Allahabad Court March 1999 Judgments
imambara of Mulnapur Through Its Taziadar Vs. State of U. P. and Other ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-31-1999
Reported in: 1999(2)AWC1356
M. Katju and Bhanwar Singh, JJ. 1. Heard Sri. M. S. Haq and Abrar Ahmad, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri P. M. N. Singh, learned Additional Advocate Generalfor the respondents.2. The petitioner has prayed for a mandamus directing the respondents to protect the Tazia procession during Moharram and for a mandamus directing respondents to comply with the direction of the respondent No. 2 copy of which is Annexure-3 to the petition and to implement the report of the respondent No. 3 at the day of burial of Tazia from village Mulnapur to village Ghatupur. Tehsil Handia, district Allahabad.3. It appears that there is an Imambara situated at village Mulnapur, Tehsil Handia, district Allahabad and the people of the said village used to perform the Fatiha on the 10th of Moharram and take out Tazia procession from the said place to the place of burial at Karbala situated at Ghatupur from times immemorial.4. It is alleged in paragraph 3 of the petition that some anti-social elements of...
Tag this Judgment!Ram Bhawan Singh Vs. State of U.P. and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-31-1999
Reported in: 1999(2)AWC1489; [1999(82)FLR613]; (1999)2UPLBEC996
D. K. Seth, J.1. The petitioner challenges the order dated 10.2.1999, by which he was suspended, on the ground that in the terms of Regulation 67 of the U. P. Co-operative Federal Authority (Business) Regulations, 1976, the order of suspension cannot be continued beyond 30 days. He further contends that the order of suspension is vague and baseless and therefore it cannot continue.2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is not getting his salary and as soon as he demanded salary, he was placed under suspension.3. Shri K. N. Mishra, learned counsel for the respondents, on the other hand, contends that from the impugned order it appears that the papers were forwarded to the Deputy Registrar in terms of Regulation 67 within 30 days period. Regulation 67 does not contemplate that unless any order is passed by the Deputy Registrar, the order of suspension shall stand revoked. The only obligation of the suspending authority is to forward the papers to the appointing...
Tag this Judgment!Rama Nand Dwivedi Vs. State of U.P. and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-31-1999
Reported in: 1999(2)AWC1632
R.K. Agrawal, J.1. By means of the present writ petition, the petitioner seeks writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorariquashing the order dated 30.5.1994 contained in Annexure-11 of the writ petition, which has been passed by the Regional Deputy Director of Education VIth, Gorakhpur, respondent No. 2. The petitioner has prayed further relief of mandamus commanding opposite parties to pay the arrears of the petitioner which is due since 1969 to uptil now of C.T. Grade as well as L.T. Grade revised from time to time and also to pay the petitioner's present L.T. grade also.2. The facts of the case in brief are that the petitioner was appointed as Assistant Teacher under Three Language Formula Scheme in C.T. Grade in Kisan Intermediate College. Uska Bazar, district Sidharthnagar (In short referred to as the Institution) for the following duration mentioned below:A. From 11.8.1969 to 30.6.1970 B. From 3.8.1970 to 30.6.1971 C. From 2.7.1971 to 3.6.1972. 3. The petitioner's qual...
Tag this Judgment!Shri Ram Vs. Board of Revenue, U.P., Lucknow and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-31-1999
Reported in: 1999(2)AWC1718
V.M. Sahai, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned standing counsel.2. The impugned order dated 11.1.1999 has been passed by the Board of Revenue which has been filed as Annexure 2 to this writ petition without giving any opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. The U. P. Land Laws (Amendment) Act. 1997 (U. P. Act No. 20 of 1997) came into force on 18.8.1997 and Section 218 wasomitted from the Land Revenue Act and Section 219 was substituted in the Act which gave power to the Board of Revenue or the Commissioner or the Additional Commissioner or the Collector, etc. to decide the revisions. The effect of this amendment was that w.e.f, 18.8.1997 the Commissioner or the Additional Commissioner had power to decide the revision. The revision was decided by Additional Commissioner by his order dated 16.11.1998 under the amended Section 219 which came into force on 18.8.1997. The Board of Revenue has remanded the matter to the Additional Commissioner or deciding it af...
Tag this Judgment!Dharam Raj Singh Vs. Babban Pandey and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-31-1999
Reported in: (1999)2UPLBEC1068
D.K. Seth, J.1. By an order dated 20-2-1999 the writ petition No. 6987 of 1999 was disposed of. This petition was moved by the Guardian Teacher Association and another. In the said writ petition it was prayed that on account of dispute between respondent Nos. 4 and 5 the names of the students and the forms and fees collected by these two persons (respondent Nos. 4 and 5) were not being forwarded to the District Inspector of Schools due to which no admit card was being issued to them for the ensuing examination to be held in March, 1999. In the said order dated 20-2-1999 it was directed that both respondent Nos. 4 and 5 should forward the fees and forms collected by each of them to the District Inspector of Schools within a period of one week and in case they had already deposited the fees and from then they should personally attend the Office of District Inspector of Schools and produce the relevant receipt so that the District Inspector of Schools can take appropriate step for issuing...
Tag this Judgment!Madan Pal and anr. Vs. State of U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-31-1999
Reported in: 1999CriLJ3383
B.K. Sharma, J. 1. This is a criminal appeal against the judgment and order dated 6-8-1980 passed by Sri Ikrarnul Bari, the then 17th Additional Sessions Judge, Bijnor in Session Trial No. 301 of 1979 State v. Madan Pal and another, whereby he convicted the accused appellant No. I Madan Pal of the offence under Section 307, I.P.C. and convicted Mahi Pal accused appellant No. 2 of the offence under Section 307 read with Section 34, I.P.C. and sentenced each one of them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of seven years and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/- and in the default of payment of fine to suffer simple imprisonment for a period of six months.2. I have heard learned counsel for the parlies. I have also gone through the record.3. The prosecution story is that Anoop Singh P.W. 2 and the accused-appellants who are his nephews lived in Village Hempur, P. S. Chandpur, that about an year before the occurrence the accused-appellants had stolen cash and a watch belonging to the daught...
Tag this Judgment!Surendra Prasad Vs. U.P. Co-operative Sugar Factory Federation Ltd., L ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-30-1999
Reported in: 1999(2)AWC1689
D.K. Seth, J. 1. The petitioner claims employment under the Dying-in-Harness Rules on account of death of his father, who was employed as permanent S.B.A, in the Kashi Sahkari Chini Mills Limited Aurai. Mr. A. K. Misra, learned counsel for the respondent raised a preliminary objection to the extent that Dying-in-Harness Rules does not apply in the Kashl Sahkari Chini Mills Ltd. since it was not a State within the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution and secondly that this writ petition is not maintainable against Kashi Sahkari Chini Mills Ltd., a Co-operative Society in view of the Full Bench decision in the case of Radha Charon Sharma v. U. P. Co-operative Federation and others. 1982 (8) ALR 342.2. Mr. C. L. Yadav, learned counsel for the petitioner, on the other hand, contends that the Cooperative Society is affiliated to the federation and that the office of the federation as well as that of the Cooperative Society are Government Office and the State Government can exercise con...
Tag this Judgment!Vinod Kumar Rajput Vs. District Inspector of Schools and Another
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-30-1999
Reported in: 1999(3)AWC2455
D.K. Seth, J.1. The vacancy was alleged to have been notified. But fortwo months, it was not filled. Thereafter a notice was pasted in the Notice Board on 13th November, 1991, by the Manager inviting applications for filling up the post on ad hoc basis. Admittedly, the vacancy was substantive in nature. A Selection Committee was constitutedby the Management on 24th November. 1991, on which date the petitioner had appeared before the Selection Committee, who had passed a resolution on the same date appointing the petitioner in the post of Assistant Teacher in L.T. Grade and the Manager had issued the appointment letter on 25th November, 1991 pursuant to which the petitioner had joined on 26th November, 1991. The approval was sought for by the letter dated 24th November, 1991, from the District Inspector of Schools, who by his letter dated 28th November. 1991, informed that there was no prior approval and, therefore, the appointment could not be approved. On these grounds, learned counse...
Tag this Judgment!Nathu Khan Vs. State of U. P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-27-1999
Reported in: 1999(2)AWC1361
M. Katju, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned standing counsel. We have also heard Sri R. C. Kandpal. We have perusedthe writ petition and the short counter-affidavit filed by the Additional City Magistrate. Bareilly.2. The petitioner has prayed for a mandamus directing the respondents not to interfere in peaceful offering of Namaz in a mosque in village Rukumpur district Bareilly. It is alleged in paragraph 2 of the writ petition that respondent No. 3 Harpal Singh who is incharge of the police station Fatehganj all of a sudden without any complaint stopped the evening prayer. Namaz Magrib, and appointed four constables at the mosque and restrained the Namazees from offering Namaz. In paragraph 4, it is alleged that the mosque was established in the year, 1973 by one Shahzade Khan. It is alleged that the aforesaid property is a waqf property and the mutwalli is at present Natthu Khan. In paragraph 5, It is alleged that earlier the property was owned by Shahzade K...
Tag this Judgment!Sita Ram and Onkar Nath Vs. Ivth Additional District Judge, Etawah and ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-27-1999
Reported in: 1999(2)AWC1457
Yatindra Singh, J. 1. Petitioners are the landlords. They filed an application under Section 21 (1) (a) of the U. P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 (the Act for short). They filed an application under Section 21 (1) (a) of the Act for the release, which was dismissed on 22.9.1993. Their appeal was also dismissed on 16.9.1996. They have filed this writ petition for quashing of the orders.FACTS :2. Petitioners are the landlords. Uttar Pradesh Basic Shiksha Parishad (the Parishad for short) is their tenant. It pays a rent of Rs. 34 per month. It runs a primary school in the premises in dispute. Forty children study there. Petitioner landlords have large family. The family of the petitioner No. 1 consists of himself, his wife, two daughters and one son. The family of petitioner No. 2 consists of his wife, one daughter and one son. They are nine in numbers. They live in the old ancestral house, which is too small. Their children are studying and require...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »