Allahabad Court April 2000 Judgments
State of U.P. and Others Vs. Lakhan Singh and Another
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-28-2000
Reported in: 2001(1)AWC506
Palok Basu, J. 1. If voluntariness is the primary requirement in alt actions concerning a document which is termed as 'resignation letter', it should follow that the voluntariness should be explicit from the initial stage of writing of the said letter and extend to the voluntary action of tendering the same to the concerned authority or his agent. 2. The controversy in the instant writ petition shall be correctly answered if there be no confusion about the steps which have to be taken and things which may intervene between writing of it on the one hand and submitting the same on the other. In case it is found that there is absolute absence of any proof of voluntarily tendering of the resignation letter, the mere writing of it should never be taken to be a voluntary conduct of resigning from the post of the person concerned. 3. What has been stated above, is the outcome of all the decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court whether it was the case of Raj Kumar v. Union of India. SCSR, Vol. 1...
Tag this Judgment!State of U.P. and Another Vs. Irfan Ahmad Siddiqui
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-28-2000
Reported in: 2000(3)AWC2045; (2000)2UPLBEC1545
A. K. Yog. J. 1.State of U. P. through Secretary (Education), U. P. Government, Lucknow and Additional Director of Education (Secondary) U. P., Allahabad have preferred this Special Appeal against Judgment and order dated 5.11.1997 passed by learned single Judge in Writ Petition No. 22407 of 1987. Irfan Ahmad Siddiqui v. State of U. P. and another, under Article 226, Constitution of India, claiming a writ of certiorari to quash the impugned orders dated 31st December 1985. 4th September, 1986. issued by Additional Director of Education (Secondary) U. P. and 17th June, 1987. passed by Director of Education (Annexures-9, 19 and 20 to the writ petition).2. The facts of the case are as follows :Petitioner was appointed, after being selected by U. P. Public Service Commission, Allahabad as Assistant Master (Chemistry) in June. 1971. In a Government Inter College-under U. P. Special Subordinate Education Service and at the relevant time, petitioner was posted as Lecturer(Chemistry) in Govern...
Tag this Judgment!State of U.P. and Others Vs. Sharda Prasad
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-28-2000
Reported in: 2000(3)AWC1973; (2000)2UPLBEC1557
A.K. Yog, J.1. Appellants through this appeal seek to challenge the judgment and order dated April 15, 1998 passed by learned single Judgeallowing Writ Petition No. 29789 of 1995. Sharda Prasad v. State of U. P. and others quashing order dated 11.10.1995 (Annexure-1 to the petition) passed by respondent No. 1/Joint Director. Printing and Stationery. U. P.. Allahabad. Facts of the case are :Petitioner possessed no educational qualification when he got employment on dally wages against a Class IV post as Assistant Binder in a Unit of Government Printing and Stationery, U. P., Allahabad on 17.4.1960. Admittedly, he is a Government employee. His services are governed by U. P. Class IV Employees Rules, 1975. His age of superannuation is 58 years which is to be determined with reference to the date of birth mentioned in his service book as provided under U. P. Recruitment to Services (Determination of Date of Birth) Rules, 1974, as amended vide Rule 1980 for short called 'the Rules'.2. Relev...
Tag this Judgment!Radha Saran Dubey and Another Vs. Ram Niwas and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-28-2000
Reported in: 2000(3)AWC2282
D. K. Seth, J.1. The order dated 10th July. 1998, passed by the Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division) Second Court. Mathura, in Original Suit No. 71 of 1992 has been challenged. By the said order, the revisionists' application for amendment, which is Annexure-II to the said application has since been rejected. Mr. Rakesh Bahadur, learned counsel for the revisionist contends that in view of the amendment that was allowed in the plaint as Is apparent from paragraph 1 of the amended plaint, Thakur Govind Dev Ji Maharaj has been described as the owner of the property to whom the plaintiffs are paying rent. Therefore, in order to prove their title, it has become necessary to implead Sebalt of Thakur Govind Dev Jl Maharaj, and. therefore, by means of amendment, it was sought to implead one Anjan Kumar Dev Goswami as party defendant to the proceeding with the added amendments to the extent that the said Anjan Kumar Dev Goswaml who is Sebait of Thakur Govind Dev Ji Maharaj had threatened th...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Dilwati Devi Vs. Commissioner and Another
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-27-2000
Reported in: 2000(3)AWC2519
D. K. Seth, J.1. The proceeding under Section 33 of the Indian Stamp Act was initiated against the petitioner. Mr. A. B. Singh. learned counsel for the petitioner contends that unless the document is produced as an evidence before the officer, no proceeding under Section 33 could be Initiated and as such the proceeding is invalid. He secondly contends that there was a general circular by the Collector under which if the land is below 16 decimal it could not be valued as an urban land. Admittedly, the land is an agricultural land as would be apparent from the Tahsildar's report. Therefore, it cannot be valued on the said basts.He also contended that the document was registered and that no proceeding under Section 47A could be initiated once the document is registered. Such proceeding can be initiated only before the registration is done. Therefore, in no manner this proceeding can be proceeded with validly.2. The submission of Mr. A. B. Singh does not appear to be sound so far as the Se...
Tag this Judgment!Jai Prakash S/O Raghubir Prasad (In Jail) Vs. State of U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-27-2000
Reported in: 2000CriLJ3774
M.C. Jain, J. 1. This appeal has been preferred by the accused appellant Jai Prakash against the judgment and order dated 18-ll-1980 passed by Sri S.M.A. Khusro, the then III Additional Sessions Judge, Aligarh in Sessions Trial No. 391 of 1979 convicting the accused-appellant under Section 302, I.P.C., 364, I.P.C. and 201, I.P.C. He has been awarded life imprisonment under Section 302, I.P.C. and 364, I.P.C. Five years' rigorous imprisonment has been awarded under Section 201, I.P.C. All the sentences have been ordered to run concurrently.2. The victim of the offence was one Pappu alias Nuruddin aged about 7 years son of Allahdin PW-2. The incident took place on 21-2-1978 at about 9 a.m. in village Agsauli, Police Station Sikdndra Rao, District Aligarh. The first information report was lodged by Allahdin PW-2 on 21-2-1978 at 9.10 p.m. The distance of the village of occurrence from the Police Station was about six miles. The prosecution case, as per the first information report and the ...
Tag this Judgment!Babu Vs. State of U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-27-2000
Reported in: 2000CriLJ4951
M.C. Jain, J.1. These are two connected appeals arising out of the judgment and order dated 23-9-1980 passed by Sri M.P.S. Tomar, the then II Additional Sessions Judge, Mathura in Sessions Trial No. 18 of 1980. They are being decided by this common judgment treating Criminal Appeal No. 2179 of 1980 as the leading appeal. Six persons were tried before the trial Court they were 1. Deep Chand, 2. Kalua alias Kali Charan, 3. Raman, 4. Bihari, 5. Bishambhar and 6. Babu. Kalua alias Kali Charan, Raman, Bihari and Bishambhar are the sons of Deep Chand whereas Babu is the son of maternal uncle of Deep Chand. Out of them, Deep Chand was acquitted, having been afforded the benefit of doubt. All the rest were convicted under Sections 147 and 302 I.P.C. read with Section 149 I.P.C. Each of them was sentenced to nine months' rigorous imprisonment under Section 147 IPC and life imprisonment under Section 302 I.P.C. read with Section 149 I.P.C. Criminal Appeal No. 2179 of 1980 has been preferred by B...
Tag this Judgment!Mehar Ban S/O Girwar and ors. Vs. State of U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-27-2000
Reported in: 2000CriLJ4702
S.K. Agarwal, J.1. This appeal was filed by as many as 44 appellants. All the appellants were convicted and sentenced under Section 323/149, I.P.C. for one year's R.I. and to life imprisonment under Section 302/149, I.P.C. Appellants Meharban, Babu, Bahadur, Nathu, Girdhari Lal, Bhagiarth, Gopi, Dayaram, Vijay, Darbari Singh, Ratan s/o Kaddey and Ratan s/o Khet Singh were also convicted under Section 148, I.P.C. and sentenced to three year's R.I. All of them were also convicted under Section 302/149, IPC and sentenced to life imprisonment.2. Appellants Komal, Anand Kumar, Guman, Kanhai, Sukh Singh, Panchu, Dasrath, Chittar, Uttam, Bhagwant, Kishore, Kashiram, Jhallau, Ashok, Gulzari, Lotan, Ganiya, Sura, Dhowan, Malkhan, Ratan s/ o Malkhan, Keshav, Kashiram, Mohan Singh, Hamira, Hathi, Dhan Singh, Ghasi, Dhan Prasad, Kapoor Chand, Man Singh, Ratan s/o Imrat and Jawahar were also convicted under Section 147, I.P.C. and sentenced to one year's R.I. All the sentences of the appellants are...
Tag this Judgment!Dina Nath Tiwari Vs. Deputy Director Consolidation, Gorakhpur and Othe ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-26-2000
Reported in: 2000(2)AWC1755
Shitla Pd. Srivastava, J.1. This petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, has been filed by the petitioner for quashing the order dated 3.3.1997 passed by the Deputy Director of Consolidation, Gorakhpur, which has been filed as Annexure-5 to the writ petition.2. The brief facts as stated in the petition are that during the courseof consolidation proceeding, petitioner was proposed chak by the Assistant Consolidation Officer at his original holding plot No. 25 towards east side of the road and his co-sharers respondents Nos. 6 and 7 were proposed towards west side of the road. It is stated by the petitioner that the road is passing through the middle of his chak. His other chak-holders No. 55 was also proposed on their original holding plot No. 26 on road side without making any reduction in area of the land on the road side. It is stated that the father of the respondent Nos. 2 to 4 filed objection under Section 20 of the U. P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953 which...
Tag this Judgment!Jitendra and Others Vs. State of U.P. and Another
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-26-2000
Reported in: 2000(3)AWC2088; [2000(87)FLR179]
Pradeep Kant, J.1. The petitioners who are 13 in number have been working as daily wagers in the office of Director, Geology and Mining, U. P., Lucknow. Some of the petitioners were engaged in the year1982, while some were engaged in1983. 1984. 1985. 1986. 1987. and 1988. Admittedly the petitioners are continuously working till date as dally wagers and they have not been given the status of regular employees or confirmed employees of the department. No doubt the wages have been revised from time to time. The petitioners being aggrieved by their non-absorption and non-regularization. approached this Court by means of present writ petition with the prayer that a direction be issued by this Court to the opposite parties to absorb the services of the petitioner on regular basis in the regular pay scale and to consider their reguiarization.2. On the first date of hearing. i.e., 26.9.1991 this Court while granting six weeks' time to the learned standing counsel to seek instructions specifica...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »