Allahabad Court November 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.
Bajrang Bahadur Singh and ors. Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-25-1997
Reported in: (1998)3UPLBEC1876
R.K. Mahajan, J.1. These writ petitions were originally filed in Lucknow Bench of this Court being Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 3538 of' 1989 and Writ Petition-No. 5433 of 1989 and were ultimately transferred to this Court under orders of Hon'ble the Chief Justice, as such both these writ petitions are being disposed of by a common judgment as common questions of fact and law are involved in these petitions.2. The short question involved in these writ petitions is whether the High Court on its administrative side after lapse of one year i.e., panel life according to Government Rules could have made recommendations for appointment and the same was rightly rejected by the Government and in case it was not rightly rejected then the petitioner can claim benefit of the same? Another question which has crept in these writ petitions is whether after cancellation of the candidature of Shailendra Kumar on 15.12.1987 and V.K. Yaduvanshi on 10.2.1988, as they were unwilling to join the post, the...
U.P. State Electricity Board and anr. Vs. Presiding Officer, Labour Co ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-24-1997
Reported in: (1998)1UPLBEC152
M.C. Agarwal, J.1. By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner employer challenges and award dated 24th November, 1994, made by the Presiding Officer, Labour Court I, U.P., Kanpur, in Adjudication Case No. 93 of 1994, whereby the Labour Court directed that the termination of the services of the workman respondent No. 2 as Boiler Attendant was not in accordance with law and he was entitled to be reinstated with the benefit of continuation in service. With regard to the back wages, it directed that the wages would be payable only from 1st February, 1994.2. Counter and rejoinder affidavits have been exchanged.3. I have heard Sri Ranjit Saxena, learned Counsel for the petitioner, and Sri K.N. Misra, learned Counsel for the respondent No. 2.4. The Government of Uttar Pradesh referred the dispute between the petitioner and the respondent No. 2. for adjudication to the Labour Court. The dispute was whether the removal of the workman from work with effect fr...
Siel Ltd. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-24-1997
Reported in: 1998(75)LC520(Allahabad)
1. We have heard learned Counsel for the parties.2. The contention of the petitioner is that it has filed as many as ten appeals before the second respondent Commissioner (Appeals), Central Excise, Ghaziabad together with stay and waiver applications but no orders have been passed either on stay or waiver applications or on the appeals and in the mean time, the fourth respondent, the Superintendent, Central Excise, Mawana, District-Meerut has threatened to take coercive steps against the petitioner for realisation of the demands which are the subject matter of dispute in the appeals. Particulars of the appeals filed by the petitioner have been set out in paragraph 5 of the writ petition which are as under:-(i) Appeal No. 669-CE/APPL/MRT/dt. 5.9.1997.(ii) Appeal No. 669-CE/APPL/MRT/97 dt. 5.9.1997.(iii) Appeal No. 728-CE/APPL/MRT/1997 dt. 6.10.1997.(iv) Appeal No. 727/CE/APPL/MRT/97 dt. 21.10.1997.(v) Appeal No. 754/CE/APPL/MRT/97 dt. 21.10.1997.(vi) Appeal No. 766/CE/APPL/MRT/97 dt. 3....
Ramesh Chandra Yadav and Others Vs. State of U.P. and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-22-1997
Reported in: 1998(2)AWC1382
D.S. Sinha and O.P. Jain, JJ. 1. Heard Sri I. N. Singh, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and Sri O. P. Slngh, learned standing counsel representing the respondent Nos. 1. 2, 3, 4 and 5. The respondent No. 6 has not responded to the notice Issued by the Court.2. The petitioners, who are either teachers or employees of Sri Ram Uchhattar Madhyamik Vidyalaya. Para, Post-Kandaur-via-Kurara, district Hamirpur, the Committee of Management of which is respondent No. 6 in this petition, [hereinafter called the Institution), feel aggrieved by the order dated 12th April, 1989, passed by the Accounts Officer, office of the Zila Basic Shiksha Adhikari. Hamirpur, the respondent No. 5, a copy whereof is Annexure-3 to the petition. By this order, the respondent No. 5 has declined to pay the salaries and other emoluments to the petitioners, in view of the fact that the Institution had been accorded permission to start High School Classes vide order dated 4th April, 1989 with effect from 1s...
Mittal Coal Enterprises Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax and o ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-22-1997
Reported in: [1998]232ITR747(All); [1998]99TAXMAN110(All)
1. The petitioner was assessed to tax by an assessment order dated September 30, 1997 (block assessment), under Section 158BC of the Income-tax Act, 1961, (for short 'the Act'). As a result of that assessment, a demand of Rs. 4,56,20,628 had fallen due against the petitioner. It is not disputed that the assessment order is not the subject-matter of challenge in this writ petition, against which an appeal has been preferred and is pending adjudication before the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal at Delhi.2. The challenge before this court was confined to the notice dated November 6, 1997, issued under Section 226(3) of the Act addressed to Synthetics and Chemicals Ltd., Bareilly. The impugned notice, inter alia, recites that the block assessment under Section 158BC read with Section 158BD of the Act has been made on September 30, 1997, in the case of the petitioner and the demand of income-tax was created at Rs. 4,56,20,628. The notice of demand has been duly served upon the petitioner on O...
Ram Kripal Sharma Vs. District Inspector of Schools and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-22-1997
Reported in: (1998)1UPLBEC159
Sudhir Narain, J.1. The petitioner is claiming salary for the month of September, 1997 and onwards for the post of Assistant Teacher in L.T. grade in Maharana Pratap Inter College, City and District Gorakhpur.2. The version of the petitioner is that a substantive vacancy of the post of Lecturer in Biology came into existence on account of retirement of the permanent Lecturer in Biology in the institution. Sri Baud Nath Yadav, who was a permanent Assistant Teacher in L.T. Grade, was granted ad-hoc promotion to the post of Lecturer. As a consequence of grant of ad-hoc promotion to Baud Nath Yadav a short term vacancy came into existence in L.T. Grade for Biology Teacher. The Committee of Management of the institution advertised the post for filling the short term vacancy of the post of Assistant Teacher in L.T. Grade for teaching Biology subject. The petitioner applied for appointment. He was selected. The Committee of Management passed resolution on 5.12.1993 to appoint the petitioner o...
Mittal Coal Enterprises Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-22-1997
Reported in: (1998)149CTR(All)462
ORDERThe petitioner was assessed to tax by an assessment order dated 30-9-1997 (block assessment) under section 158BC of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as `the Act'). As a result of that assessment, a demand of Rs. 4,56,20,628 had fallen due against the petitioner. It is not disputed that the assessment order is not the subject-matter of challenge in this writ petition against which an appeal has been preferred and is pending adjudication before the Tribunal at Delhi.2. The challenge before this court was confined to the notice dated 6-11-1997, issued under section 226(3) of the Act addressed to Synthetics & Chemicals Ltd., Bareilly, The impugned notice, inter alia, recites that the block assessment under section 158BC, read with section 158BD, of the Act has been made on 30-9- 1997 in the case of the petitioner and the demand of income-tax was created at Rs. 4,56,20,628. The notice of demand has been duly served upon the petitioner on 4-10-1997. Thus, the demand of ...
Bhanu Pratap Mishra Vs. Secretary, Minor Irrigation and Rural Engineer ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-21-1997
Reported in: 1998(1)AWC143; [1998(79)FLR176]; (1998)2UPLBEC1054
O.P. Garg, J.1. The petitioner, Bhanu Pratap Mishra, who is a Junior Engineer, in Rural Engineering Service, is posted at Gorakhpur. By order dated 13.6.1997 (Annexure 1) passed by the Director/Chief Engineer, Rural Engineering Service, Lucknow--respondent No. 2, he was transferred to Gonda along with three others. It appears, wife of the petitioner met a State Minister, on whose recommendation contained in letter dated 3.7.1997 (Annexure 2) the transfer order in respect of the petitioner was cancelled on 13.7.97 (Annexure 3). Soon thereafter, one Ramesh Kumar Pandey, a Press Reporter, Saptahik Gorakhpur-Ki-Chahat and Saptahik Monday Times, Gorakhpur made a complaint on 30.7.1997 (Annexure 4) to the Minister, Rural Engineering Service, against the petitioner, taking an exception to the continuance of the petitioner at Gorakhpur. On the same day, the concerned Minister passed an order on the complaint itself that the petitioner be not allowed to continue at Gorakhpur (In Ko Gorakhpur Ma...
Management of U.P. Ceramics and Potteries Ltd. Vs. State of U.P. and o ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-21-1997
Reported in: (1998)1UPLBEC39
S.P. Srivastava, J.1. Feeling aggrieved by the award of the Labour Court in the reference made under Section 4-K of the U.P. Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, whereunder holding the dispensing with the services of the respondent workman to be a retrenchment which had been affected without complying with the mandatory requirements stipulated under Section 6-N of the Act, the said workman had been reinstated in service with full back wages, the petitioner employer has now approached this Court seeking redress praying for the quashing of the aforesaid impugned award.2. I have heard, the learned Counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Counsel representing the respondent No. 3 and have carefully perused the record.3. The facts in bride shorn of details and necessary for the disposal of this case lie in a narrow compass. The respondent No. 3 had been employed as a workman in the establishment of the petitioner in the year 1973. He had applied for leave for the period 20.4.1980 to 30.4...
Satish and anr. Vs. State of U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-21-1997
Reported in: 1998CriLJ3352
T.P. Garg, J.1. This criminal appeal by Satish son of Debi Prasad and Ram Singh son of Reoti, accused, is directed against the judgment and order dated 21-11-1980 passed by VIII Addl. Sessions Judge, Kanpur, whereby both the appellants have been convicted under Section 395, I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo 4 years' R.I. each.2. Brief facts giving rise to the present appeal are as under:On the night between 22nd and 23rd February, 1979 Raja Singh, P.W. 3, was sleeping on the roof of his house while his father and brother-in-law were sleeping inside the house. At about 11.30 p.m., four miscreants came to his roof, upon which he got up and flashed his torch. Two of the miscreants caught him and threatened him to kill in case he would raise an alarm. One of the miscreants went down the roof with the aid of a Dhoti and opened the door of the stair-case. The three miscreants escorted him to the Angan (courtyard) and thereafter, his father and brother-in-law were also made to sit near him in t...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »