Allahabad Court August 1998 Judgments

Raymond Synthetics Ltd. Vs. Cegat and ors.

Court: Allahabad

Reported in: 1999(82)LC254(Allahabad)

S.L. Saraf, J.1. It is recorded that the respondents, in spite of several orders passed by this Court, have failed to produce necessary and the relevant documents that were required for final adjudication of the matter by this Court. However, without going into the merits of this case, I direct the Tribunal to decide the appeal filed by the petitioner within a period of three months from the date of service of this order.2. Till the final decision of the Tribunal, the interim order passed on 12.12.1994 shall remain operative and the order dated 31.10.1994 shall remain suspended.3. It is open to the petitioner to take any additional grounds which have not been taken before the Tribunal except the ground which the Tribunal is unable or incompetent to entertain.4. The petitioner shall be at liberty to make a fresh writ petition on passing of the order by the Tribunal.5. The writ petition is disposed of....

Baboo Lal Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and anr.

Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Allahabad

1. This is an application under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985. (i) A direction to the respondents to order retirement of the applicant in accordance with rules on medical grounds with consequential benefits. (ii) A direction to the respondents to treat the applicant to be on duty from the date of declaration of medical unfitness till the date of actual retirement and pay him salary and other allowances for this period. (iii) A direction to the respondents to consider the applicant's son for compassionate appointment. (iv) A direction to the respondents to pay cost of the application to the applicant.3. The facts of the case are that the applicant, who was working as Stores Majdoor in Central Railway, Jhansi, was examined by the Chief Medical Superintendent, Central Railway, Jhansi on 14.05.93 and was declared unfit in C-2 category for Khalasis but was fit for C-2 category where hearing was not required. The Deputy Controller of Stores wrote to the Chief Personal...

Ram Saran Vs. State of U.P. and Others

Court: Allahabad

Reported in: 1999(1)AWC344; (1998)3UPLBEC1867

S.R. Singh, J.1. Disputation in the Instant petition centres round the order dated 16.8.1989 by which the petitioner's appointment as Asstt. Accountant in Chakaundh Farmers' Services (Co-operative) Society, Chakaundh, Banda, was terminated.2. Factual matrix bearing on the controversy involved in this petition is that the petitioner entered the service of the respondent-society as Asstt. Accountant on a salary pegged at Rs. 300 per month. The appointment letter dated 24.12.1985 envisaged that the service was liable to be terminated at any time without any notice. The services of the petitioner came to be terminated by means of the order dated 16.8.1989 with immediate effect. The termination of service purports to have been ordered under 'Rule 4 of the U. P. Sahkart Karamchari Seva Niyamawali' and the petitioner was paid a month's advance salary pursuant to the resolution passed by the Sanchalak Mandal of the society.3. Sri K. S. Misra, appearing for the petitioner, canvassed, relyingupo...

Kailash Kumar Vs. Ivth Adl. District Judge, Moradabad and Others

Court: Allahabad

Reported in: 1999(1)AWC352

J.C. Gupta, J.1. This writ pelition is directed against the order dated 30.5.1990 passed by Rent Control and Eviction Officer and as affirmed by the lower revisional court by the order dated 25.7.1990.2. The facts in brief may be stated.3. The dispute relates to a shop which was in the tenancy and occupation of one Rama Shanker. The landlord Shree Kripa Krishan filed suit for ejectment against the tenant-Rama Shanker and the said suit was decreed by Judge Small Cause Court on 26.9.1975. The revision filed by the tenant-Rama Shanker was also dismissed on 18.11.76 so also the second revision filed in this Court, by the order dated 21.3.1978. Even before the decree of eviction could be put in execution, one Kailash Kumar. who according to the respondents is a close relative of Rama Shanker. moved an application on 30.11.1981 before the Rent Control and Eviction Officer for allotment of the shop in his favour stating therein that the shop was likely to fall vacant. A report was called for ...

Dharmendra Narayan Dwivedi Vs. Director General, Medical Education and ...

Court: Allahabad

Reported in: 1999(1)AWC363

O.P. Garg, J.1. The petitioner-Dharmendra Narain Dwivedi, with roll number 47,000, appeared as a general candidate in Combined Pre-Medical Test (for short 'C.P.M.T.') of1997 conducted by Chatrapati Sahuji Maharaj University, Kanpur. He was successful in the 'C.P.M.T. examination and was placed at Sl. No. 710 in the merit list. The petitioner appeared in counselling and thereafter he was selected for admission to Bachelor in Dental Surgeon (B.D.S.) course against a free seal and was allotted Rama Dental College Hospital, respondent No. 4--a private medical college, for admission. An order to this effect was issued by the Registrar of the University which conducted the C.P.M.T. examination, 1997. which is Annexure-1 to the writ petition. The petitioner was also informed that he has been allotted a free seat of 01 category. In order to take admission, the petitioner went to respondent No. 4 and deposited a sum of Rs. 500 as fee for Royal Society of Educational Academy on 8.9.1997. As a ca...

Basti Sugar Mills Co. Ltd., Basti Vs. State of U.P. and Others

Court: Allahabad

Reported in: 1998(3)AWC2307; (1999)ILLJ801All

B.K. Roy and R.K. Mahajan, JJ.1. The petitioner-Company, has come up with a prayer to quash the Second Reference dated 20.3.1990 arising out of C.B. Case No. 29 of 1989 made under Section 4K of the U. P. Industrial Disputes Act (as contained in Annexure-5 to the writ petition).2. The petitioner asserts, inter alia, that it is a company registered under the Indian Companies Act, 1956 having two units ; its unit at Walterganj is a seasonal industry and it has three kinds of workmen, namely, (i) Temporary, (ii) Seasonal, and (iii) Permanent ; its Union raised an industrial dispute for two workmen, namely, Suresh Kumar Srivastava and Nagendra Prasad Singh (who have filed an impleadment application) by filing a claim dated 21.4.1989 as contained in Annexure-1 which was numbered as C.B. Case No. 29 of 1989 before the Conciliation Officer. Basti ; the petitioner filed its objections dated 31.5.1989 (as contained in Annexure-2) ; to its objection the Union filed rejoinder dated 4.7.1989 (as co...

Ashok Kumar Vs. Viith Additional District Judge, Muzaffarnagar and Oth ...

Court: Allahabad

Reported in: 1998(3)AWC2187

ORDERJ.C. Gupta, J.1 This writ petition is directed against the order dated 9.2.1996 passed by respondent No. 1 allowing the appeal filed by respondent Nos. 2 and 3.2. The dispute relates to a shop situated in Gandhi Colony, North Pachenda Road. Muzaffarnagar, wherein the petitioner, as a tenant of respondent Nos. 2 and 3, is carrying on business of cycle repairing, etc., for the last more than 22-23 years. Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 moved an application under Section 21 (1) (a) of the U. P. Act No. XIII of 1972 (hereinafter to be described as the 'Act'), against the petitioner for the release of the disputed shop alleging therein that the husband of respondent No. 3. Sri Khem Chand, was going to retire shortly on 30.9.1993 from Government service as Tehsildar and after his retirement, he would involve himself in business activity with his son Raj Kumar who was aged about 23 years and was yet unemployed. They both desired to set up the business of motor parts and since no other accommodat...

Abdul Azeem Vs. Manager (Prabandhak) Madrasa Jamia Miftahul Uloom, Mau ...

Court: Allahabad

Reported in: 1998(3)AWC2369

D.K. Seth, J. 1. In this writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the order of suspension dated 6.1.1992 which was held to be illegal by the Inspector, Arabic Madrasa, U. P. Allahabad in his order dated 31.3.1992. Therefore, in this writ petition the petitioner had prayed for revocation of the order of suspension in pursuance of the order dated 31.3.1992. Admittedly in the meantime, pursuant to the charge-sheet, which was mentioned in the order of suspension, an enquiry was held and the petitioner having been found guilty, his service was terminated by the Management by an order dated 1st November, 1992. In the counter-affidavit filed on behalf of the respondents, it has been alleged that in terms of Rule 34 of the U. P. Recognition of Non-Governmental Arabian and Persian School Rules, 1987, the proceedings of the enquiry have been forwarded to the Inspector and the Inspector has not given any suggestion as contemplated in Rule 34. Therefore, after the said order has been passed, t...

Joint Director, Bhartiya Vanaspati Sarvekshan Madhya Kshettra, Allahab ...

Court: Allahabad

Reported in: 1998(3)AWC2368

D.P. Mohapatra, C.J. and R.R.K. Trivedi, J. 1. Heard Sri N.B. Singh, learned counsel for appellants. Sri S.P. Misra for respondents has not appeared though his name has been printed in the cause list and the list has been revised.2. In this appeal filed under Chapter VIII, Rule 5 of the High Court Rules, the respondents of Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 5100 of 1998 have challenged the judgment/order dated 18.2.1998 in which the learned single Judge disposed of the writ petition with certain directions. The impugned order reads as follows :'Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners. The petitioners who are five in number are Class IV employee in the office of Joint Director. Bhartiya Vanaspati Sarvekshan Madhya Kshettra. Allahabad. A controversy has been raised about the payment and nonpayment of the overtime allowances which is payable to the petitioners. This aspect of the matter cannot be gone into by this Court as it requires secretary (scrutiny) of facts. The writ petition is f...

Ravinder Singh Vs. Principal, Parker Inter College, Moradabad and Othe ...

Court: Allahabad

Reported in: 1998(4)AWC160; (1998)3UPLBEC2219

M. Katju, J.1. The petitioner is a Head Clerk in the Methodist Church School. In my opinion, no writ petition lies against the aforesaid school as it is a purely private body and minority Institution. Moreover, the claim of the petitioner is that he should be given house rent allowance in addition to the house rent allowance being given to his wife. In my opinion, this is wholly arbitrary.2. In my opinion, if both husband and wife are in service, only one of them can get house rent allowance. This is because both husband and wife obviously live in one house and they do not have to pay two rents.3. We may consider a hypothetical case. Suppose the rent of a house is Rs. 1,000 per month. Then should husband and wife both get Rs. 1,000 per month as house rent allowance? That will clearly be arbitrary and unjustified. After all, house rent allowance is paid to compensate either wholly or in part for the rent paid, and not for giving an allowance above that.4. Learned counsel for the petitio...