Allahabad Court February 2001 Judgments
Union of India (Uoi) and ors. Vs. Bishwambhar Nath Misra and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-26-2001
Reported in: [2001(89)FLR435]; (2001)IILLJ1225All; (2001)1UPLBEC864
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri AK. Dave, who has appeared for the respondents.2. The petitioners have challenged the impugned order, dated November 9, 2000, Annexure 4 to the writ petition. It appears that respondent No. 1 was in Railway service and was chargesheeted for his absence without leave for certain periods. After enquiry he was removed from service. The Tribunal substituted the punishment of removal from service by punishment of compulsory retirement. Evidently the Tribunal took this humanitarian approach because the respondent No. 1 has retired from service and by substituting the punishment of removal from service by the punishment of compulsory retirement it enabled him to get pensionary benefits in his old age. We, therefore, see no reason to interfere with this humanitarian approach of the Tribunal.3. The learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the Tribunal cannot substitute the quantum of punishment awarded by the concerned authority...
Tag this Judgment!Sher Singh Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-26-2001
Reported in: (2001)1UPLBEC866
M. Katju and O. Bhatt, JJ.1. The petitioner has been transferred to Uttaranchal. Against the impugned transfer order he made a representation on 12.1.2001 and he may make such other representation as advised and the same will be decide by the concerned authority within a month of production of the certified copy of this order.2. Till disposal of the representation the impugned transfer order dated 11.1.2001 and the order dated. 19.2.200] shall remain stayed.3. The petition is disposed off.4. We would also like to recommend to the State Government that no State Government employee should be permanently posted to Uttaranchal against his wish. People living in the plains may have difficulty in adjusting to hill areas if they are permanently posted there against their wish, and some of them may even get mental depression, apart from other hardships.5. In our opinion, it would be advisable that if certain employees are required in Uttaranchal then the U.P, State Government employees can be ...
Tag this Judgment!R.T. Industries Vs. U.P. Cooperative Federation Ltd. and Another
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-23-2001
Reported in: 2001(2)AWC1145
Jagdish Bhalla, J.1. By means of this writ petition, the petitioners has prayed for a writ, order or direction to command the respondents to communicate to the petitioner the acceptance letter of his bid relating to negotiations which took place on 8th December, 2000 to purchase the wheat within the stipulated period. He has further prayed to quash the negotiation proceedings dated 24th January, 2001.2. The facts of the case, in brief. are that the U. P. CooperativeFederation Limited (hereinafter referred to as P.C.F.) invited tenders for sale of wheat lying in the godowns of the P.C.F. including its godowns at Sahajahanpur wherefrom 6958 metric tonnes of wheat was to be sold by theP.C.F. Besides other firms, the petitioner and respondent No. 3 also submitted their tenders. On 8th December, 2000 tenders were opened. The petitioner-firm had quoted Rs. 500 per quintal for purchase of 2,880 quintals of wheat while the respondent No. 3 offered Rs. 565.52 paisa per quintal for purchase of 4...
Tag this Judgment!Prem Lata Pandey (Dr.) (Smt.) Vs. State of U.P. and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-23-2001
Reported in: [2001(89)FLR346]; (2001)2UPLBEC1264
D.S. Sinha, J.1. Heard Sri A.K. Gaur, the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri Vinay Malviya., the learned Standing Counsel of the State of U.P., representing the respondents.2. By means of instant Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner urges this Court to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to grant to her personal promotion to the post of Reader and its scale of pay.3. Undisputed act and events constituting facts of the case, as they emerge from the pleading on record, are these: The petitioner was appointed as a Lecturer in Pharmacy at Motilal Nehru Medical College, Allahabad on ad-hoc basis in the year 1974, and was regularized on 12th February, 1986.4. In the year 1986, the State of Uttar Pradesh issued a Government Order dated 24th June, 1986 envisaging grant of personal promotion to Lecturers of various Medical Colleges of the State on fulfillment of conditions specified there...
Tag this Judgment!Dr. Heera Lal Vs. State of U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-23-2001
Reported in: 2001CriLJ2849
J.C. Gupta, J.1. Appellant-Dr. Heera Lal has been sentenced to death under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code for committing the murder of his wife and three minor children in the early hours of morning of 26-1-1999 at his in-laws House No. C-33/278, B2 Chandau Chhittupur, Varanasi city within the area of police station, Sigra, Varanasi. By the impugned judgment dated 8-12-1999 Sessions Judge, Varanasi has found the appellant guilty under Section 302, I.P.C. as well as under Section 309, I.P.C. for making attempt to commit suicide. However, since the appellant has been sentenced to extreme penalty of death under Section 302, I.P.C. no separate sentence under Section 309, I.P.C. has been passed by the learned Sessions Judge.2. Undisputedly, appellant was married to Smt. Suraj Kumar! deceased about 14-15 years before the incident in question. Out of their wedlock three children, two daughters, namely, Km. Sajal aged about 11 years and Km. Priya aged about 8 years and one son Prince age...
Tag this Judgment!Jitendra Kumar and anr. Vs. State of U.P. and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-23-2001
Reported in: 2001CriLJ2872
ORDERS.K. Agarwal, J.1. Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A.2. The contention of the learned counsel for the applicants is that the defence plea of alibi was not considered by the police despite the same having been brought to its notice at the investigative stage itself. The submission of charge-sheet even after taking all these documents supporting /plea of alibi prima facie shows that the applicant's case was not probed or investigated, Apart from this it is also contended that summoning order has been passed without any application of mind. Summoning order in police challan case is issued on the basis of the allegations made in the charge-sheet. I have gone through the copy of the charge-sheet, which has been filed as Annexure-6 to the affidavit, which clearly indicates that a case is made out on the basis of the evidence collected by the investigating agency under Section 323, 324 and 506 I.P.C. Even the perusal of the first information report clearly shows ...
Tag this Judgment!Raja Ram S/O Rampati and ors. Vs. State of U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-23-2001
Reported in: 2001CriLJ2880
J.C. Gupta, J.1. Appellants, named above, have preferred this appeal against the judgment and order dated 23-3-1985 passed in Session Trial No. 107 of 1984 passed by Sri S.K. Pandey, the then Additional Session Judge, Ballia, whereby they have been convicted and sentenced to imprisonment for life under Section 320 read with Section 149 I.P.C. Appellants Raja Ram and Ram Nath have been further convicted and sentenced to undergo R.I. for one and half years each under Section 14 I.P.C. whereas all other appellants have been convicted and sentenced to one year R.I. each under Section 147 I.P.C. All the sentences are to run concurrently.2. Abridged version of the posecution case is that the deceased of this case was Yadunath Chauhan. On 10-4-1984 he was going from his village Bankat to village Jagirsar for some work. When he was near the Government tube-well and the field of Balchand, all the appellants surrounded him. Time was about 6.30 a.m. Appellants Raja Ram and Ram Nath were having 's...
Tag this Judgment!Ashok Kumar JaIn and ors. Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-22-2001
Reported in: (2001)2UPLBEC1599
Sudhir Narain, J.1. The petitioners have sought to quash the order dated 6.2.2001 whereby the appointments of the petitioners to the post of Junior Engineer have been cancelled by the Engineer-in-Chief, Irrigation Department, U.P. Lucknow, respondent No. 22. Briefly stated the facts are that U.P. Public Service Commission, Allahabad issued an advertisement in the daily Newspaper Rashtriya Sahara on 2.7.1998 inviting applications from the candidates for recruitment on the post of Junior Engineer (Civil) and Junior Engineer (Mechanical) in U.P. Irrigation Department. The petitioners applied for the posts. They appeared in preliminary examination on 10th October, 1998 and after being successful in the said examination they were invited to appear in the main examination on 29th/30th November, 1999. They were called for interview and appeared before the interview committee between 26,6.2000 to 23.7.2000. They were selected for the post of Junior Engineer (Civil). The result of the examinati...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Usha Pandey Vs. A.C.J.M. Ii and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-22-2001
Reported in: 2001CriLJ2836
ORDER1. Heard the applicant. Km. Abha Pandey, in person, Sri V. B. Upadhyaya, learned Senior Advocate whom we requested to assist us as amicus curiage and also the learned Government Counsel.2. This Habeas Corpus petition has been filed by Km. Abha Pandey on behalf of her mother Smt. Usha Pandey, who has been taken into custody in pursuance of the order of the learned A.C.J.M. II. Basti dated 17-1-2001, in Criminal Misc. Case No. 80 of 2001. State v. Usha Pandey, under Section 340, Cr. P. C.3. We have perused the order dated 17-1-2001. It appears that Smt. Usha Pandey had appeared before the learned A.C.J.M.-II Basti on 17-1-2001 in a case under Section 125, Cr. P. C. against her husband Prahlad Pandey. During the hearing she is said to have made derogatory remarks against the learned Magistrate. The order dated 17-1-2001 states:-^^Jherh mek ik.Ms; fnukad17&1&2001 dks le; djhc 11&55 cts U;k;ky; esa mifLFkr gksdj tksj&tksjls; cgl djus yxh rFkk bl U;k;ky; ea dk;Zjr ihBklhu vf/kdkjh] vf/k...
Tag this Judgment!Ram Subhag Pandey Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-22-2001
Reported in: 2001CriLJ2891
ORDERS.K. Agarwal, J.1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA.2. I have gone through the annexures appended to the affidavit filed in support of the present application under Section 482, Cr.P.C.3. The brief facts of the case are that an application was moved by opposite party No. 3 Sada Nand against his own brother that there is a dispute with regard to the partition as well as possession of the holding between them. Even the police report also discloses clearly that there exists a dispute for partition as well as possession between these brothers. The police report, however, also indicate that the disputed property was in possession of applicant. The applicant was holding entire joint property for himself as well as on behalf of his brother since it was not partitioned. Even the order of learned S.D.M. under Section 145(1), Cr.P.C. and the order under Section 146(1), Cr.P.C. are also indicative of the same situation.4. The proceedings under Section 145(1), Cr.P.C. c...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »