Allahabad Court September 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.
Santosh Kumar Tiwari Vs. District Magistrate, Deoria and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-16-1998
Reported in: 1999(1)AWC661
Binod Kumar Roy and N. S. Gupta, JJ. 1. The only question whichcalls for our answer is as to whether the respondents have got any authority to construct Sulabh Sauchalaya on the Sahan land of the petitioner?2. The petitioner asserts, inter alia, that he is resident of village Mahen, district Deoria, where he has his own house and some agricultural land ; that on 29.12.1989 his younger brother informed him that respondent No. 8, Gaon Sabha of village Mahen, district Deoria, in collusion with respondent Nos. 1 to 7 is trying to build Sulabh Sauchalaya on his Sahan lands : that on receiving the aforementioned information he left Allahabad, went to his village and learnt that a construction has been raised on his Sahan land : that he contacted respondent No. 8 and requested him to remove the construction already made on his lands, but respondent No. 8 refused ; thereafter he approached all concerned who gave evasive answers though respondent No. 2 directed respondent No. 3 to make Inspecti...
Triloki Nath Pandey Vs. Iiird Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Barei ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-16-1998
Reported in: 1999(1)AWC815
J. C. Gupta, J.1. This is landlord's petition.2. The dispute relates to premises bearing No. 499/364 situate at Sahukara, Bareilly. The petitioner filed suit for ejectment alleging that initially building in question was taken on rent by respondent No. 5 for running a school under the name of respondent No. 3 for imparting basic education and by virtue of U. P. Basic Education Act of 1972 the management, supervision and control of the said school stood transferred and vested in respondent No. 4 who became the tenant of the petitioner and started paying rent at the rate of Rs. 100 per month. It was further pleaded that as the building in question was covered by the definition of 'Public Building' within the meaning of Section 3(o) of the Act. the provisions of U. P. Act No. XIII of 1972 were not applicable and the tenancy of the defendant was terminated by a combined notice under Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act and Section 80 of theCode of Civil Procedure dated 26.11.1980 wh...
Sukhu and Others Vs. Ram Deo and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-16-1998
Reported in: 1998(4)AWC49
Sudhir Narain, J.1. This writ petition Is directed against the order of the Board of Revenue dated 7.5.1984, allowing the appeal filed by the defendant-respondents and dismissing the suit filed by the plaintiff-petitioners.2. The facts in brief are that the petitioners filed Suit No. 1053 of 1970 for declaration under Section 229B of U.P.Z.A. and L.R. Act that they are bhumidhars of the land in dispute. They relied upon the following pedigree :Durga|_____________________________________________________________________________| |Munni Lal Chunni Lal|____________________________________________________| | |Jhagaru Khannu Sukhu-widow- |Smt. Shanti Devi ChhedilalTheir case was that Munni Lal was sole tenure-holder of plot No 534 area 1.03 acre situate in village Sarai Nandan, Pargana Dehat Amanat, district Varanasi. The petitioners are related to Munnilal as given in the pedigree. Munni Lal had executed a gift deed duly registered on 8.9.1965 in favour of the petitioners. Munni Lal died on...
Rajesh Kumar Dwivedi Vs. State of U.P. and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-16-1998
Reported in: 1998(4)AWC531
D.K. Seth, J.1. The petitioner alleges that he was appointed in the post of clerk in the institution pursuant to a resolution dated 31.8.1997 passed by the Committee of Management. An appointment letter was issued to him on 1st September, 1997, which stipulates that the order of appointment would be enforceable only with the approval of the District Inspector of Schools as is apparent from Annexure-5. The petitioner joined the school on 2nd September. 1997. On 7th September, 1997, the papers were forwarded by the Committee of Management to the District Inspector of Schools. By an order dated 22nd September, 1997, the District Inspector of Schools had refused to grant approval to the appointment on the ground that no approval could be granted under the Rules. This order was challenged by means of Writ Petition No. 33547 of 1997 since been disposed of by an order dated 13lh October. 1997. By the said order, the District Inspector of Schools was directed, to reconsider the question of app...
Manoj Kumar Singh and anr. Vs. the District Basic Education Officer an ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-16-1998
Reported in: (1999)1UPLBEC776
D.K. Seth, J.1. In this petition, the petitioners had claimed consideration of their candidature for selection of teachers for basic schools which required the prescribed qualification of B.T.C. where as the petitioners were B. Ed.2. It is contended by Mr. Prakash Padia, learned Counsel for the petitioners that the qualification of B.Ed, is higher than B.T.C. Therefore, the same cannot be a disqualification for being considered. It is alleged that because the petitioners did not possess the qualification of B.T.C. they were precluded from apearing in the selection process. He relied on a decision in the case of Firoj Alam Khan v. State of U.P., 1986 UPLBEC 674. He also relied on a decision in the case of B.Ed. Berozgar Sangh v. State of U.P., passed in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 4983 of 1997 disposed of on 24-4-1997 [Reported in 1997 LBESR 44O(A11)], in support of his contention. On the basis thereof the petitioners claim that their case should be considered in terms of the said dec...
Gautam Shiksha Samiti and Another Vs. Joint Director of Education, Gor ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-15-1998
Reported in: 1999(1)AWC704
O.P. Garg, J. 1. There is an Intermediate College, siluate at Pipara, Ramdhar, Salempur, in district Deoria, with the name of Gautam Inter College, which is duly recognised by the Board of High School and Intermediate Education and is governed by the rules and regulations framed under the U. P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). The said college is run and managed by a Committee of Management, which is elected according to the terms and provisions of the scheme of administration. The parent society under the aegis of which the college is run, is known as Gautam Shiksha Samiti, which is a body registered under the Societies Registration Act.2. In the present petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, a dispute has been raised about the constitution and election of the new Committee of Management. Last undisputed elections of the Committee of Management were held on 9.12.1990. Subsequently, a dispute arose between the two rival Committ...
Nem Chandra JaIn Vs. Ix Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Meerut and ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-15-1998
Reported in: 1999(1)AWC719
J.C. Gupta, J. 1. Heard petitioners' counsel Sri Pankaj Mittal as well as Sri Framed Jain counsel appearing for the contesting-respondents.2. These are three connected writ petitions- Writ Petition No. 28480 of 1995 and Writ Petition No. 4818 of 1996 arise out of the proceedings held under Section 21 (1) (a) of the U. P. Act No. XIII of 1972, (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'), whereas Writ Petition No. 16612 of 1994 arises out of proceedings held by the Rent Control and Eviction Officer under Section 16 (1) (b) of the Act. Writ Petition Nos. 28480 of 1995 and 16612 of 1994 are by the landlord while Writ Petition No. 4818 of 1996 has been filed by the tenant.3. The dispute relates to a residential premises No. 174/125 Anandpuri. Railway Road. Meerut. It appears that the landlord had allowed the contesting-respondents to occupy the disputed accommodation on rent without an order of allotment at a time when the petitioner was employed in government service. After his retirement, the ...
Ram Dularey Vs. Shiv Mangal
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-15-1998
Reported in: 2000(2)AWC1410
Dev Kant Trivedi, J.1. This is the defendant's second appeal against the Judgment and decree passed by Sri S. B. Lal, the then Munsif Dalmau District. Rae Barely whereby the Suit No. 127 of 1976 for permanent Injunction was decreed and which decree was affirmed by Sri Y. R. Tripathi, the then Civil Judge, Rae Barell in Suit No. 80 of 1977 by means of the judgment dated 27.8.1979.2. The dispute between the parties related to the land shown by letters P, Q, R, D, in Commissioner's map 16C 2/4. According to the plaintiff-respondent, on the said land he has a bangla and chhapper for more than 50 years which was being used by the plaintiff-respondent continuously. It was pleaded by the plaintiff-respondent that proceedings under Section 115C of U. P. Z. A. and L. R. Act were initiated against him by the Gaon Sabha which terminated in his favour. Subsequently, Gaon Sabha had executed a patta of 1 biswa land of plot No. 143. The defendant-appellant in the garb of the said patta has been alleg...
Krishna Kant Gupta and Others Vs. Smt. Anita Khemka and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-15-1998
Reported in: 1998(4)AWC175
O.P. Garg. J.1. This Second Appeal, which is the proto-type of the earlier Second Appeal No. 1163 of 1998, has come to be filed again by the same appellants and against the same impugned order dated 28.7.1998 passed by Sri Ramesh Chander Singh. IXth Additional District Judge. Varanast in Civil Appeal No. 435 of 1977, Smt. Laxmi Devi Gupta v. State of U. P. and others. The earlier Appeal No. 1163 of 1998 was dismissed by this Court as not maintainable. In the earlier Second Appeal No. 1163 of 1998, which was filed by the present appellants, a preliminary objection was taken on behalf of the contesting respondents that the Second Appeal is not maintainable without leave of the Court as the appellants were not parties either to Suit No. 169 of 1994 or to First Appeal No. 435 of 1997.2. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties at some length, the appeal was dismissed on 8.8.1998 by this Court holding that it was not maintainable without leave of the Court as the appellants were st...
Raja Shanker Dubey Vs. State of U.P. and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-15-1998
Reported in: 1998(4)AWC120; (1998)3UPLBEC2233
P.K. Jain, J.1. Facts alleged by the petitioner are that he was working as Atlrikta Mukhya Adhlkarj. Zila Parishad, Varanasi, from 2.4.1983 till July, 1987. Thereafter he was posted as Additional District Development Officer, Azamgarh, from August, 1987 and worked as such till date of his retirement in the year 1988 on attaining the age of superannuation. By an order dated5.1.1989, he was reappointed for a period of one year on the above post and he joined as Additional District Development Officer. Azarngarh on 17.1.1989. While he was working as Additional Chief Officer, Zila Parishad, Varanasi, he detected embezzlement of huge sum by one Omkar Nath Upadhayaya the then Cashier in Zila Parishad. Varanasi and lodged the First Information Report in the year 1989. By an order dated 15th May, 1992, the State Government directed respondent No. 2, the Commissioner, Gram Vikas, State of U. P., Lucknow, to make payment of pension and gratuity, etc. to the petitioner. Copy of the said order is ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »