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.
Sri Ram Sahai Verma Uchchattar Madhyamik Vidyalaya Vs. Madhyamik Shiks ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-20-1999
Reported in: 1999(4)AWC2978; (1999)3UPLBEC1894
A. K. Yog, J.1. Petitioner is a recognized Intermediate College. The said Institution had applied for recognition and in expectancy it admitted students, but their forms were not accepted by the Madhyamik Shiksha Parishad. U.P., Allahabad (for short called 'Board') on the ground that Institution was not recognised.2. Petitioner being aggrieved filed present writ petition wherein interim order was granted on 26th March 1999. As a consequence of interim order, admission form has been obtained by the Board and concerned students appeared in the examination. Result of such students is not being declared. The reason for not declaring result is not far to seek as the interim order dated 26th March 1999 itself directed that result of such students shall not be declared.3. A supplementary affidavit has been filed along with Urgency ListingApplication No. 49154 of 1999 and thereby a document has been annexed to show that Institution has been granted recognition up to intermediate level by the c...
Aasif Shahdab Vs. Secretary, Madhyamik Shiksha Parishad and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-20-1999
Reported in: 1999(4)AWC2977; (1999)3UPLBEC1900
A. K. Yog, J.1. Aasif Shahdab. petitioner appeared in the HighSchool examination. 1998 with Roll No. 1774849 conducted by the Madhyamik Shiksha Parishad, U. P., Allahabad.2. Petitioner was issued aprovisional mark-sheet indicatingthat his case was underconsideration in the category 'W.B.'i.e., case of suspicion of using unfairmeans reported by the Examiner.3. On 18th January 1999, a learned single Judge directed the respondent's counsel to produce original 'Answer Books' of the petitioner, in question. On the request of learned standing counsel in the presence of learned counsel for the petitioner, I also perused the copies and find that on comparison, a person of normal prudence cannot with certainty come to the conclusion that student involved in the case has resorted to using unfair means merely similarity of certain aspects can lead to an irresistible conclusion that student/Petitioner in question has resorted to using unfair means.4. This Court time and again held that similarity ...
Jagdhar and Another Vs. Civil Judge (Junior Division), Banda and Anoth ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-20-1999
Reported in: 1999(4)AWC2967
D. K. Seth, J.1. Leave is granted to convert the petition into one under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.2. The petitioners allege that the opposite party had filed a Civil Suit No. 308 of 1996 for injunction, in which an order of injunction was sought for by the plaintiff opposite parties, which was contested upto the appellate court unsuccessfully. Thereafter the plaintiff opposite party had filed Original Suit No. 140 of 1999 in which he had obtained an order dated 31st March. 1999 granting injunction against the petitioners. It is this order which has been challenged in this petition together with a prayer for quashing of the plaint in Original Suit No. 140 of 1999.3. Mr. P. K. Gupta, learned counsel for the petitioners contends that the parties and the suit property in Suit No. 140 of 1999 are the same as is involved in Suit No. 308 of 1996. Therefore, plaint of the subsequent suit is liable to be quashed.4. I have heard Mr. Gupta at length.5. Mr. Gupta had relied on a de...
O.P. Rudra Vs. High Court of Judicature at Allahabad and Another
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-20-1999
Reported in: 1999(4)AWC3012
M. Katju and Krishna Kumar, JJ. 1. This writ petition has been filed for quashing the removal order dated 17.4.97 Annexure-H to the petition and for a mandamus directing respondents to treat the petitioner in service.2. We have heard Shri N. C. Rajvanshi learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Sunil Ambwani learned counsel for the High Court.3. The petitioner was appointed as Munsif Magistrate on 31.5.75 in the U. P. Judicial Service. He was promoted as Chief Judicial Magistrate in 1983 and as an Additional District Judge in 1987. In para 6 of the petition, it is alleged that his service record was throughout good and no adverse entry was ever communicated to him. In para 7 of the petition, it is alleged that even in 1992 he was communicated a good entry. However, he was suspended vide order dated 29.7.92 copy of which is Annexure-A and given a charge-sheet copy of which is Annexure-C to the petition. A true copy of the petitioner's reply is Annexure-D. The enquiry officer found th...
Om Prakash Vs. Addl. District and Session Judge, Kanpur Nagar and Othe ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-20-1999
Reported in: 1999(4)AWC3044
D.K. Seth, J. 1. Leave granted to convert the petition into one under Article 227 of the Constitution ofIndia.2. The petitioner has challenged the order dated 1st May. 1999 passed by the learned District Judge, Kanpur Nagar in Civil Revision No. 102 of 1999 affirming the order dated 19th March, 1999 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Kanpur Nagar in Execution Case No. 39 of1997. It is alleged that the suit properly consists of a building and as such comes under the purview of U. P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting Rent and Eviction) Act. 1972. therefore, the civil court could not have assumed Jurisdiction and pass the decree by reason of Section 20 of the said Act, which provides bar of suit before the civil court prescribing the forum before which such proceedings are to be initiated. The trial court had dismissed the said objection under Section 47 of the Code of Civil Procedure on the ground that the suit property was described as a vacant land and the decree...
Rajendra Prasad Gupta and Another Vs. State of U. P. and Another
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-20-1999
Reported in: 1999(4)AWC3446
O. P. Garg, J.1. The fate of this writ petition would turn out on the determination of twin simple legal questions--firstly, whether a disciplinary authority can order de nova enquiry against a Government servant on the same allegations and charges which have already been dropped, and, secondly, whether a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India against a notice to show cause why the enquiry into the matter be not re-initiated, is maintainable. The controversy emanates in the background of the following facts :The petitioner No. 1 is Sub-inspector, while petitioner No. 2 is Head Constable in the Civil Police posted respectively at Meerut and Pilibhit. The gravamen of the charge against the petitioners was that they had misbehaved and ill-treated Jasbir Singh, resident of village Harralya Kanja. Police Station Gajraula, district Pilibhit,who had come to the Police Stationto lodge an F.I.R. on 25.11.1993and that instead of recording theF.I.R.. faithfully and correctly...
Committee of Management Choudhary Ram Roop Singh Dhanraj Singh Interme ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-20-1999
Reported in: 1999(4)AWC3522
A.K. Yog, J.1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned standing counsel for respondent Nos. 1 and 2 and the learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent Nos. 3 and 4 respectively.2. Writ petition is finally disposed of at the admission stage as contemplated under High Court Rules since all the respondents are represented and have no objection.3. This is a petition challenging two orders dated 24.4.1999 and 28.6.1999 (Annexures-3 and 4 to the writ petition) whereby the District Inspector of Schools revoked the suspension order passed by the Management on the ground that petitioner's Management did not submit relevant papers within time stipulated under law before District Inspector of Schools under provision of Section 16G (1) of the Act and Chapter 3. Regulation 39 of the Regulations framed under the Act. The District Inspector of Schools, however, observed that no action of punishment could be initiated against any member of staff of the college since the authority of C...
Amil Rashid Vs. Nagar Panchayat, Ajuha and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-19-1999
Reported in: 1999(4)AWC2935
Aloke Chakrabarti, J.1. The petitioner contends that being the highest bidder In the auction held for collection of Tahbazari within municipal area of Nagar Panchayat, AJuha and having completed all formalities including deposit of one-fourth amount being the first Instalment and making several representations, formal grant is not being made and the petitioner is deprived of collection of Tahbazari. Petitioner also challenges the order dated 19.5.1999 passed by the District Magistrate on a contention that the District Magistrate has no power to intervene in the matter of such grant by the Municipal authorities.2. As only question of law has been raised, learned standing counsel agreed to final disposal of the writ petition at this stage without filing a counter-affidavit.3. Mr. H. N. Singh. learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the Nagar Panchayat authorities are required to function on their own and in the matter of collectlort of Tahbazari after the auction is held and th...
Basti Ram Vs. Nagar Nigam, Ghaziabad and Another
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-19-1999
Reported in: 1999(4)AWC3041
P.K. Jain, J. 1. Heard Sri Santosh Kumar, learned counsel for the appellant.2. This is plaintiffs second appeal against the judgment and decree passed by the lower appellate court allowing the appeal of the respondent No. 1 and dismissing the suit of the plaintiff/appellant.3. The plaintiff/appellant filed Suit No. 811 of 1996 with the allegations that Khasra Plot No 243 Situated at village Raeespur, Pargana Pasna, District Ghaziabad belongs to him since time of his ancestors and he is in possession of the same. There are certain constructions as stated in the plaint which exist on the said land and the land was being used by him as abadi, Main door of his house opens on this land and he was possessed of the land in suit from before zamindari abolition and land is vested in him under Section 9 of the Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act. The defendants had noconcern whatsoever with the suit land and had wrongly got the land entered as Banjar land in the Revenue Records. Proceedings...
Committee of Management, Mahatma Buddha Kanya Primary Pathshala, Banka ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-19-1999
Reported in: 1999(4)AWC3348
A.K. Yog, J.1. This Court takes judicial notice of the fact that several representations are being filed by and on behalf of Primary Pathshalas, wherein it is asserted that long back re&pondents; invited applications, entertained them on merit, gave hope if the Pathshalas complied with certain conditions, collected reports after inspection made through concerned District Magistrates. It is said petitioner has changed his position on account of representation of respondent and they moved because of legitimate expectation of securing certain object/privilege. It is stated in the instant case, the District Magistrate itself sent letter dated January 2, 1995 to the Secretary. Government of U. P. Samaj Kalyan Vibhag, Lucknow.2. It is interesting to note that the concerned Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Salempur vide letter dated September 29. 1994 addressed to Tehsildar concerned, required him to submit report/recommendation to his office in this connection. A true copy of the said letter has b...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »