Allahabad Court February 1999 Judgments

Nepa Ltd. Vs. Jnanamandal Ltd.

Court: Allahabad

Reported in: [2001]107CompCas240(All)

A.K. Banerji, J.1. By means of this company petition, the petitioner M/s. Nepa Ltd. ('petitioner' in short) has sought the winding up of the respondent-company M/s. Jnanamandal Ltd. (respondent-company) under Section 433(e) and (f) read with Section 439(b) of the Companies Act, 1956 ('the Act' in short), on the ground that the said respondent-company has failed to pay its debts despite the receipt of the statutory notice ; hence, it deserves to be wound up.2. The petitioner's case in brief is that it is a Government company within the meaning of Section 617 of the Act and is engaged in the business of manufacture and sale of newsprint which is a controlled commodity and covered by the Newsprint Control Order, 1962. The petitioner has been supplying newsprint under the entitlement certificate to the respondent-company for the past several years against its quantity allotted by the Registrar of Newsprints of India under the Newsprint Control Order, 1962. The payments for such supplies wh...

Jagdish Prasad Bishan Vs. Asst. Supdt. of Post Offices and

Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Allahabad

1. In this OA filed under Section 19 of the Central Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, the applicant makes a prayer to quash the impugned notice dated 3.7.1997 for terminating the services of the applicant.The applicant also makes a prayer to allow him to continue on the post with all consequential benefits.2. The facts of the case in brief as stated by the applicant are that the applicant is a SC candidate and out of 17 E.D. posts in Agra Central Sub-Division, one post was filled up from SC category in Agra Division. It is also stated that the applicant was appointed on 26.12.1996 as E.D. Runner but the respondents issued notice dated 3.7.1997 to the applicant to terminate the services of the applicant so as to appoint Sri Yuvraj Singh. It is stated that the applicant is a regularly selected candidate after sponsoring the name from the Employment Exchange and he was found most suitable. Thereafter, he was appointed vide order dated 26.12.1996. Since then he is working with full sati...

Deo Kumar Pathak Vs. Sub Divisional Inspector of Post

Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Allahabad

1. In this OA the prayer of the applicant is to quash and set aside the impugned order dated 26.12.1997 by respondent No. 1 and the order dated 23.12.1997 passed by respondent No. 2.2. It appears that in pursuance of the order dated 23.12.1997 issued by respondent No. 2, respondent No. 1 has issued an order dated 26.12.1997 terminating the services of the applicant under Rule 6 of the ED Agents (Conduct and Service) Rules, 1964.3. In brief the facts of the case as stated by the applicant are that the post of E.D.M.C. Piyarauta, district Ballia fell vacant due to retirement of one Sri Kapil Deo Singh on 31.12.1996. In order to fill up that post, respondent No. 1 requisitioned the names of suitable candidates for appointment from Employment Exchange. The Employment Exchange in pursuance of the same sponsored six names and the applicant was found suitable out of those six to be appointed on the post of E.D.M.C. Piyarauta district Ballia. It is stated that after the selection, the applica...

Sri Johan Tigga Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Allahabad

1. This is an application under Section 19 of Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 filed by the applicant being aggrieved by the respondent's Notice No. 754-E/93/Pram-TCI-I/E-2B-2, dated 24.2.94 promoting junior Shri G.K. Meena (ST)--respondent No. 4 as Telecommunication Inspector-I Grade Rs. 2000-3200 as a result of restructuring of the cadre of Telecommunication Inspectors. The applicant has prayed for the following reliefs:- (a) This Hon'ble Tribunal may be pleased to issue a writ of Mandamus directing the respondents No, 1 to 3 to fix the lien of the applicant against a permanent post in any of the Divisions of Northern Railway so that his service record may be maintained by that Division for determination of seniority. (b) To promote the applicant as Telecommunication Inspector Grade-II Rs. 1600-2600 and Grade-I Rs. 2000-3200 with effect from the date his junior Shri G.L. Meena was promoted according to modified selection procedure as applied to the case of his junior Shri Ganpat L...

Ram Kripal Singh Vs. U.P. State Road Transport Corporation, Lucknow an ...

Court: Allahabad

Reported in: 1999(2)AWC1147; [1999(81)FLR996]; (1999)IILLJ763All; (1999)2UPLBEC1617

N.K. Mitra, C. J. and D.K. Seth,J.1. The preliminary objection taken by Mr. Vivek Saran, learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 1. 2 and 3 is that the appeal is not maintainable under Chapter VIII, Rule 5 of the Allahabad High Court Rules. He pointed out that in the writ petition, the relief sought for, was in respect of an award passed by the labour court. Therefore, in view of the provisionsprovided in Chapter VIII, Rule 5 of the Allahabad High Court Rules, such appeal is not maintainable against an order of a single Judge passed in exercise of jurisdiction conferred by Article 226 of the Constitution of India in respect of an award passed by the tribunal.2. Mr. B. N. Singh, learned counsel for the appellant, however, pointed out that it was not an award which was challenged in the writ petition. He pointed out that it was the duty of the State Government to lodge appropriate complaint for non-implementation of an award by the respondent who is bound by the award. According to him, ...

Rajvendra Singh Vs. Hakim Singh and Others

Court: Allahabad

Reported in: 1999(2)AWC1174

N.K. Mitra, C.J. and D. K. Seth, J.1. Heard learned Advocates for theparties.2. The appeal is devoid of any merit as it appears on the face of the order passed by the learned single Judge on 4th February. 1999 in Writ Petition No. 3657 of 1999. Mr. K. D. Tripathi, learned counsel for the appellant contended that since there are charges of embezzlement against the Up-Pradhan and the other members objected to the discharge of function of the Pradhan by the Up-Pradhan, Section 12J cannot be applied. In support of his contention, he relied on the decision in the case of Dhani Ram v. Zila Panchayat, 1998 (89) RD 701.3. We have gone through the judgment and we do not find any infirmity in the same. Section 12J of the U. P. Panchayat Raj Act, 1947 provides in case of death or otherwise incapacity of the Pradhan, the Up-Pradhan shall exercise all powers and discharge all duties of a Pradhan. It does not require even any order to be passed by any officer, namely, the District Panchayat Raj Offi...

Vishambar Singh Vs. Co-operative Cane Development Union Ltd. and Anoth ...

Court: Allahabad

Reported in: 1999(2)AWC1229; (1999)3UPLBEC1892

N.K. Mitra, C.J and D.K. Seth, J.1. The appellant had been served with an order that on attaining the age of 58 years, he would retire from service on 31st January, 1999 as his date of birth has been recorded in the service record as 20th January. 1941 at the lime of his entry in service. The appellant claims that he had appeared in High School Examinations conducted by Hindi Sahitya Sammclan, Allahabad in the year, 1990 wherein his date of birthhas been recorded as 20th January. 1943 in the certificate issued pursuant to such examinations. On the basis of this subsequent certificate, after entry into the service, the appellant claims that he should be made to retire only on the basis of the date of birth recorded in the certificate.2. Sri Atul Mehri, learned counsel for the appellant contends that according to the rules, the date of birth recorded in the High School Certificate should be the correct date of birth for the purpose of calculating the date of retirement. He relied on a de...

Laxman Prasad Vs. Vth Additional District Judge, Ballia and Others

Court: Allahabad

Reported in: 1999(2)AWC1444

Sudhir Narain, J.1. This writ petition is directed against the judgment and order dated 22.9.1986 of the Judge Small Causes Court decreeing the suit for recovery of arrears of rent, ejectment and damages against the petitioner and the order of the revisional court dated 12.9.1991 affirming the said Judgment in revision.2. Respondent No. 3 filed Suit No. 20 of 1984 against the petitioner for recovery of arrears of rent, ejectment and damages on the allegation that the shop in question was constructed in the year 1976 and, therefore, he was not entitled to the benefit of provisions of U. P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act. 1972 (in short the Act). The tenancy of the petitioner was terminated by notice dated 25.10.1984 and he having not vacated the shop in question, the suit was instituted.3. The petitioner contested the suit. It was denied that the shop in question was constructed in the year 1976. It was old building and only some repairs were made in the ...

Ganga Ram Vs. State of U.P.

Court: Allahabad

Reported in: 1999CriLJ4112

ORDERM.L. Singhal, J.1. I have heard learned Counsel for the applicant and the learned Additional Government Advocate for the State.2. The occurrence is night occurrence. Three persons are said to have caused injuries by firearm but only one firearm injury has been found on the person of the deceased.3. The accused-applicant Ganga Ram in Case Crime No. 351 of 1998 under Section 302, I.P.C. P.S. Bahedi, District Bareilly shall be admitted to bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate concerned....

Nand Kumar Vs. State of U.P.

Court: Allahabad

Reported in: 1999CriLJ2339

ORDERM.L. Singhal, J.1. The accused-applicant Nand Kumar has applied for bail under Sections 302, 324, 504, and 506, I.P.C. I have heard the learned counsel for the accused-applicant and the learned A.G.A. for the State.2. The role assigned to the accused-applicant is of exhortation only.3. Let the accused-applicant Nand Kumar, involved in Case Crime No. 210 of 1998, under Sections 302, 324, 504, and 506, I.P.C., Police Station Tewaripur, District Gorakhpur, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate concerned....