Allahabad Court September 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.
U.P. Urdu Development Organisation and anr. Vs. Dr. Sanjay Bhosh Reddy ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-11-2001
Reported in: (2001)3UPLBEC2363
Sunil Ambwani, J.1. This contempt petition has been filed for taking action against the opposite parties for the willful disobedience of the direction of this Court dated 21.1.1999 in writ petition No. 21260 of 1998 for deciding applicants representation regarding their grievance to the authority concerned who was required to decide the same within two months of the production of certified copy of the order in accordance with law.2. The applicant, U.P. Urdu Development Organisation through its Secretary Dr. Parwaz Ulum filed writ petition with the prayer to grant a writ of general mandamus commanding the respondents to issue all Government advertisements in Urdu Newspapers also. The petitioner also prayed for a writ of certiorari quashing the advertisement dated 12.6.1998 published in 'Rastriya Sahara', and a writ of mandamus commanding the Chairman/District Rural Development Agency to readvertise in the Urdu Newspaper according to Government order dated 14.4.1988 and Notification date...
Sanjay Goel (In Jail) Vs. State of U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-11-2001
Reported in: 2002CriLJ625
S.K. Agarwal, J.1. This appeal arises out of the judgment and order dated 31-1-1992 passed by Sri S.B. Vaish, I Additional District & Sessions Judge, Kanpur Nagar, in S.T. No. 70 of 1988 convicting the appellant, Sanjay Goel, under Sections 302, I.P.C. and sentencing him to life imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 5,000/-. In default of payment of fine the appellant is to undergo 6 months' R.I. The appellant was further convicted under Section 328, I.P.C. and sentenced to 7 years' R.I. and a fine of Rs. 2,000/-. In default of payment of fine the appellant is to undergo 2 months' R.I. Both the sentences were, however, directed to run concurrently.2. The facts of the present case are quite peculiar. They are not only dramatic in character, but also exhibit a picture of masculine trust over a girl, liberal, free and mentally western. The family background also indicates that the girl was not accustomed to any orthodox family dominance. The story revolves round the appellant, who is son of a we...
Awadh NaraIn Vs. Ivth Addl. District Judge, Jaunpur and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-10-2001
Reported in: 2001(4)AWC2822
S.K. Singh, J. 1. These are two connected writ petitions. Writ Petition No. 8617 of 1992 has been filed by Awadh Narain in which Shitla Prasad is respondent No. 3. Writ Petition No. 8798 of 1992 has been filed by Shitla Prasad in which Awadh Narain is respondent No. 2. The writ petition filed by Awadh Narain, i.e., Writ Petition No. 8617 of 1992 is the main case and, therefore, that is treated as leading case.2. The facts of Writ Petition No. 8617 of 1992 appear to be that Shitla Prasad. respondent No. 3 filed a suit. i.e., Original Suit No. 1550 of 1991 for permanent injunction for restraining the present petitioner from interfering in his peaceful possession and also from making any construction over the suit land and from forcibly ousting him. It was stated by the plaintiff that no partition between the parties has taken place by metes and bounds but the defendant by taking forcible possession has encroached the additional land for which he is not entitled. It was pleaded by the pla...
Jai Singh Vs. Iind Addl. District Judge, Muzaffarnagar and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-10-2001
Reported in: 2001(4)AWC2826
S.K. Singh, J.1. These are three writ petitions in which common questions of law are involved and. therefore, they are being taken up together and are being disposed of. The file of Writ Petition No. 9587 of 1988 shall be the leading case.2. In Writ Petition No. 9587 of 1988, Jai Singh v. 2nd Addl. District Judge and Ors., the courts below have taken a view that the suit for cancellation of sale deed as has been filed by the plaintiff will lie in the civil court even though the plaintiff is not recorded in the revenue papers and documents sought to be cancelled in view of the pleadings, appear to be void.3. In Writ Petition No. 29170 of 1990, Ramapati v. Babau and Ors., the courts below after repelling the plea of the petitioner, held that the civil court has jurisdiction to try the suit.4. In Writ Petition No. 19105 of 1987, Tara Chand and Ors. v. IInd Addl. District Judge and Ors., there was a question of abatement of the suit under the provisions of U. P. Consolidation of Holdings A...
islah UddIn and ors. Vs. District Judge, Bulandshahr and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-10-2001
Reported in: 2002(1)AWC235
S.K. Singh, J.1. By means of this writ petition, the petitioners have challenged the judgments of the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 dated 21.10.1980 and 8.9.1979 (Annexures-4 and 3 to the writ petition) respectively.2. Suit for specific performance of agreement of sale was filed by the petitioners (Original Suit No. 22 of 1964) against the respondent No. 3 on the basis of agreement dated 20.7.1963. In the plaint, relief of possession was not specifically claimed. The suit, as was filed by the plaintiffs, was decreed by the trial court on 27.5.1971 against which appeal was filed by the defendants which was dismissed on 24.2.1976. Thereafter, a second appeal was filed which was numbered as Second Appeal No. 47 of 1976 in which on 29.4.1976, an interim order was granted in favour of the appellants. In the meantime, in pursuance of the Judgment and decree of the trial court, the petitioners filed execution application (Execution Case No. 30 of 1971) for execution of sale deed and for possession....
Singari Devi Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-07-2001
Reported in: 2001(4)AWC2844; [2001(91)FLR610]; (2002)1UPLBEC740
D.R. Chaudhary, J.1. By means of this petition, the petitioner Smt. Singari Devi is assailing the order dated 2.8.1985 (Annexure-4) terminating her services as no longer required. The resume of the facts are that pursuant to the advertisement issued by the respondents, the petitioner applied for the post of full-time dai ; she was appointed against the substantive post of full-time dai by means of order dated 15.12.1983 (Annexure-1) in the scale of Rs. 315-440 through selection process ; her services were confirmed on completion of one year in service and office started deduction of G.P.F., etc. from her salary ; she started receiving threats of termination of her services as she denied to part with some money which was being realised as donations to be used for the purpose best known to respondents No. 2 and 3 ; she tried to seek relief against her apprehended termination by filing O. S. No. 1552 of 1985 in which the civil court granted interim injunction, on legal advice of her couns...
Shubh NaraIn Singh Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-07-2001
Reported in: 2001(4)AWC2878; [2001(91)FLR571]
D.R. Chaudhary, J.1. Thepetitioner herein was appointed on 1.12.1988 as class IV employee of the Gramin Abhiyantran Seva of the State Government. He continued to serve as such with some artificial breaks. His prayer is that the respondents be directed to pay the salary and other emoluments admissible to class IV regular employees of the department of Rural Engineering Services. In counter-affidavit filed by the respondents, the facts, aforestated, have not been disputed except that there are breaks in service which, according to the petitioner, are artificial in nature. The similar question came for consideration before this Court in Writ Petition No, 8148 of 1990 and several other connected petitions, and this Court, after having considered the entire law on the subject laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court as well as the High Court, allowed the writ petitions by means of the judgment dated 21.7.1993 with the following directions :'In view of the aforesaid, it does not lie in the mou...
Musafir Yadav Vs. Commandant, 47 Bn., C.R.P.F., Gandhinagar (Gujarat) ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-07-2001
Reported in: 2001(4)AWC2976; [2001(91)FLR613]; (2001)1UPLBEC325
D.R. Chaudhary, J.1. The petitioner herein was initially recruited on 1.7.1974 as a constable in 47, Bn. C.R.P.F. He proceeded on 60 days leave (15.1.1991 to 15.3.1991) duly sanctioned by the competentauthority. His wife was ill and her treatment was going on at Primary Health Centre, Lar, Deorta. She was not cured during the leave period, hence the petitioner sent a registered letter on 14.3.1991 along with the Medical Certificate of his wife for extension of leave for one month more. The petitioner, allegedly, made another request for further extension of time. When the petitioner received no communication from the competent authority, he reported for duty on 4.5.1991 after having overstayed the 60 days of leave for 49 days. On 29.5.1991, the petitioner was required to appear before the Judicial Magistrate. 1st Class, for trial, who without affording opportunity of defence, passed an order convicting and sentencing the petitioner to undergo simple imprisonment till rising of the Cour...
Krishna Bhagwan Pandey Vs. Up Prabandhak, Western Region, Meerut and o ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-07-2001
Reported in: 2001(4)AWC3187; [2001(91)FLR989]; (2002)1UPLBEC52
D.R. Chaudhary, J. 1. The petitioner, a bus conductor of U.P. Stale Road Transport Corporation (for short 'Corporation') was allotted Bus No. URT 9824 running from Mathura to Deeg Koshi, The bus was intercepted on 3.12.1989 by the checking staff. During the checking, 8 passengers were found travelling without ticket. On the report submitted by the checking staff, the petitioner was placed under suspension on 6.12.1989. Charge-sheet was given to the petitioner on 12.12.1989 to which the petitioner submitted his reply. The inquiry officer submitted his report on 23.12.1990. Annexure-II to the writ petition. On the basis of the enquiry report, the petitioner was served with show cause notice on 16.3.1990, copy of which is Annexure-III to the writ petition. The petitioner submitted his reply to the show causenotice on 2.6.1990 vide Annexure-IV to the writ petition. Disciplinary Authority by means of an order dated 18.4.1990 (Annexure-V) dismissed the petitioner from service of the Corporat...
Archana Mehta Vs. Hon'ble the Chief Justice, High Court of Judicature ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-06-2001
Reported in: 2001(4)AWC2669; (2001)3UPLBEC2326
G.P. Mathur, J. 1. This special appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 24.5.2000 of a learned single Judge by which the writ petition filed by the appellant was dismissed. 2. An advertisement was issued for making appointment of Routine Grade Clerks on the establishment of the Allahabad High Court. The appellant appeared in the written examination held for making the selection but she failed to qualify for the interview. Thereafter, she filed the writ petition giving rise to the present appeal praying that the result of the written examination be quashed and a writ of mandamus be issued directing the respondents to comply with 20 per cent reservation for women candidates as per Government order dated 26.2.1999. The writ petition filed by the appellant washeard along with 4 other writ petitions which had been filed by those candidates who had not qualified in the written examination and several pleas were raised. The learned single Judge repelled all the contentions of ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »