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.
Tayal Potteries and Another Vs. Macroplast (P) Ltd.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-09-1998
Reported in: 1998(3)AWC2200; [2001]103CompCas404(All)
A.K. Banerji, J.1. By means of the abovenoted company petition filed under Sections 433(e) and 434(1)(a) of the Companies Act, 1956 (The Act in short), the petitioners M/s. Tayal Potteries through its sole proprietor (hereinafter referred to as the petitioners) have sought the winding up of the respondent-company M/s. Macroplast Pvt. Ltd. (Respondent-company) on the ground that the said respondent is unable to pay its debts, consequently, it be wound up.2. Briefly stated the petitioner' case is that it is engaged in the manufacturing of bushing which are used for transformers. On the orders placed by the respondent-company which is basically engaged in the manufacture of transformers, the petitioners supplied goods. The respondent-company defaulted in making payment, consequently, a sum of Rs. 89,123.75 paise as on 25.3.95 was due besides interest at the rate of 24% per annum. On request for payment, the respondent issued a cheque for Rs. 90,000 on 8.4.1995 which was returned by the Ba...
Atma Deen Srivastava Vs. State of U.P. and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-09-1998
Reported in: 1998(4)AWC218
S.H.A. Raza, J. 1. The petitioner, who has retired from service on 28.2.1993 While holding the post of Additional Secretary, Regional Office, U. P. Board, Allahabad, by means of the present writ petition has prayed that the impugned order dated 31.5.1995 passed by the State Government, which was served upon the petitioner on 27.10.1995 by means of which the Governor of U. P. exercising his powers under Section 351A of Civil Service Regulations, directed the reduction of 5% of pension with permanent effect, he quashed. The petitioner has also prayed for the issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to forthwith disburse the deductedamount to the petitioner along with interest at the rate of 14% per annum from the date of retirement till the date of actual deduction.2. Before dealing with the question as to whether the order of the State Government, which has been impugned in this writ petition, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, was legal ...
Vinod Kumar Vs. Rent Control and Eviction Officer/ D.S.O., Saharanpur ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-09-1998
Reported in: 1998(4)AWC183
J.C. Gupta, J.1. Despite time having been granted, no rejoinder affidavit has been filed on behalf of the petitioner.2. By means of this writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 25.5.1998 passed by the Rent Control and Eviction Officer, respondent No. 1 rejecting the petitioner's application for recalling the order dated 25.3.1998 whereby the disputed shop has been released in favour of the landlord, respondent No. 2 under Section 16 (1) of the U. P. Act No. XIII of 1972 (hereinafter referred to as the Act).3. The facts relevant for this writ petition may be abated in brief as follows. The dispute relates to shop No. 3/1048/3 Mohalla Ram Nagar Pathanpura district Saharanpur of which respondent No. 2 is admittedly the landlord. The petitioner carne into occupation of the said shop in May, 1981 undisputedly without any order of allotment in his favour. In the year 1987 one Mahaveer Prasad moved application for allotment on the ground that the shop in question was vaca...
U.P. Jal Nigam and Others Vs. Iind Addl. District Judge, Dehradun and ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-09-1998
Reported in: 1998(4)AWC242
S.R. Singh, J.1.Cynosure of attention is the order dated 19.12.1997 passed by 2nd Addl. District Judge, Dehradun in Civil Revision No. 114 of 1997, Sant Ram and another v. U. P. Jal Nigam and others, the correctness of which has been challenged in the instant petition. The aforesaid revision was preferred against the order dated 14.7.1997 passed by the 1st Addl. Civil Judge, (Sr. Division), Dehradun on an application for temporary injunction filed in Suit No. 432 of 1997.2. The suit was Instituted by Sant Ram and Ratan Singh in their own rights as ZAMINDARNA/KASHTKARAN/INHABITANTS of Mauza Kharsi Pargana Jansar, Bhabar, district Dehradun and also in representative capacity under Order 1, Rule 8, of the Code of Civil Procedure on behalf of other ZAMINDARS/KASHTKARAN/ BASHINDAGAN of Mauza Kharsi forperpetual injunction restraining the defendants from constructing TANK for storing water gushing out of SPRINGLET in Mauza Kharsi Khet Vishlang Pargana Jansar Bhabar, district Dehradun and fro...
Smt. Noor Jahan Alam Vs. Union of India and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-09-1998
Reported in: 1998(4)AWC185; 1999(107)ELT591(All)
S.R. Singh, J.1. By order impugned herein the Commissioner of Customs (Prevention), Indo Nepal Border declined to accede to the request of the petitioner for release of truck No. UP-78-2500 which belongs to the petitioner's minor son Zafar Alam. It appears that the truck aforestated was seized by the Custom Authorities at Varanasi under the provisions of the Customs Act. 1962. The order as communicated to the petitioner by the Assistant Commissioner (T) Customs Head Quarter, Lucknow reads as under :'Please refer to your letter dated 29.4.98 in which you have requested for provisional release of Truck No. UP-78 N/2500. The Commissioner of Customs after careful consideration of the said application and observing the gravity of offence committed in the instant case, has not acceded to your request. Sd/- Illegible 24.7.Assistant Commissioner (T)Custom HDQRS.Lucknow'2. Learned counsel for the petitioner urged, relying on the provisions contained in paragraph 56 of Chapter VI of the Adjudica...
Murlidhar Srivastava Vs. State of U.P. and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-09-1998
Reported in: 1998(4)AWC524; [1999(82)FLR83]
R.R.K. Trivedi, J.1. This petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, challenging the order dated 27.6.1990 (Annexure-6 to the writ petition), served on petitioner on 13.8.1990, by which petitioner has been dismissed from service.2. The facts, in short, giving rise to this petition are that petitioner Murlidhar Srivastava was serving as Assistant Engineer, in Irrigation Department of State of Uttar Pradesh. He was served a memo of charge dated 20.10.1987 with regard to charges of misconduct allegedly committed by him during the period 1.11.1982 to 10.7.1983 while he was posted as Assistant Engineer in the Irrigation Division, Gonda, at Bahraich. The charge memo contained 15 charges. Evidence relied on in support of each charge was mentioned in the memo of charge. In the last paragraph of the memo of charge, petitioner was required to indicate in writing whether he wanted to appear and examine himself orally. If he wants to examine or cross-examine any witnes...
Anup Pratap Singh Vs. Principal, Udai Pratap Mahavidyalay (Autonomous) ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-09-1998
Reported in: (1998)3UPLBEC2169
O.P. Garg, J.1. Discipline is the first casuality in the academic field. It is a universal phenomenon and a perennial complex problem plaguing the educational institutions. In the recent past, incidents of grave indiscipline among students have come to be multiplied.2. The point for determination in the present writ petition is whether at the alter of the procedural law of natural justice and undue insistence on this concept, the orders of suspension and expulsion of the petitioner passed by the Principal of the College should be interferred with on the face of the emphatic assertion that continuance of the petitioner in the institution was not congenial to the orderly atmosphere in the college campus. This controversy has come to be raised in the backdrop of following facts.The petitioner-Anup Pratap Singh was a regular student of B.A. Part III during the session 1996-97 in Udai Pratap Singh Maha Vidhayalaya (Autonomous), Varanasi. An unfortuanate incident had taken place on 3.11.1996...
Shyam Behari Agarwal Vs. Chancellor of Allahabad University and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-09-1998
Reported in: (1999)1UPLBEC498
S.H.A. Raza, J.1. Dr. Shyam Behari Agrawal has filed the present writ petition assailing the decision of the Chancellor, by means of which the Chancellor found that the decision arrived at by the Members of the Selection Committee in favour of Dr. R.K. Vishwakarma, respondent No. 3 recommending him to the post of Lecturer in Painting in Allahabad University, was justified and secondly, the Allahabad University must give the appointment to Dr. R.K. Vishwakarma to the post of Lecturer in question. Thus, the representations, which were filed before the Chancellor under Section 68 were accordingly disposed of.2. The present dispute pertains to the appointment of Lecturer in Painting in the University of Allahabad in the year 1985. Advertisements were issued inviting applications for the post of Lecturer in Painting in the University of Allahabad. The petitioner as well as respondent No. 3 applied for the said post.3. On 20-10-1985 the Selection Committee met for the purpose of recommending...
Dr. (Smt.) Maya Chaudhary Vs. State of U.P. and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-08-1998
Reported in: 1999(1)AWC744
A. N. Gupta and R. P. Nigam, JJ. 1. Smt. Sawarn Lata Srivastava, opposite party No. 8, was appointed on 25.9.1972 on regular basis as Lecturer in Raja Mohan Girls Post Graduate College, Falzabad. In Education Department, the Committee of Management of which and the Principal are opposite party Nos. 6 and 7 to the writ petition. Disciplinary proceedings were initiated against her and she was removed from service as a result thereof with effect from 6.4.1978 after obtaining Vice-Chancellor's approval dated 18.3.1978 as required under sub-section (2) of Section 35 of the Uttar Pradesh State Universities Act, 1973. She made a representation to the Vice-Chancellor against her order of dismissal under Section 68 of the said Act which was rejected on 18.12.1979, Thereafter, she preferred Writ Petition No. 826 (S/B) of 1980 which was allowed on 12.3.1997 by this Court. The order removing Smt. Sawarn Lata Srivastava from service and the order of Vice-Chancellor rejecting her representation were...
Amar Pratap Bharti Vs. Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Bareilly and A ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-08-1998
Reported in: 1998(4)AWC180
Aloke Chakrabarti, J.1. Certain Tacts stated in this writ petition are relevant for resolving the dispute involved herein.2. The petitioner was appointed as Operator 'B' in Production Deapartment, B.D. Plant under the Management of Synthetics and Chemicals Limited at Bareilly with effect from 6.12.1978. Junior persons, who were working with the petitioner in Butadine Plant, were transferred to Rubber Plant and they were promoted there as Operator Grade-A with effect from 15.3.1988 ignoring the seniority of the petitioner. The petitioner raised objection and made representation and thereafter was given promotion as Operator Grade-A in the year 1991 with effect from 1.9.1990, although the petitioner was entitled to be promoted much earlier along with his aforesaid juniors. By subsequent similar action again, junior persons were transferred to other department and then given promotion compelling the petitioner to make objection. Ultimately, the petitioner raised Industrial dispute which w...
- ‹ Prev
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- Next ›
- Last »