Allahabad Court May 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.
State of U.P Vs. 14th Addl. District Judge, Agra and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-11-2001
Reported in: 2001(2)AWC1578
B. K. Rathi, J.1. The premises in dispute is number 3/50 (new) 165/1 (old) is five storied building with land underneath, known as Bharatpur House, Kandhari, Agra, owned by Bharatpur Royal Family Religious and Ceremonial Trust, a public religious trust. The ground floor of the said premises was reported to be vacant by the Rent Control Inspector as the premises was vacated by District Planning Officer. Notice was sent for consideration of vacancy. No objections were filed. Therefore, the vacancy was declared on 17.11.1997, and by order, dated 29.1,1998 the premises was allotted to the District Supply Officer, who has also obtained possession.2. The respondent No. 3 moved an application for the review of allotment order, dated 29.1.1998. The application was moved on 19,7.1999, Annexure-3 to the petition. The reviewwas requested on several grounds. The respondent No. 2 considered the review application and allowed it on 13.1.2000, by order Annexure-7 to the petition. Against that order, ...
Santosh Kumar Agarwal Vs. Special Judge/Addl. District Judge, Allahaba ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-11-2001
Reported in: 2001(2)AWC1618
B.K. Rathi, J. 1. The dispute is regarding the small shop. That Sri Dwarika Prasad was the tenant of the said shop. After his death, the petitioner and respondent Nos. 7 to 15 being the heirs of Dwarika Prasad became the tenant of the same.2. The landlord moved an application for release under Section 21 (1) (b) of U. P. Act No. XIII of 1972 alleging that the shop is in dilapidated condition and is required for demolition and new construction. The application for release was rejected by order dated 28.4.1988 by the prescribed authority. Annexure-4 to the writ petition. Against that order, the landlord preferred appeal under Section 22 of the Act being appeal No. 104 of 1998 which have been allowed on 27.1.2000 by Additional District Judge, Allahabad by judgment. Annexure-5 to the writ petition. The petitioner, therefore, has approached this Court Invoking the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.3. I have heard Dr. R. G. Padia. Senior ...
Mst. Ahmadeen Begum and Others Vs. Abdul Qayum Khan and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-11-2001
Reported in: [2001(90)FLR348]; 2001LabIC3906; (2001)2UPLBEC1550
Janardan Sahai, J.1. This is an application for review of the judgment of Hon'ble D.C. Srivastava, J. The plaintiff Abdul Qayum Khan filed suit for declaration against the defendant Ashiq Husain, that he is the only son and heir of the deceased Jan Mohammad. The dispute related to entitlement to the provident fund of the deceased Jan Mohammad. The plaintiff claimed the sums on the basis of being son of the deceased while the defendant claimed to be real brother and also relied on a nomination made in his favour by the deceased. The question which arose for determination in the secondappeal was. whether the nomination will prevail or the plaintiff being son had a right of declaration in respect of the said sums. It was held by this Court that relying upon decision of the Supreme Court in : [1984]1SCR992 , that the nominee does not have a right to appropriate the moneys of the provident fund but the heirs have a right to the said fund.2. In support of this review application, Sri Sankath...
State of U.P. Vs. Indra Singh and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-11-2001
Reported in: 2001LabIC4031; (2001)2UPLBEC1467
ORDERS.R. Singh, J. 1. These writ petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seek quashing of the Judgment and order dated 10.9.1997 rendered by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Allahabad Bench, Allahabad in three connected Original Applications being Original Application No. 982 of 1996, Original Application No. 927 of 1996 and Original Application No. 1120 of 1996 besides the order dated 24.10.1993 rendered in Review Application No. 96 of 1997 filed by some of the opposite parties in Original Application No. 982 of 1996.2. The applicants before the Central Administrative Tribunal had challenged the validity of the select list prepared by the authorities for induction of the State Forest Service Officers into the Indian Forest Service and sought quashing of the select list as well as the order dated 7.9.1996 by which some of the officers in the select list were appointed to the Indian Forest Service. The principal ground of challenge to the select list was that the a...
Satguru Sharnanand Vs. Shiv Kailash Pandey
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-11-2001
Reported in: 2001(3)AWC2008; (2001)3UPLBEC2093
S. Ambwani, J.1. The applicant has filed this contempt petition against Sri Shiv Kallash Pandey, the Additional District Judge, Varanasi, alleging that he had heard the arguments in four revisions on 22nd September, 1989 and had fixed 26th September, 1989, for delivery of judgment, in all four cases. It is alleged that a transfer application was prepared on 25th September, 1989 and was presented in the office of the District Judge, Varanasi. Since the Courts closed half day due to reference on death of an Advocate, the said application was ordered to be put up on 26th September, 1989 as first case. On 26th September, 1989, the District Judge, Varanasi, stayed delivery of judgment and despite the communication of this order by the learned counsel for the applicant, the opposite party signed it. In paragraph 14 of the application, it has been alleged that the opposite party granted to the learned counsel for the applicant ten minutes time to bring the stay order, as the judgments had bee...
Ravi Dutt Sharma Vs. State of U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-11-2001
Reported in: 2001CriLJ4408
ORDERU.S. Tripathi, J.1. This petition Under Section 482, Cr. P.C. has been filed for quashing the order dated 12-5-87, 21-3-89 and 17-5-90, passed by Munsif Magistrate Bijnor and Special Judge, Bijanor for discharge of the applicant in Criminal Case No. 1720 of 1987 and for quashing the proceedings in the above criminal case.2. A report was lodged against the applicant Under Sections 379, I.P.C. and 39 of Indian Electricity Act on 5-11-1983, on the basis of which a case at crime No. 547 of 1983 was registered under the said sections. After investigation the police submitted charge-sheet in the said case. However, the charge-sheet was placed before the Magistrate on 12-5-1987. The Magistrate ordered registration of the case and issued summons to the applicant. The applicant moved an application for discharging him on the ground that the occurrence took place on 5-11-1983 and cognizance of the offence was taken on 15-12-1987 that is much after three years of limitation and, therefore, h...
M.D. Gautam Vs. Union of India and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-10-2001
Reported in: [2001(90)FLR279]; 2001LabIC3525; (2001)2UPLBEC1752
S.R. Singh, J.1. Petitioner, a Senior Auditor who retired from service in January, 1998 from L.A.O. (AF), Agra, had been suspended from service vide order dated 21.1.1994 with retrospective effect, i.e.. 9.11.1993 (Anncxure-1 to the petition). By means of the order dated 7.11.1994. the petitioner was resituated in service, his suspension order having been revoked with immediate effect in exercise of powers conferred by clause (c) of sub-rule (v) of Rule 10 of the Central Civil Services (Classification. Control and Appeal) Rules. 1965. The causative factor of his suspension, as would transpire from the record, was his detention in public custody for a period exceeding 48 hours in a criminal case under Sections 323 and 506. I.P.C. The essence of his grievance is that he Is being paid provisional pension only stemming from the reason that a criminal case under Sections 323 and 506, I.P.C. has been lingering trial in the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Agra.2. The Instant pe...
Raja Ram (Decd.) Through L.Rs. and Others Vs. Ram Sabad and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-10-2001
Reported in: 2001(2)AWC1651; (2001)3UPLBEC2144
ORDERU. K. Dhaon, J.1. Heard Sri R. P. Singh, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Sri V. S. Tripathi appearing on behalf of the opposite parties.2. The petitioners have approached this Court against the order dated 8.2.1980 passed by opposite party No. 10 and the order dated 29.8.1978 passed by opposite party No. 11.3. The brief facts of the case are that one Baiju, the Co-Bhumidhar along with Raja Ram, Rajmani, Kalpnath and Dharamraj transferred his share through the sale deed dated 16.7.1974 in favour of opposite party Nos. 1 to 6 and by another sale deed executed on the same day, i.e., 16.7.1974. transferred his share in favour of opposite party Nos. 7 to 9. Thereafter the transferees moved the application before the Consolidation Officer for mutation of their names in the revenue records. The petitioners Raja Ram and three others filed objection and the Consolidation Officer rejected the mutation application on the ground that the transfer was bad as no permis...
Lady Parassan Kaur Charitable Educational Trust Society Vs. State of U ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-10-2001
Reported in: 2001(3)AWC1801
R.H. Zaidi, J.1. These five writ petitions arise out of proceedings under Section 10 (2) of the U. P. Imposition of Ceiling on Land Holdings Act. 1960 (for short 'the Act') and are directed against the orders passed by the Appellate Authority allowing the appeals filed by the contesting respondent and setting aside the orders passed by the Prescribed Authority.2. In all these petitions, common questions of law and fact were involved, they were, therefore, heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment. Writ Petition No. 23641 of 1988 shall be the leading case.3. The relevant facts giving rise to the present petitions, in brief, are that it was on 24.6.1974, the Prescribed Authority issued notice to the petitioner through its trustees under Section 10 (2) of the Act as no return was filed in reply of general notice under Section 9 of the Act. On receipt of the notice, the petitioner filed objection mainly claiming that the land in dispute was owned by a public trust, n...
Rajendra Prasad and ors. Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-10-2001
Reported in: (2001)2UPLBEC1794
S.R. Singh, J.1. Both the petitions are inter-knit by common questions of law and fact and being amenable to disposal by a Composite order, the petitions were taken up together with the consent of the learned Counsel, for the parties.2. The dispute relates to appointment on posts of Sub-Inspector of Police and the facts concisely stated are that the petitioners had put form their candidatures for appointment pursuant to an advertisement published in Newspaper on 10.10.91. The petitioners in writ petition No. 2223 of 2000 are backward class candidates whereas the petitioners in writ petition No. 19900 of 2000 belong to general category.3. The gravemen of the petitioners is that despite direction given by this Court to fill up the unfilled and dropped vacancies, the waiting list was wrongly abbreviated to 25% of the main list. It appears that in the course of interview, the State Government cancelled the entire selection vide notification dated 9th June, 1994 but the Government decision ...
- ‹ Prev
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- Next ›
- Last »