Allahabad Court August 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.
Rajkumar Gupta and Others Vs. Union of India and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-05-1999
Reported in: 1999(4)AWC2958; (1999)3UPLBEC1917
D. S. Sinha, J.1. Heard Shri Saghlr Ahmad, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and Shri Shambhu Nath Srivastava, learned senior standing counsel of the Central Government representing the respondents, at length and in detail.2. The uires of Rule 8 (d) of the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Rules. 1959. (hereinafter called the 'Rules') made by the Central Government in exercise of powers conferred upon it under Section 38 of the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, 1958, is under challenge in this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.3. It is not disputed that the vires of Rule 8 (d), aforesaid, was considered by a Division Bench of this Court in Virendra Kumar Chadda v. Union of India and others, Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 10714 of 1991, and the writ petitions connected therewith. The Division Bench vide its Judgment and order dated September 10, 1992, upheld the vires of Rule 8 (d) of the Rules and dismissed...
Raghuvendra Sharan Singh Vs. District Inspector of Schools, Kushinagar ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-05-1999
Reported in: 1999(4)AWC3091; (1999)3UPLBEC1908
D.K. Seth, J. 1. The petitioner's ad hoc appointment against a short-term vacancy was not accorded financial sanction by the District Inspector of Schools. In paragraph 4 of the writ petition, the petitioner has pointed out that one Shri Navnath Dubey was promoted to the next higher grade i.e.. L. T. grade.2. Shri T. N. Tiwari, learned counsel for the petitioner contends that by reason of such promotion, a vacancy was created in C. T. grade. Relying on the statement made in paragraph 5 of the rejoinder-affidavit, he contends that the said vacancy in C.T. Grade would be treated to be a. vacancy in L. T. grade and appointment against existing vacancy in C.T. grade is to be filled up treating them in L.T. grade. Thus, in view of promotion of Navanath Dubey according to the petitioner, a short-term vacancy had come into being. The petitioner was appointed in the said short-term vacancy in accordance with the provisions contained in U. P. Secondary Education Service Commission (Removal of D...
Jagat NaraIn Tiwari Vs. State of U.P. and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-05-1999
Reported in: 1999(4)AWC3095
P.K. Jain, J.1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. The ex parte decree for rent and eviction was passed against the revisionist. In the execution proceedings, an application for amendment in the plaint was moved on the ground that the boundaries of the suit property were inadvertently wrongly stated in the plaint. That application has been allowed by the trial court. The present revision is against the said order.2. The sole question that arises for consideration is whether in the execution proceedings, amendment in the plaint can be allowed under Section 152, C.P.C. or not. Court below has relied upon two decisions of this Court In : AIR1935All914 .3. The learned counsel for the revisionist submits that an amendment is not permissible under Section 152, C.P.C. Only clerical errors can be corrected in the judgment and decree.4. Copy of the plaint has been filed as Annexure-1 to the affidavit in which Municipal No. of the suit property Is described as 117/111, M-Block, Kaka Dev, Kan...
Amrendra Pratap Singh and ors. Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-05-1999
Reported in: (1999)3UPLBEC2061
S.H.A. Raza, J.1. All the above mentioned writ petition involved the common question of facts and law and were heard together, hence the same are being disposed of by a single and common judgment. However, writ petition No. 32348 of 1992 shall be the leading case.2. In most of the writ petitions the result dated 10th & 11th August, 1992 published in the U.P. Public Service Commission in respect of the Combined State Service/Upper Subordinate Service Preliminary Examination, 1990 and the result dated 28-8-1992 publised in the U.P. Public Service Commission in respect of the Combinded Upper Subordinate Service Examination. 1988 and Lower Subordinate Services. 1987 have been challanged. The Government Orders dated 19-2-1981, 4-8-1989. 11-4-1991 and 19-10-1992 were also assailed. Besides the above U.P. Act No. 21 of 1989 and the schedule appended thereto was also challenged and the State of U.P. was sought to be restrained from making recruitment in the State of U.P. by giving the benefit ...
Sabir HussaIn Vs. State of U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-05-1999
Reported in: 2000CriLJ863
ORDERP.K. Jain, J.1. The prosecution case in short is that between the night of 8/9-3-1998 at about midnight a dacoity was committed at the house of Smt. Bano in which besides looting the property, two persons were killed and some others were injured. It was alleged that around 13-14 persons armed with gun, pistol etc. entered the house of first informant and started ransacking the house. While leaving the house, one of the miscreants, namely Sabir Husain, the present applicant who was armed with a gun exhorted that he will teach a lesson today and thereafter he put the barrel of the gun on the eye of husband of the first informant and fired at him. Co-accused Ishaq fired a shot from his pistol on the chest of the deceased. Thereafter Laiq co-accused put the barrel of pistol on Mohammad Shaft's chest and fired at him. On alarm several witnesses were attracted. The accused were identified in the light of electric as well as moon light.2. First bail application was pressed on the ground ...
Ashoka Metal Decor (P) Ltd. Vs. C.C. and C.E. (Appeals)
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-05-1999
Reported in: 1999(66)ECC82; 1999(113)ELT783(All)
M.C. Agarwal, J.1. These two petitions by different petitioners arise in similar circumstances and are directed against a common order. The petitioners are represented by Sri A.P. Mathur, Advocate while the respondents are represented by Sri Vikram Gulati, Advocate. Both of them have been heard.2. The petitions are directed against an order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), Customs and Central Excise, Ghaziabad whereby in exercise of powers under the proviso to Section 35F, he partly waived the condition of the pre-deposit of adjudicated dues.3. The petitioners had availed the Modvat credit in respect of inputs which were used in the production of goods which during the process of production, were sent to other persons outside the factory for job work. This is permissible under Rule 57F of the Central Excise Rules, Sub-rule (11) whereof requires that if inputs or partially processed inputs are not received back in the factory by the manufacturer of final products within a period of...
Km. Poonam Awasthi Vs. State of U.P. and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-04-1999
Reported in: 2000(2)AWC1420
Virendra Saran andNaseemuddin, JJ. 1. Kumari PoonamAwasthi has filed this writ petition forquashing the first information reportdated 8.5.1998 in Case Crime No. 174of 1998 Police Station Kotwali Gola,district Khert.2. Learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government advocate were heard.3. It appears that opposite party No. 3 Dr. O. P. Mlshra (Senior Superintendent) Principal, C.G.N. (P.G.) College, Gokaran Nath, district Kheri lodged an F.I.R. with the allegation that on 8.5.1998 at about 7.10 a.m. the petitioner, who was appearing in the examination of B.A. II year, handed over some unauthorised material to the invigilator in the examination room after the distribution of the question papers at 7.10 a.m. She was appearing on that day in 1998 Studies Hindi Literature II paper. That the petitioner did not make use of the material. That even then in order tosave the infectious effect of keeping the unauthorised material, action was taken against her and second copy was given to ...
Jamwant Singh and Others Vs. Chhetriya U.P. Nibandhak, Sahkari Samitiy ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-04-1999
Reported in: 1999(3)AWC2666; (1999)3UPLBEC1911
D.S. Sinha, J.1. Heard Shri Z. K. Hassan, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and Shri K. M. Sahai, learned standing counsel of the State of U. P., representing the respondent No. 1.2. The order dated 8th October. 1993. passed by the respondent No. 1 in exercise of powers under Section 29 (4) of the U. P. Co-operative Societies Act. 1965. as it then stood. is under challenge in this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.3. By the impugned order, the respondent No. 1 has purported to appoint a new Managing Committee of the Authortan West Employees Cooperative Rin Sahkari Samiti Ltd.. Kanpur, modifying its earlier order dated 9th July. 1993. whereby another Managing Committee, of which petitioners claim to be members, had been appointed.4. The submission of the learned counsel of the petitioners is that the respondent No. 1 lacked power to modify the order dated 9th July, 1993 and appoint new Managing Committee by the impugned order.5. It is not disputed that ...
Mohammed Yusuf Khan Vs. State of U.P. and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-04-1999
Reported in: 1999(3)AWC2656
Onkareshwar Bhatt, J.1. The petitioner, Mohammad Yusuf Khan, in his individual capacity as also in the capacity of Secretary of the Union of Three Wheeler (Auto-Rickshaw) Operators. Kamalganj, district Farrukhabad, has filed this writ petition under Article 226 of theConstitution of India. He has prayed that bye-laws regarding parking fee made by Town Area Committee. Kamalganj, Farrukhabad, respondent No. 3, published in U. P. Gazette on 30.3.1991 at page 255. Annexure-1 to the writ petition, be declared unconstitutional and void. In the alternative, he has prayed that of the above bye-laws the bye-law which imposes fees of Rs. 2 per trip on a three-wheeler be declared ultra vires.2. In the writ petition, it has been averred that the respondent No. 3 is a local body, which manages the affairs of the town-area. Kamalganj, that the petitioner has been plying his three-wheeler (Auto-Rickshaw) in between Kamalganj and Fatehgarh, district Farrukhabad, the distance being 10 kilometres in bet...
Ram Lakhan Vs. State of U.P. Through Collector, Allahabad and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-04-1999
Reported in: 1999(3)AWC2671
ORDERBinod Kumar Roy and Lakshmi Bihari, JJ.1. The prayer of the petitioner is to quash the demand citation dated 28.8.1995 issued byTehsildar, Tehsil Meja, as contained in Annexure-2 to the writ petition at the behest of respondent No. 2. Bankof Baroda. Branch Bharatganj, which has been sued through its Manager.2: A perusal of Annexure-2 reveals that a sum of Rs. 14,002 was remained to be paid towards instalments by the petitioner and thus, he was asked to pay the same and appear before respondent No. 3 on 4.9.1995 failing which steps can be taken for his arrest, attachment of his properties and their auction.3. Annexure-1 is a copy of the letter dated 11.8.1995 written by the petitioner to respondent No. 2 asserting, inter alia, that he had never taken any loan nor was he given any loan by the Bank, but having learnt of the steps taken by Tehsildar, he is requesting for considering the entire matter seriously, as there appears to be some fraud played on him and to take action against...
- ‹ Prev
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 14
- 15
- 16
- Next ›
- Last »