1984. In the impugned judgment the learned single Judge has allowed the writ petition, quashed the order passed by the Board of Directors of the Corporation (for short, the Board) dated June 30, 1984, which was communicated to the petitioner by the Managing Director of the Corporation by his letter dated June 30, 1984 (Annexure 27 to the writ petition) and directed that the petitioner shall be reinstated on the post held by him forthwith with all benefits, leaving it open to the Corporation to initiate fresh proceedings against the petitioner if it so desires.2. On analysis of the facts of the case the findings recorded an...
Narendra Pal Singh Teotia Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-22-1997
Reported in: (1999)IIILLJ536All; (1998)2UPLBEC853
R.A. Sharma, J.1. The petitioner, who is a Government servant, belonging to the Provincial Civil Service, was served with a charge sheet dated December 10, 1992, in response to which he submitted his reply denying the charges. The Commissioner, Bareilly Division, Bareilly was appointed as Inquiry Officer, who submitted his report dated March 3, 1994, holding the petitioner guilty of charges. Acting on the report of the Inquiry Officer the Government passed an order dated April 24, 1996, dismissing the petitioner from service. Being aggrieved by the said order he has filed this writ petition.2. Counter affidavits have been filed on behalf of the Government as well as the Commissioner, Bareilly Division, Bareilly, who was appointed as Inquiry Officer. The petitioner has filed rejoinder affidavit in reply thereto. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing counsel.3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has made two submissions in support of the writ petit...
Committee of Management, Shukhpura Inter College and anr. Vs. Alleged ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-22-1997
Reported in: (1998)1UPLBEC379
D.P. Mohapatra, C.J.1. The Committee of Management, Shukhpura Inter College, Sukhpura, District Ballia, through its Manager Shri Ram Bilas Singh and Sri Ram Bilas Singh filed this appeal challenging the judgment dated 23.4.1996 of Civil Misc. Writ Petitions Nos. 36325 of 1995, 37775 of 1995 and 38072 of 1995. By the said judgment the learned Single Judge disposed of the aforementioned three writ petitions. The operative portion of the judgment reads:-'From the aforesaid facts the over all position which has emerged is that the elections held on 8.2.1992 and 5.2.1995 was wholly illegal and without authority, the election could be held only in supervision of the Managing Director appointed by the Joint Director of Education. In the circumstances there is no option but to dispose of all the 3 writ petitions with a direction to the Joint Director of Education to appoint a Managing Director within a period of one month from the date of the production of a certified copy of this order. The M...
Jitendra Pal Singh Bhadauria Vs. Chairman and Managing Director and Re ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-22-1997
Reported in: (1998)1UPLBEC28
R.A. Sharma and Aloke Chakrabarti, JJ1. After hearing the learned Counsel for the parties and perusing the materials available on record, we find that the only consideration required is challenge in the present writ petition is order dated 6.9.1989 at annexure No. 27 to the writ petition whereby upon exercise of power of review the respondents have imposed a penalty of dismissal of the petitioner from service.2. The relevant brief facts are that in respect of petitioner there was a disciplinary proceeding initiated by issuance of a charge-sheet dated 23.11.1987 at annexure No. 17 to the writ petition after written statement of defence was filed by the petitioner and on enquiry by the enquiry officer report dated 11.3.1988 was submitted by the Enquiry Officer. Disciplinary authority by his order dated 6/7.6.1988 (Annexure No. 20 to the writ petition) awarded major penalty of lowering of pay at two stages as provided in Clause (e) of Regulation- 4 of the Allahabad Bank Officer Employees,...
Smt. Ram Kumari and anr. Vs. Shiv Bahadur Singh and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-22-1997
Reported in: 1998CriLJ1584
ORDERP.K. Jain, J.1. Heard Sri Virendra Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner. None appeared for respondent No. 1, although the case was taken up in the revised list.2. By the present petition, the petitioners have challenged the judgment and order dated 21-/-87 whereby the learned 1st Addl. Judicial Magistrate, Allahabad rejected the application under Section 125 of the Cr. P. C, filed by the petitioners.3. At the out-set it may be noted that though the said order was revisable under Sections 397 and 401, Cr. P. C. yet (he learned counsel preferred to file Criminal Misc. Application under Section 482, Cr. P. C. Subsequently by an application dated 23rd January, 1990 the learned counsel made a prayer for conversion of the Criminal Misc. Application into a writ petition which was allowed by the order dated 8-2-90. Normally when alternate remedy is available by way of appeal or revision, the High Court is slow in interfering in exercise of writ jurisdiction. However, in this case the...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Anup Ciiand Sarup Chand Jain
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-22-1997
Reported in: (1999)152CTR(All)113
ORDERBY THE COURT:At the instance of the Revenue, the Tribunal referred the following question for the opinion of this Court ..'Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, was the Tribunal legally correct in deleting the addition of Rs. 72,758 representing income worked out on pro rata basis for the period 19th May, 1975, to Diwah, 1975 ?2. The case relates to the asst. yr. 1976-77 accounting year of which is a Diwah year, commencing from 14th Nov., 1974. The firm was originally constituted on 9th Nov., 1970, and it was reconstituted w.e.f. 16th Nov., 1974, when a fresh partnership deed was executed. Under this deed the firm was constituted by 7 partners and in addition to them six minors were admitted to the benefit of the partnership. Clause 16 of such partnership deed clearly provided that the partnership would not dissolve on the death of any partner. On 18th May, 1975, one of the partner namely, Chunnilal Jain died. The assessee-firm filed return for the period comm...
Jagdish Prasad Sharma and Others Vs. Director of Education, Allahabad ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-21-1997
Reported in: 1998(1)AWC629
O.P. Garg, J.1. By means of this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners are seeking to challenge the correctness, legality and validity of the action and omission, on the part of the respondents in excluding the petitioners from the combined seniority list of lecturers serving in the Government Inter Colleges in the State of U. P.2. During the pendency of the writ petition, ad interim order was passed by Hon'ble B. M. Lal, J., (as His Lordship then was) on 24.8.1991. which runs as follows :'Heard learned counsel for the parties on stay. Vide order dated 7.5.1991 this Court directed to the respondents, the State, that they shall take decision within a month and communicate the same to the petitioners. However, still the standing counsel is not in a position to make any statement as to whether the Government has taken decision in this regard or not. Under these circumstances, this Court is constrained to pass an ad interim stay order in favour of th...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »