Allahabad Court December 1999 Judgments
Committee of Management, Jagdish Saran Rajvanshi Kanya Inter College M ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-23-1999
Reported in: 2000(1)AWC744; (2000)2UPLBEC1161
R.R.K. Trivedi and M. C. Jain, JJ. 1. As in both the aforesaid special appeals, the controversy involved is similar, they can be disposed of by a common order against which learned counsel for the parties have no objection. Special Appeal No. 619 of 1999 shall be the leading case.2. The facts, in short, giving rise to Special Appeal No. 619 of 1999 are that the post of Principal of Jagdish Saran Rajvanshi Kanya Inter College, Meerut (hereinafter referred to as the College) fell vacant on account of retirement of Smt. Sarla Bansal. This vacancy was communicated to the U. P. Secondary Education Service Commission under the provisions of U. P. Secondary Education Services and Selection Boards Act. 1982 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) and the rules framed thereunder. The Commission in its turn advertised the post inviting applications vide advertisement No. 1, 1995-96. Large number of persons applied in pursuance of the aforesaid advertisement. The Commission having interviewed two se...
Tag this Judgment!Sita and ors. Vs. State of U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-23-1999
Reported in: 2000CriLJ2818
M.C. Jain, J.1. Six persons, namely, Sita, Bandhan. Shyam Deo, Inarman, Hari Nath and Jagdhari were tried by the IV Additional Sessions Judge, Azamgarh in Sessions Trial No. 290 of 1979. By judgment and order dated 28-10-80, Bandhan was acquitted and the remaining five of them were convicted and sentenced to various terms. All of them were convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment under Section 302 I.P.C.read with Section 149 I.P.C. All of them were also convicted under Section 323 I.P.C. read with Sessions 149 I.P.C. and each of them was sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for six months and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/- for the said offence. In default of payment of fine, each of them was to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for three month. Out of fine, if realized, Rupees 500/- was ordered to be paid to Smt. Barsati and Rs. 250/- each to Sumiran and Smt. Phulwa (all injured of the felony) were to be paid. Accused Shyam Deo was also convicted under Section 148 I.P.C. and sentence...
Tag this Judgment!State of U.P. Vs. Haripal Singh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-23-1999
Reported in: 2000CriLJ3023
M.C. Jain, J.1. Four accused persons, namely, Hari Pal Singh, Raghubar Singh, Daya Ram and Natthu Lal were tried in Sessions Trial No. 153 of 1986 by Special Judge/ Additional Sessions Judge, Pilibhit for the offences punishable under Section 302, I.P.C. read with Sections 34, I.P.C. and 307, I.P.C. read with Section 34, I.P.C. He acquitted all of them by judgment and order dated 24-5-1989. Aggrieved thereby the State preferred this appeal which was earlier dismissed by this Court on 22-5-1992. The State then filed Special Leave Petition before the Supreme Court. Special Leave Petition was dismissed by the Supreme Court against the accused-opposite parties Daya Ram and Natthu Lal by order dated 11-10-1993. However, as against the remaining two accused-opposite parties Hari Pal Singh and Raghubar Singh the order of this Court dated 22-5-1992 dismissing the appeal filed by the State against acquittal was set aside by the Apex Court in Criminal Appeal 62 of 1996 by order dated 15-1 -1996 ...
Tag this Judgment!Latoor and ors. Vs. State of U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-23-1999
Reported in: 2000CriLJ3324
M.C. Jain, J. 1. There are five appellants, Latoor Son of Ram Prasad, Tripal alias, Kripal, Hari Singh, Jai Singh alias Lalloo and Latoor son of Ram Das. They have preferred this appeal against the judgment and order dated 3rd of August, 1979 passed by Sri. P.C. Agarwal, the then VII Additional Sessions Judge, Bulandshahr in Sessions Trial No. 171 of 1979. All of them have been convicted under Section 302, I.P.C. read with Section 149,I.P.C. and sen tenced to life imprisonment. The accused-appellants Tripal alias Kripal, Hari Singh and Jai Singh alias Laloo have also been convicted under 147, I.P.C. and each sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for two years. The accused-appellant Latoor son of Ram Prasad and Latoor son of Ram Das have been convicted under Section 148, I.P.C. and each of them has been sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for three years. All the sentences have been ordered to run concurrently.2. The deceased of the incident in question was one Ghanshyam. The genesis of the...
Tag this Judgment!indra Pal and ors. Vs. State of U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-23-1999
Reported in: 2000CriLJ4975
M.C. Jain, J. 1. The appellants-accused-Indra Pal, Mishri Lal and Mohan Lal have preferred this appeal against the judgment and order dated 1-10-1980 passed by Sri K. K. Srivastava, the then IVth Additional Sessions Judge, Fatehpur in Sessions Trial No. 329 of 1979. Each of them has been convicted under Section 302, I.P.C. read with Section 34, I.P.C. and sentenced to life imprisonment. The appellants-Indra Pal and Mishri Lal are real brothers and the murdered person was their own father Nanku.2. The prosecution case may be set forth in its broad essentials. The incident took place between the night of 23rd and 24th June, 1977 at the outskirts of village Hasanpur, Police Station Bindki, District Fatehpur. The report was made by P.W. 1 Baboo (brother of the deceased) on 24th June, 1977 at 8.30 a.m. The distance of the Police Station from the place of occurrence was nine miles. The deceased-Nanku was aged about 60 years and, as stated above, he was the father of accused-appellants-Indra ...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Sudha Rani Garg Vs. Vth Additional District Judge, Saharanpur and ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-22-1999
Reported in: 2000(1)AWC692
Yatindra Singh, J.1. When a construction of a building is completed within the meaning of U. P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 (the Act)? What is the meaning of the word 'Q September. 1982' in an extract of the house and water tax register? Does it mean recording of completion of building on 1.7.1982? These are the questions involved in this writ petition. They arise on the following facts.FACTS2. Respondents 3 to 7 (the contesting respondents) are the landlords of the shop in question. Smt. Sudha Rani Carg (the petitioner) is the tenant of the same. The contesting respondents filed a suit for ejectment against the petitioner after terminating her tenancy. The ground was that the provisions of the Act are not applicable and the tenancy being at will, the petitioner was liable for eviction.3. The parties led their evidence and also filed an extract of the register of house and water tax (Annexure-6 to the writ petition) for the year 1980-85. This is...
Tag this Judgment!Ravindra Kumar Sharma Vs. Smt. Preeti Archana Sharma
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-22-1999
Reported in: 2000(2)AWC1154
D. K. Seth, J.1. After hearing Sri S. K. Verma. counsel for the applicant and Sri Vtvek Mishra. counsel for the respondent it appears thai the suit for divorce which was originally in Allahabad was transferred to Mainpuri. Mr. Verma contended that the entire bar was supporting the respondent and. therefore, he could not get any lawyer to contest the case at Mainpuri, ultimately it was dismissed in default and thereafter the application for restoration was also dismissed. All records have been made untraceable. He contends that the father of the respondent was one of the leading lawyer and very influential in Mainpuri and that two brothers of the respondent are also practicing lawyer in Mainpuri and, therefore, it was not possible for the applicant to get assistance at Mainpuri even any lawyer who had appeared on behalf of the applicant at Mainpuri, was also threatened, therefore, in such situation the present Suit No, 83 of 1993 filed under the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act by the...
Tag this Judgment!Suryamani Singh Alias Jhilmit Singh and ors. Vs. State of Uttar Prades ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-22-1999
Reported in: 2000CriLJ2836
M.C. Jain, J.1. Seven appellants, namely, (1) Surajmani alias Jhilmit Singh, (2) Gauri Shankar, (3) Narain Pal Singh, (4) Rajpati Singh, (5) Bahadur Singh, (6) Ram Asray Singh and (7) Algu Singh have preferred this appeal against the judgment and order dated 30-1-1980 passed by Sri U.S. Pandey, the then IV Additional Sessions Judge, Mirzapur in Sessions Trial No. 168 of 1978. All of them have been convicted and sentenced for life imprisonment under Section 302 I.P.C. read with Section 149 I.P.C. and five years rigorous imprisonment under Section 307 I.P.C. read with Section 149 I.P.C. Bahadur Singh has also been convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment under Section 302 I.P.C. simpliciter and Algu Singh has been convicted and sentenced to undergo five years' rigorous imprisonment under Section 307 I.P.C. Accused/appellant Surajmani alias Jhilmit Singh has also been convicted and sentenced to undergo two years' rigorous imprisonment under Section 147 I.P.C. while remaining appellant...
Tag this Judgment!Rajan Upadhyaya Vs. Labour Court, Varanasi and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-21-1999
Reported in: 2000(1)AWC690; [2000(84)FLR704]
M. C. Jain, J 1. The petitioner Rajan Upadhyay Is aggrieved by an order dated 29.9.1998 passed by respondent No. 1 under Section 33C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act and seeks its quashing in so far as it relates to refusal to pay to him the salary as per the pay scale applicable to the regularly appointed class IV employees and directs for the adjustment of the payment already made to him. Mandamus is also sought against the respondents to pay salary/wages to him like similarly situated persons as regularly appointed class IV employees and not to terminate his services treating him as temporary employee.2. A brief resume of the relevant facts may be set forth The petitioner was a daily wager as Class IV employee of respondent Nos. 2 to 4and worked as such from 10.10.1986 to 25.11.1989. He was a handicapped person and was demanding pay scale according to Government Orders as well as also payment for holidays and over time together with bonus. He was illegally terminated on 26.11.1989....
Tag this Judgment!Radhey Shyam Pandey Vs. State of U.P. and Another
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-21-1999
Reported in: 2000(1)AWC722; [2000(85)FLR227]; (2000)IILLJ1256All; (2000)2UPLBEC975
M. Katju, J. 1. Heard learnedcounsel for the parties.2. The petitioner was appointed as a Junior Engineer in the Rural Engineering Services of the U. P. Government and was promoted as Assistant Engineer and subsequently given charge of Executive Engineer from 14.7.1997. He was placed under suspension by the order dated 22.12.1998 on grave charges of financial irregularities along with others. An F.I.R. was also filed against him and others at police station Kotwali, Ballia on 19.2.1998 vide Annexure-1 to the petition. The petitioner has been charged for embezzlement of an amount of Rs. 34,98.622. True copy of the F.I.R. is Annexure-2 to the petition. True copy of the suspension order dated 22.12.1998 is Annexure-3 and true copy of the charge-sheet is Annexure-4 to the writ petition. Thus, both, criminal and departmental proceedings are going on against the petitioner.3. It is alleged in paragraph 18 of the writ petition that both criminal and departmental proceedings are based on ident...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- Next ›
- Last »