Court : Allahabad
Reported in : (1998)1UPLBEC480
D.K. Seth, J.1. By the order dated 21.2.1990 (Annexure-2), the petitioner was asked to carry on the work of Junior Engineer (Technical) in a vacant post for a period of two months or till joining of a regular Junior Engineer on ad hoc basis. By order dated 17.7.1991 (Annexure-11), the petitioner was asked to handover charge to regular Junior Engineer, who had joined the post. The petitioner has challenged this order by means of this writ petition.2. Mr. Madan Lal Srivastava holding the brief of Mr. Janardan Sahai, learned Counsel for the petitioner, relied on a Government Order dated 19th September, 1981 (Annexure-13) and contended that in view of the said Government Order, the petitioner cannot be removed.3. On the basis of such allegation, the petitioner has obtained an interim order and is still coninuting in the said post.4. Respondent No. 5 as well as the State Government has filed counter-affidavit pointing out that the arrangement so made was purely on ad hoc basis. The said app...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : 1998(1)AWC370; (1998)3UPLBEC1777
S. H. A. Raza, J.1. The short question Involved in this writ petition is as to whether an employer can deny the dues of a workman for the reason that the workman has already resigned and was not in service on the date of settlement.2. In a proceeding under Section 33C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) the Labour Court negatived the contention of the employer by giving a finding to the effect that as the settlement was of a retrospective nature, the workman cannot be denied his dues which were given to the employees similarly situated.3. The brief facts as set out by the workman and which are admitted by the employer are that the respondent-workman was appointed as a Junior Assistant Trainee with effect from 8.1.1991, firstly on a stipend of Rs. 1.600 per month for 12 months and thereafter on a stipend of Rs. 1,800 per month for 18 months. On 24.2.1992 the workman was appointed as Steno-Typist Trainee for a period of 18 months on a stipend of Rs. 2,0...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : 1998(2)AWC1424
R. H. Zaidi, J.1. Petitioner by means of this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, prays for Issuance of a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to admit the petitioner in B.Com. (Honrs.) Part I, 1997-98 session and to permit him to pursue his studies in the aforesaid course in Banaras Hindu University.2. The facts of the case, as set out in the writ petition, are that it was in the year 1996-97 that the petitioner appeared in the entrance examination for admission in the aforesaid course ; but was not allowed to complete the said examination by the invigilator Inspite of protest. In the year 1997-98, applications were again invited for appearing in the entrance examination by the University. The petitioner again applied for permission to appear in the said examination after fulfilling all the formalities for the same. He was issued a provisional admit card and was allotted Roll No. 42853 by the University. The application for...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : 1998(1)AWC429
B.K. Roy and P.K. Jain, JJ.1. The petitioner has knocked the doors of this Court by taking recourse to Article 226 of the Constitution of India for grant of following three reliefs :(i) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent Nog. 1. 2 and 3 to follow the dictum contained in the Government Order date4 19.2.1996 on the subject of the provision of shadow, gunner and guard with regard to the persons having criminal history and background in all strictness or alternatively clarify or formulate the clear guideline for the citizens of State of U. P. with regard to the principles which govern the feasibility of the provisions of shadow, gunner and guard etc. to the persons having the criminal history: (ii) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to grant the gun licence applied by the petitioner notwithstanding the pendency of the Case Crime No. 229/91 under Sections 147. 148, 149 and 302, I.P.C.. P. S. C...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : 1998(1)AWC723
R.R.K. Trivedi, J.1. In this petition, learned standing counsel has accepted notice for respondent Nos. 1 to 3 and respondent No. 4 U. P. State Road Transport Corporation (hereinafter referred to as the Corporation) is represented by Shri Rajiv Sharma. The writ petition was filed on 20.1.1997, Learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel, appearing for respondent Nos. 1 to 3, was granted time to file counter-affidavit by the next date of listing. The writ petition was directed to be listed on 31.1.1997. By order dated 4.3.1997, the case was directed to be listed showing the name of Shri Rajiv Sharma as counsel for respondent No. 4 and respondents were directed to file counter-affidavit. The case was thereafter listed on various dates but counter-affidavit has not been filed by the respondents. As sufficient time has already been granted to file counter-affidavit, we have heard the learned counsel for the parties on merits for deciding the writ petition finally at this stage against which ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : 1998(2)AWC1416; (1998)3UPLBEC2156
S.C. Verma, J.1. The State of Uttar Pradesh through the Secretary HomeDepartment and the Commandant, 34 Battalion, P.A.C. Varanasi, had filed the present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution challenging the order of U. P. Public Services Tribunal dated 18.1.1993 by which the Claim Petition of ihe respondent No. 1 Chandra Prakash Shahi, has been allowed and the order of termination dated 19.7.1989 has been quashed.2. Assailing the Impugned order, the petitioners have alleged that the work and conduct of respondent No. 1 was not found satisfactory and as such, his services were terminated by order dated 19.7.1989 under the U. P. Temporary Government Servant (Termination of Service) Rules. 1975. The opposite party No. 1 was recruited as a temporary recruit Constable on 1.10.1985 at 34 Battalion P.A.C.. Varanasi and after the respondent No. 1 completed training on 6.9.1986 he was placed as temporary Constable. The petitioners have alleged that the opposite party No. 1 at no ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : [1998(79)FLR195]; (2000)IIILLJ614All
M.C. Agarwal, J. 1. By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner employer challenges an order dated June 6, 1989 made by the Competent Authority under Section 15 of the Payment of Wages Act directing the employer petitioner to pay a sum of Rs. 10,032/- towards wages for the period February 16, 1984 to February 15, 1985 to the wife and legal representative of the deceased employee Paltu along with a penalty of Rs. 70,224/- and an order dated February 14, 1994 passed by the IX Addl. District Judge, Kanpur dismissing the petitioner's appeal against the first mentioned order. 2. The deceased Paltu was employed in the Muir Mills owned by the National Textile Corporation U.P. Ltd. He moved an application dated February 27, 1985 before the Competent Authority claiming that he was employed on the post of a reeler in the reeling department and that he has been going for duty regularly in the reeling department but he has been turned back every day by the emplo...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : I(1998)DMC423
G.S.N. Tripathi, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties. Admittedly, the Family Court was established m the District of Moradabad on 3,6.1997. The present matter was pending before the Magistrate 1st Class prior to this date i.e. 3.6.1997, situated at Chandauli, out of Court in the same district but the learned Magistrate concerned could not know about it on the date on which he passed the order i.e. 5.6.1997 that a Family Court had been established in the district. Therefore, he passed bonafidely an order of maintenance in proceedings Under Section 125, Cr.P.C. 2. My attention has been invited to the provisions of Section 8 of the Family Court Act, 1984 (Act No. XXXVI of 1984, Central Act), which provides that all pending matters shall stand transferred to the Family Court on the date on which it is established.3. In the present case, the Family Court was established on 3.6.1997. So by virtue of the legal fiction, the case pending before the Magistrate concerned stood transferred ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : 1998CriLJ2354
ORDERKundan Singh, J.1. Heard Sri G.C. Saxena, learned Counsel for the applicant and Shri Manphool Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State.2. The above noted revision was admitted by this Court on 10th July, 1984. There is no prayer in the memo of revision for summoning the lower Court record nor any such prayer was made before this Court. There is no order of the Court for summoning the lower Court record that was necessary for deciding the case.3. This case was taken up for-hearing on 26th November, 1997. The learned Counsel for the applicant submitted that in this case the lower Court record has not been summoned and requested for summoning the lower Court record. The lower Court record is necessary in all cases of appeal and revision, if they are admitted. He relied on the provisions of Section 397, Cr.P.C. wherein the High Court or any Sessions Judge may call for and examine the record of any proceeding before any inferior Criminal Court for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : 1998CriLJ2871
ORDERKundan Singh, J.1. This appeal has been preferred against the judgment and order dated 25th November, 1980 passed by Sri P. K. Dixit, the then IV Additional Sessions Judge, Bareilly, whereby the appellants have been convicted and sentenced to five years' rigorous imprisonment under Section 394 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that the robbery was committed at about 12/1 in the intervening night of 27/28th December, 1978 at the house of Rama Shanker in village Basant Nagar, police station Devernia, district Bareilly. At the relevant time 3 or 4 miscreants entered the house of the complainant after scaling the wall, where a lantern was burning. His mother was sleeping towards Kuthia. On the other side of the Kuthia, the complainant and his maternal cousin, Ram Prakash, were sleeping. His mother cried that the miscreants had come. The complainant and his cousin attracted to the cry of his mother and saw the miscreants were dragging her outside. Bot...
Tag this Judgment!