Allahabad Court December 2002 Judgments
Sukhdeo Prasad Vs. Astt. Cit
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-31-2002
Reported in: (2004)87TTJ(All)604
ORDERIn the Itat, Allahabad Bench P.S. Kalsian, A.M. & Bhavnesh Saini, J.M. Income Tax Act, 1961, sections 158BC & 158BI); In favour of: AssesseeSearch and seizureBlock assessmentCounsel : S.K. Garg & Siddharth Pathak, for the Appellant Ashok Kumar, for the RespondentOEDERBha Vnesh Saini, J. M.This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of the Assistant Commissioner (Circle), Allahabad, dated 31-7-1998, under section 158BD/144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for the block period from 1-4-1986 to 5-7-1996. The assessee has filed this appeal on preliminary as well as other grounds. However, we take up the preliminary grounds first for disposal of this appeal which read as under'1. Because the impugned order dated 31-7-1998, is wholly illegal and without jurisdiction as the same has been passed without complying with the mandatory requirement of issuing and serving a notice as contemplated under clause (a) of section 158BC of the Income Tax Act. 2. Because the so-called notice ...
Tag this Judgment!Bishan Pal Malik and ors. Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-20-2002
Reported in: 2003(1)AWC633; (2003)1UPLBEC636
Sunil Ambwani, J.1. The petitioners posted as Sub-Inspectors in U. P. Civil Police, have challenged the orders dated 10.8.2002 issued by the Deputy Inspector General of Police (Establishment) U.P. Police Headquarters, Allahabad, by which they have been transferred from Bulandshahr to different zones in the State of U. P. They have also prayed for quashing the order dated 11.8.2002 issued by the Senior Superintendent of Police, Bulandshahr, communicating orders of their transfer, and indicating the districts to which they have been transferred.2. I have heard Sri Ashok Khare, Senior Advocate, assisted by Sri Vikram D. Chauhan for petitioners ; and learned Advocate General, assisted by Sri Hanuman Upadhyaya, Additional Chief Standing Counsel for respondents.3. Transfer orders have been challenged on the ground of colourable exercise of powers by the State Government. According to the petitioners, there did not exist any administrative or other justifiable grounds for their transfers whic...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Somana (D.) Through L.Rs. Vs. Joint Director of Consolidation and ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-20-2002
Reported in: 2003(1)AWC691
R.H. Zaidi, J.1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. By means of this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, petitioner prays for issuance of a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the orders dated 22.7.1980 and 4.8.1979, passed by respondent Nos. 1 and 2 respectively. 3. The relevant facts of the case giving rise to the present petition, in brief, are that in the basic year, the name of the petitioner was recorded on the land in dispute. Objection was filed by the contesting respondent Nos. 4 to 9 claiming that they were entitled to the land in dispute, as the petitioner was not the daughter of Jhingur but she was the daughter of Mohan. The petitioner contested the objection filed by respondents and claimed that she was the daughter of Jhingur and was entitled to the land in dispute. It was also asserted that the basic year entry was correct. Parties, produced evidence in support of their cases, oral and documentary. The Consolida...
Tag this Judgment!Rishi Kumar Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-20-2002
Reported in: 2003(3)AWC1770; [2003(97)FLR750]; (2003)IIILLJ317All
Jagdish Bhalla, J.1. The above mentioned first three writ petitions, namely, Writ Petition Nos. 954 (SB) of 2002, 956 (SB) of 2002 and 953 (SB) of 2002 are identical in nature, hence they were connected and heard altogether. Later on Writ Petition No. 1372 (SB) of 2002 was filed. Learned counsel for both the parties stated that this writ petition may also be connected with Writ Petition No. 954 (SB) of 2002 as the controversy involved in this writ petition is similar to that involved in Writ Petition No. 954 (SB) of 2002. Accordingly, learned counsel for the respondents Sri Ajit Kumar made a statement that the counter-affidavit filed in earlier writ petitions be read as counter-affidavit to this writ petition, i.e.. Writ Petition No. 1372 (SB) of 2002 as well. Accordingly, the judgment was reserved also in fourth writ petition.2. Writ Petition Nos. 954 (SB) of 2002, 956 (SB) of 2002 and 953 (SB) of 2002 are directed against the order dated 19th July, 2002, challenging the impending ter...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Hem Lata Agarwal Vs. District Inspector of Schools and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-19-2002
Reported in: 2003(2)AWC939
Janardan Sahai, J.1. Th epetitioner has challenged the order dated 11.6.2002 of the Manager, Crosthwaite Girls College, Allahabad, which states that the management committee of the college in its meeting dated 7.6.2002 had resolved to relieve the petitioner as in-charge Principal of the institution and also communicating that the respondent No. 3 Smt. Asha Pandey, who was given charge of the post of Principal during the period when the petitioner was under suspension, would continue to hold the charge. The petitioner has challenged this order on the ground that the order is arbitrary and does not contain any reason and was passed without opportunity afforded to the petitioner and also on the ground that no approval under Section 21 of the U, P. Secondary Education Services Commission and Selection Boards Act, 1982 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) has been obtained.2. Undisputedly, the petitioner is the seniormost teacher in the institution and it is submitted that she is entitled t...
Tag this Judgment!Ram NaraIn Singh (In Jail) Vs. State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-19-2002
Reported in: 2003CriLJ3160
Y.R. Tripathi, J.1. This criminal appeal is directed against the conviction and sentence recorded by Sri Usha Kant Verma, the then IIIrd Addl. Sessions Judge, Kanpur in S.T. No. 8 of 1980 State v. Ram Narain Singh, whereby he having convicted the appellant-Ram Narain Singh S/o Ayodha Singh r/o village Fattepur Gohi P.S. Bidhuna District Kanpur of the charge under Section 302. I.P.C. has sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for life.2. The appellant and the deceased are residents of village Fattepur Gohi, which lies within police station Bidhuna District Kanpur at a distance of 8 miles to the northwest of the Police Station, To the south of the house of the deceased there is 2-2 1/2 paces wide path way running from east to west. To the south-west of the house 'of the deceased after the said path way existed the house of one Toothi Chamar. The house of Toothi Chamar opened in his sahan to the west. There existed two cattle troughs adjacent to the south of the path way lying to the south...
Tag this Judgment!Panchami Singh Vs. Junior Director of Education and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-19-2002
Reported in: 2003(3)AWC2227
Janardan Sahai, J.1. The issue in this writ petition is the determination of inter se seniority between the petitioner Panchami Singh and the third respondent Indrajeet Gaur. They are both teachers in the L.T. grade in Jawahar Lal Nehru Uchchatar Madhyamik Vidyalaya, Jayatpur, which is a recognised Intermediate College. The Committee of Management decided the dispute by holding the third respondent Indrajeet Prasad Gaur as senior. The petitioner took the matter to the Joint Director of Education in appeal. By the order dated 31.5.2001 the Joint Director of Education has decided the matter in favour of the third respondent. Aggrieved, the petitioner has come in this writ petition. The petitioner and the third respondent were both appointed as L.T. grade teachers by promotion on 7.9.1993. In such: a case where two persons are promoted on the same date in a particular grade, seniority would be determined by Regulation 3 (bb) of Chapter II of the Regulations framed under the Intermediate E...
Tag this Judgment!Union of India (Uoi) and ors. Vs. Central Administrative Tribunal and ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-18-2002
Reported in: 2003(1)AWC448
M. Katju, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. This writ petition has been filed against the impugned order of the Central Administrative Tribunal, dated 11.9.2000 (Annexure-1 to the writ petition). 3. The facts of the case are that the respondent No. 2 was in postal department and he was charge-sheeted on various charges of financial irregularities and other misconducts. The charges are stated in paragraph 4 of the writ petition. 4. An enquiry was held and the respondent No. 2 was found guilty and was dismissed on 3.5.1989. Against that order, he filed an appeal in which the punishment was reduced by reduction of eleven stages in the time scale of pay for a period of five years and respondent No. 2 was deprived of increments during this period. The respondent No. 2 filed an O.A. against the appellate order before the Tribunal and that application has been allowed. Hence this writ petition. 5. The ground taken by the Tribunal for allowing the respondent No. 2's, O.A. is that...
Tag this Judgment!Sheo Shyam and ors. Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-18-2002
Reported in: 2003(1)AWC661; (2003)1UPLBEC700
M. Katju, J.1. This writ petition and connected writ petitions are being disposed of by a common judgment.2. Heard Sri Ashok Khare and Sri A. K. Singh for the petitioner and learned standing counsel and Sri B. N. Singh for the respondents.3. The facts of the case are that the U. P. Public Service Commission issued an advertisement of filling the posts of Assistant Prosecuting Officer (A.P.O.). True copy of the said advertisement is Annexure-1 to the writ petition. By means of this advertisement a total of 218 posts of Assistant Prosecuting Officer were required to be filled in on the basis of the selection. The petitioner has alleged in paragraph 4 of the writ petition that they were eligible for being appointed being fully qualified. The petitioner Nos. 1 to 5 in Writ Petition No. 28192 of 2002 belong to general category while the petitionerNo. 6 belongs to O.B.C. category. The result of the selection was published in the newspaper 'Dainik Jagaran' dated 20.3.1999 vide Annexure-2 to t...
Tag this Judgment!Shri Madan Mohan Dammamal Trust Society and ors. Vs. Akhil Bhartiya Vi ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-17-2002
Reported in: 2003(1)AWC497; (2003)1UPLBEC386
S. P. Srivastava and M. P. Singh, JJ.1. Heard the learned counsel for the appellants. The learned counsel representing the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 as well as the learned counsel representing the respondent Nos. 4 and 5, who have put in appearance at this stage, have also been heard.2. This special appeal is directed against an interlocutory order passed by a learned single Judge.3. The principal submission in support of this appeal, urged by the learned counsel for the appellants is that taking into consideration the nature of the writ petition, it was clearly a public interest litigation and consequently, the writ petition was not cognizable by a learned single Judge.4. In this connection, reference has been made to the assertions made in paragraph 35 of the writ petition, a copy of which has been annexed along with the special appeal where the petitioners have asserted that they were espousing the cause of students. It is, however, not disputed that none of the students of the degree...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »