Allahabad Court October 2002 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.
Mohit Kumar Dwivedi Vs. Madhyamik Shiksha Parishad and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-03-2002
Reported in: (2003)1UPLBEC38
S.P. Mehrotra, J.1. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, inter alia, praying for the following reliefs :-'(A) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to produce the answer books of petitioner for the subject Mathematics I, II and III papers and Physics I and II papers before this Hon'ble Court on the date as may be fixed by this Hon'ble Court.(B) a direction may also be given to the respondents to complete the exercise of scrutiny of the petitioner's answer books of Physics and Mathematics in all papers and correct the marks and provide fresh copy of the mark-sheet to the petitioner within specified period as may be fixed by this Hon'ble Court.(C) issue a writ, order or direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper on the facts and circumstances of the case in the interest of justice.(D) award the cost of the petition to the petitioner.'2. It is, inter alia, alleged ...
Swargiya Sri Janardan Prasad Pandey High School Through Its Manager Sh ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-03-2002
Reported in: (2003)1UPLBEC195
S.P. Mehrotra, J.1. Connect with Writ Petition No. 41002 of 2002.2. Issue notice pending admission.3. Counter-affidavit and rejoinder-affidavit have already been exchanged between the parties in this case.4. List this case for admission in the week commencing 1lth November, 2002.5. Heard on the question of grant of interim reliefs.6. Learned Counsel for the petitioner has referred to an interim order dated 12th September, 2002 passed in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 38891 of 2002 wherein similar controversy is involved.7. Learned Counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that by the action of the respondents in not issuing Examination Forms for High School Examination, 2003 in respect of a number of students, the interest of such students will be adversely affected.8. Learned Standing Counsel, on the other hand, has submitted that restrictions in question were imposed by the notification dated 22nd November, 2000 with effect from the examination for the year 2002, and the petiti...
Vishal Srivastava Vs. the Secretary, Madhyamik Shiksha Parishad and or ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-03-2002
Reported in: (2003)1UPLBEC198
S.P. Mehrotra, J.1. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, inter alia, praying for the following reliefs :-'(i) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the order dated 13.2.2002 obtained by the petitioner.(ii) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to declare the result of the petitioner of Intermediate Examination, 2002 bearing Roll No. 912913 and also issue his marksheet of the said examination.(iii) issue any other suitable writ, order or direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.(iv) allow the writ petition with costs in favour of the petitioner.'2. It is, inter alia, alleged by the petitioner that the petitioner passed the High School Examination from U.P. Board of High School and Intermediate Education in the year 2000 with II Division; and that the petitioner took regular admission in ...
State Bank of India Vs. Rizvi Exports Ltd.
Court: DRAT Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-01-2002
Reported in: II(2003)BC96
1. Original Application No. 6 of 2000 was filed under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 for recovery of Rs. 1,89,38,751 44 (Rs. one crore eighty-nine lakhs thirty-eight thousand seven hundred fifty-one and paise forty-four) only against the defendant Nos. 1 to 6 who are joint ly and severally liable to repay the Bank's dues together with interest thereon @ 16.83% per annum with quarterly rests in respect of debts due in the Cash Credit (Hypothecation) and EPC accounts and @ 20% per annum with quarterly rests in respect of the debts due in the FBP Account. The applicant-Bank has also claimed the recovery of this amount through the sale of the hypothecated goods and immovable properties equitably mortgaged with the applicant-Bank. A cost of the suit has also been claimed. The said suit has been received on transfer under operation of law in this Tribunal and re-numbered the case as T.A. 1593 of 2000.2. The facts of the case as containe...
Shobha Kant Chaturvedi Vs. Central Administrative Tribunal, Additional ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-01-2002
Reported in: 2003(1)AWC138
Y.R. Tripathi, J.1. By means of this writ petition the petitioner, a pensioner, having retired from the post of O.S.L from the Small Arms Factory, Kanpur, has prayed for issue of a writ of certiorari quashing the order dated 4.7.1997 of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Allahabad Bench (Annexure-A 28 to the writ petition) rejecting thereby his application under Section 19 of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Act, 1985, the order dated 3.7.1991 (Annexure-A 25 to the writ petition) passed by respondent No. 4, imposing punishment of reduction of pay at two stages in the scale of Rs. 1,680-2,040 and order dated 31.3.1992 (Annexure-A 27 to the writ petition) passed by respondent No. 3 dismissing the representation made by the petitioner. The petitioner has further prayed for issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the respondent Nos. 2 to 7 to pay the entire arrears of his salary and other retiral benefits with interest.2. It appears that the petitioner on 10.1.1990 was working as Up...
Smt. Aisha Siddique Vs. Senior Terminal Manager, I.O.C. and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-01-2002
Reported in: 2003(2)AWC1642
M. Katju and Rakesh Tiwari, JJ.1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.2. The petitioner has prayed that the respondents be directed to entertain and consider the petitioner's tender in pursuance of the tender notice dated 29.7.2002. The last date and time of submitting the tender in pursuance of the tender notice dated 29.7.2002 was 21.8.2002 by 12.00 Noon. It has been alleged in paragraph 4 of the writ petition that because of traffic Jam, the petitioner's driver could not reach at the office of the respondents at 12.00 noon but reached there at 12.10 p.m., that is, he was late by 10 minutes. Although, in paragraphs 6 and 9 of the counter-affidavit, it has been stated that in fact the petitioner's tender was not given on 21.8.2002 but was given on 22.8.2002, but even assuming that the allegation of the petitioner is correct, there is no doubt that the tender was late by 10 minutes.3. In our opinion, time is of the essence in such matters, otherwise the legal position will be totally...
Dinesh Yadav Vs. State of U.P. Through Chief Secretary and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-01-2002
Reported in: 2003CriLJ218
M. Katju, J.1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.2. The petitioner has challenged the impugned detention order dated 9-1-2000 Annexure 1 to the petition, passed under the National Security Act.3. In our opinion this petition deserves to be allowed on the ground that the District Magistrate did not apply his mind independently while rejecting the representation of the petitioner. He rejected only on the ground that after approval of the detention order by the State Government the District Magistrate was not empowered to consider the said representation. This has been stated in paragraph 4 of the counter affidavit of the then District Magistrate.4. It has been held by this Court in Idrish v. Secretary, Ministry of Home Affairs, 2002 U.P. Crl Rulings 718 (para 4) that the District Magistrate must independently apply his mind while deciding the representation, and he cannot reject it only on the ground that the State Government has approved the detention order. This Court in Lallan Gos...
Noopur Vs. Joint Secretary, Central Board of Secondary Education and o ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-01-2002
Reported in: (2003)1UPLBEC492
S.P. Mehrotra, J.1. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, inter alia, alleging that the petitioner is the student of High School in State of Bihar at Green Field English School, New Area, Vishar Talab, Gaya; and that grievance of the petitioner is that she is not being permitted to appear in High School Examination which is going to be held in March, 2003; and that the concerned authorities of Green Field English School, New Area, Vishar Talab, Gaya (Respondent Nos. 3 and 4) are demanding Rs. 6,000/- as donation for the school for which neither they are authorized nor the petitioner is ready to give them donation; and that the Respondent Nos. 3 and 4 are demanding the said donation money as fee for appearing in High School Examination; and that the petitioner's father gave an application dated 19.8.2002 to the Director of Green Field English School, New Area, Vishar Talab, Gaya where the petitioner is regular student of Clas...
Rajendra Kumar (Minor) Vs. Board of High School and Intermediate Throu ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-01-2002
Reported in: (2003)1UPLBEC183
S.P. Mehrotra, J.1. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, inter alia, praying for the following relies :-(i) issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 to evaluate the answer book of English of the petitioner of High School Examination, 2002 vide Roll No. 2319426.(ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 to complete the English Paper within 2 weeks (Roll No. 2319426) of High School Examination, 2002.(iii) Issue a suitable writ, order or direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper under the circumstances of the case.(iv) Award the cost.'2. It is, inter alia, alleged by the petitioner that the petitioner appeared in the High School Examination, 2002 vide Roll No. 2319426 as a private student of S.B.N. Inter College, Lodhipur, Niwada, District Hamirpur, and that the examination has been conducted by th...
- ‹ Prev
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- Next ›