Allahabad Court February 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.
Ram Adhar Gautam Vs. Mukhya Nagar Adhikari, Nagar Nigam, Allahabad
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-20-1999
Reported in: 1999(2)AWC1180; [1999(81)FLR1001]; (1999)3UPLBEC2265
D.K. Seth, J.1. The order dated8.1.1999 by which the petitioner was suspended by the Mukhya Nagar Adhikari has since been challenged in this writ petition. Shri Shashi Nandan, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the power of suspension vests with the State Government in terms of U. P. Palika (Centralised) Service Rules, 1966. According to him, the order of suspension is wholly without jurisdiction. He relied on Rule 28 of the U. P. Nagar Nigam Seva Niyamawali, 1962.2. Shri Q. H. Siddiqui, learned counsel for the respondent produced a copy of an order dated 6.1.1997, whereupon in exercise of Rule 37 of the U. P. Palika (Centralised) Service Rules, 1966, the power to suspendhas been conferred on Mukhya Nagar Adhikari in case it is necessary to suspend a person immediately provided such person is drawing a scale less than 2.200-4.000. If there is no prohibition of delegation of power under Rule 37 of the U. P. Palika (Centralised) Service Rules. 1966, in that case there is no ...
Waqf Masjid Hauz Wali Vs. Arun and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-20-1999
Reported in: 1999(2)AWC1196
P.K. Jain, J.1. The plaintiff-appellant filed Suit No. 636 of 1992before Civil Judge, Muzaffarnagar, alleging that waqf in respect of mosque Hauz Wali and other lands described in paragraph 2 of the plaint and the disputed land was created orally. The waqf is entered in relevant records under the U. P. Muslim Waqfs Act. 1936. By a subsequent amendment, it was also stated that the waqf is also registered under the U. P. Muslim Waqfs Act, 1960 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). Further allegations are that Maulana Mohd. Irfan was appointed Mutawalli and Manager of the waqf property and is thus authorised to file the suit on behalf of the plaintiff-appellant. Certain people, namely, Akbar, Udai Ram and others had made unauthorised possession over part of the above property prior to 1883. Suit No. 841 of 1883 was filed in the Court of Munsif Deoband, district Saharanpur. During the pendency of the suit, a commission was issued and map as contained in Schedule A of the plaint was prepare...
Committee of Management of Sri Tilak Vidyaley Inter College, Firozabad ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-20-1999
Reported in: 1999(2)AWC1365
D.K. Seth, J. 1. The petitioners allege that after attestation of signatures, a rival claim has been lodged by a rival committee. Since the petitioners' signatures had already been attested and the election was held long before, therefore, there was no scope for raising a dispute by the rival committee, and therefore, the reference under Section 16A (7) is bad.2. After having heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learnedstanding counsel and perusing the records, it appears that the D.I.O.S. has given reasons for the reference. In fact, if such a rival claim is made, fn that event, unless the D.I.O.S. finds the same on the face of it to be baseless, it is incumbent upon him to refer the same under Section 16A (7). Since the D.I.O.S. has not been given any jurisdiction to decide such rival claim and the jurisdiction having been conferred on the Deputy Director of Education under Section 16A (7), it is not expected that the D.I.O.S. should decide the question finally unless he is o...
Shiv Shankar Singh Vs. State of U.P. and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-20-1999
Reported in: 1999(3)AWC2169; (1999)2UPLBEC1126
D.K. Seth, J.1. The petitioner has challenged validity of Section 33Csince been introduced by amendment of the U. P. Secondary Education Service Commission and Selection Board Act, 1982 by means of enactment of U. P. Secondary Education Service Commission and Selection Board (Amendment) Act, 1998 being Act No. 25 of 1998, on the ground that the cut-off date 25th August, 1993 is arbitrary and without any rational basis.2. Mr. Sudhakar Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioner has challenged the safd amendment on the basis of the petitioner's right to avail of benefits of the said provision of Section 33C as amended by reason of petitioner's ad hoc appointment on the post of Principal. Admittedly, a person can challenge vires or validity of an Act provided the same affects his legal right. One can also challenge vires of such Act if in its application. It affects all similarly situated persons generally. This writ petition has not been presented in a representative capacity nor the peti...
Balram Gupta Vs. Superintendent, District Jail and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-20-1999
Reported in: 1999CriLJ1894
R.R.K. Trivedi, J.1. In both the aforesaid petitions questions of fact and law are similar and both the petitions can be decided by a common judgment against which learned counsel for the parties have no objection. Writ Petition No. 20786 of 1998 shall be the leading case.2. Writ Petitions have been filed challenging orders dated 23-3-1998, which are Annexure 1 to both the writ petitions, passed by respondent No. 2, under Section 3(2) of the National Security Act, 1980 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) under which the petitioners have been detained. Petitioners have also challenged the legality of their continued detention.3. Along with the orders of detention, petitioners were also served with the grounds on which basis the detaining authority formed the subjective satisfaction for detaining them. From perusal of the grounds it appears that petitioner Balram Gupta was serving as Junior Engineer in mechanical branch of Jal Nigam, Banda. Petitioner Mustaq Ali was working as contracto...
Smt. Sandhya Gupta Vs. District Magistrate and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-19-1999
Reported in: 1999(2)AWC913; (1999)1UPLBEC718
O.P. Garg, J.1. The petitioner-Smt. Sandhya Gupta admittedly is the duly elected Pradhan of Gaon Panchayat. Jagatpur, Post Muradganj. Block Ajitmal, district Auraiya, which was earlier a part of district Etawah. Certain complaints were received against her with regard to financial irregularities including squandering of public money as well as extracting illegal gratification. The Chief Development Officer, Etawah passed an order on 19-7-1997 stripping the petitioner of her financial powers by invoking the provisions of Section 95 (1) (g) of the U. P. Panchayat Raj Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act of 1947). This order was challenged by the petitioner by filing Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 26863 of 1997 in which the order passed by the Chief Development Officer (forshort 'C.D.O.') was directed to remain in abeyance. Consequently, the C.D.O. rescinded his earlier order dated 19,7.1997 and restored the financial power of the petitioner by passing fresh order dated 28.8.1997...
Ahmad Baksh and Sons and Another Vs. State of U.P. and Another
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-19-1999
Reported in: 1999(2)AWC1144
N.K. Mitra, C.J. and D. K. Seth, J.1. A preliminary objection was raised by the learned standing counsel to the extent that in absence of any vakalatnama accompanying the memo of appeal in order to enable the counsel to represent his client, the appeal is not maintainable.2. Mr. A. K. Gaur, learned counsel for the appellants on the other hand contends that Special Appeal is a continuation of the writ proceedings and, therefore, when the client is represented by the same counsel who represented in the writ proceedings, no fresh vakalatnama would be necessary in the appeal. He also points out that Rule 10, Chapter IX of the Allahabad High Court Rules. 1952 does not prescribe that a vakalatnama has to accompany memorandum of appeal though it has specified what document should accompany the memorandum of appeal.3. Mr. Ran Vijay Singh, learned standing counsel on the other hand contends that by reason of Section 141 of the Code of Civil Procedure, the provisions of C.P.C. Is not applicable ...
Muslim Educational Society, Shahjahanpur and Others Vs. District Inspe ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-19-1999
Reported in: 1999(2)AWC1175
N.K. Mitra, C.J. and D.K. Seth,J.1. Respondent No. 2 is alleged to have held an election of the Committee of Management, pursuant to which one Haji Jameel Uddin Khanis alleged to have been elected as Manager of the Committee of Management of the Institution, which is a minority one. The D.I.O.S. had attested the signatures of the said Manager despite the fact that erstwhile Committee of Management which was admittedly running the Institution, had intimated the D.I.O.S. that they should be given an opportunity before accepting the claim of anyone else for constituting the Committee of Management.2. We have heard Mr. R. N. Singh assisted by Mr. A. P. Shahi for the appellants. Mr. R. Asthana for respondent No. 2 to 5 and Mr. Pipersenia, learned standing counsel for respondent No. 1.3. Mr. R. N. Singh, learned counsel for the appellants submits that the appellants' committee is still surviving and, therefore, there cannot be any constitution of the Committee of Management during the lifeti...
Atique Ahmad and Others Vs. District Magistrate, Bands and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-19-1999
Reported in: 1999(2)AWC1439; (1999)2UPLBEC850
Ravi S. Dhavan, J.1. The petitioners Atique Ahmad and eighteen others, have filed the present writ petition complaining that the enhanced rent which is being collected from them of shops which had been allotted by the Nagar Panchayat, Naraini, Banda, is illegal. The facts of the present case are that the Nagar Panchayat, Naraini, had constructed shops on the roadside of Atarra road. These shops had been demolished by the Public Works Department. The Nagar Panchayat claimed its right that the shops could be constructed and were rightly constructed at the place so constructed. The Public Works Department asserted that the shops on the roadside could not be permitted and were an encroachment. Thus, there were issues between the Nagar Panchayat, as a local body and the Public Works Department, on behalf of the State. These issues are highlighted on record in an application which was given by some of the petitioners to the District Magistrate, Banda (Annexure-6).2. At this stage, the Court ...
Ram Charit Pandey Vs. State of U.P. and Another
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-19-1999
Reported in: 1999(3)AWC2144
R.H. Zaidi, J.1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learnedstanding counsel and also perused the record.2. By means of this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, petitioner prays for issuance of a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the notice dated 5.2.1999 whereby the petitioner has been called upon to show cause as to why censure entry noted in the said notice be not awarded to him. Proper for issuance of a writ, order or direction in the nature of prohibition restraining the respondents from conducting any further proceedings against the petitioner in pursuance of the aforesaid notice as well as prayer for issuance of a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents not to enforce the provisions of Rule 4 (1) (b) (iv) of the V. P. Police Officers of the Subordinate Ranks (Punishment and Appeal) Rules 1991. to declare ultra Hires of Section 7 and Section 46(2)(c) of the Police Act have also been made.3...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »