Allahabad Court July 2000 Judgments
Smt. Saroj Vs. Smt. Imarta Saini and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-31-2000
Reported in: 2000(4)AWC3152
O.P. Garg, J.1. The order dated 13th July. 2000, passed by Sri K.K. Tyagi, Special Judge/Additional District and Sessions Judge, Mathura, directing the recounting of the votes on the application of, respondent No. 1 Smt. Imarta Saini in her Election Petition No. 66/95-96 has given rise to the present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 2. The wood-cut profile of the case is that the present writ petitioner Smt. Saroj was declared elected as Adhyaksh. Nagar Panchayat, Govardhan in district Mathura on 27th November. 1995. Smt. Imarta respondent No. 1 filed an election petition to challenge the election of the present petitioner primarily on the ground that the votes polled in favour of the election petitioner in respect of certain wards were illegally excluded from counting while the votes polled by certain other candidates were included for counting to declare the present petitioner Smt. Saroj as elected. It has been specifically pleaded in the election petitio...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Sales Tax Vs. Kashi Prasad Ram Chandra Lal
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-31-2000
Reported in: [2001]122STC567(All)
R.K. Agrawal, J.1. These six revisions filed by the Commissioner of Sales Tax, U.P., Lucknow, raises common question as to whether penalty under Section 10-A of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 can be levied upon the assessee-opposite party on the purchase of Gari Gola from outside the State of U.P. against declaration form C.2. The assessee-opposite party is a registered dealer under the provisions of the Central Sales Tax Act and is engaged in the business of Kerana, etc. It is specifically registered under the Central Sales Tax Act, as a dealer for kerana, colour food, drugs, dry fruits, seeds, kattha, supari, campher and chemicals.3. According to the contention of the assessee-opposite party it had been importing Gari Gola against form C as Gari ka Gola is generally treated as an item of Kerana. It is sold by the Kerana dealers. The assessing officer had been permitting the assessee-opposite party to purchase Gari Gola against form C for the last several years, but on account of som...
Tag this Judgment!Nabbu Khan Vs. Iiird Additional District Judge, Pilibhit and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-28-2000
Reported in: 2000(4)AWC2667; 2000AIHC(All)4470
D. K. Seth, J.1. After hearing Mr. R. N. Bhalla and Mr. Somesh Khare for the applicants and Mr. S. A. Gilani, be an order dated 18th July, 2000. was dictated in open court disposing of the said application after having allowed the substitution on the ground that the Impugned order arose out of a proceedings under Order XXI, Rule 97 of the Code of Civil Procedure, which was otherwise appealable and no revision lies, and, therefore, the case was remitted to the Court for deciding the revision directing it to treat the memo of revision as a memo of appeal in exercise of its appellate jurisdiction since the order determining the question under Rule 98 or under Rule 100 of Order XXI of the Code are deemed decrees by reason of Rule 103 of Order XXI. Mr. Khare had pointed out that the impugned orders were passed in a proceeding arising under Order XXI, Rule 97. This question was specifically pointed out to Mr. Gilani, who conceded to the situation. Therefore, the said order was passed.Subsequ...
Tag this Judgment!Rama Kant Vs. State of M.P. and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-28-2000
Reported in: 2000CriLJ4682; (2000)3UPLBEC2215
B.K. Rathi, J.1. Opposite Party No. 2 is an accused for offence under Section 326, IPC in Crime No. 61 of 1998, P.S. Jhangaha, District Gorakhpur, of which the FIR was lodged by the applicant. Opposite party No. 2 moved an application before the Juvenile Judge, Gorakhpur pleading that he is a juvenile. The Juvenile Judge, Gorakhpur rejected the application after considering the evidence and held that opposite party No. 2 is not a juvenile. Against that order, opposite party No. 2 preferred Criminal Appeal No. 26 of 1999 under Section 37 of the Juvenile Justice Act. The appeal was heard and decided on 20.10.1999 by IIIrd Additional Sessions Judge, Gorakhpur and he has declared opposite party No. 2 a juvenile. Against that order, the present revision has been preferred by the complainant.2.1 have heard Sri H.N. Singh, learned Counsel for the complainant revisionist and Sri B.K. Tripathi, learned Counsel for opposite-party No. 2, who is accused in this case.3. The perusal of the orders sh...
Tag this Judgment!Girish Chandra Saxena and ors. Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-28-2000
Reported in: 2000CriLJ4684
U.S. Tripathi, J.1. Heard Sri Ramji Saxena, learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned A.G.A. for respondents Nos. 1 and 2.2. This writ petition has been filed for issuing an order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents Nos. 1 arid 2 to wash of their hands from the investigation of case crime No. 262 of 2000 under Sections 498A, 504/506 and 120B, IPC and under Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act. P. S. Fatehgarh, District Farrukhabad and commanding respondents Nos. 1 and 2 to transfer investigation to the concerned police station Subhash Nagar, Bareilly.3. The learned counsel for the petitioners contended that it is clear from the allegations of the FIR of the impugned case (Annexure-1 to the writ petition) that the alleged occurrence of the offences took place at the residence of petitioners i.e. Subhash Nagar, P. S. Subhash Nagar, District Bareilly and the First Information Report was lodged at P. S. Kotwali. Fatehgarh, District Farrukhabad and no...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Swarn Manjal Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-28-2000
Reported in: 2000CriLJ4679
B.K. Rathi, J.1. This is a revision under Section 397/401, Cr.P.C. The facts giving rise to this revision are as follows :2. The opposite party No. 2 filed a complaint against the revisionist and three others for offences under Section 406, I.P.C. and 138 N.I. Act which was case No. 792 of 1998 pending before VIth Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Agra. The learned Magistrate recorded the evidence under Sections 200 and 202, Cr.P.C. and thereafter passed the order under Section 204, Cr.P.C. summoning the revisionist. In compliance of the process issued against the revisionist, the revisionist appeared and filed objections pleading that no case is made out against her and therefore, the order of summoning her under Section 204, Cr.P.C. be recalled. The application was not considered on the merits. On the other hand, it was rejected only on the ground that objections against the order for issuing summons arc not maintainable in view of the decision of Full Bench of this Court in the ...
Tag this Judgment!Dr. Prabhu NaraIn Saxena Vs. Chancellor, Agra University and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-27-2000
Reported in: 2000(3)AWC2484; (2000)3UPLBEC1951
Sudhir Narain, J. 1. The petitioner seeks to quash the order dated 28.11.1988, passed by the Chancellor. Agra University, respondent No. 1, whereby the selection of the petitioner to the post of Reader in Zoology in Agra University (hereinafter referred to as the University) has been set aside.2. Briefly stated the facts are that a post of Reader in Zoology fell vacant at the University. The University advertised the post. Dr. S.P. Jain, respondent No. 3, applied for appointment. The Selection Committee, in its meeting dated 29th April. 1986, interviewed ten candidates. Respondent No. 3 also appeared for selection before the Selection Committee. The Selection Committee did not find respondent No. 3 or any other candidate suitable for the post and recommended for re-advertisement of the post. The post was re-advertised in the newspapers. The petitioner and respondent No. 3 along with other candidates applied for the post in the month of December, 1986.3. The University wrote a letter to...
Tag this Judgment!Hari Ram Yadav Vs. State of U.P. and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-27-2000
Reported in: 2000(3)AWC2594; [2001(89)FLR285]; (2001)2UPLBEC1268
U.K. Dhaon, J.1. I have heard Sri S. M. Nasir, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri H. S. Sahay, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the opposite party No. 4 and the learned standing counsel, who has put in appearance on behalf of the opposite parties Nos. 1 and 2. None has appeared on behalf of the opposite party No. 3,2. Petitioner has prayed for a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the opposite parties to handover the charge of acting principal to the petitioner in pursuance of the order dated 29.1.1996. Petitioner has alleged in the petition that he was appointed as a Sanskrit Teacher in L.T. Grade on 2.7.1965 and later on he was promoted as lecturer on 1.12.1971. Sri Brij Ballabh Singh, the permanent principal of the college died on 5.9.1986 and thereafter the post of principal had fallen vacant and Sri Desh Raj Slngh was appointed as ad hoc principal of the college who submitted his resignation, on 15.4.1988, a photostate copy of whichis Annexure-1 to the writ pet...
Tag this Judgment!Canara Bank Vs. Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-labour Cour ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-27-2000
Reported in: 2000(4)AWC2858; [2000(86)FLR956]; (2000)3UPLBEC2504
D. K. Seth, J.1. The order dated October 27, 1997 passed in L.C.A. No. 1151 of 1997 by the presiding officer, Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Kanpur has since been challenged in this writpetition. Mr. Tewari, learned counsel for the petitioner employer contends that the order allowing payment of back wages cannot be sustained since it had included payment at the rate at which the workmen would have been entitled to if he was reinstated with back wages in view of the qualified expression used in the award to the extent that 'back wages at the rate at which lastly drawn.' According to him, this will not include any increment nor any revision of pay neither any other components as are mentioned in Section 2(rr) of the industrial Disputes Act while defining the word 'wages'. According to him, the workman would not be entitled even to Dearness Allowance. He relies on the interpretation of the words 'last drawn' of the Apex Court in the case of Dena Bank v. Kirti Kum...
Tag this Judgment!Mohd. Latif Khan Vs. State of U.P. and Another
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-27-2000
Reported in: 2000(4)AWC3074
Khem Karan, J.1. The petitioner was appointed on the post of Non-Medical Assistant on 31.7.1964, after undergoing prescribed training course of six months. Before he could be confirmed in his appointment, his services were terminated by a simplicitcr order dated 4.2.1970 passed by Swasthya Sewa Nideshak, Uttar Pradesh. Against his termination, he represented to the Secretary. Ministry of Health. Govt. of U. P. and also to the Hon'ble Chief Minister, but nothing was done by them. He, therefore, served a notice under Section 80 of C.P.C. and thereafter filed a regular Suit No. 813of 1972 in the Court of Munsif, Gorakhpur. The main ground taken in the suit was that the termination order was punitive in nature and was, therefore, bad for want of compliance of Article 311(2) of the Constitution of India. It was said that several juniors to the petitioner were retained and only the petitioner was removed from the job.2. The State filed its written statement (copy of which is Annexure-4) in t...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- Next ›
- Last »