Allahabad Court February 2001 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.
Gajey Singh and anr. (In Jail) Vs. State of U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-16-2001
Reported in: 2001CriLJ2838
1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 4-12-1980 passed 'by the then 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Meerut, in Sessions Trial No. 276 of 1979, convicting the appellants under Section 302 read with Section 34, Indian Penal Code and sentencing each of them to life imprisonment.2. Briefly stated, the facts of the prosecution case are that in the morning of 27-1-1979 at about 8 A.M. Lakhi Ram, deceased of this case and his brother P.W. 1 Jai Singh were sitting at the Gher of Sahid Akhtar, P.W. 3. Accused Gajey Singh and his father Mehar Singh came there. Some quarrel took place between Lakhi Ram and Mehar Singh, father of the accused persons. On the intervention of Sahid Akhtar and Virendra, the matter was got settled and the parties went back.3. It is alleged that at about 9.30 A.M. on the same day, Lakhi Ram followed by Jai Singh and his father Godha Singh were going towards their field for the 'chhol' (harvesting of sugarcane crop) and when they reached in front...
Surendra Singh Vs. State of U.P and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-15-2001
Reported in: 2001(2)AWC1106; [2001(89)FLR562]; (2001)3UPLBEC2069
M. Quddusi, J. 1. By means of this writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 2nd September, 1999, putting the result of promotion of the petitioner on the post of Inspector of Police in a sealed cover.2. The necessary facts draped in brevity are that the petitioner was enrolled as Constable in U. P. Police on 13.3.1975 and after completing 5 years service, he appeared for selection to the post of Sub-Inspector and on 1.6.1980, the petitioner was selected accordingly. After completing the training, the petitioner joined as Sub-Inspector w.e.f. 1.6.1981 and out of 1,200 candidates, the petitioner was figured at S1. No. 9 in the list. It has been averred that the petitioner had received 112 cash awards and as many as 76 good entries. These awards were granted sometimes bythe Inspector General of Police and sometimes by the Deputy Inspector General of Police. He has completed refresher course between 24.4.1987 to 23.5.1987 at P.T.C. Moradabad. It has been urged that as p...
Mangali Prasad Pal Vs. State of U.P. and Another
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-15-2001
Reported in: 2001(2)AWC1139
I. M. Quddusi, J.1. Since the petitions are knit together by reasons of common question of law being involved therein and also by reasons of facts being identical, these petitions were grouped together and heard accordingly for convenient disposal by a common judgment.2. The necessary facts giving rise to Writ Petition No. 2474 of 2000 (S/S) are that by means of the aforesaid petition, the petitioner has the challenged the impugned order dated 28.4.2000 passed by the Senior Superintendent of Police, Lucknow, transferring the petitioner from the post of Station Officer, Police Station. Thakurganj, Lucknow to Police Station, Maha Nagar, Lucknow, as Senior Sub-Inspector.3. It has been averred in the petition that the petitioner is a sincere and obedient police personnel. He has come to Lucknow on transfer from district Banda in the year 1997. He was transferred from D.C.R.B. to P.S. Thakurganj as Station Officer vide order dated 2.11.1999. Since, then the petitioner has been performing hi...
Rakesh Kumar Contractor Vs. Superintending Engineer, Irrigation Works ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-15-2001
Reported in: (2001)2UPLBEC1322
V.M. Sahai, J.1. The petitioner is a contractor. He executed some work in pursuance of a contract entered into between the petitioner and respondents No. 2 to 4. A dispute arose between the parties. The petitioner on 10.3.1992 invoked the arbitration Clause 34 of the agreement. Sri Kuldeep Singh Sohan. Chief Engineer (Ganga), Irrigation Department, Sichai Bhawan, Vistoria Park, Meerut appointed himself as Sole Arbitrator on 17.7.1997. Notices were issued and proceedings were started by the Arbitrator. The petitioner filed Misc. Case No. 218 of 1998 impleading Sri Kuldeep Singh Sohan, the sole arbitrator and respondent Nos. 2 to 4 as parties. The application was allowed by the Additional District Judge vide order dated 18.5.1998. He removed Sri Kuldeep Singh Sohan and appointed in his place Sri K. K. Sahanan as the new arbitrator. This order dated 18.5.1998 was challenged by Sri Kuldeep Singh Sohan before this Court by means of Civil Revision No. 284 of 1998 which was dismissed summaril...
Girja Shanker Dwivedi Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-15-2001
Reported in: (2001)2UPLBEC1427
I.M. Quddusi, J.1. The instant petition is directed against the impugned order dated 7.8.2000 and order dated 1.9.2000 by which the petitioner has been directed to be retired on the date, of attaining 58 years of age.2. Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner who is working as Jeep Driver and the aforesaid orders have been passed treating the petitioner as Class III employee.3. I have heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel at length and perused the documents annexed therewith.4. The contention of learned Counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner was initially appointed against the post of Jeep Driver (light Motor Vehicles) on 28.1.1964. According to his own averments made in para-5 of the writ petition, subsequently, the post of Jeep Driver has been placed in the pay scale of Rs. 950- 1500 which has since been revised to Rs. 3050-4590, but his assertion is that even though the post of deep Driver has been placed in Class III but he has not...
Babu and anr. Etc. Vs. State of U.P. Etc.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-15-2001
Reported in: 2001CriLJ2485
M.A. Khan, J.1. The above noted Criminal Appeal and Criminal Revision arise out of the same judgment and under Sectioner dated 30-9-1980 passed by Sri Y.P. Singh, the then Addl. Distt. and Sessions Judge, Budaun in Sesssion Trial No. 408 of 1979 thereby convicting the appellants Babu and Mohkam of the offences punishable under Sections 147/148/302 read with Section 149, I.P.C. and sentencing them to undergo imprisonment for life under Section 302 read with Section 149, I.P.C. and R.I. for a period of one year under Section 147, I.P.C. to appellant Babu as also R.I. for a period of two years under Section 148, I.P.C. to appellant Mohkam. Accused Naurangi, Nami and Shishpal have however been acquitted under the same under Sectioner and against that acquittal, the complainant Tarachand has filed the revision. Since the appeal and the revision arise out of the same judgment and under Sectioner, they are being disposed of by the common judgment.2. The facts leading to the prosecution of the...
Om Prakash Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-15-2001
Reported in: 2001CriLJ2859
G.P. Mathur, J.1. The petitioner Om Prakash was working as senior assistant in the District Hospital, Pilibhit. A FIR was lodged against him under Section 409, IPC on 24-3-1999 alleging that he committed misappropriation of Rs. 1,78,504/- while discharging his duties. The case was investigated and, thereafter, papers were sent to the Directorate of Medical and Health, Lucknow, for granting sanction for his prosecution. The Director (Administration), Medical and Health by his order dated 16-10-2000 granted sanction for the prosecution of the petitioner under Section 409, IPC in Case Crime No. 100 of 2000. The present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution has been filed for quashing of the said order.2. Shri S.P. Singh learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner Om Prakash did not himself misappropriate any public funds and on the contrary money was taken from him by the Chief Medical Officer on the pretext of official expenditure who did not give a...
Anand NaraIn Singh Vs. U.P. Secondary Education Service, Selection Boa ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-14-2001
Reported in: (2001)2UPLBEC959
Yatindra Singh, J.1. These writ petitions (detailed in Appendix-9 of this judgment) challenge selection of Heade of private High School (10th Class) and Intermediate Colleges (12th Class) (referred to as institutions in this judgment). These selections are being made by U.P. Secondary Education Service Selection Board (the Board) under U.P. Secondary Education Service Selection Board Act, 1982 and the rules framed therein. These petitions raise common grounds about validity of the cut-off date, validity of the Rules, advertisements inviting application, process of selection, award of marks, and the reservation policy. This judgment decides all writ petitions mentioned in Appendix 9 of this judgment.2. In some cases selected candidates have already joined. In other cases selections could not be held as the selection process was stayed. In most cases selections have been held, but selected candidates could not join due to interim orders. Ad-hociam is still continuing : damaging education...
Pemi and ors. Vs. State of U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-14-2001
Reported in: 2001CriLJ2500
U.S. Tripathi, J.1. The above appeal has been preferred.against the judgment and order dated 28-11-1980 passed by Sri S.S. Agrawal, the then learned Sessions Judge, Budaum, in S.T. No. 30 of 1980 convicting appellants Pemi and Janki under Section 148, 302 read with 149 I.P.C. and 326 read with 149 I.P.C. convicting appellants Hari Singh, Ram Chandra, Dalley and Jhamman under Section 147, 302 read with 149 I.P.C. and 326 read with 149 I.P.C. and convicting appellant Ramjeet under Section 148, 302 read with 149 I.P.C. and 326 I.P.C. and sentencing appellant Pemi and Janki to undergo R.I. for a period of two years under Section 148 I.P.C, imprisonment for life under Sections 302 read with Section 149 I.P.C. and R.I. for a period of three years under Section 326 read with 149, ' appellant Ramjeet to undergo two years R.I. under Section 148 I.P.C, imprisonment for life under Section 302 read with Section 149 I.P.C. and three years R.I. under Section 326 I.P.C. Appellants Hari Singh, Ram Cha...
Prem Chand Vs. Workmen Compensation Commissioner, Agra and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-13-2001
Reported in: 2001(2)AWC1192; [2001(89)FLR679]
Pradeep Kant, J.1. The petitioner being aggrieved by an order dated 1.2.2001 passed by the Workmen Compensation Commissioner, by virtue of which the ex parte order dated 6th March. 1999, has been set aside, has approached this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.2. The main thrust of challenge to the impugned order is as follows :(i) The Workmen Compensation Commissioner under the provisions of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923, was having no power to set aside the ex parte order. (ii) The only remedy available to the petitioner was to file an appeal under Section 30 of the Act and that too within the prescribed period. (iii) There was neither any power to entertain the application for setting aside the ex parte order nor the benefit of Section 5 of Indian Limitation Act could be given to the petitioner as the said benefit in view of sub-section (3) of Section 30 is available to the appeals only. (iv) In view of Section 23 which prescribes power or procedure of Comm...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »