Allahabad Court February 1999 Judgments

Agam Prakash Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and anr.

Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Allahabad

1. This is an application under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 against wrong fixation of pay and for the relief of arrears of pay with interest after due restoration of salary at the rate which was already being paid to the petitioners at the time of arbitrary deduction started. The applicant has sought for the following reliefs : (a) To issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus thereby commanding the respondents to pay the entire amount recovered from the pay sheet of the petitioner from 15.10.1985 to January, 1988 as consequence of fixing pay of the petitioner at the rate of Rs. 1900/- from the higher fixation to pay Rs. 2250/- as back as 1988 with interest. (b) To issue any other writ, order or direction in the nature of writ, as this Hon'ble Court may deemed fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.2. In the O.A., the applicant stated that he was promoted to ex-cadre post of Law Assistant in grade Rs. 550-750 w.e.f. 16.12.1972 in which...

Smt. Sunita Singh and Others Vs. Secretary, Board of High School and I ...

Court: Allahabad

Reported in: 1999(2)AWC1326; (1999)3UPLBEC2267

I. M. Quddusi, J.1. These are three connected writ petitions involving common question and, therefore, these petitions are decided by a common order.2. In the Writ Petition No. 41361 of 1998. It has been stated that the petitioners are regular students of Intermediate and High School Classes of Janta Intermediate College, Ahiraula, district Azamgarhwho are to appear in the U. P. Board Examination in the academic year 1999. The Institution is a recognised one. Prior to 1998 for the last several years, the Centre of High School and Intermediate Examinations conducted by the U. P. Board was the same institution but in the year 1997, the Centre Superintendent had committed a mistake, i.e., he opened packet of paper before the scheduled date, on which the examination committee considered the matter and debarred the Centre Superintendent for 10 years and to function as Invigilator for 5 years and also not to make the Institution in question, i.e., Janta Intermediate College. Ahiraula. Azamga...

Janardan Vs. State of U.P. and Others

Court: Allahabad

Reported in: 1999(2)AWC1435

Ravi S. Dhavan, J.1. Janardan, the petitioner in this writ petition, resident of village and post Kharuav, District Ballia, seeks a writ of mandamus to direct the respondents, the District Magistrate, theSuperintendent of Police, Ballia and the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Rasara, Ballia, that they ought to take steps to ensure that Holika Dahan be prevented from being performed on plot No. 1229. In this writ petition, what is not relevant on what the petitioner desires or as he asserts. What is relevant is that the petitioner makes a statement of fact that on this plot No. 1229, previously it was reserved for the performance of Holika Dahan on the eve of Holi. Now the petitioner contends that this ceremony on the eve of Holi is not being performed and the plot is in disuse. The Court inquired from petitioner's counsel, why is this so? In answer to the Court's inquiry, the reply is that the Land Management Committee of the village has passed a resolution that this plot of land hereinafte...

Durga Prasad and Others Vs. State of U.P. and Others

Court: Allahabad

Reported in: 1999(2)AWC1452

Ravi S. Dhavan, J. 1. The eight petitioners, M/s. Durga Prasad. Noor Mohammad, Wahid Ali, Guddu, Iqbal, Risalat, Khiyali and Yusuf, have filed the present petition seeking reliefs that the respondents be restrained from evicting them on the demolition drive to clear the Bhojipura Road--Pilibhit--Bareilly Road. Town Rithora, district Bareilly. The contention of the petitioners is that they remain on the roadside by necessity. The petitioner No. 1 runs a shop to repair tyre punctures of heavy vehicles, motor cars and trucks. The petitioner No. 2 has been running a scrap dealer's shop, a kabari. The petitioner No. 3 has a general merchandise shop. The petitioner No. 4 has a cycle spare parts shop. The petitionerNo. 5, also, has a general merchant shop. The petitioner No. 6 is, also, running a cycle spare parts shop. The petitioner No. 7, also, has a spare parts shop for motor cycles and scooters. The petitioner No. 8 is running a spare parts shop for tractors.2. The law is very clear that...

State of U.P. Through Labour Commissioner Vs. Om Prakash Sharma and Ot ...

Court: Allahabad

Reported in: 1999(2)AWC1508

V. M. Sahai, J.1. Heard Sri R. K. Awasthi standing counsel for the petitioner and Sri B. D. Mandhyan, learned counsel for respondent No. 1.2. The landlord respondent No. 1 filed application under Section 21 (8) of the U. P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 for fixation of standard rent of the accommodation in dispute and prayed that the standard rent fixed earlier at Rs. 356 per month be enhanced in accordance with law. The Rent Control and Eviction Officer by his judgment dated 8.8.1990 fixed the standard rent to be Rs. 1,070 per month. The petitioner filed an appeal along with an application under Section 5 of the Indian Limitation Act supported with an affidavit as the appeal was beyond time by twelve days. The application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act has beenrejected and appeal has been dismissed as time barred by the District Judge by his Judgment dated 13.3.1991. The petitioner has challenged the judgment of the appellate court by the ...

Tej Pal Singh Vs. State of U. P. and Others

Court: Allahabad

Reported in: 1999(2)AWC1662

V. M. Sahai, J.1. Heard Sri. S. K. Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri V. K. Rai, brief holder for the State of U. P., for the respondents.2. The only point raised by the petitioner's counsel is that in spite of directions of the Supreme Court dated 1.12.1987 given In S.L.P. No. 3654 of 1987 that the petitioner's ceiling area be re-determined after arriving at a finding as to whether the plots of the petitioner are irrigated and submerged under water or not, the Courts below have not adverted to the question involved in light of judgment of the Supreme Court. The petitioner moved an application on 14.2.1989 before the Prescribed Authority for spot inspection so that the plots, which are submerged under water and the plots which are sandy, may be verified. Earlier also, as stated in the writ petition, spot inspection was made by Lekhpal and Naib Tehsildar on 28.12.1974 and copies of reports of Lekhpal and Naib Tehsildar have been annexed along with the writ petition as Ann...

Hindustan Lever Ltd. and Another Vs. State of U.P. and Others

Court: Allahabad

Reported in: 1999(2)AWC1706; (1999)2UPLBEC982

M. Katju, J.1. This writ petition has been (lied praying for a writ of certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 22.7.1998 passed by the Mandi Samiti, Etah copy of which is Annexure-2 to the petition and for a writ of mandamus restraining the respondents from recovering the amount including interest under the aforesaid order and for restraining the respondent Nos. 3 to 5 from withholding issuing of Gate Passes or taking any coercive action against the petitioner in future. There was also a prayer in the petition for declaring the Explanation to Section 17 (iii) of the U. P. Krishi Utpadan Mandi Adhiniyam, 1964 (hereinafter referredto as Mandi Adhiniyam) as ultra vires, but this prayer has not been pressed by the learned counsel for the petition.2. We have heard Sri Shanti Bhusan learned counsel and Sri Tarun Agarwal, learned counsel for the petitioners, and Sri B. D. Mandhyan learned counsel for the Krishi Utpadan Mandi Samiti, Etah.3. The facts of the case are that the petitioner i...

Kundan Lal Ratan Lal JaIn Vs. Assessing Officer

Court: Allahabad

Reported in: [2000]245ITR434(All)

1. These four writ petitions by the same assessee are directed against the issue of notices under Section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), for the assessment years 1989-90,1990-91,1991-92 and 1992-93, respectively. The original assessments for all the years were duly completed under Section 143(3) of the Act in which the assessee had shown substantial amounts of income as agricultural income from land taken on lease. In addition, the assessee had shown a large number of loans from various persons. These were accepted in the assessments after some inquiry.2. Further inquiries were pursued during which the land holders are said to have denied having leased out any land to the assessee. A large number of creditors were also examined who denied having lent any money to the petitioner. On the basis of these investigations, the Assessing Officer issued notices under Section 148 of the Act as he had reason to believe that the income chargeable to tax had...

Gopal and Etc. Etc. Vs. State of U.P.

Court: Allahabad

Reported in: 1999CriLJ2501

K.D. Shahi, J. 1. These appeals were once heard by a Division Bench of this Court, consisting of Sri Girdhar Malviya, J. (since retired) and Sri B. K. Sharma, J. Both the Judges gave contradictory opinion. There was difference of opinion in their judgment. Shri Girdhar Malviya, J. upheld the conviction. Sri B.K. Sharma, J. after reading the judgment recorded by Sri Girdhar Malviya, J. was of the view that the appeals deserve to be allowed and all the appellants deserve acquittal.2. Then there was again difference of opinion between both the Judges on the question whether the appeals be laid before the 3rd Judge or be reheard and decided by a Larger Bench. The matter was then referred to Hon'ble the Chief Justice for appropriate orders. Hon'ble the Chief Justice by constituting this Larger Bench directed that the appeals be laid before the bench of three Judges for re-hearing and disposal. This is how these appeals came up for hearing and were heard by this Larger Bench.3. Ram Ajore, PW...

State of U.P. Vs. Akshey Kumar and ors.

Court: Allahabad

Reported in: 1999CriLJ2987

K.D. Shahi, J.1. This Government Appeal has been preferred by State against the acquittal of the accused respondents Akshey Kumar, Anil Kumar and Shiv Kumar by order dated 29-1-1986 passed by Shri Ramji Lal, the then learned Sessions Judge, Farrukhabad in S.T. No. 145 of 1-982 under Sections 302 and 302/34, I.P.C. (Akshey Kumar) and under Section 302 read with Section 34, I.P.C. (Anil Kumar and Shiv Kumar). 2. Accused-respondents Akshey Kumar and Shiv Kumar have since died, the appeal against them stands abated. The appeal now remains only against accused-respondent Anil Kumar.3. The brief facts of the case are that Goverdhan Lal son of Guljari Lal lodged First Information Report, hereinafter referred to as 'F.I.R.' on 27 -2-1980 at 4.45 p.m. with the allegation that at about 3.00 p.m. on the same date accused Akshey Kumar, Anil Kumar and Shiv Kumar came towards their house. Accused Shiv Kumar was driving the tractor while Akshey Kumar and Anil Kumar were sitting on the trolley of the ...