Allahabad Court February 2002 Judgments
Shambhu Dayal Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-25-2002
Reported in: (2002)2UPLBEC1396
M. Katju, J.1. Heard Sri V.B. Singh, learned Senior Advocate and Sri P.S. Bhagel Advocate for petitioner, and learned Counsel for the Central Government.2. Learned Counsel for respondent prays for and is granted 3 weeks to file counter-affidavit.3. Issue notice to respondent Nos. 4, 5 and 6 returnable at an early date.4. List peremptorily on 24.3.2002 on which date the petition may be finally disposed off. .5. The petitioner has prayed for quashing the panel prepared for the posts of Vice Chairman in various Benches of the Central Administrative Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as CAT).6. Section 6(2) of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 states :'A person shall not be qualified for appointment as the Vice Chairman unless he is, or has been (or is qualified to be) a Judge of a High Court; or(a) has, for at least two years, held the post of Secretary to the Government of India or any other post under the Central or a State Government carrying a scale of pay which is not less than t...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Beer Bala Gupta Vs. Xvth Additional Sessions Judge, Meerut and or ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-22-2002
Reported in: 2002(2)AWC1212; 2002CriLJ3601; [2002(93)FLR475]
R.K. Dash, J.1. This writ petition is filed seeking for issuance of a writ, order or direction to quash the order dated 23rd January, 2001 (Annexure-6) passed by Special Judicial Magistrate, respondent No. 2. By the said order, the learned Magistrate rejected the petitioner's application whereby she had prayed for quashing the order taking cognizance of the offence under Section 630 of the Companies Act. M/s. Sir Shadi Lal Enterprises Limited, respondent No. 3 filed a complaint alleging that the petitioner was a nurse-cum-mid wife in Upper Doab Sugar Mills and on retirement from service, did not vacate the company's quarter allotted to her in spite of notice and reminders issued from time to time. So withholding of possession of the quarter by the petitioner being an offence punishable under Section 630 of Indian Companies Act, she is liable for punishment as provided therein. The learned Magistrate took cognizance of the said offence and issued process against the petitioner. whereupo...
Tag this Judgment!Shiv Shankar Vs. State of U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-22-2002
Reported in: 2002CriLJ2673
U.S. Tripathi. J.1. The condemned prisoner Shiv Shankar has preferred this appeal against his conviction under Sections 302, 376/511, 394, 504 and 506 I.P.C. and sentence of extreme penalty of death and fine of Rs. 10,000/- under Section 302 I.P.C, R.I. for a period of 7 years and fine of Rs. 5,000/- under Sections 376/511 I.P.C. R.I. for a period of 5 years and fine of Rs. 5000/- under Section 394 I.P.C. and fine of Rs. 1000/- each under Sections 504 and 506 I.P.C.2. The prosecution story, briefly stated, was as under:-Appellant Shiv Shankar alias Chaukidar and Bharat Singh (P.W.I) were residents of village Nivalpur, P.S. Shamshabad, district Farrukhabad. Bhaiat Singh (P.W. 1) had two daughters Smt. Usha Devi (21) deceased and Pushpa Devi (P.W. 2) Smt. Usha Devi was married, but on the date of occurrence she was residing at the house of her father Bharat Singh had his agricultural plots towards west of village abadi. There was maize crop in the field near Rasta. Jagram (P.W.3) had his...
Tag this Judgment!Dambar Singh Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-22-2002
Reported in: 2002CriLJ3578
ORDERU.S. Tripathi, J.1. This revision has been directed against the order dated 19-11-1990 passed by Special Judge (Dacoity Affected Area), Agra in Sessions Trial No. 195 of 1985 discharging opposite parties Nos. 2 to 9 of the charges under Sections 395, 397, 307, 302, 324, 147, 148, 149, I.P.C. and framing charges only under Sections 307 and 324, I.P.C. against opposite parties Nos. 10 and 11.2. The fact of the case giving rise to this revision, briefly stated, was that Pancham Singh, father of applicant Dambar Singh and Jorawar Singh, father of opposite party Kamod Singh, were real brothers. They had another brother Amiri Singh. Jorawar Singh, father of opposite party Kamod Singh died in the year 1961. Thereafter, Amiri Singh died issueless in the year 1973. Property of Amiri Singh was inherited by Pancham Singh, father of applicant Dambar Singh being real brother of Amiri Singh as his other brother Jorawar Singh father of Kamod Singh died prior to him. Kamod Singh also claimed half...
Tag this Judgment!Anil (In Jail) Vs. State of U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-22-2002
Reported in: 2002CriLJ2694
J.C. Gupta, J. 1. On being found guilty under Section 302 read with Section 34 I.P.C., the appellant Anil alias Teetu has been sentenced to death by the judgment dated 21-10-2000 passed by Sri J.S.P. Singh, Additional Sessions Judge, Bulandshahr in Sessions Trial No. 927/ 1993, Appellant has been further convicted and sentenced to imprisonment for life under Section 364 I.P.C. and also to two years R.I. under Section 201 I.P.C. All the sentences have been ordered to run concurrently.2. Learned Sessions Judge has also made a reference to this Court for confirmation of death sentence awarded on the appellant.3. Deceased of this case, Nirvikar aged about 18 years, was the son of complainant P.W. 1 Bhopal Singh. He was related to accused Anil alias Teetu in as much as maternal grand mother of the appellant and mother of complainant Bhopal Singh were real sisters. Anil alias Teetu was running a merchandise shop in front of the house of Bhopal Singh. As per the prosecution case that anti-soc...
Tag this Judgment!Miss Anju Nigam Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-20-2002
Reported in: (2004)(1)SLJ18CAT
1. By this O.A. under Section 19 of the A.T. Act, 1985, the applicant has prayed to quash the order dated 18.4.94, 26.5.94 (Annexures-5 and 6), by which the claim of the applicant for pay protection has been rejected. She has also prayed to quash para, 4 of the O.M. dated 7.8.1989 (Annexure-5). A direction has been prayed to respondents to grant pay protection to the applicant counting her service rendered in the State Bank of India from 1.10.1985 to 13.5.1989 under the O.M.dated 7.8.1989.2. The facts in short giving rise to this application are that the applicant initially joined as Probationary Officer in the main branch of the State Bank of India, Kanpur and served there from 1.10.1985 to 13.5.1989. While she was serving as Probationary Officer, she with the permission of the Bank authorities appeared in the Civil Services Examination 1987, conducted by Union Public Service Commission. She was selected for I.A.S. (Allied) and she joined the Department of Posts on 15.5.1989 as India...
Tag this Judgment!Moti Lal Gupta Vs. Central Administrative Tribunal, Allahabad and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-20-2002
Reported in: 2002(2)AWC931; [2002(93)FLR284]
M. Katju and R. Tiwari, JJ.1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.2. The petitioner has challenged the Impugned order of the Central Administrative Tribunal, dated 15.4.1999 (Annexurr-1 to the writ petition).3. We have carefully perused the impugned order and find no illegality in the same. The Tribunal has observed that there was break in the petitioner's service, and since he did not complete ten years service, therefore, he is not entitled for pension.4. Learned counsel for the petitioner had urged that certain points were urged before the Tribunal, which have not been considered by the Tribunal. It is well-settled that if certain points are not mentioned in the judgment of the Court or Tribunal, it will be deemed that they were never pressed by the learned counsel for the petitioner. The presumption in law is that the Court or Tribunal deals with all the points which are pressed. It often happens that 10 points are taken in a petition but only 3 points are pressed. Naturally the ...
Tag this Judgment!Ram Prakash Dewakar Vs. District Inspector of Schools and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-20-2002
Reported in: 2002(2)AWC995
R.R. Yadav, J.1. Heard.2. Sri P. K. Jain is appointed as amicus curiae to assist the Court, who pointed out that a representation made by the petitioner is pending before the District Level Committee in this regard.3. It is revealed from the averments made in the writ petition that in petitioner's institution, there are 500 students in the High School and Intermediate classes out of which 116 girls students are nominated for appearing in the forthcoming examination which is going to be held from 18th March. 2002. It is also averred in paragraph 5 of the writ petition that when the petitioner came to know through newspaper dated 19.10.2001 that petitioner's institution has not been made a centre for Board Examination, he sent a representation to respondent No. 1 on 27.10.2001 and the same was received also in the office of respondent No. 1. In the aforesaid representation dated 27.10.2001, the petitioner stated that report of the Examination Authority was found satisfactory about the ex...
Tag this Judgment!Sheo Prasad and ors. Vs. Deputy Director of Consolidation, Basti and o ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-20-2002
Reported in: 2002(2)AWC1090
R.H. Zaidi, J.1. In both these petitions, common questions of law and fact are Involved, they were, as desired by the learned counsel for the parties, heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment. Writ Petition No. 27585 of 1992 shall be the leading case.2. By means of this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, petitioners pray for issuance of a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the order dated 22.6.1992 passed by the Deputy Director of Consolidation, allowing the revision filed by the contesting respondents under Section 48 of the U. P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, for short, 'the Act'.3. The relevant facts of the case giving rise to the present petition, in brief, are that the land comprised in Khata No. 150 of village Pagar Tappa Naval. Pargana Nagar Pashchim, Tehsil Harraiya, district Basti, (hereinafter referred to as 'the land in dispute') was recorded in the basic year in the name of Lautoo son of Ramai. ...
Tag this Judgment!Mahesh and ors. Vs. State of U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-20-2002
Reported in: 2002CriLJ2683
1. This appeal arises out of the judgment and order dated 26-2-1981 passed by Shri M.G. Godbole, the then Sessions Judge, Jalaun at Oral in Sessions Trial No. 153 of 1980 whereby the above named appellants have been convicted and sentenced to imprisonment for life under Section 302 read with Section 34 I.P.C.2. Prosecution story, in brief, is that in the evening hours of 11-8-1980, Chhadami, P.W. 1, father of deceased, was sitting on the chabutra of his house. His cousin Hari Singh, P.W. 2, Gopal, P.W.3 and Ram Swaroop were also present there. They all were talking with each other. At about 7.30 p.m. Jalim Singh, Chhadami's son went out of the house to purchase Biri, shortly thereafter Chhadami and other witnesses heard cries of Jalim Singh coming from the side of Khandhar (dilapidated house) of Khannaji, which was situated in the east of the house of the complainant at a far distance. Chhadami and the above named witnesses rushed towards that side and saw that all the three appellants...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »