Court : Allahabad
Reported in : 2002(1)AWC764
A.K. Yog, J. 1. Considering the facts of the case which have already been recorded by this Court by passing judgment and order dated 10.12.2001 (Annexure-III to the writ petition) in W.P. No. 41349 of 2001, Maqsood Akhtar Badshah v. Rent Control and Eviction Officer, Allahabad and Ors., between the same parties, same accommodation and arising from the same bundle of facts. 2. Xth-Additional District Judge. Allahabad, respondent No. 2 initially granted Interim order on the basis of undertaking given on 11.1.2002 by the opposite parties and subsequently extended by the Court vide order dated 17.1.2002 as per order sheet filed as Annexure-VI to the writ petition. 3. Memo of Revision No. 1766 of 2001, S. M. Jaffar Hussain through its attorney Masood Akhtar v. Homudul Hasan Jafri, has been filed as Annexure-IV to the writ petition. Memo of revision itself shows that S. M. Jaffar Hussain has now appeared through its alleged attorney Maqsood Akhtar who had already lost from this Court as afor...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : 2002(1)AWC753
Ashok Bhushan, J.1. By this writ petition the petitioner has prayed for quashing of the order dated 11.1.2002 passed by the Deputy Director of Consolidation. The writ petition arises out of the proceedings under Section 20 of the U. P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953. The respondent No. 2 filed objection under Section 20 of the U. P. Consolidation of Holdings Act claiming allotment of original holding plot No. 56. The objection was rejected against which an appeal was filed. The appeal was partly allowed by the Settlement Officer ofConsolidation by order dated 29.7.2000. An application to recall the order dated 29.7,2000 was filed on which the Settlement Officer of Consolidation again passed an order dated 7.4.2001. A revision was filed by the respondent No. 2 under Section 48 of the U. P. Consolidation of Holdings Act which was allowed by the Deputy Director of Consolidation on 11.1.2001 against which order the petitioner has come up to this Court in this writ petition.2. Sri M. D...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : 2002(1)AWC865; (2002)2UPLBEC1322
S.K. Singh, J.1. By means of this writ petition, petitioners have prayed for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari quashing the order dated 8.7.1999 (Annexure-7 to the writ petition) passed by respondent No. 1, by which the select list for the post of Gram Vikas Adhikarl of Group 'C' service was cancelled.2. An advertisement for direct recruitment for 36 post of Gram Vikash Adhlkari of Group 'C' service under the District Development Officer Sonebhadra. respondent No. 3 was published in August. 1998. The aforesaid posts were to be filled up in accordance with provisions of U. P. Procedure for Direct Recruitment for Group 'C' Posts (Outside the Purview of U. P. Public Service Commission) Rules. 1998. hereinafter referred to as the Rules. It was also notified that a competitive written examination for the said post will be held in each district where the vacancies have been published on one and the same date by an Independent agency appointed by the State Government for this pur...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : 2002(2)AWC968
Binod Kumar Roy and U. S. Tripathi, JJ.1. Following questions crop up for adjudication in this writ proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution of India :(1) Whether Rule 416 (3) of Telegraph Rules, 1951 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules) bars the maintainability of a writ petition as premature unless the petitioner files a representation before the Telecom Authorities against a notice? (2) Whether for the non-payment of the bill of that telephone which was got installed by the father, the Telecom Authorities can justifiably refuse to deny new telephone connection to his son for another premises, which he claims to be commercial, by taking aid of Rule 416 (2) (d) of the Rules? (3) Whether in the facts and circumstances, the petitioner is entitled to the reliefs prayed for? The Prayers :2. The petitioner has made three fold prayers in this writ petition : (i) to quash that portion of the Notice-cum-Demand Note dated 25.5.1998 (as contained In Annexure-2) imposing a condition a...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : 2002(2)AWC1196; (2002)3UPLBEC2203
Anjani Kumar, J.1. By means of this writ petition, petitioner has challenged an order passed by the respondent-university dated 26.11.1992 (Annexure-11 to the petition) whereby the petitioner's admission to M.B.B.S. course in the Institute of Medical Sciences, Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi has been cancelled. 2. Facts leading to filing of the present writ petition are that the petitioner, who was admitted to M.B.B.S. course in the year 1990under scheduled caste quota and on the basis of his performance in the pre-medical test, the petitioner could not have been admitted under General quota. University further says that it came to the knowledge of the university that the petitioner claims to be a scheduled caste candidate not on the basis of birth in a scheduled caste family but by adoption in a scheduled caste family. The university, therefore, directed the petitioner to produce necessary documents on the basis of which petitioner claims to be a scheduled caste candidate. On the a...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : 2002(82)ECC542; 2003(159)ELT101(All)
1. The petitioner has sought writ of mandamus commanding the Commissioner, Customs and Central Excise (Appeals), Mangal Pandey Nagar, Meerut, respondent No. 1, to decide the application for stay of the recovery of the dues and a further writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the detention memo dated 29th November, 2001 and a direction restraining the respondents from realising the amount of Rs. 14,25,092 from it.2. Briefly, stated the facts, as stated in the petition, are that the petitioner is engaged in the manufacture and sale of sugar and molasses at its factory situated in village and post Titawi, District Muzaffarnagar. It, during the period October, 1995 to June, 1997, received number of consignments as inputs and the entry was accordingly made in R.G. 23A, Part I Register but did not make its corresponding entry for availing Modvat Credit in R.G. 23A, Part II on the advice of the Excise Officer. The petitioner was given a show cause notice, dated 21st Apr...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : 2002CriLJ2214
M. Katju, J.1. This writ petition has been filed against the impugned detention order dated 2-5-2001 Annexure 1 to the petition passed under National Security Act.2. We have heard counsel for parties.3. In the grounds of detention, copy of which is Annexure 2 to the petition, it has been stated that on 15-1-2001 at about 3.45 P.M. one Madan Pal and his son Subhash were returning home with witnesses, When they reached near the house of the petitioner Satvir, the petitioner and some other persons armed with deadly weapons came out of the house and accosted them. The petitioner said that Subhas had given evidence in a case and hence he should be killed. On hearing this Subhas started running and the petitioner and his associates surrounded him and attacked him with deadly weapons and killed him. They did not allow others to come for helping Subhash. Due to this incident and firing, there was panic and terror in the Village and people ran inside their houses and public order was disturbed ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : 2002CriLJ2233
ORDERJ.C. Gupta, J.1. Smt. Asha Shukla wife of Dr. S.D. Shukla has filed this revision against the order dated 18-5-2001 passed by VI Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ghaziabad in case No. 522 of 2001 State v. Smt. Asha Shukla under Section 306 I.P.C. whereby the learned Magistrate on the basis of charge sheet submitted by police after investigation has taken cognizance and summoned the applicant as accused to face trial.2. Deceased of this case were smt. Nimisha and her husband Praveen Sharma. On 21-3-1998 they both were found dead as a result of hanging in the rented house of Praveen Sharma. Deceased Nimisha was the daughter of the applicant in revision while Praveen Sharma was son of Shri V.D. Sharma who in this revision has filed his own counter affidavit in reply to the affidavit filed on behalf of the applicant.3. In the affidavit filed in support of this revision it is alleged that the applicant is an educated lady of about 53 years of age. Her father was a Senior Professor and ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : (2002)2UPLBEC1921
Sunil Ambwani, J.1.This writ petition has been filed for quashing the order dated 18.4.2001 passed by Director of Education (Basic), UP., Lucknow rejecting petitioner's representation for grant of regular pay-scale as Class-IV employee in Basic School, and for a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to pay to the petitioner regular salary in the pay-scale of Class-IV employee from the date of absorption i.e. 23.3.1982 with arrears till date with interest of 18% per annum.2. Heard Sri Virendra Kumar appearing for the petitioner, Sri P.K. Sharma for the respondent No. 3 and learned Standing Counsel.3. Petitioner was appointed in the year 1968 as Part Time Peon in Primary Pathshala, Bhadrekhi, Tahsil-Kalpi. District-Jalaun on consolidated salary. It was initially fixed at Rs 15 p.m.UP. Basic Education Act, 1972 came into force on 17.8.1972 providing for constitution of Basic Education Board consisting of an Ex-Officio Director to be Chairman two persons to be nominated the State Gov...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : 2002(1)AWC551; [2002(93)FLR897]; (2002)1UPLBEC904
Katju, J.1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.2. This writ petition has been filed praying for a writ of certiorari to quash the Impugned order dated 28.2.2001 (Annexure-5 to the petition) and for a mandamus directing the respondents to issue order for notional promotion and grant of personal pay scale to the petitioner with interest.3. The petitioner who possessed a M.B.B.S. degree joined as Medical Officer in Zila Parlshad Dispensary, Etmadpur, district Agra on 6.10.1963 on a substantive post, which was under the control of Panchayat Raj Department, State of U. P.4. Under the provincialization scheme, the State Government in the year 1977 provincialised the dispensary and the petitioner gave option on 23.12.1977 and opted to join the service of Medical Department of the U. P. Government. However, the petitioner was denied benefit of his service in the Panchayat Raj Department from 6.10.1963 to 23.12.1977. Hence, he approached the U. P. Public Service Tribunal which allowed his cl...
Tag this Judgment!