Allahabad Court April 2000 Judgments
Rakesh Kumar Arora Vs. Lucknow Development Authority and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-26-2000
Reported in: 2000(3)AWC2126
Bhanwar Singh, J.1. The petitioner has invoked this Court's jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for a writ in the nature of certiorari quashing the decision of the opposite parties as contained in their lettersdated 26.9.1995 and 16.11.1995 as also the cancellation order dated 14.1.1997 (Annexures-8. 10 and 11 respectively). Further a writ of mandamus commanding the opposite parties to provide and deliver possession of shop No. 1. Basement, Janpath Market. Lucknow to the petitioner upon the sale consideration calculated at the rate of Rs. 2.500 per sq. metre instead of Rs. 4.500 per sq. metre, has also been sought for.2. The petitioner's case is that he applied for allotment of a godown-cum-shop No. 24 at Vyavasaylk Kendra (Basement), Janpath Market. Hazratganj, Lucknow constructed by the opposite party No. 1, namely, the Lucknow Development Authority. The said Development Authority, vide letter dated 10.8.1979, asked the petitioner to submit a Bank Draf...
Tag this Judgment!State of U.P. Vs. Anirudh Rai and Another
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-26-2000
Reported in: 2000(3)AWC2102; (2000)3UPLBEC2635
Bhanwar Singh, J.1.The State of U. P. has filed this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for a writ in the nature of certiorari quashing the judgment and order dated 11.1.1993 as contained in Armature-1. By virtue of the said judgment and order, the respondent No. 1 Sri Anirudh Rai was held to be entitled to get promotion to the post of C.I. List II with effect from the date his next junior was promoted along with all consequential benefits.2. The petitioner's case is that Sri Anirudh Rai filed a claim petition before the U. P. Public Services Tribunal. Lucknow. praying for inclusion of his name in the select list of candidates who were entitled to be promoted to the post of C.I. List II. The select list was prepared for promotion of Sub-Inspectors by the departmental selection committee. The petitioner's case was also considered by the said committee but he was not found fit. His contention was that his claim for promotion had not been considered because of...
Tag this Judgment!Moallim-e-urdu Prashikshit Berojgar Sangh and Others Vs. State of U.P. ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-26-2000
Reported in: 2000(3)AWC2346
D.K. Seth, J.1. Moallim-E-Urdu Prashikstiit Berojgar Sangh through its Executive Member Smt. Rana Rajia and others have filed this writ petition seeking the following relief :'(i) Issue an writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to consider the candidature of every member of the petitioner's association for appointment on the post of Assistant Teacher in Junior Basic School run by the respondent and in view of theGovernment order dated1.9.1999 and 13.9.1994 and Judgment dated 28.8.1998 and 11.5.1999 passed by this Hon'ble Court in Civil Misc. Writ Petition Nos. 30711 of 1997 and 19324 of 1999 respectively and accordingly appoint and pay them full regular salary since the date of joining of their duties by deciding their representation dated 20.12.1999. (ii) Issue any other suitable writ order or direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper under the facts and circumstances of the case. (iii) To award the cost of the petition to the peti...
Tag this Judgment!Harivansh Mishra and ors. Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-26-2000
Reported in: (2000)2UPLBEC1594
V.M. Sahai, J. 1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents.2. The petitioners are working as Store Keeper (Senior) in Medical Colleges in Uttar Pradesh. By G.O. dated 18-7-1974 pay scale of Rs. 230-385 was sanctioned for Store Keeper which was revised by order dated 1-7-79 as Rs. 430-685 but by mistake in the G.O. dated 12-10-82 the revised pay scale mentioned was Rs. 400-650. The petitioners represented for rectification in the pay scale to Director/respondent No. 2, who wrote a letter to respondent No. 1 on 29-1-98, copy of which has been filed as Annexure-4 to the writ petition, admitting that due to mistake in the Government orders the petitioners' are being paid lower pay scale whereas juniors to the petitioners are being paid lower pay scale. The Director wrote to State Government that the mistake be corrected and the pay scale of the petitioner's with effect from 1-7-79 be fixed at 430-685 and w.e.f. 1-1-86 in the pay sc...
Tag this Judgment!Archana Srivastava Vs. Vice-chancellor, University of Allahabad and An ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-25-2000
Reported in: 2000(3)AWC1798; (2000)2UPLBEC1264
ORDERV.M. Sahai, J. 1. The petitioner passed her B.A. examination from Allahabad University in 1996 in second division with 57.19% marks. In January. 1997 notification was published in newspaper inviting applications for LL.B. first year admission for the session 1996-97. Petitioner filled up the form and deposited it in the office on 13.1.1997. Receipt No. 4580 was issued to her on same say. For 1996-97 there was no entrance examination and admissions were made on the basis of marks secured by the candidates in graduation or post graduation examination. Intimation card was issued by Dr. H. N. Tiwari, Chairman LL.B. admission committee on 25.11.1998. The petitioner deposited admission fee on 26.11.1998 and she was enrolled as LL.B. first year student of Allahabad University. She was issued enrolment certificate by faculty of law on 24.2.1999. She joined regular law classes. In the short counter-affidavit, it is stated that the university received a complaint of large scale bungling in ...
Tag this Judgment!Nripesh Dutta Mazumdar Vs. State of U.P. and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-25-2000
Reported in: 2000(3)AWC2067
R. H. Zaidi and R. P. Nigam, JJ. 1. By means of this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner prays for issuance of a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing memorandum No. 7501/1 Prize-86 dated 13.10.1986 (Annexure-12 to the writ petition), and for a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to give first prize of U. P. Raffle Lottery in 227th draw held on 20th July, 1986.2. The relevant facts of the case giving rise to the present petition as borne out from the material on record, in brief, are that it was in the year 1986 that the petitioner purchased a U. P. Lottery ticket being Ticket No. RB-149245 of 227th draw. The said tottery was being conducted by the Government of Uttar Pradesh. As mentioned in the aforesaid ticket, the first prize winner was entitled to Rs. 1,00,000 in cash or an Ambassador car and a scooter. On the reverse side of the said ticket. It was noted that the prize winn...
Tag this Judgment!J.K. Sharma and Others Vs. State of U.P. and Another
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-24-2000
Reported in: 2001(2)AWC1486; (2001)2UPLBEC1797
S.H.A. Raza J. 1. Mr. J.K. Sharma, and others as well as Vinod Kumar, who have filed the writ petitions bearing No. 1219 (SB) 98 and 1220 (SB) 98 both have knocked the door of this Court praying that the seniority list dated 29.4.97 and 22.7.97 contained in Annexures 1 and 2 to the writ petition and the impugned order dated 5.9.98 be quashed. Sri J.K. Sharma and others want this Court to Issue a command to the opposite parties to place their names below the names of Sri Chandra Pal Sharma at Serial No. 735 and above the name of Sri Ram Pal Singh Panwar at Serial No. 736 in the seniority list considering their selection againstthe year 1969 by counting their entire services rendered in LSGED/PWD respectively towards the total length of service and to consider their names for promotion on the post of Superintendent Engineer by placing them in the eligibility list dated 16.7.98 before the name of Ram Pal Singh Panwar before considering the same for the purpose of promotion.2. Sri Vinod Ku...
Tag this Judgment!Workmen of Pepsico India Holdings Limited Vs. Deputy Labour Commission ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-24-2000
Reported in: 2000(3)AWC1800; [2000(85)FLR778]; (2000)IILLJ523All; (2000)2UPLBEC1602
M. Katju, J. 1. Heard Sri K. P. Agarwal learned counsel for petitioner.2. The petitioners are workmen of Pepsico India Holdings Limited which is a purely private company and is not State under Article 12 of the Constitution.3. The grievance of the petitioner is that the company has terminated the services of certain employees and is doing unfair labour practices. In our opinion, the petitioner has an alternative remedy of raising an industrial dispute under the U. P. Industrial Disputes Act. and hence this writ petition should not be entertained as held by the Full Bench of this Court in Chandrama Singh v. Managing Director. 1991 (2) UPLBEC 898. Also, the writ petition is not maintainable as it is against a purely private body.4. Learned counsel for the petitioners has invited our attention to the decisions of the Supreme Court in Shri Anadi Mukta Sadguru Shree Muktajee Vandasjiswami Suvarna Jayanti Mahotsav Smarak Trust and others v. V. R. Rudani and others, AIR1989 SC 1607 ; Unni Kri...
Tag this Judgment!Ganga Prasad and Others Vs. Dy. Director of Consolidation, U.P., Luckn ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-24-2000
Reported in: 2000(3)AWC1793
Shitla Pd. Srivastava, J.1. This writ petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, has been filed by the petitioners for quashing the order dated 24.2.1973 passed by the Settlement Officer Consolidation, Jaunpur and order dated 28.2.1978 passed by the Deputy Director of Consolidation, Jaunpur.2. It appears from the pleading of the parties that the property in dispute is of village Kurthuwa, Pargana Gardwara, Tehsil Machchli-shahar, district Jaunpur.3. From the pleading of the petitioners, it is apparent that Gajadhar was a fixed rate tenant of certain properties situate in different villages, namely, Kurthuwa, Meerapur Stroman. Manapur and Ghuskhuri. The fixed rate tenancy of these villages were mortgaged by Gajadhar in favour of certain outsiders who are neither interested nor are necessary parties in the suit. Gajadhar died leaving behind him his widow Smt. Sirtaji, who through registered sale deed sold her entire right of redemption to Mala Badal, who has been shown in ...
Tag this Judgment!Bishan Pal Singh Vs. Giriraj Singh and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-24-2000
Reported in: 2000(2)AWC1783
Shitla Pd. Srivastava, J.1. This writ petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, has been filed by the petitioners for quashing the order dated 19.5.1994 passed by the Deputy Director of Consolidation. Ghaziabad.2. The brief facts as stated by the petitioners in the present writ petition are that the land in dispute was recorded as bhumidhar of one Giriraj Singh in the basic year khatauni. At the time of portal, Biahan Pal Singh and Om Pal Singh (petitioners') sons of Har Bhajan Slngh also claimed co-bhumidhari right along with Giriraj Slngh. The petitioners have given pedigree, which does not appear to be disputed.3. Respondent No. 1, Giriraj Slngh, filed objection under Section 9A (2) of the U. P. Consolidation of Holdings Act claiming that the land in dispute to be his self-acquired property and also claimed to be recorded as a sole bhumidhar. The petitioners contested the claim of the respondent No. 1 and alleged that the property in dispute is joint property as the ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »