Allahabad Court March 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.
Ram Awadh Vs. State of U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-04-1998
Reported in: 1999CriLJ4083
G.P. Mathur, J.1. Ram Awadh has preferred this appeal against the judgment and order dated 22-4-1991 of the learned Sessions Judge, Basti in S.T. NO. 105 of 1990 by which he has been convicted under Section 302, IPC and has been sentenced to imprisonment for life.2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the appellant Ram Awadh is resident of village Banjaria within Police Station Khalilabad in the district of Basti. At about 12 a.m. on 5-6-1990 the appellant assaulted his wife Smt. Budhna with a gandase. She raised alarm on which the complainant Rasiyawan who happens to be a collateral of the appellant, Chattarpal, Sriram and several others rushed to the spot. However, before these people could reach the spot, the appellant had succeeded in giving several blows to his wife who fell down dead. The appellant was apprehended on spot by the village people. Gandasa was also taken into custody. Thereafter Rasiyawan lodged a written report of the occurrence at 3.50 p.m. on 5-6-1990 a...
Ramharakh and ors. Vs. State of U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-04-1998
Reported in: 1999CriLJ3001
K.D. Shahi, J.1. This appeal has been filed against the judgment and order dated 7-3-1980 passed by Shri G.D. Dubey, the then I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Azamgarh in Sessions Trial No. 359 of 1977 whereby appellants Ram Harakh, Maniram and Ram Dwar have been convicted under Section 148,1.P.C. and sentenced to two years' R.I. and appellants Musafir, Shobhnath, Ram Karau, Shriram, Sui ajbali and Raja have been convicted under Section 147, I.P.C. and sentenced to one year's R.I. They have also been convicted under Section 302 read with Section 149, I.P.C. and sentenced to imprisonment for life. They hav.e further been convicted under Sections 326, 324 and 323 read with Section 149, I.P.C. and sentenced to five years' R.I., one year's R.I. and six months' R.I. respectively. All the sentences were directed to run concurrently.2. In brief, the case of the prosecution is that on 1-5-1976 at 3.00 p.m. Malak (since deceased) and the father of the informant Banwari were sitting in ...
Buniyad HusaIn and Others Vs. Zila Adhikari, Barabanki and Another
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-03-1998
Reported in: 1998(2)AWC946
R.H. Zaidi, J.1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned standing counsel and also perused the record.2. By means of this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, petitioners pray for issuance of a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the order dated 27.4.94, whereby respondent No. 1 has directed the land in dispute to be recorded as enemy property in the revenue papers.3. According to the case set out in the writ petition, land in dispute is ancestral property of the petitioners. It was so recorded in the revenue papers since 1932. During consolidation proceedings also, the name of the petitioners were recorded over the land in dispute as tenureholders. No objection, whatsoever, was raised by any body. It is stated that the order dated 27.4.1994, was passed by respondent No. 1 without affording opportunity of hearing to the petitioners. As soon as petitioners came to know about the aforesaid order, they approached this Court and file...
Satya Prakash Singh and Another Vs. Vice Chancellor, Dr. Bhimrao Ambed ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-03-1998
Reported in: 1998(2)AWC1147; (1998)2UPLBEC823
S. R. Singh, J.1. The Special Appeal No. 562 of 1992. Is directed against the judgment and order dated 30.7.1997, whereby a learned single Judge dismissed the CM] Misc. Writ Petition No. 23760 of 1997 on the ground of alternative remedy available to the writ petitioners--Satya Prakash Singh and Himanshu Agrawal under Section 68 of the U. P. State Universities Act. 1973, (in short the Act). The said writ petition was filed, inter alia, for the following reliefs :'(i) to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the decision by means of Resolution No. 26 dated 7.5.1997 of the Executive Council. Annexure-2 to this writ petition, amended rules approved in its meeting dated 14.6.97. Annexure-'3' to this writ petition.(ii) to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent No. 4, the Management Committee of the Institution to hold the entrance test for the year 1997-98 for the course of B.Sc. Agriculture 1.'2. Civil Misc. Writ P...
Prakashan Bhawan and Others Vs. State of U.P. and Another
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-03-1998
Reported in: 1998(2)AWC1142; (1998)3UPLBEC2317
G.P. Mathur, J. 1. The petitioners seek to challenge the Government Order dated 14.1.1998 (Annexure-1 to the writ petition) sent to the Director of Education and Chairman of the Board of High School and Intermediate Education. U. P.. Allahabad (hereinafter referred to as the Board).2. Sri Dinesh Dwivedi has submilted that by the impugned order the course of studies prescribed in the High School classes have been completely changed, which power could only be exercised by the Board under Section 7 (1) of the U. P. High School and Intermediate Education Act. 1921, (hereinafter referred to as the Act) or by making regulations under Section 15 (2) (d) thereof and, therefore, the same is illegal. We are unable to accept the submission made. A perusal of the impugned order would show that the Principal Secretary of U. P. Government has written a letter on 14.1.1998 to the Chairman of the Board, which office is ex officio held by Director of Education, intimating him that in accordance with Na...
Hari Singh Vs. State of U.P. and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-03-1998
Reported in: 1998(2)AWC1409
D.K. Seth, J.1. As prayed for. leave is granted to learned counsel for thepetitioner to amend the prayer portion.2. By the impugned order dated 17.6.1981 contained in Annexure-4, the Commissioner, Moradabad Division. Moradabad rejected the petitioner's application for recalling the order dated 7.4.1981 and restoring the appeal to file. The reason given is that no provision for restoration was shown to the Commissioner by the counsel for petitioner. The order appears to be misconceived. Inasmuch as the authority having power to dismiss is also empowered to recall. Rule 56 of the Arms Rules. 1962 prescribes the procedure to be followed by the appellate authority. It provides that 'on receipt of an appeal, the appellate authority may call for the records of the case from the authority who passed the order appealed against and after giving the appellant a reasonable opportunity of being heard, pass final orders'. Thus, the appeal has to be decided after giving reasonable opportunity. On ac...
Lalta Prasad Misra Vs. Taxing Officer, Allahabad High Court and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-03-1998
Reported in: 1998(2)AWC1401
D.S. Sinha, J.1. The order dated 25th January, 1993 and the report dated 30th November. 1992. appended to the petition as Annexures-'VIII' and 'VI' respectively, passed by the Stamp Reporter and the Taxing Officer of this Court in relation to the question of sufficiency of the court-fees paid by the petitioner on the memorandum of the First Appeal No. 358 of 1990, Lalta Prasad v. Collector. Varanasi and others, are under challenge in this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.2. Before filing the memo of appeal, the petitioner obtained a report dated 8th May, 1990 on the sufficiency of the court-fees as required by Rule 3 of Chapter XI of the Rules of Court. 1952 holding the court-fees paid by the petitioner to be sufficient. The appeal was admitted by the Court on 16th May. 1990.3. Later on, an objection being raised in that regard, the Court, vide its order dated 13th November. 1992, called for a fresh report on the sufficiency of the court-fees paid by the petition...
Dinesh Chand Gupta Vs. Union of India and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-03-1998
Reported in: 1998(2)AWC1454; [1998(79)FLR941]; (1998)3UPLBEC2305
S.R. Singh, J. 1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 25.4.95 passed by the learned single Judge by which the Civil Miscellaneous Writ Petition No. 14143 of 1997 filed by the petitioner seeking relief of writ of certiorari quashing the order dated 23.6.93 passed by the Commandant 102 R.A.F. Battalion C.R.P.F., was dismissed by the learned single Judge. The Commandant 102 Bn R.A.F., C.R.P.F, by the order dated 23.6.93 had accepted the resignation tendered by the petitioner-appellant and accordingly discharged him from service with effect from 30.6.93 (A.M.).2. It is the case of the appellant that he had submitted his resignation under compelling circumstances but before acceptance of his resignation, he moved an application on 25.6.93 for withdrawal of the same. The stand taken by the respondents is that the appellant never sought for withdrawal of his resignation prior to its acceptance. The learned single Judge dismissed the writ petition holding that the case...
Ashok Kumar Vs. District Inspector of Schools, Varanasi and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-03-1998
Reported in: 1998(2)AWC1471
Sudhir Narain, J. 1. This writ petition is directed against the order dated 28.2.1996 passed by the District Inspector of Schools whereby representation of the petitioner has been rejected.2. The facts, in brief, are that one Pramod Prakash Singh was working as Class IV employee in Gandhi Smarak Inter College, Sahabganj, districtVaranasi (hereinafter referred to as the institution). The Principal of the institution dismissed him from service on 1.10.1990. He submitted a representation to the Committee of Management and further to the District Inspector of Schools against the order of termination.3. In the meantime, the Principal of the institution appointed the petitioner on the post of peon in the institution on 27.6.1992. The papers were forwarded to the District Inspector of Schools for according financial sanction. The matter was not decided. The petitioner filed Writ Petition No. 11761 of 1994 in this Court. The writ petition was disposed of by this Court on 5.5.1995 with the obse...
Rajesh Gupta Vs. Xth Additional District Judge, Kanpur Nagar and Other ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-03-1998
Reported in: 1998(2)AWC1463
J.C. Gupta, J. 1. In this writ petition, the petitioner challenges the authority of the respondent No. 2 (the Rent Control and Eviction Officer, Kanpur Nagar) for making an order of allotment dated 6.10.93 in favour of the respondent No. 3 by ignoring the nomination made by the landlord in favour of the petitioner under the provisions of Section 17 (1) of the U. P. Act No. XIII of 1972 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). The order of respondent No. 1 dated 22.1.96 dismissing the revision filed by the petitioner under Section 18 of the Act is also under challenge in this writ petition.2. Some material facts relevant for the purposes of this writ petition may be stated in brief.3. The dispute between the parties relates to a shop situated on the ground floor of premises No. 128/38 'F' Block Kidwai Nagar, Kanpur Nagar. One Faiyaz Ahmad was undisputedly tenant in the said shop. Since he was likely to vacate the shop, the landlord sent intimation of expected vacancy to the respondent No...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »