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.
Dr. Mrs. Krishna Srivastava and ors. Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-20-1998
Reported in: (1998)2UPLBEC1280
D.K. Seth, J.1. These group of writ petitions have been heard together by the consent of parties since common questions of law and facts are involved in these cases. They are being disposed of by common judgment.2. After referring to the common facts, we shall refer to the scope of the respective writ petitions separately. The common facts giving rise to the respective cases are summarised as hereinafter.3. Some vacancies in the post of Readers, Lecturers and Professors arose in the Allahabad University before June, 1993. On 15.6.1993 applications were invited through public advertisements (Annexure-1, 1A and IB) for 8 posts of Lecturers and 4 posts of Readers and one post of Professor in the Department of Chemistry in the said University. The Petitioners (in writ petition No. 21723 of 1995), hereinafter referred to as the petitioners, were called for interview by letters issued on 26.11.1993. The interviews were held between 12.12.1993 and 15.12.1993. The recommendation of the Selecti...
Ravi Singh Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-20-1998
Reported in: 1998CriLJ3313
N.S. Gupta, J.1. By means of this writ petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner Ravi Singh has challenged the validity of the order of detention dated 26th June, 1997 passed against him by Sri Hari Ram, the then District Magistrate, Sonbhadra, whereby the petitioner was directed to be detained under Section 3(2) of the National Security Act.2. It appears that the petitioner was a resi dent of Mohalla Kalikutti, Shastri Nagar, P. S. Kotwali District Jaunpur. He came to Sonbhadra under the garb of contractor and started indulg ing himself into the criminal activities. As per grounds of detention stated by the District Mag istrate, upon which he based his subjective satisfaction regarding the detention of the petitioner were as follows :(1) In the first instance, the petitioner was involved in case crime No. 277 of 96 punishable under Section 307, I.P.C. P.S. Anapara District Sonbhadra, in which the petitioner had assaulted one Uma Shankar Gupta on 23-7-96 by m...
Mohammad Rafiq Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-20-1998
Reported in: 1998CriLJ3337
1. These five matters were taken up together as common points of fact and law were raised in these writ petitions. All these matters are being disposed of by this single judgment.2. The petitioner Mohammad Rafiq has been detained under the provisions of Section 3(2) of the National Security Act (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') by an order dated 20-5-1997 recorded by the District Magistrate Bulandshahr, for preventing him from acting in any manner prejudicial to the maintenance of public order. On the date of detention, he was already in custody in connection with case Crime No. 26 of 1997 relating to Police Station Khurja Dehat, District Bulandshahr. The detention order was served along with the grounds as required under Section 8 of the Act and it spoke of involvement of the petitioner in criminal activities along with his associates, viz. Liyaqat, Saniullah, Mauji, Jakiullah and Ahmad Saeed. It spoke of murder of one Wahid Khan by then and in that incident the miscreants had cu...
Desh Kumar and Others Vs. State of U.P. and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-19-1998
Reported in: 1998(2)AWC958
M. Katjti and D.K. Seth, JJ.1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners.2. The petitioners pray for renewal of their fishery lease.3. In our opinion, there is no question of renewal of the lease which has already expired. If the fishery lease has expired, then it has to be auctioned afresh, otherwise, Article 14 of the Constitution will be violated.4. It is settled law that public property is not largesse which can be distributed, as has been held in the case of Ramana Dhayaram Shetty v. International Airport Authority of India and others, AIR 1979 SC 1678. Hence, for giving lease, there must be public auction which is advertised in newspapers having wide circulation so that everybody eligible can participate. The lease cannot be renewed automatically, if it has expired.5. Thus, we see no merit in the petition and the same is accordingly dismissed. However, we direct the authority concerned to auction the fishery right afresh after wide publication in well circulated newspapers, jf no...
Vijay Singh Vs. State of U.P. and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-19-1998
Reported in: 1998(2)AWC1322; 1998CriLJ3333
S.K. Phaujdar and N.S. Gupta, JJ.1. Through the present application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India the petitioner has challenged his order of detention dated 2.6.97 recorded by the District Magistrate, Fatehgarh, Farrukhabad, under Section 3(2) of the National Security Act. A prayer has been made for quashing the detention order and for setting the petitioner at liberty forthwith. The State of U. P. through Home Secretary, Lucknow. the District Magistrate. Fatehgarh, Farrukhabad, Senior Superintendent of Police, Fatehgarh. Farrukhabad and Jail Superintendent, District Jail, Lucknow. were noticed as respondents and counter-affidavits were filed by the respondents.2. The detention order was annexed as Annexure-6 to the writ petition. It was stated therein that the District Magistrate, Fatehgarh, Farrukhabad. was satisfied that detention of the petitioner was necessary to prevent him from committing acts prejudicial to the maintenance of public order. Accordingly, the dete...
Abdul Qayyum Vs. State of U.P. and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-18-1998
Reported in: 1998(2)AWC1029; (1998)2UPLBEC918
D. K. Seth, J.1. In this writ petition, vires of U. P. Act No. 14 of 1994 whereby Section 54(2) of the United Provinces Municipalities Act, 1916 (hereinafter called as the Act) has been sought to be substituted by way of amendment has been challenged.2. Learned counsel for the petitioner Shri Vijendra Slngh assailed the validity of the said amended Section 54 (2) of the Act on two grounds ; First, that the amendment is ultra vires to Article 243U of the Constitution and as such the same is invalid. Second, that the substituted Section 54 (2) of the Act is discriminatory and is violative of Article 14 of the Constitution, in that it introduces restriction on tenure of one year in respect of the office of the Vice-President while all other office bearers under different Acts have not been subjected to such restrictions and that it has been discriminatory between President and Vice-President.3. We have heard Shri Vijendra Slngh, learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned standing ...
U.P. State Co-operative Land Development Bank, Lucknow and Others Vs. ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-18-1998
Reported in: 1998(2)AWC1124
Aloke Chakrabarti, J.1. This is a revision arising out of the judgment and order dated 24.10.1985 passed by the VI 1th Additional District Judge, Meerut in J.S.C.C. Suit No. 8 of 1983.2. Plaintiff-opposite party by lease-deed dated 18.1.1977 leased out the disputed house with effect from 14.1.1977 at the rate of Rs. 250 per month for a period of five years which expired on 13.1.1982. One of the conditions of the lease-deed was that the defendants would vacate and hand over the vacant possession of the disputed premises after the expiry of five years to the plaintifflandlord and if it fails to do so, it would be liable to pay Rs. 600 per month until the landlord ejects the tenants from the said property through the Court of law or enters into a fresh lease agreement amicably and gets it registered.3. The plaintiff-opposite party sent a notice dated 11.12.1981 informing the defendants to hand over possession of the premises in dispute on 13.1.1982 and in default to pay Rs. 600 per month....
Dhanesh Kumar Srivastava Vs. Director of Education, Allahabad and Othe ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-18-1998
Reported in: 1998(2)AWC1208
ORDERAloke Chakrabarti, J.1. This writ petition was heard along with Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 7848 of 1980.2. Dispute involved herein is regarding seniority between the petitioner and the respondent No. 4.3. The contention of the petitioner is that several posts of lecturer in Economics, Sociology, Civics and other courses in Rama Nath Uma Shanker Inter College, Phulmanha, Lehra, Goraknpur were advertised in July, 1971. Several candidates applied in response and the petitioner and the respondent No. 4 also were applicants. Interview was held on 11.7.1971 and the petitioner was appointed as lecturer in Education and the respondent No. 4 was appointed as lecturer in Economics. One Keshav Lal Srivastava was also appointed as lecturer in Civics. Such appointments were approved by the respondent No. 2, District Inspector of Schools. Goraknpur (hereinafter referred to as D.I.O.S.). A copy of the said order of approval dated 2.9.1971 has been annexed at Annexure-4 to the writ petition. P...
Sushant Elhence Vs. State of U.P. and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-18-1998
Reported in: 1998(2)AWC1266
D.K. Seth, J. 1. The order dated 10.12.1997 (Annexure-1 to the supplementary-affidavit), order dated 11.12.1997 (Annexure-5) and the order dated 19.12.1997'(Annexure-8) issued by the State Government and the Excise Commissioner and Controller of Molasses, as the case may be, have been impugned in the present writ petition. The said orders have been challenged on the ground that the same imposes unreasonable restrictions on the petitioner's right to carry on trade guaranteed under Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution, prohibiting transport of khandsari molasses outside the State of Uttar Pradesh without permission of the Controller.2. By the aforesaid order. It has been provided that in case khandsari molasses is sought to be transported outside the State of Uttar Pradesh, permission of the Controller would be necessary. This has been challenged by Sri V. B. Upadhyaya, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, on various grounds, which will be referring to at appropr...
Chandradhar Prasad Narayan Singh Vs. State of U.P. and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-18-1998
Reported in: 1998(2)AWC1356
Sudhir Narain, J.1. This writ petition is directed against the order dated 27.12.1981 passed by the Prescribed Authority and the order dated 14.3.1983 passed by the IInd Additional District Judge, Varanasi, respondent No. 2 partly dismissing the appeal of the petitioner,2. The facts of the case in brief are that the proceedings under U. P. Imposition of Celling on Land Holdings Act, 1960 (in short referred to as the Act) were initiated against the petitioner. He was issued a notice under Section 10 (2) of the Act proposing 38.113 acres of land as surplus land. The prescribed authority by its order dated 27.12.1981 declared 38.033 acres of irrigated land as surplus land of the petitioner. The petitioner filed appeal against this order. Respondent No. 2 has partly allowed the appeal by order dated 14.3.1983. The petitioner has filed instant writ petition challenging the part of the order whereby his appeal has been dismissed.3. I have heard Shri Faujdar Rai, learned counsel for the petit...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »