Allahabad Court August 2001 Judgments

Mustakeem Vs. the State of U.P.

Court: Allahabad

Reported in: 2002CriLJ1516

ORDERJ.C. Gupta, J.1. Heard Sri Samit Gopal holding brief of Sri Rohit Agrawal for the applicant in revision and the learned A.G.A. for the State.2. This revision is directed against the order dated 21-12-2000 passed by VIth Addl. Sessions Judge, Meerut in S.T. No. 890/99 under Sections 364/302, I.P.C. and under Section 25 of Arms Act, allowing the application moved by the prosecution under Section 311, Cr.P.C. for summoning three witnesses namely Station Officer, Arvind Singh, Pundir, F.I.R. writer Noor Mohammad and the doctor who conducted post mortem examination of the deceased.3. The order under revision is challenged merely on the ground that as witnesses of fact had turned hostile there was absolutely no need for the trial Court to summon the aforesaid witnesses. It is further submitted that after the prosecution evidence had been closed the trial Court had no power to fill up lacuna in the posecution case. After examining the facts and circumstances, this Court finds that this r...

Ashok Kumar Yadav Vs. the Principal Kendriya

Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Allahabad

1. In the present OA the applicant Shri A.K. Yadav has challenged the order of Commissioner, Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan (in short KV Sangathan), New Delhi dated 16.10.2000 terminating the services of the applicant and has prayed that the order dated 16.10.2000 be set aside with all consequential benefits.2. The facts as per applicant in brief are that the applicant has been working in Kendriya Vidyalaya (NTPC) Shaktinagar Distt. Sonbhadra as primary teacher since 30.7.1979. He was selected as Trained graduate Teacher (in short TGT) in August 1984 and has been working as TGT in the same school since September 1984. On 6.5.2000, the last working day before summer vacation he detained 5 girl students whose copies could not be checked so that he could do so, after school hours. Out of 5 students 3 logded complaint against him which he came to know about on 29.5.2000 at Allahabad during vacation, when he received a show cause notice from the Principal dated 10.5.2000 as to why disciplina...

Jagpati Vs. Chief Revenue Officer, Allahabad and Others

Court: Allahabad

Reported in: 2001(3)AWC2319

R.R. Yadav, J. 1. By way of filing the present writ petition, the petitioner is seeking a relief of quashing the order dated 16.6.2001 (Annexure-2) passed by respondent No. 2 and order dated 13.7.2001 (Annexure-4) passed by respondent No. 1. 2. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that when the petitioner received notice under Z.A. form 49A prescribed by Rules framed under U. P. Act No. 1 of 1951, he filed an objection to the effect that he has not encroached upon chak road and he is in possession only over his chak which was allotted to him during consolidation operation. It is next contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the respondent No. 2 did not afford an opportunity to petitioner to adduce evidence in support of his objection. It is urged by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the respondent No. 2 had passed an order evicting thepetitioner and imposing damages of Rs. 4,000 upon him by a cryptic order. In support of the order impugned dat...

Surendra Nath Bhargava and Others Vs. Ixth Additional District Judge, ...

Court: Allahabad

Reported in: 2001(3)AWC2462

Yatindra Singh, J.1. T h epetitioners are tenants of a residential house. Sri Satish Chandra and Sri Mahesh Chandra, the two brothers, were landlords of the same. The landlords filed an application under Section 21 (1) (b) of U. P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 (the Act) with the allegation that the building is in dilapidated condition and requires reconstruction after demolition. This application was partly allowed on 10.10.1978 and it was held that south-eastern portion of the building is in dilapidated condition. Both sides filed appeals, which were dismissed on 22.9.1979. The landlords filed Writ Petition No. 10346 of 1979 (the earlier writ petition) against these orders, which was disposed of on 6.1.1984. This Court held that :1. The north-eastern portion was also not in good condition and the entire building should bedemolished. 2. The south-eastern portion of building be reconstructed and possession of the same to be given to tenants first....

Manoj Singh Vs. Public Service Commission, Uttar Pradesh and ors.

Court: Allahabad

Reported in: 2001(4)AWC2640; [2001(90)FLR1129]; (2002)1UPLBEC166

S.K. Sen, C.J.1. We have heard Sri A. P. Sahi, learned counsel for the petitioner-appellant and Sri B. N. Singh, learned counsel appearing for respondents.2. In this special appeal, the appellant has challenged the order dated 17.8.2000 passed, by the learned single Judge dismissing the writ petition filed by him.3. The appellant has applied for recruitment to the post of Regional Inspector (Technical) and Assistant Regional Inspector (Technical). pursuant to Advertisement No. A-4/E-1 /1999 in U. P. Transport Department. The recruitment was to be made on the basis of the said advertisement, which prescribes educational qualifications and other qualifications enumerated against item No. 5 of the advertisement. It was specifically provided in the advertisement that for the post of Regional Inspector (Technical), the candidates must possess five years' experience and for Assistant Regional Inspector (Technical), the candidates must possess three years practical experience of repairs, over...

Sanjeev Kumar Vs. State of U.P. and ors.

Court: Allahabad

Reported in: 2002(1)AWC260; [2001(91)FLR835]

Pradeep Kant, J. 1. The petitioner allege to have been engaged on daily wages on 1st May, 2000, in the office of Nldeshak, Rajya Sangrahalaya. Lucknow. According to the averments made in the writ petition, he has been paid daily wages for the period he has worked but has been discharged from such engagement with effect from 19th July, 2001.2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has completed 240 days, therefore, the petitioner attained the status of temporary Government servant and he cannot be dispensed with from service without following the provisions of Section 6N of U. P. Industrial Disputes Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act).3. The petitioner has not taken any plea In the writ petition nor has even stated that the office in which the petitioner is engaged, is an 'Industry' and the petitioner is a 'workman' nor the plea that the termination of services of the petitioner has been made without complying the provisions of Section 6N of the Act, beca...

Vice-chancellor, University of Allahabad and Another Vs. Som Prakash R ...

Court: Allahabad

Reported in: 2001(3)AWC2287; (2001)3UPLBEC1964

S.K. Sen, C.J. and S. Rafat Alam, J. 1. Heard Mr. P. S. Baghel,learned counsel for the appellant and Mr. B. N. Pathak, learned counsel for the respondents. 2. This special appeal has been preferred by the Allahabad University against the order passed by the learned single Judge whereby the learned single Judge has held that the University Authorities were not at all justified in holding that the petitioner had failed in LL.B. 1st year examination and directed the University to declare the result of the petitioner treating him to have passed in LL.B. 1st year examination. 3. It appears that the petitioner-respondent was a regular student of LL.B. course in Allahabad Degree College, which is an affiliated college of Allahabad University. He appeared in LL.B. 1st year examination, 1995 conducted by the Allahabad University and secured 261 marks in aggregate out of 600 marks. In Criminal Law paper, he secured 32 marks out of 100 and in Constitutional Law of India only 32 marks out of 100. ...

Committee of Management, Lakhori Inter College and anr. Vs. District I ...

Court: Allahabad

Reported in: 2001(4)AWC2654; (2002)1UPLBEC199

S.K. Singh, J.1. By means of this writ petition, the petitioners have prayed for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondent No. 1, the District Inspector of Schools, Moradabad, to attest the signature of petitioner No. 2 as Manager of the committee of management on the basis of the election held on 14.9.1997. A further prayer has been made that the letter dated 11.9.1997 (Annexure-12 to the writ petition) as issued by the respondent No. 1 be also quashed.2. When the matter was taken up, a preliminary objection was raised on behalf of the respondents that this writ petition, by lapse of time, has become infructuous as the term of the committee of management as provided under the Scheme of Administration is 3 years and thereafter, for 1 month, the office-bearers of the old committee can continue and, therefore, according to the learned counsel for the respondents, the election in which the petitioners claim to have been elected being of the year 1997, no relie...

State of U.P. Vs. Ram Bharat and ors. Etc.

Court: Allahabad

Reported in: 2002CriLJ1529

1. It is a case in which hair raising gruesome crime was executed in a most dastardly and horrendous manner. As many as nine persons lost their lives on account of homicidal act and seven persons (four from the side of the prosecution and three on the side of defence) received injuries from the formidable weapons of assault.2. The incident had taken place on 19th June, 1973 at about 10 a.m. in Village Dangipur Tola Bharpur of district Gorakhpur. In all 53 persons were prosecuted for the offence punishable under Sections 147, 148, 302, 307, 324, 201 with the aid of Sections 149 and 395, I.P.C. Out of them two died during the trial, surviving 51 accused persons were put up for trial. 25 accused persons who are covered by appeal Nos. 996 of 1976 and 1228 of 1997 have been convicted on various counts and sentenced to varying prison terms. The remaining 26 accused have been acquitted. Against the order of acquittal the State has preferred an Appeal No. 1874 of 1976. Out of the convicted acc...

Bhaskar Vs. State of U.P.

Court: Allahabad

Reported in: 2002CriLJ146

ORDERJ.C. Gupta, J. 1. Heard appellant's counsel and the learned A. G. A.2. A prayer has been made for releasing the appellant on bail during the pendency of appeal. Appellant was duly tried for committing murder of one Prabhakar by firearm in Court compound in broad day light on 19-6-1995 at 10.30 a.m. With the help of police the witnesses succeeded in apprehending the accused on the spot with a country made pistol used in the commission of murder. The prosecution produced three eye witnesses, who fully supported the prosecution case and stated of appellant's arrest on the spot with the pistol used in the commission of murder. Motive alleged was that in the year 1991, appellant along with three others had committed murder of Vimal Kumar, father of first informant of the present case. The trial Court has found the evidence of the prosecution evidence wholly reliable and trustworthy and accordingly concluded that case against the appellant has been established beyond doubt and according...