Allahabad Court May 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.
Om Prakash and Others Vs. U. P. State Electricity Board, Lucknow and O ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-25-1999
Reported in: 1999(3)AWC1996
D.K. Seth, J. 1. Mr. S. P.Mehrotra, learned counsel for the respondents relied on the decision in the case of U. P. Bijli Karmchari Sangh v. U. P. State Electricity Board and others, in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 14342 of 1999, disposed of by this Court on 7th April, 1999. In the present case, the petitioner alleges to be a retrenched employee. Mr. Shyamji Gaur, learned counsel for the petitioners contends that instead of giving re-employment to the petitioner in terms of Section 6Q of the U. P. Industrial Disputes Act. 1947, the respondents are going to recruit in pursuant to an advertisement Issued only for Schedule Caste and Backward Classes candidate for filling up of different posts. According to Mr. Shyamji Gaur before making such recruitment, the petitioner's case requires a consideration. According to him, by virtue of the said advertisement, the petitioner's right under Section 6Q has been taken away.2. The Section 6Q of the U. P. Industrial Disputes Act does not prescribe ...
Usman Gani Khan Vs. Rent Control and Eviction Officer, Allahabad and O ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-25-1999
Reported in: 1999(3)AWC2033
O.P. Garg, J. 1. This writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is directed against the order dated 15.12.1998 passed by the Rent Control and Eviction Officer 1. Allahabad (for short 'R.C.E.O.') declaring the vacancy of the second floor portion of premises No, 31/31 Sardar Patel Marg, Allahabad under Section 12 of the U. P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act').2. Put briefly, the facts of the case are that Shambhoo Chopra, respondent No. 5, who is owner/landlord of premises No. 31/31, Sardar Patel Marg, Allahabad intimated the District Magistrate about the vacancy of the accommodation on the second floor of the aforesaid house stating that Rizwan Ullah, who was in occupation of the same as a tenant has delivered vacant possession to the landlords and has cleared rent up to May, 1998. On this intimation, the R.C.E.O. deputed the Rent Control Inspector (for short 'R.C.I.') to verify the facts. A rep...
Madan Tiwari, Constable Vs. Deputy Inspector General of Police (Group ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-25-1999
Reported in: 1999(4)AWC2908; (1999)2UPLBEC1494
Palok Basu and R.R.K. Trivedi, JJ. 1. Madan Tiwari has challenged his dismissal order dated 17.8.1991 passed by the Commandant, 7 Battalion, Central Reserve Police' Force and also the appellate order dated 2.12.1991 passed by the appellants authority, namely, the Deputy Inspector General of Police, C.R.P.F., Rampur, U. P. The petitioner was charge-sheeted on the allegations of having abused his superior officer and being drunk while on duly and further that he aimed his rifle at another constable. While hearing the instant writ petition, the learned single Judge was of the view that the decision of a Division Bench in Giriraj Sharma v. Union of India, and others, 1989 (1) UPLBEC 351, was not in accordance with the objectives and intentions behind Section 11 of the Central Reserve Police Force Act [for short, the Act). When the matter went to the Division Bench headed by one of us (Hon. R.R.K. Trivedi, J.), the said Division Bench recommended that since Giriraj Sharma case (supra) was a...
Ramesh Prasad Vs. Manager, Shri Narsingh Inter College and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-25-1999
Reported in: (1999)3UPLBEC1954
D.K. Seth, J.1. In writ petition No. 30121 of 1992, the petitioner's father died in harness on 24-4-1982. The petitioner had applied for appointment under the Dying in Harness Rules on 6.-7-1991 but the same was not considered by the respondents. In the meantime on 30-7-1992 Regulations 101, 102 and 103 framed under the U.P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921 had since been amended and new provisions have been incorporated relating to appointment under Dying in Harness Rules. In a notice appended to Regulation 103 as amended it has been pointed out that this regulation is applicable in those cases where the employees had died on or after 1-1-1981. The said regulation provides that if a teacher or non-teaching staff died in harness, in that event, one member of the family of the deceased would be given in a post of non-teaching staff. Relying on these provisions, Mr. Siddharth Verma, learned Counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner has become eligible under the said provisi...
Bal Kishan Agarwal Vs. PulIn Garg and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-24-1999
Reported in: 1999(3)AWC2010
O. P. Garg, J. 1. The dominant sole question involved in the present writ petition is whether in a suit which has been filed in forma pauperis for relief of temporary injunction can be granted. This question has come up in the following circumstances.2. It is common case of the parties that one Dwarka PrasadAgarwal was owner of the properties Nos. 217/34 and 217/37 situate at Bhuteshwar, Mathura. He left behind him his two sons, namely, Bal Kishan Agarwal, the present petitioner and late Kanhaiya Lal Agarwal who died leaving behind Suit. Kavita Rani his widow and two sons respondent Nos. 1 and 6, besides three daughters, who are respondent Nos. 3 to 5. Pulin Garg, one of the sons of late Kanhafya Lal Agarwal respondent No. 1 filed Suit No. 65 of 1996 in the Court of Civil Judge, (Senior Division), Mathura, for the relief of partition of his 1/12th share in the disputed properties and for permanent injunction against the present petitioner-defendant No. 1 to restrain him from interferin...
Hari Om Tripathi Vs. Nideshak, Rajya Nagar Vikas Adhikaran and Another
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-24-1999
Reported in: 1999(3)AWC2414; (1999)2UPLBEC1405
D.K. Seth, J. 1. The petitioner was sent on deputation for a period of one year by order dated 28.7.1998. By order dated 9.3.1999, he was reverted to his original department.2. Mr. A.K. Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner contends that since the deputation was for a fixed term, the said term could not be curtailed and the petitioner could not be asked to Join his parent department during the period of deputation. In support of his contention, Mr. Singh has relied on the Full Bench decision of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of Dr. Bhagwat Singh v. Chancellor. Punjab University and others, 1981 Lab IC 1057. Relying on the said decision, he contends that the period of deputation cannot be curtailed.3. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner Shri A.K. Singh at length.4. In the present case, the petitioner was sent on deputation for a period of one year while he had been holding the lien in the original department. Person on deputation have right to hold any pos...
Mahaveer Prasad Sharma Vs. Cane Commissioner, U.P. and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-24-1999
Reported in: 1999(3)AWC2440; (1999)2UPLBEC1407
D.K. Seth, J.1. A charge-sheet was issued to the petitioner on 8th July, 1997, pursuant to which an enquiry was proposed. By an order dated 9th October, 1998, the petitioner was punished by the Committee of Management. This order is contained in Annexure-6 tothe writ petition. Mr. N.L. Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner had retired on 30th June. 1998. The crushing season 1997-98 ended on 15th July, 1997. In view of Regulation 27 of the U. P. Cane Co-operative Service Regulation. 1975. the disciplinary proceedings should be deemed to have been automatically dropped, if it is not completed within the same crushing season expiring on 15th July, 1997. Therefore, the impugned order is incompetent and is liable to be quashed.2. Mr. Manish Umrao, holding brief of Mr. P.M.N. Singh, learned counsel for the respondents contends that since the charge-sheet was issued on 8th July, 1997, namely, seven days before the end of the crushing season, i.e., 15th July, ...
Badri Prasad Vs. S.P. Transport Co. (P.) Ltd.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-24-1999
Reported in: 1999(3)AWC2415; (1999)IILLJ1074All
D.K. Seth, J. 1. The petitioner alleges that his services have been retrenched orally by the respondents-a private limited company.2. Mr. A.N. Tripathi, learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the provision of Section 6N of the U. P. Industrial Disputes Act enshrines the statutory liability on the part of the respondents. Therefore, if a body. Individual or person discharging certain statutory duties, failed to fulfil the statutory obligations, the writ jurisdiction can be invoked. Since in the present case, the retrenchment was effected without following the provisions contained in Section 6N of the Act, the writ is maintainable and therefore he prays that writ of mandamus be issued commanding the respondents tocomply with Section 6N of the Act before retrenching the petitioner.3. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner at length.4. It would be stretching the concept of instrumentality and agency to an extent that the action on the part of the respondents--a private l...
Pawan Kumar and Others Vs. Board of U.P. High School and Intermediate
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-24-1999
Reported in: 1999(3)AWC2472
A.K. Yog, J.1. Four students, who appeared in the Intermediate Examination, 1997, held by the U. P. Board, filed this petition seeking a writ in the nature of mandamus to command the U. P. Board of High School and Intermediate Regional Office, Meerut (hereinafter called 'the Board') to declare the result of the petitioners as successful exonerating them of charge of using unfair means and mass-copying.2. At the outset Court would like to record its anguish over the tenor and the expression used in the petition by these student-petitioners, in Paragraph Nos. 13 and 14 of the petitioner, serious allegations leveling charges against the Board officials have been made, which, if found to be correct, will expose the Board officials to criminal charges. Wild allegations against the Board officials have been made without giving requisite particulars and details so as to inspire confidence necessarily required to initiate action. Such a practice of making allegation lightly and only to lend co...
Raja Singh Vs. General Manager, Power Grid Corporation of India Ltd. a ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-24-1999
Reported in: 1999(3)AWC2466; (1999)2UPLBEC1401
D.K. Seth, J.1. Shri L. P. Singh. learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the entire land of the petitioner was acquired some time in 1984 by the State Government for the respondents. According to the Government Circular dated 29.2.1996 contained in Annexure 7 to the writ petition, the petitioner is entitled to employment since his entire land was acquired by the State Government for the respondents.2. Learned counsel for the respondents on the other hand contends that the petitioner is guilty of delay and laches. Secondly, he contends that the Government Order contained in Anncxure-7 is applicable only in respect of the corporation/undertaking of the State Government. Here in this case the respondents are Central Government Corporation and, therefore, the said Government Order does not apply. He next contends that the petitioner could not have any legal or statutory right to get the appointment on compassionate ground.3. Mr. Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner in reply c...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »