Allahabad Court October 1999 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.
Satyapriya Sonkar Vs. Superintendent, Central Jail and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-15-1999
Reported in: 2000CriLJ1369
R.R.K. Trivedi, J.1. Petitioner, by means of this writ petition, has challenged his detention under order dated 4-6-1999, passed by respondent No. 2 District Magistrate, Allahabad under Section 3(2) of National Security Act, 1986 (here-in-after referred to 'Act').2. Along with impugned order of detention, petitioner was served the grounds of detention on which basis respondent No. 2 formed his subjective satisfaction for passing the order of preventive detenition against him. In grounds served on petitioner allegation against petitioner was that on 29-5-99 he alongwith his companions went to Allahabad Degree College, Allahabad in the evening where the examination of B.A. Part I scheduled for 3.00 P.M. to 6.00 P.M. was in progress. Petitioner and his companions asked principal of the aforesaid Degree College not to check the use of unfair means during the said examination. However, Principal disagreed and said that if the unfairmeans are adopted during examination they shall be checked....
Hari Nath and ors. Vs. State of U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-15-1999
Reported in: 2000CriLJ3338
S.K. Phaujdar and M.A. Khan, JJ.1. Both the above appeals are directed against the judgment and order 22-4-1978 recorded by the Special Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Mirzapur, in ST No. 87 of 1974. This very judgment was challenged in two appeals - Crl. Appeal No. 1547 of 1978 at the instance of accused-appellant Dangar challenging his conviction and sentence, and Govt. Appeal No. 2071 of 1978 by the State praying for interference in the quantum of sentence of this Dangar. Death of Dangar was reported and confirmed. Accordingly, an order was recorded on 18-8-1994 indicating abatement of these two appeals due to death of Dangar. Of the present two appeals, one is against conviction of the four appellants, Hari Nath, Vishwa Nath, Mahant and Shiv Nath in the aforesaid trial and against the sentence imposed on them under Sections 304/149 IPC directing their rigorous imprisonment for 7 years (Crl. Appeal No. 1246 of 1978). The other appeal (Govt. Appeal No. 2108 of 1978) is directed ag...
Sahara India Savings and Investment Corporation. Ltd. Vs. Asstt. Cit
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-15-1999
Reported in: [2001]79ITD56(NULL)
ORDERI.S. Verma, J.M.Since the issue involved in all the aforesaid appeals are common, we, for the sake of convenience proceed to decide all these appeals by this consolidated order.Interest Tax Appeal Nos. 1 & 2/Alld/1996 (A.Y. 1992-93 & 1993-94-Sahara India Savings & Investment Corpn. Ltd.) :2. Ground Nos. 1 to 6 of Interest Tax Appeal No. I (Alld) of 1996 and Ground Nos. 1 to 4 of Interest Tax Appeal No. 2(Alld) of 1996 pertains to the issue whether the appellant-company, which is a Residuary Non Banking Company, can be brought within the purview of the Interest Tax Act and whether it can be considered a Miscellaneous Finance Company as defined in section 2(5B) & (vi) of the Interest Tax Act, as amended by the Finance (No. 2) Act of 1991.3. We have heard the parties and the brief facts necessary for the decision of the issue are as under :3.1 Brief Facts :The appellant-company was incorporated on 11-8-1987 and its main objects are reproduced in para-7 Page 4 of the Commissioner (App...
Smt. Manju Upadhayay Vs. State of U.P. and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-14-1999
Reported in: 2000(1)AWC22; (2000)1UPLBEC494
V. M. Sahai, J. 1. Heard Sri Anupam Kulshreshtha. learnedcounsel for the petitioner and learned standing counsel appearing for respondent No. 2 and Sri Aditya Narain Singh learned counsel appearing for respondent No. 3.2. The election of gram pradhan was held on 20.4.19915. The elected pradhan Ram Raksha Pal Singh was working as pradhan. However, an election petition was filed in which the election of gram pradhan was set aside by order dated 19.9,1998. This order was not challenged by Ram Raksha Pal Singh. The respondent No. 3 issued a notification on 1.10.1999 to fill the post of pradhan, which was vacant in pursuance to the aforesaid notification another notification has been issued by respondent No. 2 on 5.10.1999 fixing dates for holding election of gram pradhan. The petitioner has challenged the notifications issued by respondent Nos. 2 and 3 on the ground that since the elections are going to be held on 27.10.1999 which period is less than six months when the term of elected pra...
Yash Export Industries and Others Vs. Union of India and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-14-1999
Reported in: 2000(1)AWC30
S.R. Singh, J.1. Summons dated 9.4.1999 issued under Section 108 of the Customs Act. 1962 (in short the 'Act') being Annexures-3 and 4 are sought to be quashed by issuance of writ of certiorari. Further relief claimed herein Is that the respondent No. 5 be directed to clear the shipping bills of petitioner No. 1. a proprietorship firm of which Shri Sudhir Malik claims himself to be the sole proprietor having export activities at S-25/265. K-4A. Vrindavan Colony. Sarsoli, District Varanasi. It is alleged in the petition that M/s. Sokasi International General Trading (LLG). Post Box No. 2215 A. I. Naumaiah. Ajman. UZAE. a foreign buyer, agreed to purchase goods viz, P.V.C. soles-One set of goods which the foreign buyer aforestated agreed to purchase was 25,000 pair P.V.C. soles @ $ 10.10 per pair and the other part of the consignment was of 32,000 pairs of P.V.C. soles @ $9.60 per pair. The contract price of the entire goods came to $ 5,59.700 and pursuant to the said contract, the petit...
Syed Qaisar Ali Vs. Waqfs Commissioner, Uttar Pradesh, Lucknow and Oth ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-14-1999
Reported in: 2000(1)AWC35; [2000(84)FLR606]; (1999)3UPLBEC2389
N. K. Mitra, C.J. and S.R. Singh, JJ.1. Present appeal has been filed impugning the judgment and order dated 15.9.1999. The facts necessary to shed light on the disputation involved in the matter are that the petitioner-appellant was suspended from service by means of the order dated 8.12.1998 passed by the Survey Commissioner, Wakfs, U.P. in contemplation of disciplinary enquiry. The appellant has already been served with charge-sheet. The charge as unfolded in the charge-sheet reads as under :^^vfHk;qDr Jh egs'k flag ds mijksDr c;kuksa ls;g Li'V gS fd vYila[;d@in dk;kZy; eqjknkckn esa dk;Zjr nks deZpkjh lEcU/khdSlj vyh jkeiqj fuoklh ofj'B fyfid in ,oa Jh jQr lQh] ofj'Bfujh{kd oDQ] vkfn blesa fyIr gS ftuds blesa fyIr gksus ls 'kklu dks yk[kksa :i;sds jktLo dh gsjkQsjh djds izR;{k :i ls {kfr igqpk;h gSA**2. The suspension order and the charge-sheet were sought to be quashed in the writ petition on the premises, inter alia, that evidence proposed to be adduced in aid of the charges fram...
Ram Swaroop Bajaj Vs. Indian Oil Corporation Ltd., Panki, Kanpur Nagar
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-14-1999
Reported in: 2000(1)AWC80
D.K. Seth, J.1. Mr. M. M. Sahai, learned counsel for the petitioner contends that his client has filed an application under Order XXI, Rule 31 sub-rule (3) of the Code of Civil Procedure but instead of deciding the same, the learned trial court appointed a Survey Commission on the allegation that the Judgment debtor had demolished the wall some times in 1999. Mr. Sahal contendsthat in terms of sub-rule (3) unless the decree is complied with within six months from the date of Judgment, the attached property is liable to be sold. In order to decide as to whether the decree was complied with within six months, it is necessary to determine the application under Order XXI, Rule 31. sub-rule (3) of the Code before issuing commission and directing the Survey Commissioner to inspect and submit a report as to whether the wall has been demolished or not. Mr. Sahai contends that the question that the -wall was not demolished within six months can be decided on oral evidence, if in the meantime it...
All Indian Public School's Welfare Society, Ghaziabad and another Vs. ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-14-1999
Reported in: 2000(1)AWC280
S. R. Singh, J. 1. Questions raised in this writ petition are two-fold : First, whether buses owned by recognised educational Institutionsand used exclusively for the conveyance of pupil to and from the Institution come within the purview of 'public service vehicle' so as to be liable to pay additional tax under Section 6 of U. P. Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, 1997 (hereinafter referred to as the Act)? ; Second, whether the exemption from payment of additional tax under the Act granted to 'stage carriages' owned by recognised educational institution and used exclusively for transportation of pupil of the institution to and from the institution granted vide clause (v) inserted in Rule 29 of the U. P. Motor Vehicles Taxation Rules. 1998 (in short the Rules) vide Notification dated 28.4.1999 is retrospective in operation?2. The instant petition has been filed by 'All India Public School's Welfare Society. Ghazlabad', a registered society through its President Shri Gyan Prakash for a genera...
Satrughan Tripathi and another Vs. Hon'ble the Chief Justice, High Cou ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-14-1999
Reported in: 2000(1)AWC311; (2000)2UPLBEC1309
O.P. Garg, J. 1. For departmental promotion to the post of Bench Secretary, Grade II, an Office Memorandum dated 24.11.1998 was Issued by this Court inviting applications up to 10.1.1999 from the Assistants of this Court who have put in not less than ten years' continuous service on 1.12.1998 in class HI cadre. Selection was to be held on the basis of the competitive examination and interview. All the eligible candidates who had applied for the said post, were to appear in the examination on 9.1.1999. 2. The petitioners, Satrughan Tripathi and Kamlakar Dwivedi, who were Lower Division Assistants applied for the aforesaid post. Their applications were not entertained as admittedly they had not completed ten years' continuous service in class III cadre. Consequently, they filed the present writ petition with the prayerthat they shall be treated to have been appointed in the year 1988 and if their length of service is reckoned from 1988, they would be eligible to appear in the examination...
Balraj Misra and another Vs. Hon'ble Chief Justice of High Court, Alla ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-14-1999
Reported in: 2000(1)AWC296
O.P. Garg, J. 1. A question of farreaching importance is involved inthese writ petitions as to whether theemployees on the establishment ofthe High Court of Judicature atAllahabad can be debarred fromwriting their answers in Hindi in thedepartmental promotionalexaminations. It sounds ridiculousthat after lapse of half of the centuryof the commencement of theConstitution of India, the officials ofthe High Court, which is located inthe Hindi speaking belt, are beingcompelled to writ their answers indepartmental examination in Englishonly. For the better appreciation ofthe controversy in hand, thebackground in which the present writpetitions have come up before thisCourt may be narrated. Theemployees who are recruited to theestablishment of this Court aregoverned by the provisions ofAllahabad High Court Officers andStaff (Conditions of Service andConduct) Rules, 1976 (hereinafterreferred to as 'the Rules'). Thepromotional avenues are available tothe Lower Division Assistants (forshort 'LD...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »