Allahabad Court January 1999 Judgments
Sanjeev Kumar and Others Vs. State of U.P. and Another
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-29-1999
Reported in: 1999(1)AWC853; (1999)1UPLBEC575
S.R. Singh, J. 1. Petitioners'grievances are focussed on orders by which their services came to be terminated as 'no longer required'. The petitioners seek the reliefs of a writ in the nature of certiorari quashing the orders by which their services were terminated in purported exercise of powers under notification dated 29.4.1980 as 'no longer required' and for a direction in the nature of mandamus to pay them salary.2. Petitioners in this fascicle of writ petitions were appointed junior clerks/Asstt. Cashiers Grade-2concerned Sub-Regional Transport Offices. The Civil Writ Petition No. 13799 of 1998 wearing the mantle of leading file, pertains to Sub-Regional Transport Offices in Meerut Region. The appointments were seemingly made in the purported compliance of the service Rules notified by Notification dated 29.4.80 and ostensibly against permanent vacancies after prior intimation of the vacancies to the Addl. Transport Commissioner (Head quarters) U. P. Lucknow vide D.O. letter date...
Tag this Judgment!Pushpendra Pal Singh Vs. Dev Raj Pandey and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-29-1999
Reported in: 1999CriLJ3706
R.R.K. Trivedi, J.1. This is a petition with a prayer to punish opposite parties for committing criminal contempt of the Hon'ble Supreme Court. A prayer for awarding compensation has also been made along with the prayer for punishing the opposite parties for committing criminal contempt.2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned State counsel.3. Our attention has been drawn to paragraph 36 of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, reported in 1997 (1) (JT) SC 1 : (1997 Cri LJ 743): (AIR 1997 SC 610), D. K. Basu v. State of West Bengal. Certain directions have been issued which are required to be followed in all cases of arrest or detention till legal provisions are made in that behalf. The submission, which has been made before us, is that the authorities, namely, opposite parties who have been impleaded by name, did pot follow the requirements as enumerated in paragraph 36 of the decision in the case of D. K. Basu referred to above and the petitioner was detained ...
Tag this Judgment!Mohd. Sharif Saifi Vs. State of U.P. and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-28-1999
Reported in: 1999(1)AWC820
M. Katju and S. L. Saraf, JJ.1. Heard the petitioner in person andlearned standing counsel. The petitioner has prayed in this petition that he wants to make a mosque on the land in question which is in village Kuri, Tehsil Thakurdwara, district Moradabad. It is alleged in paragraph 4 of the writ petition that the respondent No. 4, the S.H.O. of P.S. Dilari, district. Moradabad has restrained the petitioner from building the mosque in question tillpermission is obtained from the District Magistrate.2. A counter-affidavit has been filed by respondent No. 4. In para 7 of the same, it is alleged that there is a controversy regarding title to the land in question, and a suit is pending before the Civil Judge, Thakurdwara.3. We are not entering into the factual controversy as to who is owner or bhumidhar of the land in question, and this dispute can be decided by the Civil/Revenue Court. However, we wish to lay down the law in this connection.4. This is a free and secular country. Subject to...
Tag this Judgment!Sushil Kumar Srivastava, Adv. Vs. State of U.P. and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-28-1999
Reported in: 1999(1)AWC821
M. Katju and S. L. Saraf, JJ.1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned standing counsel.2. The petitioner is an advocate of this Court and he has filed this petition against the illegal realisationof an amount of money which is described as 'Goonda Tax'. The petitioner has alleged in paragraphs 4 to 11 of the writ petition that while travelling from Allahabad to Gorakhpur in connection with a marriage and on the return Journey, at several places 4-5 persons along with Dandas and Lathis stopped the bus and forcibly realised Rs. 30-60/ at such places as Goonda tax arid illegal money. When the petitioner and other persons objected to that, filthy words were given to them and they were threatened with dire consequences. It is alleged in paragraph 7 of the petition that the driver of the bus Rajendra Prasad Sharma was manhandled and snatched from the bus. It is alleged that such hold-ups are often taking place for realisation of illegal money on national highways. The peti...
Tag this Judgment!General Manager, Moradabad Dugdh Utpadak Sangh Ltd. Vs. Presiding Offi ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-28-1999
Reported in: 1999(1)AWC825; [1999(81)FLR822]
Aloke Chakrabarti, J. 1. This writ petition was heard along with Civil Misc. Writ Petition Nos. 15485 of 1994 and 26104 of 1994.2. Award dated 12.5.1993 (Annexure-I to the writ petition) has been challenged by the General Manager. Moradabad Dugdh Utpadak Sangh Ltd. Dalpatpur, Moradabad. The respondent No. 4 got a reference made by the State Government to respondent No. 1 Labour Court in respect of his claim for reinstatement and back wages on an allegation thatthe said respondent No. 4 had been in employment as junior electrician under the present writ-petitioner who was made opposite party No. 3 before the Labour Court. The respondent No. 2. the present petitioner and respondent No. 3 were made respondents before, the said Labour Court and they filed separate written statements. After a contested hearing ultimately, the Labour Court passed the impugned award directing reinstatement of the respondent No. 4 and back wages for the period between June. 1991 and the date of reinstatement.3...
Tag this Judgment!Sahkari Ganna Vikas Samiti Ltd. Vs. State of U.P. and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-28-1999
Reported in: 1999(1)AWC822; [1999(81)FLR817]
Aloke Chakrabarti, J.1. Forquashing the award dated 22.9.1990 passed by the Labour Court, Ghaziabad, this writ petition was filed by the employer.2. Heard Mr. Rakesh Triwari, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Shyam Narain, learned counsel for the respondent workman.3. Learned counsel for the petitioner raised two contentions over and, above raising an objection that the respondent No. 3 employee herein being employed by a Co-operative Society, no proceeding was maintainable under the Industrial Disputes Act and, therefore, reference itself was bad. The other two contentions raised on behalf of the employer-petitioner were that the proceeding before labour court was barred by the principle of res judicata and that after acquittal of employee concerned in the criminal proceeding, the disciplinary proceeding could be very well held in respect of his conduct and the findings of the labour court in that respect is not tenable.4. Learned counsel for the respondent workman contended ...
Tag this Judgment!Sarvajeet Singh Vs. Director of Education (Madhyamik) and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-28-1999
Reported in: 1999(1)AWC838
D.K. Seth, J.1. By an order dated 12.12.1997 the dispute regarding the seniority between the petitioner and respondent No. 6 was decided against the petitioner and in favour of respondent No. 6. A copy of the said order is Annexure-7 to the writ petition. The petitioner had challenged the said order by means of writ petition No. 4766 of 1998. The said writ petition was dismissed on the ground of alternative remedy by granting liberty to the petitioner to prefer an appeal.2. Learned counsel for the petitioner Mr. A. K. Shukla submits that though the petitioner had preferred an appeal but the same has not been decided and is still pending. Before the appeal is decided, the respondents are purporting to fill up the post by promotion. The question of promotion is dependent on the outcome of the dispute of seniority. Therefore, the order dared 17.11.1998 by which the District Inspector of Schools had asked the Principal of Kisan Inter College to send requisition could not be issued. Therefo...
Tag this Judgment!Jang Bahadur Singh Vs. District Magistrate/Collector, Hamirpur and Oth ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-28-1999
Reported in: 1999(2)AWC1379
Ravi S. Dhavan and V. P. Goel, JJ. 1. Jang Bahadur Singh has filed the present writ petition impugning the recovery proceedings by which the sale proclamation for attachment of his property has been issued as he would not pay the electricity bills relating to charges for consumption of electrical energy to run his tube-well. The petitioner calls himself a marginal farmer. On an enquiry by the Court, it was indicated by learned counsel for the petitioner that this petitioner has 20 bighas of land so much so that he needs a tube-well for irrigation of agricultural lands. The Court has also indicated that the tube-well is being run by a 10 H.P. motor with a four inch discharge. All that has happened is that the petitioner was to pay the electricity charges for running the tube-well at the rate of Rs. 532 per month.2. Learned counsel for the U. P. State Electricity Board opposes this writ petition by submitting that the petitioner pays a fixed concessional rate. Between April, 1996 to Dece...
Tag this Judgment!Rafeeq Ahmad Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-28-1999
Reported in: [2002]111CompCas761(All)
ORDER1. The petitioner, Rafeeq Ahmad, borrowed money from the Bank of Baroda, branch Mooratganj, District Kaushambi. In the writ petition no details have been given on when exactly the loan was taken and the amount taken against the loan. A perusal of the writ petition itself reveals that the petitioner had no intention to return the loan. The record speaks for itself that in 1984 respondent No. 3, Manager, Bank of Baroda, branch Mooratganj, District Kaushambi, filed suit No. 40 of 1984 before the Additional Civil Judge, Allahabad. The suit was decreed by the VIII Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Allahabad. The ex-parte decree against the petitioner is dated 12-1-1995. The suit was decreed for a sum of Rs. 42,240.95. The Execution case was numbered as case No. 3 of 1996. The execution of the decree was put in motion. The petitioner has knowledge of it as he has appended papers relating to the execution of the decree along with this petition. Yet, the petitioner would not discharge...
Tag this Judgment!Gaon Sabha and Another Vs. Deputy Director of Consolidation, Gorakhpur ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-27-1999
Reported in: 1999(2)AWC1009
Shitla Prasad Srivastava, J.1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.2. This writ petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, has been filed by the petitioners for quashing the order dated 3.4.1979 and 28.11.1994, passed by the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 respectively, i.e., the Dy. Director of Consolidation. Gorakhpur and the Assistant Settlement Officer Consolidation.,Gorakhpur.3. In brief, the facts giving rise to the present petition, are that plot No. 19 was recorded in the basic year khatauni belonging to the Gaon Sabha and the nature of the land was shown to be the banjar land. The respondent No. 3. Bhagwan Sahai. filed objection under Section 9A (2) of the U. P. Consolidation of Holdings Act and claimed himself to be the grove holder (bhumtdhar) of the land in dispute. The claim of the respondent No. 3, Bhagwan Sahai, was contested by the Gaon Sabha. It is alleged by the Gaon Sabha that no tree was planted by the respondent No. 3. Bhagwan Sahai, nor the landin dispute...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »