Allahabad Court November 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.
Committee of Management, Adarsh Shri Gauri Shankar Sanskrit Mahavidyal ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-12-2002
Reported in: 2003(1)AWC371
A.K. Yog, J.1. All the respondents are represented by learned standing counsel. For the first time, notice of the petition was given on 6.5.1999, Vide order dated 7.5.1999 Court directed the case to be listed on 15.7.1999 since learned standing counsel accepted notice for respondent Nos. 1 to 5, obviously with the desire that parties be provided opportunity to exchange pleadings and case be heard on merit itself. Respondents have not cared to file counter-affidavit as the record stands before the Court today.2. Learned standing counsel again, as a routine, prayed for further time without furnishing any valid explanation for not filing counter-affidavit.3. Writ petition is being decided after hearing learned counsel since all the parties are represented by learned standing counsel and as contemplated under Rules of Court.4. Having perused the record of the writ petition, I find that controversy involved in the present writ petition is fully covered by the judgment and order dated 18.1.1...
National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Smt. Maina Devi and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-12-2002
Reported in: I(2003)ACC1; II(2003)ACC406; 2004ACJ390; 2003(1)AWC410
S.P. Srivastava and M.P. Singh, JJ.1. Heard the learned counsel for the insurer-appellant.2. The only submission urged and pressed in support of this appeal by the insurer-appellant is that the deceased who was travelling in the offending motor vehicle (a Truck) was the owner of the goods being carried in the truck and, therefore, there being a breach of the terms and conditions, subject to which the insurance policy had been issued, the insurer could not be saddled with any liability to pay the amount of compensation determined by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal.3. Learned counsel for the respondents has strenuously urged that in the facts and circumstances of the case taking into account the statutory liability of the insurer, it has rightly not been exonerated as claimed.4. We have given our anxious consideration to the above submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties.5. It is not disputed that the terms and conditions subject to which the policy has been issued, per...
Dr. Geeta Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-12-2002
Reported in: 2003(1)AWC412
M. Katju, J.1. This writ petition has been filed for quashing paragraph2 of the G.O. dated 5.8.1993, Annexure-1 to the writ petition in so far as it states that the demonstrators will be appointed every year in the State Medical Colleges, and on the completion of one year service the service of demonstrators will automatically come to an end.2. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties.3. In paragraph 4 of the writ petition, it is alleged that the applications were invited for appointment as demonstrator in Bio-Chemistry in G.S.V.M. Medical College, Kanpur vide advertisement dated 25.8.1999, vide Annexure-II to the writ petition. The petitioner was appointed as demonstrator in Biochemistry after his selection and given appointment letter dated 19.11.1999, vide Annexure-III to the writ petition. In pursuance of the appointment letter, the petitioner joined the post of the demonstrator. The petitioner's term was extended up to 19.11.2000. True copy of the extension order is Annex...
Sankatha Prasad Singh Vs. Regional Administrative Committee of U.P. Co ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-12-2002
Reported in: 2003(2)AWC1049; (2003)1UPLBEC16
M. Katju, J. 1. This writ petition has been filed against the dismissal order dated 26.6.1994, Annexure-11 to the writ petition and the appellate order dated 11.2.1999, Annexure-16 to the writ petition. 2. We have heard learned counsel for the parties. 3. The petitioner has alleged that he was appointed in the Co-operative department as cadre secretary in 1976 after screening. He has further alleged that his work and conduct has been good. He was posted in various places as mentioned in paragraphs 5, 6 and 7 to the writ petition. The present dispute relates to Hallia where the petitioner was posted at Sikta Sadhan Sahkarl Samiti Limited, block Hallia, district Mirzapur. 4. The petitioner had opened his personal S.B. Account in the head quarter branch of District Co-operative Bank Ltd., Mirzapur. The account number is 3173 which is still pending in the said head quarter branch. The petitioner opened another S.B. Account in Hallia branch of District Co-operative Bank at Mirzapur where th...
Jamal Vs. Iqbal and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-12-2002
Reported in: 2003(2)AWC961
S.P. Mehrotra, J.1. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, inter alia, seeking quashing of the Judgment and order dated 1.5.2002 (Annexure-8 to the writ petition) passed by the learned Additional District Judge/ Special Judge, N.D.P.S. Act, Meerut and the judgment and order dated 19.11.1998 (Annexure-7 to the writ petition) passed by the learned Additional Judge, Small Cause Court, Meerut.2. The dispute relates to an accommodation in house No. 34 situated in Mohalla Purwa Hafiz Abdul Karim, Meerut, the details whereof have been given at the foot of the plaint of the suit referred to hereinafter. The said accommodation has, hereinafter been referred to as 'the disputed accommodation.'3. From the allegations made in the writ petition, it appears that Aziz Uddin, the predecessor-in-interest of the respondents filed a suit for ejectment and arrears of rent, mesne profits, etc. against the petitioner in respect of the disputed acc...
Union of India (Uoi) and ors. Vs. Roshan Lal Madhok and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-12-2002
Reported in: 2003(2)AWC1040
M. Katju, J.1. This writ petition has been filed against the impugned order of the Central Administrative Tribunal dated 28.7.2000, Annexure-3 to the writ petition.2. We have heard learned counsel for the parties.3. The respondent No. 1 filed a claim petition before the Tribunal alleging that he was working as Loco Cleaner under Loco Foreman and was granted casual leave for certain urgent work from 26.4.1972 to 2.5.1972, i.e., for seven days with station leave permission. Thereafter he has alleged that he fell 111 and remained absent for about seventeen years, i.e., from 3.5.1972 to 28.2.1989. The respondent alleged that he became fit on 28.2.1989 and reported for duty before Loco Foreman, Northern Railway, Laksar on 1.3.1989, who directed him to report to Divisional Railway Manager, Moradabad and produce his appointment letter. However, the respondent No. 1 failed to produce his appointment letter. There was no record available with the railway administration about the appointment and...
Smt. Purnima Pandey Vs. Chief Medical Superintendent and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-11-2002
Reported in: AIR2003All57; 2003(1)AWC390
M. Katju, J. 1. We have heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. The petitioner is challenging the impugned order dated 30.10.2002, Annexure-1 to the writ petition cancelling her licence to run a canteen in S.S.P.G. Hospital, Varanast and a public call office (P.C.O.) within the premises of Rajkiya Mahila Chikitsalaya, Varanasi. 3. It is alleged in paragraph 4 of the writ petition that the petitioner was granted a licence to run a P.C.O. within the premises of Rajkiya Manila Chikitsalaya, Varanasl, by the order of Chief Medical Superintendent of the said hospital dated 21.10.2000 vide Annexure-3 to the writ petition. It is alleged that there is no complaint against her regarding running of the P.C.O. and she has invested a lot of money. In paragraph 7 of the writ petition, it is alleged that the petitioner was granted a licence for running a canteen within the premises of S.S.P.G. hospital vide order dated 24.9.2002, Annexure-4 to the writ petition. It is alleged that the petitioner h...
Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Sanjiv JaIn and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-11-2002
Reported in: I(2003)ACC242; 2004ACJ587
S.P. Srivastava, J. 1. Heard the learned counsel for the insurer appellant. Learned counsel for the claimants-respondents who has put in appearance at this stage has also been heard.2. Perused the record.3. Feeling aggrieved by the award of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal determining an amount of Rs. 4,12,500 as just compensation to which the claimants-respondents were found entitled to on account of the death of Seema Jain, the wife of respondent No. 1 and the mother of respondent Nos. 2 and 3, the insurer, appellant, has now approached this court seeking redress praying for the setting aside of the impugned award.4. The relevant facts shorn of details and necessary for the disposal of this appeal lie in a narrow compass.5. Seema Jain, aged about 32 years met her untimely death in an accident which took place on 11.11.2000 involving the offending motor vehicle, a truck. She left behind her husband Sanjiv Jain aged about 33 years and a minor daughter Ekta Jain aged about 10 years a...
U.P. State Electricity Board and anr. Vs. Panchhi Lal and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-01-2002
Reported in: 2003(1)AWC35; [2002(95)FLR1112]; (2003)1UPLBEC647
Anjani Kumar, J.1. By means of this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the U. P. State Electricity Board, the employer-petitioner, challenges the award of the Labour Court IV, Uttar Pradesh, Kanpur, dated 12th March, 1995, passed in Adjudication Case No. 256 of 1989.2. The following dispute was referred to the labour court for adjudication :^^D;k lsok;kstdksa }kjk viusdeZpkjh iaNh yky pkyd iq= Jh lq[knso dks fnukad 6-1-987 ls dk;Z ls i`Fkd@oafpr fd;k tkuk mfpr rFkk@vFkok oS/kkfud gS ;fn ugha]rks lacaf/kr deZpkjh D;k fgrykHk ikus dk vf/kdkjh gS] rFkk fdl vU; fooj.k lfgr**3. Parties have exchanged their pleadings and adduced evidence before the labour court. The case set up by the concerned workman was that he was employed with effect from 6th January, 1986 as driver, to drive School Bus and he has worked up to 5th January, 1987 without there being any complaint regarding his work and conduct and inspite of his work being satisfactory, his services were arbitra...
Harendra Singh Vs. Joint Director of Education and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-01-2002
Reported in: 2003(1)AWC361
Rakesh Tiwari, J.1. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the standing counsel and perused the records.2. By means of this writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 22.6.1999, passed by the District Inspector of Schools, Kushinagar, Annexure-3 to the writ petition and the order dated 30.3.2000, passed by the Joint Director of Education, VIIth Region, Gorakhpur, Annexure-7 to the writ petition.3. The dispute relates to the qualification and appointment of the petitioner and respondent No. 4 to the post of Principal, which fell vacant in Janta Inter College, Ramkola, Deoria, due to retirement of Sri Uma Shankar Pandey on 30.6.1999.4. The date of appointment and the qualification of the petitioner and respondent No. 4 are as follows :NameDate of appointmentQualification1.Harendra Singh22.10.1970M.Sc.2.Vlshwanath LalSrivastava (Respondent No. 4)14.7.1967B.Sc. Post Graduate Diploma5. It is contended by the petitioner that the qualification for the post of Princ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »