Allahabad Court July 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.
Chandresh Paswan Vs. State of U.P. and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-13-2001
Reported in: 2001CriLJ4430
ORDERJ.C. Gupta, J.1. Heard Shri Sunil Kumar for the applicant in revision and the learned A.G.A.2. This revision is directed against the order dated 6-7-2001 passed by Addl. Sessions Judge (Court No. 11) Gorakhpur in Sessions Trial No. 107 of 1998 directing the applicant to appear in person before the Court on 12-7-2001. It appears that when PW. 5 Head Constable Shree Niwas Rai was examined in the Court below he stated that he could identify the miscreants in Court if confronted with. Since the applicant was not present, in Court on that day, the learned D.G.C. moved an application before the Court to adjourn the case and to direct the applicant to be present in person so that the said witness could identify him as one of the miscreants. This application has been allowed by the impugned order.3. Apart from the fact that the order in question is an interlocutory order against which no revision lies on account of the bar created by Sub-section (2) of Section 397, Cr. P.C. this Court als...
Dharm Vir Vs. Smt. Nemwati and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-13-2001
Reported in: 2001CriLJ4427
ORDERJ.C. Gupta, J.1. Heard.2. This revision is directed against the order dated 2-6-2000 passed by Sri Dhani Ram, Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Pilibhit allowing the revision filed by opposite party No. 1 against the order of the Magistrate dated 10-11-1997 whereby accused/applicant was acquitted of the offences punishable under Section 406, IPC and under Sections 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.3. Undisputedly the case before the learned Magistrate proceeded on a complaint filed by opposite party No. 1 which ultimately resulted into acquittal of the applicant. Against this order of acquittal opposite party No. 1 filed revision before the Sessions Judge which has been allowed by the impugned order and the case has been sent back to the trial Court for a fresh decision in the light of observations made in the body of order.4. It is submitted that learned Special Judge has committed gross illegality in allowing the revision totally overlooking the fact that revision itself was not legally ...
Kamal UddIn Vs. Raisa Begum Alias Munni and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-13-2001
Reported in: 2001CriLJ4410
ORDERU.S. Tripathi, J.1. This revision has been directed against the order dated 4-8-1989, passed by Special Judge/Addl. Sessions Judge, Hamirpur in Criminal Revision No. 129 of 1988, allowing the revision and setting aside the order dated 6-9-88, passed by the Magistrate and directing the Magistrate to ensure that the maintenance allowance of Rs. 130/- per month to the opposite party No. 1 be paid regularly in the light of observation made by this Court in order dated 21-7-86 in Criminal Misc. Case No. 8812 of 1986.2. The facts giving rise to this revision are that the applicant and respondent No. 1 are husband and wife respectively. The wife respondent No. 1 moved an application Under Section 125, Cr.P.C. against the applicant before the Magistrate for grant of maintenance allowance at the rate of Rs. 250/-per month. The applicant challenged the above order in a revision before the Sessions Judge, the same was dismissed on 24-4-86. Thereafter the applicant moved this Court in a petit...
Motilal and Brothers Vs. Customs, Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-13-2001
Reported in: 2001(77)ECC629
ORDERS.K. Sen, C.J.1. Heard Shri A.P. Mathur learned Counsel for the petitioner and Shri S.P. Kesarwani learned Standing Counsel for respondents. 2. In the instant writ petition the petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs: (i) issue a writ of certiorari quashing the order dated 27.7.99 served on 6.8.99 read with order dated Nil March 1997 passed on the modification application of stay and stay cum waiver application by the Hon'ble Customs, Excise & Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal, (ii) issue any other writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the Hon'ble Tribunal Mumbai to decide the Appeal No. C/2/R/97 Bom filed by the petitioners without insisting on any pre-deposit within a stipulated period and further to say [stay] the recovery proceedings till the disposal of the Appeal. (iii) issue any other writ, order or direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. (iv) and to award the cost of this petition to the...
Neeraj Kamboj and Others Vs. State of U.P. and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-12-2001
Reported in: 2001(3)AWC2091
G.P. Mathur and U.S. Tripathi, JJ.1. This writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed seeking three reliefs, namely, quashing of the order of reservation of seats, dated 18.5.2000, quashing the election process Including declaration of result dated 26.6.2000 and a writ of mandamus declaratlng appointment of Sub-Divisional Magistrate as Prescribed Authority under U. P. Panchayat Raj (Settlement of Dispute of Election) Rules, 1994, as illegal.2. The petitioners are members of Gram Panchayat Dara Kot Tala, Block Punwaraka, district Saharanpur. They claim that the office of Pradhan of Gram Panchayat Dara Kot Tala was reserved in favour of a Scheduled Caste woman candidate in the elections held in the year. 1995. The State Election Commission issued a notification on 18.5.2000. wherein the office of Pradhan of Gram Panchayat Dara Kot Tala. referred to above was again reserved in favour of a Scheduled Caste woman candidate. The election was held in the third w...
Rajiv Gogte and Others Vs. Addl. District Magistrate (Civil Supplies)/ ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-11-2001
Reported in: 2001(3)AWC2103
R.H. Zaidi, J.1. Heard learned counsel for the parties and also perused the record.2. By means of this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners pray for issuance of a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the order dated 24.5.1998 whereby the building No. 113/68 (residential), Swaroop Nagar, Kanpur Nagar, consisting of three rooms etc. has been declared vacant by the Rent Control and Eviction Officer.3. It appears that originally Mr. W. G. Gogte, the father of petitioner Nos. 1, 2 and 4, and husband of petitioner No. 3, was the tenant of the said building, who died leaving behind the petitioners as his heirs and legal representatives. The petitioners who have been living in the building in question after his death, inherited the tenancy but it was in the year 1996 that an intimation of vacancy is alleged to have been given by the petitioner No. 1 as the petitioners were going to vacate the building in question as they wanted...
Nikhil Kumar Yadav Vs. Secretary, U.P. Public Service Commission, Alla ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-11-2001
Reported in: 2001LabIC3973
S.R. Singh, J. 1. Petitioner, a candidate in the lower Subordinate Examination, 1998 conducted by the Public Service Commission U. P. for appointment in group 'C' category posts advertised by the respondent-Commission in Daily Newspapers displaying 1,395 vacancies, was allotted roll No. 026172. He succeeded in the preliminary examination and thereafter, appeared in the main written examination and on the basis of the marks obtained by him in the written examination, he was called for interview vide letter dated 14.10.1999 which was held on 3.11.1999. The final result was declared by the Commission on 19.12.1999 and was published in the Newspapers on 20.12.1999 but the petitioner's name did not appear in the list of selected candidates albeit the fact that he had secured a total of 283 marks-equal to four other candidates who were selected. The details of the marks obtained by the petitioner and four other candidates who had secured equal marks are delineated below for ready reference.C...
Sandeep Chauhan and Others Vs. State of U.P. and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-11-2001
Reported in: 2001(3)AWC2176; (2001)3UPLBEC2259
S.K. Sen, C.J. 1. Heard Sri Ajay Yadav, learned counsel for the appellants and Sri V. N. Upadhyay, learned standing counsel appearing for the respondents.2. This special appeal is directed against an order passed by the learned single Judge dismissing the writ petition on the ground of the maintainability of the writ petition following decision of this Court in the case of Ashok Kumar Chawla v. Central Board of Secondary Education. Shiksha Kendra. Preet Vihar. New Delhi and others, 1998 UPLBEC 370. In the aforesaid decision, the view taken by the Court was that a writ petition against a college run by a Society is not maintainable.3. Learned standing counsel has, however relied upon a decision in the case of K. Krtshnamacharyulu and others v. Sri Venkateswara Hindu College of Engineering and another, AIR 1998 SC 295, in which the Supreme Court held that taking into consideration the claim of the employees of the said private educational institution, who were appointed on daily wages an...
Shabbir Khan and Another Vs. State of U.P. and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-11-2001
Reported in: (2002)1UPLBEC293
Sudhir Narain and V. M. Sahai, JJ.1. The petitioners seek writ of quo warranto declaring that respondents No. 5 to 15 have ceased to be members of Nagar Palika Parishad, Khurja.2. Briefly stated the facts are that the election of members of Nagar Palika Parishad, Khurja, district Bulandshahr (in short the Parishad) took place in November, 2000. In this election, 25 persons were elected as members of the Parishad from different wards of the Nagar Palika. Smt. Razia Salim was elected as the President. The Parishad was constituted on 2.12.2000. The President and 14 members of the Parishad took oath of allegiance on 2.12.2000. The oath was administered by Sri P. K. Srivastava, Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Khurja. The remaining eleven members protested against the Sub-Divisional Magistrate and did not take oath of allegiance.3. The next meeting of the Parishad took place on 11.12.2000. In these meeting remaining members, who have been impleaded as respondents No. 5 to 15, took their oath unde...
Allahabad Regional Rural Bank Officer Organisation and Another Vs. All ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-11-2001
Reported in: 2001(3)AWC2265
D.S. Sinha, J.1. Heard helplessly, in the name of justice, specious rhetoric and diatribe sans substance, of Sri Bhoopendra Nath Singh, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners. Sri P. N. Khare, learned counsel representing the respondent No. 1, has also been heard. Nobody has appeared for the respondent Nos. 2 and 3.2. The petitioner No. 1, a Trade Union of the Officers of the Allahabad Kshetrlya Gram in Bank, the respondent No. 1, and the petitioner No. 2, an Officer of the respondent No. 1, and a Member and Office Secretary of the petitioner No. 1, urge this Court :(a) to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing paragraph 4 and the last paragraph of the circular dated January 20. 1999. Issued by the respondent No. 1, in respect of revised housing loan for officers, a photo copy whereof is Annexure-1 to the petition. (b) to issue a further writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to grant house purchase loan/const...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »