Allahabad Court July 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.
Sree Kant Udyog and anr. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-25-1997
Reported in: AIR1998All42
G.P. Mathur, J. 1. This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution has been filed praying that a writ of mandamus be issued directing the respondents No. 1 to 4 to issue a work order in its favour and further to cancel and set aside any work order, if issued, in favour of respondents No. 5 and 6.2. According to the case of the petitioner respondents No. 2, 3 and 4 floated global tender to bid for supply of rock phosphates. The petitioner, claims that it fulfilled all the requirements laid down by respondent No. 3 and in the tender the petitioner quoted lowest rate of Section 52.57 white the rates quoted by respondent No. 5 and 6 were higher. However inspite of the factthat the rate offered by the petitioner was lowest, no work order has been issued in its favour.3. It is well settled that award of a contract by the State or a public authority can be judicially reviewed but a Court would interfere only if it comes to the conclusion that the award of contract is vitiated by arbitrari...
Naresh Shankar Srivastava Vs. U.P. Co-operative Tribunal and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-25-1997
Reported in: (1997)3UPLBEC1641
S.R. Singh, J.1. Dispute in the instant petition is circumscribed to the validity of election from Lucknow Revenue Division Constituency, to the Committee of Management of the U.P. Co-operative Processing and Cold Storages Federation, Ltd., Lucknow (for short 'PACSFED')-an Apex Co-operative Society registered as such under the provisions of the U.P. Co-operative Societies Act, 1965. The petitioner and two others namely, Sri Radhey Shyam Gupta, Opposite Party No. 3 and one Sri M.M. Gupta were the contesting candidates from the said constituency. One of them had to romp home. Admittedly, 31 delegates elected from different Primary Co-operative Societies falling within the territorial jurisdiction of Lucknow Revenue Division Constituency constituted an electoral collegiate for the purposes of electing one Director from amongst themselves to the Committee of Management of the said Apex Society. The petitioner having secured 16 votes as against 15 votes polled in favour of the Opposite Part...
Smt. Radha Devi Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-25-1997
Reported in: (1997)3UPLBEC1593
M. Katju and D.K. Seth, JJ.1. By means of this petition the petitioner has challenged the validity of amendment to Section 14 of U.P. Panchayat Raj Act by U. P. Act No. 9 of 1994.2. A Division Bench of this Court in Special Appeal No. 423 of 1997 Bankey Lal v. State of U.P. and Ors., decided on 15-7-1997 [Reported in (1997) 3 UPLBEC 1590 (DB)] has upheld the validity of the above provision, following the decision of the Supreme Court in Mohan Lal Tripathi v. District Magistrate, Rae Bereilly and Ors., AIR 1993 SC 2042: (1993) 1 UPLBEC 35 (SC) Another Division Bench in Jhinkan v. District Panchayat Raj Adhikari, writ petition No. 22309 of 1997, decided on 14-7-1997, has also taken a similar view.3. Following the said decisions, we hold that Section 14 of the UP. Panchayat Raj Act, 1947 as amended by U. P. Act No. 9 of 1994 as well as the amended Rule 33-B of the Rules are valid. Consequently, we dismiss this petition.4. Since a large number of petitions challenging the validity of the a...
Santosh Kumar Pandey and Others Vs. Sachin-cum-general Manager, Zila S ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-24-1997
Reported in: 1998(1)AWC89
D.K. Seth, J. 1. The petitioners have challenged the cessation of their employment by means of the present writ petition and had made the following prayer:(i) to issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to declare that the petitioners should continue in service and that the petitioners' removal/termination is in violation of Regulation 29 of the U. P. Cooperative Societies Employees Services Regulations, 1975 and is void ; (ii) to issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to continue to pay salary to the petitioners month by month onward with arrears on that account of the post of Guard-cum-Peon ; (iii) to issue any other suitable writ, order or direction in the nature of writ as may be considered fit and proper in the circumstances of the case and to award costs of this petition, so that Justice be done.2. Mr. A. P. Sahi, learned counsel for the petitioners, contends that petitioners were given appointment only for 89 days and after short breaks were re-employed for...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. N.K. Patni and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-24-1997
Reported in: (1998)148CTR(All)411; [1998]234ITR12(All)
1. The following question is referred by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal for the opinion of this court under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (briefly 'the Act') :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was correct in law in holding that no assessment could be made in the status of association of persons in the case of the assessee ?'2. The facts, as stated in the statement of the case, are that in the business, known as Johns Mills, there were four groups with the share ratio as follows :1.Johns group consisting of S/Sh I. L. John, M. L. John andMrs. Doris Hara26/802.Patni group consisting of 1/rs of late Sh. Hira Lal Patnicomprising N. K. Patni and others19/803.Sh. Munni Lal Mehra19/804.M/s Bambhir Mal Pandra Pvt. Ltd.19/803. The Income-tax Officer in the course of reassessment proceedings made assessment for the assessment years 1971-72 and 1972-73 in the status of association of persons. He did so on the ground that...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Himalaya Drug Co. (P.) Ltd.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-24-1997
Reported in: (1998)149CTR(All)260; [1998]234ITR167(All)
1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal referred the following question relating to the assessment year 1975-76 for the opinion of this court under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (briefly, the Act) :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was legally correct in holding that a sum of Rs. 60,000 spent on resurfacing the road within the factory premises was allowable as revenue expenditure ?'2. The facts, in brief, are that the assessee is a private limited company carrying on business in the manufacture and sale of Ayurvedic and Unani medicines. The assessee had its head office at Dehradun and branch offices at Bombay and Bangalore.3. The Income-tax Officer, noticed that the assessee had paid Rs. 60,000 to one Thomse and Thomse for repairs (resurfacing with concrete) of the existing road, which was claimed as revenue expenditure. The Income-tax Officer negatived the contention of the assessee and concluded that the expenditure incurred by the as...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Gulab Singh Lachi Ram
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-24-1997
Reported in: [1998]233ITR261(All)
1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, at the instance of the Revenue, referred the following question for the opinion of this court :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was legally correct in holding that two separate assessments in respect of two periods should be made in the hands of newly constituted firm ?'2. The facts are that the assessee-firm was constituted under a partnership deed dated May 8, 1967, by two partners, namely, Bhagwan Dass and Chandu Lal, having equal shares. They claimed having represented the respective shares of their Hindu undivided families in the firm. It was pleaded that a partial partition had taken place in both the Hindu undivided families on September 30, 1975, and then a fresh partnership deed dated August 12, 1976, was drawn up between the four partners, including the two original partners. Arun Kumar, son of Sri Bhagwan Dass, and Swatantra Kumar, son of Sri Chandu Lal, were inducted into the partnership under th...
imtiyaz Ahmed Vs. Shamim Bano
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-24-1997
Reported in: 1998CriLJ2343; II(1997)DMC469
C.A. Rahim, J.1. This revision has been directed against the order of Judge Family Court, Allahabad dated 13.6.1997 in Case No. 491 of 1991 under Section 125 Cr. P.C. awarding Rs. 350/- per month as maintenance allowance for the period commencing from 6.4.1989 to 29.10.1991 and for a further period of three months thirteen days, i.e. the period of Iddat.2. The order has been challenged on the ground that it is not maintainable in view of Section 5 of the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986 (in short Muslim Women Act). He has referred the case of Mohammad Umar Khan v. Gulshan Begum & Anr., Criminal Revision No. 503 of 1989 decided on 28.2.1991 by Hon. B.M. Lai, J. as he was sitting singly in Madhya Pradesh High Court at that time, wherein it has been held that no proof is required to prove the Talaq as per Section 310 of Mulla's Mohammedan Laws and hence application by the wife for interim maintenance is not tenable.3. In that case the applicant-husband appeared bef...
Chitra Kumar Vs. Senior Superintendent of Police, Aligarh
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-23-1997
Reported in: 1998(1)AWC695
Aloke Chakrabarti, J.1. The petitioner, a constable, was prosecuted for an offence under Section 384 of the Indian Penal Code giving rise to Crime No. 120 of 1988 and the same culminated in conviction of the petitioner under Section 384of the Indian Penal Code by Judgment and order dated 19.8.1988 whereby punishment of imprisonment for three months was imposed which he had already undergone. The petitioner was served with an order of dismissal under para 493 (b) of the Police Regulations on 30.9.1988. The petitioner in this writ petition has challenged the said order of dismissal on the ground that as the petitioner was not punished with rigorous imprisonment, the dismissal order could not be passed without following the prescribed procedure.2. The respondents filed counter-affidavit stating that the service record of the petitioner shows that he was punished with rigorous imprisonment and, therefore, the impugned order is valid and proper.3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitione...
Bhunesh Mishra Vs. State of U.P. and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-23-1997
Reported in: 1998(2)AWC990
Giridhar Malaviya and B.K. Sharma, JJ.1. In this writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the validity of the notice dated 26.5.1997 issued by Additional District Magistrate (Administration), Allahabad under Section 3(1) of the U. P. Control of Gundas Act. The petitioner's contention is that the said notice is not in accordance with law as has been held by the Full Bench of this Court in case of Ramji Pandey v. State of U. P., 1981 Cr LJ 1083. However, the learned Additional Government Advocate has raised a preliminary objection that a writ petition against the notice issued to the petitioner is not maintainable in view of the recent Division Bench judgment of the Court in Ballabh Chaubey v. Additional District Magistrate, Mathura and others. Writ Petition No. 2354 of 1996 connected with Rajesh Pal v. Additional District Magistrate, Varanasi and others, Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. J816 of 1996, since reported in 1997 ACrR 387.When this preliminary objection was raised by the l...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- Next ›
- Last »