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.
Chakkhari Lal and ors. Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-01-1997
Reported in: (1998)1UPLBEC417
D.K. Seth, J.1. The petitioners are four in number. They were employees in the judgeship of Agra. The dispute involved is confined to their right to promotion to different posts from the respective posts held by the petitioners. The petitioners have based their right on the decision in the case of Chakkhan Lal and Ors. v. District Judge, Agra and Ors., decided by the Apex Court on 9.1.1990 (Annexure-5).2. As many as six prayers have been incorporated in the writ petition. Second to sixth prayer really flows from the first prayer in as much as second to sixth prayer are the consequential benefits arising out of the first prayer. The first prayer has been couched in the following expression :'Prsue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to comply with/execute the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court dated 8.1.1990 forthwith.'3. The petitioners claim that despite the order dated 9.1.90, the petitioners have not been given the benefits arising ther...
Smt. Usha Malviya Vs. Basic Shikshadhikari and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-01-1997
Reported in: (1998)1UPLBEC38
D.K. Seth, J.1. The petitioner alleges that she had made an application an terms of the advertisement dated August 8, 1995 contained in annexure-7 to the writ petition, and pursuant to her application, she was called for interview and she appeared in the interview where all her original certificates were verified (paragraph 8 of the writ petition). She was asked to produce residential certificate which she had submitted.2. The petitioner has nowhere mentioned in the writ petition that she was selected in the said interview nor any document has been produced to arrive at the conclusion that the petitioner was so selected in the said selection. On the other hand, the petitioner contends that she had made certain representation since no communication was given to her in respect of her selection, but the said representation were not considered. In paragraph No. 14 of the writ petition, the petitioner has contended that some of the candidates whose names are mentioned therein, who are junio...
Shiksha Prasar Samiti and anr. Vs. Registrar, Societies, Chits and Fir ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-01-1997
Reported in: (1998)1UPLBEC399
R.R.K. Trivedi, J.1. In both the aforesaid writ petitions parties are the same and questions of facts and law are also identical. Thus, both the petitions can be decided by a common judgment against which the parties have no objection. Writ Petition No. 2687 of 1997 shall be the leading case.2. Facts necessary to appreciate the controversy between the parties are that the petitioner Society was registered on 18.10.1958 and it started an educational institution known as Adarsh Higher Secondary School, Jurapur Beehar, Dahiyawan, Allahabad. Prabha Shankar Pandey and Ram Lakhan Shukla, petitioner No. 2, claiming themselves as Sachiv and Manager respectively of the Society, made an application seeking renewal of the registration of the Society. At their instance, vide order dated 8.10.1991, renewal was granted for a period of five years with effect from 10.10.1990. Respondent No. 4 also filed an application on 9.1.1992 claiming renewal of the registration. However, when it came to his notic...
Raghunandan Prasad and ors. Vs. State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-01-1997
Reported in: 1998CriLJ1571
B.K. Sharma, J.1. There is an appeal against the judgment and order dated 4-11-1980 passed by Sri Ghanshyam Das, the then IVth Additional Sessions Judge, Bulandshahar in S.T. No. 228 of 1979, State v. Raghu Nandan Prasad and two others under Sections 147, 323, 426, 452 and 147, I.P.C. Police Station, Jahangirabad, whereby, he convicted the accused-appellant of the offence under Section 147, I.P.C. and sentenced them to undergo R.I. for a period of 6 months and further convicted them of the offence under Sections 323/149, I.P.C. and sentenced them to R.I. for 6 months.2. Heard counsel for the parties. The prosecution story in this case was that the informant Ramesh Chandra lived in House No. 106, Mohalla Prabhu Dayal, Jahangirabad which previously belonged to Smt. Dropadi Devi who had executed on 28-10-1975 an agreement to sell the house to him, that possession of the house has been delivered to him on 28-10-75 i.e. the date of the agreement and since then, he was coming down in possess...
Mohd. Nazim and Etc. Vs. State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-01-1997
Reported in: 1998CriLJ1089
ORDERS.K. Phaujdar, J.1. All these cases have been taken up together as certain common questions of law regarding interpretation of the provisions of the Arms Act, 1959, had cropped up in all these matters. While taking up the matters, the common points will be dealt in common while the individual cases of the applicants, beyond the common points, shall be taken up separately. The cases could be grouped in three broad groups. In almost all the applications the FIRs in the respective case have been sought to be quashed. In some of them protection against arrest during investigation has been prayed for while in one case there is simply a prayer for transfer of the investigation of C.B.I (in Cri. Misc. Application No. 4694 of 1997). Some of the applicants are dealers in arms, who are sought to be prosecuted for purchase of weapons allegedly smuggled into India. Some others are both purchasers and sellers while a third group consists of mere bona fide purchasers as per their claims.2. The ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›