Allahabad Court December 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.
Ashok Kumar Alias Achhaibar and Another Vs. Deputy Director of Consoli ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-08-1997
Reported in: 1998(2)AWC1391
S. P. Srivastava, J.1. Feeling aggrieved by the order passed by the Deputy Director of Consolidation whereunder allowing the revision filed under Section 48 of the U. P. Consolidation of Holdings Act by the contesting respondent and upholding the claim of the objectors in respect of the agricultural holdings pertaining to Khata No. 31, the name of the petitioners were directed to be expunged from the basic year khatauni determining the shares of Deo Narain and Surendra Kumar Lo be one half share each, they have now approached this Court seeking redress praying for the quashing of the revisional order.2. 1 have heard Shri N. Lal, learned counsel for the petitioners and Shrl G. N. Verma, learned counsel representing the contesting respondents and have carefully perused the record.3. The facts in brief shorn of details and necessary for the disposal of this case lie in a narrow compass. In the basic year Khatauni, the plots in dispute were recorded in the names of Deo Narain. Raj Karan S/...
Moti Lal and Others Vs. State of U.P. and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-08-1997
Reported in: 1998(3)AWC2324
B. Dikshit, J.1. The questions which arises for determination in this writ petition is whether a tenure-holder is entitled for restitution of possession of land declared as surplus on his success in an appeal filed under Section 13 of Uttar Pradesh Imposition of Ceiling on Land Holdings Act. Will it make any difference where the Collector, after taking over possession, put allottee in possession after allotting it under Section 27 (4) of the Act? As the question raised is purely question of law for which facts have been set-out in impugned order passed by prescribed authority and, whereas, the counsel for petitioners and standing counsel have been heard on merits, the writ petition is being finally disposed of at this stage of admission.2. The facts, as set-out in impugned order, are that prescribed authority declared disputed land as surplus against which appeal was allowed and order of prescribed authority was set-aside. As the Collector took possession of disputed land after its bei...
Jauhariya and ors. Vs. State of U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-08-1997
Reported in: 1998CriLJ3298
N.S. Gupta, J.1. This criminal appeal is directed against the judgment and order of convication dated 7-7-1980 passed by Sri J.P. Sharma the then II Addl. Sessions Judge, Banda in Session Trial No. 13 of 1980 convicting the accused-appellants named above sentencing them to undergo life imprisonment under Section 302,/ 149, I.P.C. and 5 years R.I. under Section 307/ 149, I.P.C. and one year R.I. under Section 147, I.P.C. each. All the sentences were made to run concurrently.2. The prosecution story briefly stated is as follows :--The complainant Maiyadin (PW 1) is a resident of village Atarra P.S. Atarra District Banda. His grand father was Kamta, who had three sons namely Gokul, Rajadwa and Sukhuwa, Gokul had two sons Chulbuliya and Pusaiyan (Accused), Chulbuliya has no sons. When Chulbuliya died he left behind a minor daughter who had since been married. Accused appellant No. 5 Shiv Prasad was the son-in-law of Chulbuliya. Pusaiyan (Accused) had four sons namely Jauhriya, (accused app...
Dr. Khalid BIn Yusuf Khan Vs. Aligarh Muslim University and Another
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-05-1997
Reported in: 1998(1)AWC722
M. Katju and R.K. Singh, JJ.1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.2. The petitioner is a confirmed Lecturer in Sanskrit in Aligarh Muslim University, Aligarh. By means of this petition, he has prayed that three per cent reservation should be made for the post of Sanskrit Reader in favour of a physically handicapped person. The petitioner claims to be a physically handicapped person and he has relied on Section 39 of the provisions of Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995. Section 39 of the Act reads as under :'39. All Government educational Institutions and other educational institutions receiving aid from the Government, shall reserve not less than three per cent seats for persons with disabilities.'3. In our opinion, Section 39 has no application because it deals with reservations for seats and not for posts. In this connection, we may refer to Section 32 of the same Act which uses the word posts. Posts are meant for the teachers...
Rakesh Kumar Mishra Vs. State of U. P. and Another
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-05-1997
Reported in: 1998(2)AWC963
S.H.A. Raza and Bhagwan Din, JJ.1. The petitioner after obtaining a degree of Bachelor in Engineering underwent the course of apprenticeship under the Apprentices Act in the Public Works Department. In pursuance of Notification No. Al/B-3/96-97 for recruitment of Assistant Engineers (Civil), the petitioner appeared in the examination but the result of the same is not being declared.2. The contention of the petitioner is that neither the Public Service Commission has made its recommendations nor the appointment on any post in the Public Works Department has yet been made.3. Placing reliance upon a decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in U. P. State Road Transport Corporation and another v. U. P. Pariwahan Nigam Shikshak Berojgar Sangh and others, JT 1995 (2) SC 26, which has arisen from the judgment passed by the Lucknow Bench of this Court in which one of us (Hon'ble Mr. Justice S. H. A. Raza) was a member, it was contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that as he had unde...
Allahabad Bank, Banda Vs. Central Government, Industrial Tribunal-cum- ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-05-1997
Reported in: 1998(2)AWC975; [1998(79)FLR113]; (1998)IILLJ1048All; (1998)2UPLBEC1257
R. K. Mahajan, J.1. This writ petition involves a short question whether a joint reference with respect to termination/retrenchment of several employees can be subject-matter of adjudication by the Labour Court when the employees are working in different branches though their employer is one and the same. The reference in question as referred in Annexure-C.A. 1 is as under :'Whether the action of the Management of Allahabad Bank in terminating the services of S/Sri Swami Din, Jeevan Chander, Udai Kumar. Chander Shekhar Dwivedi, Ram Manohar, Shahu Ram, Shankar Lal, Namdeo, Devldin, Bala Prasad, Surendra Kumar, Guiab Chander, Hari Kishan, Kalpanath Ram, Ram Lakhan, Harish Chandra Yadav, Narendra Narain Mishra, Sunder Lal, Ram Naresh, Daya Ram, Ramayan Rai, Ram Shanker Ram, Htaph Khan, Ram Pati Ram, Devanand Ram, Khem Chand, Nand Kishore, Hari Charan, Rajendra Pratap Mishra from the services of the Bank and not considering them for further employment while recruiting fresh hands under Sec...
Mahabir Metal Co. Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-05-1997
Reported in: (1999)157CTR(All)143; [1999]235ITR797(All)
1. This writ petition is directed against two notices both dated January 27, 1997, issued under Section 143(2)/142(1) of the income-tax Act, 1961 (for short 'the Act'), for the assessment years 1990-91 and 1992-93 and also against a notice under Section 154 of the same date in relation to the assessment year 1990-91. By the impugned notices, the petitioner has been called upon to show cause, inter alia, as to why certain disallowances should not be made in computing its total income for the aforesaid two assessment years in view of the provisions contained in Section 43B of the Act inasmuch as, the petitioner had not deposited the amounts of Central sales tax collected by it in the previous years relevant to the assessment years stated earlier!2. We have heard learned counsel for the parties.3. Section 43B of the Act provides for certain deductions in the computation of total income only on actual payment. It provides, inter alia, that notwithstanding anything contained in the provisio...
Udhawa Dhangana Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-05-1997
Reported in: 1998(75)LC518(Allahabad)
1. Shri Piyush Misra states that he has filed Vakalatnama on behalf of the petitioner.2. This writ petition was filed seeking quashing of seizure of garlic under seizure order dated 17.11.1994 and for a further relief that respondents No. 3 and 4 be directed to release the garlic in question.3. Sri Misra learned Counsel for the petitioner states that in response to the show cause notice the petitioner has already filed his reply and the matter is being contested bsefore the Customs Authorities.4. In view of this statement we do not feel inclined to go into the merits of the controversy raised in this petition as the petitioner has a remedy before the Custom Authorities to seek redressal of his grievances, which as stated he is already pursuing.5. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed....
Bhagwan Singh Vs. District Inspector of Schools, Mathura and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-04-1997
Reported in: 1998(1)AWC742
J.C. Gupta, J.1. Heard petitioner's counsel and learned standing counsel for the respondent Nos. 1 and 2.2. This petition has been filed with a prayer that the respondents be directed to make payment of the salary to the petitioner from 1.7.1991 and also pay him regular salary month to month as and when the same falls due. It has also been prayed that respondent No. 1 be directed to decide the petitioner's representation dated 20.5.1991, Annexure-4 to the petition and that a writ of certiorari be issued quashing the order dated 13.5.1994, Annexure-6 to the petition passed by the respondent No. 1. Admittedly, the college in question is governed by the provisions of U. P. Intermediate Education Act and the Payment of Salary to the Teacher and other Employees Act, 1971.3. According to the petitioner, he was appointed as an Assistant Teacher in L. T. grade on a sanctioned post under the resolution of the Committee of Management dated 30.6.1991 and in pursuance of the same, he was issued an...
Mayank Rajput Vs. State of U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-04-1997
Reported in: 1998CriLJ2797
ORDERJ.C. Mishra, J.1. This revision has been filed by the accused against the order dated 17th Oct. 1996 passed by III Additional Sessions Judge, Bijnor, rejecting the application that his case should be sent to the Court of Juvenile Judge for trial as he is a juvenile and in view of the provisions of Section of the Juvenile Justice Act (hereinafter called 'the Act') he cannot be tried with the other accused.2. Accused Mayank along with other accused was named in the F.I.R. and he was committed to session. At the time of trial the accused-revisionist moved an application stating that he was born on 1st July, 1980 and, therefore, he had not completed 16 years of age on the date of occurrence of offence. The State Counsel contested the application stating that he had completed 16 years of age before the date of occurrence and thus he was not a juvenile. The learned Additional Sessions Judge gave opportunity to the parties to adduce evidence. The accused examined his mother Smt. Prem Bal...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »