Allahabad Court July 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.
Commissioner of Trade Tax Vs. National Cereal Products Limited
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-16-1998
Reported in: [1998]111STC241(All)
S.L. Saraf, J.1. The present application has a chequered career. When the matter came up before this Court for the first time, this honourable Court on consideration of Clause (i) of Section 14 of the Cental Sales Tax Act, 1956 decided that barley and malt are two different commodities and malt is taxable as separate from barley as an unclassified item at 8 per cent. As against the order of this Court passed on 16th September, 1993 a special leave petition was moved before the honourable Supreme Court. A rectification application was also filed before the High Court as well. The special leave petition was disposed of by an order dated 5th May, 1994 directing the High Court to dispose of the rectification application of the earlier judgment, filed before the High Court. On September 21, 1994, the honourable High Court disposed of the rectification application by directing the Sales Tax Tribunal to consider as to whether the malt having been obtained from barley can be treated as foodgra...
U.P. State Road Transport Corporation Vs. U.P. Public Service Tribunal ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-16-1998
Reported in: (1998)3UPLBEC1769
D.K. Seth, J.1. The respondent No. 2 was subjected to an enquiry pursuant to a charge sheet dated 3rd January, 1975 and was found guilty of the charges upon such enquiry and was accordingly removed from service by an order dated 30th May, 1997. The said order of removal was challenged in Claim Case No. 161/V/R/M1/81. An appeal was preferred against the said order, which was rejected by an order dated 29th April, 78. Thereafter, the petitioner had moved the U.P. Public Services Tribunal (V), Lucknow in Claim No. 161/V/R/MI/81. By an order dated 16th July, 87, the claim petition was allowed and the impugned order dated 30th May, 97 removing the petitioner from service, was declared illegal and invalid and was set aside and it was declared that the petitioner would be deemed to be in continuous service while granting liberty to hold fresh disciplinary proceedings against him.2. Mr. S.K. Sharma, Counsel for the petitioner employer challenged the said order of the Tribunal on four grounds (...
Naseem Vs. State of U.P. and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-16-1998
Reported in: 1999CriLJ301
ORDERS.K. Phaujdar, J.1. Heard.2. The present applicant happens to be a Muslim husband who had divorced his wife, Saira Begum. They had a daughter named Shabnam. Her age now is 10 years. On the application of Saira Begum for maintenance for herself and for Shabnam, the Court of first instance had taken note of the fact of divorce and had opined that Saira was not entitled to the relief under Section 125 Cr. P.C. but the child, Shabnam would be entitled to maintenance and the direction reads as such :LEKIN USKI LADKI SHABNAM KE LIYE YEN PRARTHNA PATRA SWEEKAR KIYA JATA HAI VIPAKSHI KO AADESH D1YA JATA HAI KI VOH PRARTHNA PATRA DENE KI TINANK SE LADKI SHABNAM KE BHARAN POSHAN HETU 300 RUPYE PRATIMAH ADA KAREIN TATHA JAB TAK ADA KAREIN JAB TAK VOH BALIG HO. 3. This order was challenged by the present applicant in a revision before the Sessions Judge at Muzaffarnagar and the revision application was dismissed.4. It was submitted that in terms of provision of Section 3 of the Muslim Women (...
Ghuran Dubey Vs. Deputy Director of Education, Vth Region, Varanasi an ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-15-1998
Reported in: 1998(3)AWC2028
D.K. Seth, J. 1. The petitioner who had been working in the college from 1.7.1972 was selected for appointment by the Committee of Management along with respondent No. 4 for two different posts. Pursuant to such selection by a letter dated 22.11.1972 approval for both the appointments was sought from the District Inspector of Schools by the Committee of Management. By an order dated 30.11.1972, the appointment of the petitioner was approved by the District Inspector of Schools. On receipt of the said approval, the Committee of Management had issued appointment letter to the petitioner on 1.12.1972. Pursuant to which, he joined on 1.12.1972. The Committee of Management while issuing order of appointment to the petitioner had also addressed letter to the District Inspector of Schools on 1.12.1972, informing him that by letter dated 22.11.1972, the Committee of Management had sought for approval ofboth the petitioner as well as respondent No. 4, but only approval of the petitioner has bee...
Daya Shankar Vs. State of U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-15-1998
Reported in: 1999CriLJ302
J.C. Mishra, J. 1. While deciding Criminal Appeal No. 2672 of 1981 and 2830 of 1981 on 27-9-1996 we found that the site plan was not prepared on scale, thereby leaving room to the defence to canvass that the fire-arm injuries, found on the body of the deceased, could not be caused from the place, from where, the accused had allegedly fired. In our opinion it is ripe time when the investigation should be made in a scientific manner. The importance of scientific investigation in solving crimes, specially where no eye-witnesses are available and also for testing the statements of witnesses, where they are available, is assuming increasing significance. It has become necessary for the State to take immediate steps for more scientific investigations and reliable medico legal examinations of the injuries-ante or post-mortem and to maintain accurate records.2. Despite repeated opportunities being given neither the then Additional Advocate General Sri P. P. Srivastava nor the then Director Gen...
Kripa Shankar Yadav Vs. State of U.P. and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-14-1998
Reported in: 1998(2)AWC1589
S.H.A. Raza and R.K. Singh, JJ. 1. By means of the present writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for Issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the U. P. Higher Education Service Commission, Allahabad to issue interview letter for the post of lecturer in Political Science. The advertisement for filling up several posts of the lecturers was Issued by the Commission on 13th July, 1994. Prior to the last date for submission of the forms, i.e., 7.9.1994, the petitioner has-submitted his form for selection to the post of lecturer In Political Science. But he was not called for Interview as according to the respondents he did not fulfil the minimum qualification. The petitioner secured 66.4 per cent marks in Intermediate Examination, obtained 51 per cent marks In the course of Bachelor of Arts and obtained 65,5. per cent marks in Master's Degree. He did his M. Phil, successfully in the month of December, 1993.2. Initially fifty posts of lecturers in Political Science were adv...
Dashrath and Others Vs. Deputy Director of Consolidation, Varanasi and ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-14-1998
Reported in: 1998(2)AWC1587
Sudhir Narain, J. 1. This writ petition is directed against the order dated 31.5.1975 passed by the Deputy Director of Consolidation, Varanasi.2. The parties are related to each other as mentioned in the following pedigree :Ramsukh|____________________________________________________| | |Kishuni Shiv Dihal Ram Dihal| | || ____________________ || | | |Parmu Ambar Swayambar Lautan| | | |___________________ | | || | | | || | | | |Jai Mangal Shiv Mangal | Raghunandan _____________| | | |___| | || | | | Jagnandan RamaSwaminath ______________ Budhi Ram | || | | | | KhedarooDashrath Hargen Ram Ratan | | || || || || ____________| | || Ram Banarsi| Briksh||Shivnandan|Devnandan3. The parties filed objection in respect of various khatas in dispute.4. Sri S.N. Singh, learned counsel for the petitioners has challenged the decision of the Deputy Director of Consolidation, respondent No. 1, in respect of plot Nos. 563 and 583 of Khata No. 90. The claim of the petitioners was that these plots exclusiv...
V.D. Bhaskar Vs. General Manager, N.R., Baroda House and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-14-1998
Reported in: 1998(3)AWC2035
D.K. Seth, J.1. The petitioner is an employee in the Northern Railway. He was sought to be transferred from one place to another by an order dated 14.7.1995. This order has been sought to be challenged by means of this writ petition.2. Mr. Govind Saran, learned counsel for the respondents raises a preliminary objection as to the maintainability of the writ petition in view of Section 28 read with Sections 14 and 19 of the Central Administrative Tribunal Act, 1985. According to him, by reason of ouster of jurisdiction and conferment of the jurisdiction on the Tribunal specially constituted under the said Act, the petitioner is precluded from seeking his remedy before this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution on the principle as enunciated by the Apex Court in the case of L. Chandra Kumar v. Union of India and others, AIR 1997 SC 1125, which had only permitted the orders passed by the Tribunal to be amenable to revision of scrutiny by the High Courts under Article 226 of the Const...
Niwas Khandsari Udyog, Village Hilalpur, Chandpur, Bijnor and Another ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-14-1998
Reported in: 1998(3)AWC2030
D.K. Seth, J. 1. The plaintiff respondent, Canara Bank, had filed a suit for recovery of certain amount. The said suit was registered as Original Suit No. 74 of 1992. By an order dated 9.7.1992 it was found by the learned Civil Judge, Bijnor that the court fees of Rs. 41,645 was in deficit. It had extended time for depositing deficit court fee on 9.8.1992. The time was granted successively either on the application of the plaintiff or otherwise and the case was being adjourned from time to time even sometimes on account of strike by the lawyers. Ultimately the plaint was rejected by an order dated 20.1.1994 on account of non-payment of deficit court fees under Order VII, Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure. It may be noted that the said order was passed in absence of the parties. The plaintiff had made an application under Order IX, Rule 4 read with Section 148 of the Code of Civil Procedure on 19.2.1994. Misc. Case No. 45 of 1994 was registered on the said application. The defendan...
Deo NaraIn Tiwari Vs. State of U.P. and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-14-1998
Reported in: 1998(4)AWC351
R.H. Zaidi, J.1. 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 Award of Labour Court, Varanasi tn adjudication Case No. 166 of 1985, rejecting the claim of the petitioner. Prayer for grant of consequential benefits such as payment of back wages etc, has also been made.2. Proceedings before Conciliation Officer yielded no result, therefore, vide Government Order dated 19.6.85 reference was made under Section 4K, of the U. P. Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (for short the 'Act') to the labour court. The disputes in substance was 'Whether termination of the workman Dev Narain (for short the petitioner) from service on 11.10.83 by M/s. K. M. SugarMills Limited, Motinagar, District Faizabad, (for short, the 'employer') was proper and legal. If not, to what relief the workman was entitled.'3. Petitioner filed written statement before the labour court in the abovenote...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »