Allahabad Court February 1998 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.
Kamlesh Singh Vs. C.B.i. and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-23-1998
Reported in: 1998(2)AWC1415
M. Katju and S.L. Saraf, JJ.1. The petitioner has prayed for mandamus directing C.B.I, inquiry regarding alleged scandal regarding 400 acres land In Varanasi. A large number of writ petitions are being filed in this Court praying for enquiry regarding various bunglings and scandals. If the Court keeps onentertaining such petitions, it will not be able to do its normal work. It is only inrare cases that this Court should entertain such petitions. Petitioner shouldapproach in respect of his grievance to the authority concerned and if he doesso, the authority will look into the matter and do the needful. Petition isdisposed of....
Ex. Nayak Ram Singh Vs. Union of India and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-21-1998
Reported in: 1998(2)AWC1223
M. Katju, J.1. Heard counsel for the parties.2. The petitioner has been discharged from the Army. There are as many as four adverse entries against him, two of them are of 1993 and the earlier were of 1984. In the entry of 1993, it has been mentioned that the petitioner is an undesirable soldier. This entry has been given by his superior officer. In my opinion, this Court should not ordinarily Interfere in Army matters as that undermines the discipline of the army.3. Sri Tej Pal Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner relied on the decision of the Supreme Court in Nor Singh Patnaik v. State of Orissa, 1996 Lab IC 1552. In my opinion, this decision Is wholly distinguishable because this decision does not pertain to army matters. In my opinion, ordinarily in army matter, there should not he any Interference by this Court as that undermines the discipline of the army. Petition is dismissed....
Ram Darash Rai Vs. State of U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-21-1998
Reported in: 1998CriLJ4205
S.K. Phaujdar, J.1. The present appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 16-11-1990 passed by the District and Sessions Judge, Basti, in S.T. No. 59 of 1990, whereby the present appellant was found guilty for offences under Section 302 and 376, I.P.C. and was sentenced to life imprisonment and rigorous imprisonment for ten years respectively for the aforesaid two offences. The sentences were to run concurently. Upon presentation of the appeal, bail was not granted to the appellant.2. The alleged incident took place on 8-2-1990 at about 12 noon in the agricultural fields of village Satahara 6 or 8 kilomters from police station Mahuli in the district of Basti. The report was made on the same day at 5.35 p.m. by Ram Dulare, father of the deceased Sheela, upon which case crime No. 31 of 1990 for an offence under Section 367/302, I.P.C. was registered at police station Mahuli. The present appellant was named in the FIR and it was stated in the report of Ram Dulare that on the...
Bhagwati Dayal Singh Vs. State of U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-21-1998
Reported in: 1998CriLJ4165
S.K. Phaujdar, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and orders dated 17-1-1981 recorded by the Sessions Judge, Ballia, in S.T. No. 178 of 1990, whereby the two appellants were convicted Under Sections 302/34, IPC, as also under Sub-Section 323/34, IPC and were sentenced on the first count to Life Imprisonment and on the second count for R.I. for 6 months. The appeal was preferred on 20-1 -1991 and on that very date Bhagwati Dayal Singh was directed to be released on bail. The prayer for bail on behalf of Ranjit Bahadur Singh was considered after receipt of the records and he too was allowed bail by an order of this Court dated 15-5-1981.2. The matter was heard before a Division Bench comprising of Hon. S.K. Verma and Hon. R.N. Ray, JJ. on 25-7-1996 and judgment was reserved. On 3-10-1996 a judgment of dismissal was recorded under the signatures of Hon. A.N. Gupta and Hon. R.N. Ray, JJ. although Hon. A.N. Gupta, J. was not in the bench which had heard the appeal. It appears...
Uttam Hospital and Research Centre Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-21-1998
Reported in: 1998(101)ELT16(All)
1. This writ petition is directed against the show cause notice dated 3-1-1998, a copy of which has been filed as Annexure-1 to the writ petition. The petitioner had imported 'Whole Body CT Scanner' and it availed exemption of customs duty under Notification No. 64/88-Cus. dated 1-3-1988. By the impugned show cause notice the petitioner has been called upon to show cause as to why the exemption granted under the said Notification be not withdrawn and petitioner be called upon to pay the customs duty and penalties and other amounts, details of which have been set out in the show cause notice. It is not disputed that the petitioners have already filed a reply to the show cause notice and 26-2-1998 is fixed for personal hearing as it was demanded by the petitioner in reply to the show cause notice. Learned Counsel for the petitioner contended that the show cause notice proceeds on the allegations which are factually incorrect. It is also contended that in response to the show cause notice...
Smt. Shakuntala Shukla Vs. State of U. P. and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-20-1998
Reported in: 1998(1)AWC505; (1998)2UPLBEC1093
M. Katju, J.1. This writ petition and the connected writ petitions have been filed for a writ of certiorari praying for quashing the select list of 1996-97 of persons who had been selected for promotion from the post of Sub-Inspector of Police to the post of Inspector. A true copy of the select list is Annexure-4 to the writ petition.2. In pursuance of an interim order dated 15.9.97 in Writ Petition No. 23137 of 1997, the selected candidates have been served notices through the D.I.G. (Karmik) in Police Headquarters. A large number of points have been raised by several counsel for the petitioners in this case as well as in the connected petitions. I have perused the petitions, counter-affidavit and rejoinder-affidavit and have heard submissions of the parties, in my opinion, this petition and the connected petitions deserve to be allowed on two of the points raised by the learned counsel for the petitioners, and I am not expressing any opinion on the other points (e.g., whether the Sel...
Shri Bhola Sugar Mills (P.) Ltd. Vs. State of U. P. and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-20-1998
Reported in: 1999(1)AWC811
R.H. Zaidi, J.1. Heard learned counsel for the parties and also perused the record.2. By means of this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, petitioner prays for issuance of a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the order dated 11.12.1997 passed by respondent No. 1, allowing the appeal filed by respondent No. 3, against the order dated 27.11.1997 passed by Sugar Commissioner, U. P., Lucknow.3. It appears that in exercise of powers under U. P. Khandsari Sugar Manufacturer Licensing Order, 1967 (for short 'Licensing Order'), licensing authority granted a licence in favour of respondent No. 3. Petitioner, who was adversely affected by the grant of said licence, filed objection before respondent No. 2 Sugar Commissioner/Licensing Authority, and prayed for cancellation of the licence granted in favour of respondent No. 3. In brief, it was pleaded that the licence was obtained by respondent No. 3 by concealing material facts, committing forgery an...
Ram Khelwan Pathak Vs. State of U.P. and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-20-1998
Reported in: 1998(2)AWC1171; (1998)3UPLBEC1954
O. P. Garg, J.1. By means of this writ petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has prayed that the orders dated 30th April, 1996 and 23rd November, 1996, Annexures-2 and 3 to the writ petition, passed by respondent No. 2. Executive Engineer, Minor Lift Canal Division, Jaunpur be quashed and the date of superannuation of the petitioner be treated for the purposes of obtaining pensionary benefits as 28th February, 1997.Counter and rejoinder-affidavits have been exchanged.2. The petitioner was appointed as class IV employee on the post of Chaukidar under the establishment of Minor Lift Canal Division, Jaunpur in the year 1969. He was confirmed on the said post in the year 1973. In the service record of the petitioner, his date of birth had been recorded as 3rd November, 1994. The age of superannuation for class IV employee is 60 years and therefore on the basis of the said date of birth, the petitioner was to retire on 30th November, 1994.3. It is alleged ...
H.V.K. Nathan Vs. Regional Dy. Director of Education (Madhyamik), Paur ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-20-1998
Reported in: 1998(2)AWC1358; (1998)2UPLBEC901
S.K. Phaujdar, J.1. Undisputedly, Messmore Intermediate College of Pauri Garhwal, is a minority institution managed and run by members of the Christian community. There is also no dispute that after the superannuation of the former principal of that institution, the post fell vacant and the process for selection of a principal was taken up. The petitioner and the respondent No. 3, along with others faced an interview by the selection board in the aforesaid process of selection. The trouble started after the selection. While the petitioner claimed that he had scored the maximum marks in the selection process, he was illegally shown as second while respondent No. 3 who actually came second was illegally shown as first. It was the case of the respondent No. 3 that after his selection was duly made, his name was forwarded to the Regional Deputy Director of Education, Garhwal Mandal and the selection was approved. It was asserted that despite this selection and approval, the present Manager...
Bhola Nath Yadav Vs. Joint Director of Education and Another
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-20-1998
Reported in: 1998(2)AWC1482
O.P. Garg, J. 1. The petitioner. Bhola Nath Yadav. who was employed as Head Clerk in the office of the District Inspector of Schools (for brevity 'D.I.O.S.'), Allahabad, has challenged the order dated 17.2.1996 and the subsequent order dated 18.2.1997 whereby a sum of Rs. 1,36,235.25 p. is sought to be recovered from him by way of deducting the same from his retiral benefits.2. Counter and rejoinder-affidavits have been exchanged. Heard Sri B. P. Srlvastava, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned standing counsel on behalf of the respondents.3. The petitioner was working as Senior Clerk in the office of D.I.O.S., Allahabad. His date of birth according to High School Certificate is 8th September, 1935. On attaining the age of 58 years, he was to stand superannuated on the last date of the month, i.e., 30th September, 1993. Amazingly, the petitioner continued to work even after the aforesaid date of retirement and he was superannuated on 27th February 1996 by the departmen...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »