Allahabad Court April 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.
Banaras Hindu University and Others Vs. Vikas Jain
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-06-1998
Reported in: 1998(2)AWC1475; (1998)3UPLBEC2135
G.P. Mathur, J. 1. Vikas Jain (writ petitioner and respondent in appeal) seeking admission in B.Com.. Part I in Banaras Hindu University in the academic session 1997-98 appeared in the Undergraduate Entrance Test. An intimation dated 19.7.1997 was sent to him from the University that he had qualified in the test. He went to deposit the admission fee which was not. accepted and ultimately he was denied admission. He then filed Writ Petition No, 26317 of 1997 which was allowed by a learned single Judge by the Judgment and order dated 28.11.1997 and the appellants herein (respondents in writ petition) were directed to admit him in B.Com. Part I in the academic session 1997-98. Feeling aggrieved by the aforesaid Judgment and order, the University has preferred this Special Appeal.2. The case set up by Vikas Jain in writ petition was that he had appeared in the Entrance Test seeking admission in B.Com. Part 1 in the academic session 1996-97 but the invigilator prevented him from answering t...
Jagbir Singh Rana Vs. Ivth Additional District Judge, Muzaffarnagar an ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-02-1998
Reported in: 1998(3)AWC1655
J. C. Gupta, J.1. Heard petitioner's counsel Sri R. B. Slnghal. Sri A. K. Srivastava is present for the caveator- landlord.2. Respondent Nos. 3 and 4 moved an application under Section 21 (1) (a) of the U. P. Act No. XIII of 1972 for the release of the house in question which is admittedly in the tenancy of the petitioner. This application was contested by the petitioner. The application for release has been allowed mainly on the ground that the respondent No. 4 is a Major in Indian Army and, therefore, the case is covered by Explanation (iii) of Section 21 (1) (a) of the Act. The said Explanation is in the nature of an exception which has the effect of lifting the rigour of proving the bona fide need by the landlord, who is a serving or retired Indian Soldier as defined under the Indian Soldiers (Litigation) Act, 1925. The need of the landlord on the existence of the conditions envisaged under such Explanation is to be deemed sufficient by a legal fiction. In the present case, it is n...
Ester Industries Ltd. Vs. Asstt. Commr. of C. Ex.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-02-1998
Reported in: 1999(114)ELT807(All)
1. This is a second writ petition by the same petitioner between the same respondents.2. Before the ink barely dried on the orders of the first writ petition, this one was filed after fifteen days. The first writ petition carried the number Writ Petition No. 149 of 1998 and was dismissed on 17th March, 1998. On the first writ petition, the Court had passed the following orders :-'The order sought to be impugned, which aggrieves the petitioner, is dated 27-2-1998 (Annexure 8 to the writ petition).This order has been issued by the Superintendent, Central Excise, Range-1, Khatima, Respondent No. 7.The petitioner accepts that in some matters Appeals have been filed and are pending and in some matters hearing has concluded but judgment is awaited. Learned Counsel fairly concedes that any interim order which could be passed by the High Court can be passed by the authority which is seized of the Appeals. In the context of the present case the Commissioner (Appeals) under Section 35F of the Ce...
Chandra Pal Singh Vs. State of U.P. and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-01-1998
Reported in: 1998(2)AWC1369; (1998)3UPLBEC2121
M. Katju and S.L. Saraf, JJ.1. Heard Sri Vineet Saran, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Addl. Advocate Genera! and Sri H. R. Misra for respondent Nos. 1 and 2, and Shri Murlidhar and Sri V. C. Tripathi for respondent No. 3.2. The petitioner by means of this writ petition has challenged the -orders dated 26.7.97 and 20.1.98.3. The facts of this case are that the petitioner claimed to be the Chairman of the Committee of Management of the U. P. Co-operative Federation which is a State Level Apex Co-operative Society registered under the U. P. Cooperative Societies Act. 1965. The petitioner was suspended by order dated 26.7.97 against which he filed a Writ Petition No. 25346 of 1997, Chandra Pal Singh and Committee of Management v. State of U. P. and others, which was dismissed as withdrawn by order dated 6.8.97, copy of which is Annexure-5 to the petition. Subsequently it appears that the petitioner filed a representation praying for withdrawal of the suspension order and that ...
Ayurvediya Chikitsa Parishad, U.P. and Others Vs. State Government of ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-01-1998
Reported in: 1998(2)AWC1486
Sudhir Narain, J. 1. The petitioners have challenged the vires of Sections 8 and 9 of U. P. Indian Medical Institutions (Acquisition and Miscellaneous Provisions) Act. 1982. They are running Ayurvedic Educational Institutions. They have enrolled students in their institutions for imparting Ayurvedic systems of medicine. They also award degrees and diplomas.2. In the year 1982, the State Legislature passed U. P. Indian Medical Institutions (Acquisition and Miscellaneous Provisions) Act. 1982 thereinafter referred to as 1982 Act). This Act was enacted to provide for the acquisition andManagement of non-Government institutions mentioned in the Schedule of the Act imparting instructions in Ayurvedic and Unani-Tibbi Systems of Medicine and also to regulate other non-Government institutions imparting instructions in Ayurvedic and Unani-Tibbi Systems of Medicine, Yogtheraphy and Naturopathy. The names of the petitioners' institutions do not find place in the Schedule of the said Act. The peti...
Committee of Management, D.A.V. Inter College, Aligarh and Another Vs. ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-01-1998
Reported in: 1998(2)AWC1556; (1998)2UPLBEC1532
O. P. Garg, J.1. This petition is a glaring instance of the litigative zeal which is permeating the educational sphere. To what extent a Principal appointed on permanent basis after due selection and recommendation having been made by the U. P. Secondary Education Services Commission could be subjected to harassment and nagging by being suspended more than once and terminated on flimsy grounds and to suffer humiliation by allowing him to sit idle because he failed to toe the line of the management and refused to fall prey to its evil and selfish designs and aggrandizement is the theme of present litigation. Such a fruitless repetitive litigation has to be deprecated. This lamentation comes in the wake of the following facts.There is an aided and recognised institution with the name of D. A. V. Inter College, Aligarh which is governed by the provisions of U. p. Intermediate Education Act, 1921 and the U. P. Higher Secondary and Intermediate Colleges (Payment of Salary to Teachers and ot...
Umesh Chand Paliwal and Others Vs. Board of Revenue, U.P., Allahabad a ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-01-1998
Reported in: 1998(3)AWC1696
Sudhir Narain, J. 1. This writ petition is directed against the order of the Board of Revenue dated 13.8.1996, whereby the representation filed by the contesting opposite parties were allowed and the substitution application filed by the petitioners were dismissed.2. The facts in brief are that petitioner No. 3 and predecessor of petitioners No. 1 and 2 filed suit under Sections 209 and 229B of U. P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), read with Section 164 of U. P. Urban Area Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act seeking relief of declaration that they were Bhumidhars of the land in suit, on the allegations that the land in dispute belonged to one Babu Ramson of Ram Dayal who had sold his half share to the plaintiffs by means of registered sale deed dated 24/25 September. 1959. The other half share was sold by Babu Ram to Gopi Chand and Bhikhu Lal. Gopi Chand and Bhikhu Lal sold their share purchased by them from Babu Ram to plaintif...
Smt. Sumitra (Decd.) Through L.R. Vs. Gaya Prasad and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-01-1998
Reported in: 1998(3)AWC1944
Sudhir Narain, J.1. This writ petition is directed against the order of Consolidation Officer dated 10.11.1975, the order of the Assistant Settlement Officer Consolidation dated 13.8.1976 and the order of the Deputy Director of Consolidation, Mirzapur, dated 12.5.1978.2. The dispute relates to Khata No. 50. 64, 19 and 17 of village Raipur Pokhta. Tappa Chaurasi. Pargana Kantit. Tahsil Sadar, District Mlrzapur. During the consolidation proceedings in the basic year khatauni the name of Smt. Sumitra, petitioner No. 1. was recorded over Khata Nos. 50 and 19 exclusively, while in Khata Nos. 64 and 17 she was recorded with the respondents. The contesting respondents filed objection that Smt. Sumitra had no right over the land in dispute as her husband died before the year 1937. The land in dispute was Sir and Khudkasht and she will not have any right over the land in dispute. The petitioner denied this allegation. She claimed that her husband died after the year, 1937. The consolidation aut...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- Next ›