Allahabad Court April 2002 Judgments
Gyanendra Pratap Singh Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-24-2002
Reported in: 2002(3)AWC1799; (2002)3UPLBEC2080
M. Katju and Rakesh Tiwari, JJ.1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Rajesh Srivastava, learned counsel appearing for respondent No. 1 and Sri Arun Tandon, learned counsel appearing for the respondent Nos. 2 and 3.2. The petitioner prays that he should be permitted to appear in the interview for the Dealership of retail outlet open category to be granted by respondent No. 2.3. In the advertisement dated 21.9.2000, a copy of which has been filed as Annexure-2 to the writ petition, it is stated that the applicants should apply by 30.10.2000 but it is admitted that thepetitioner never applied within that period. In fact, the petitioner is relying on an application which he had given in pursuance of an earlier advertisement dated 31.12.1997 referred to in para 3 of the writ petition. We are of the opinion that the petitioner cannot rely on his earlier application. He should have filed a fresh application in pursuance of the advertisement dated 21.9.2000 but he never did so. I...
Tag this Judgment!Masroor Vs. District Judge, Shahjahanpur and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-24-2002
Reported in: 2002(3)AWC1930
A.K. Yog, J. 1. Heard Sri Shyam Ji Gaur, advocate learned counsel for the applicant who has filed this transfer application under Section 24, Code of Civil Procedure, praying for transfer of Civil Appeal No. 102 of 1994 pending before V-Additional Civil Judge. Shahjahanpur before another competent court at Shahjahanpur itself.2. A transfer application was initially filed before the learned District Judge, Shahjahanpur by Masroor, the applicant through Sri Rakesh Chandra Sharma, advocate dated 23.3.2002 (Annexure-1 to the affidavit filed in support of the present transfer application for short called 'the affidavit'), Madan Lal, respondent through his counsel filed objections denying the allegations in the Transfer Application Annexure-2 to the affidavit.3. The learned District Judge rejected aforesaid Transfer Application vide order dated 16.4.2002, observed that Madan Lal has rebutted the allegations made by Masroor to the effect that he (Madan Lal) had gone to the house of the concer...
Tag this Judgment!Dr. Satyendra Singh Vs. Director of Education (Higher Education) and o ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-24-2002
Reported in: 2002(3)AWC1981; (2002)3UPLBEC2434
S.P. Srivastava, J. 1. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned counsel representing the respondents. 2. Perused the record. The facts, in brief, shorn of details and necessary for the disposal of this writ petition, lie in a narrow compass. In the proceedings for the selection and appointment of Principal in accordance with the provisions contained in Section 12 of the Uttar Pradesh Higher Education Services Commission Act, 1980, the petitioner had given his preference for various colleges. During the period of the validity of the list referred to in sub-clause (2) of Section 13 of the said Act, a vacancy in the post of Principal of Durga Dutt Chunnilal Khakdelwal Postgraduate College, Maunath Bhanjan had come into existence. The petitioner submitted an application to the Director for changing the preference given by him and requesting that he may be granted appointment on the post of Principal of the aforesaid College Instead of Ram Swarup Gram Udyog Postgr...
Tag this Judgment!Krishi Utpadan Mandi Samiti, Aligarh and ors. Vs. Heinz India Limited
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-24-2002
Reported in: 2002(3)AWC1910A
G.P. Mathur, J.1. This appeal has been preferred by the defendant-respondents against the judgment and order dated 24.1.2002 of Civil Judge (Sr. Division), Allgarh, in O. S. No. 233 of 2000 by which the application 7C for grant of temporary injunction moved by the plaintiff under Order XXXIX, Rules 1 and 2 read with Section 151, Code of Civil Procedure was allowed. By the impugned order, temporary injunction was granted whereby it was directed that if the plaintiff transferred stock from its factory situate within the mandi area of Aligarh to its godown outside the mandi area by way of stock transfer, neither any gate pass would be required nor any mandi fee would be charged and the plaintiff would furnish Bank guarantee for the amount of mandi fee which it is liable to pay on each stock transfer in favour of the defendant.2. The plaintiff, M/s. Heinz India Limited, filed the suit against the Krishl Utpadan Mandi Samiti, Aligarh and two others, praying that defendant Nos. 1 to 3 and th...
Tag this Judgment!Aditya Nath Pathak Vs. District Assistant Registrar Co-operative Socie ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-24-2002
Reported in: 2002(3)AWC1998; (2002)2UPLBEC1391
Rakesh Tiwari, J.1. This writ petition has been filed challenging the order dated 8.10.1999 passed by the Co-operative Tribunal and the order dated 4.5.1994 passed by the District Assistant Registrar, Cooperative Societies, U. P. Varanasi. These orders have been appended as Annexure-1 and Annexure-2 respectively to the writ petition.2. The brief facts of this case are that the petitioner was appointed as Accountant in Sadhan Sahkari Samiti in the year 1961, and was promoted on the post of Sachiv in the said Samiti in the year 1978. While working as Sachiv of the Samiti, Anai Block Badagaon, district Varanasi, certain charges were levelled against him and he was put under suspension. The Upper Zila Sahkari Adhikari, Sadar, Varanasi, was appointed as inquiry officer and an ex parte report was submitted by him.3. By the impugned order dated 4.5.1994, the District Assistant Registrar, Co-operative Societies, U. P., Varanasi, passed an order under Section 68 (2) of the Act declaring the pet...
Tag this Judgment!Gyan Prakash Singh Vs. Central Administrative Tribunal, Allahabad Benc ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-24-2002
Reported in: 2002(3)AWC2024; (2002)3UPLBEC2163
Rakesh Tiwari, J. 1. This writ petition has been filed challenging the validity of the impugned Judgment and order dated 7.12.1999 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Allahabad. 2. The brief facts of the case are that on 31.12.1995 the office of the Central Excise and Customs, Allahabad advertised two vacancies of Inspector, one of Upper Division Clerk and two posts of Lower Division Clerk for appointment of meritorious sportsmen in the Newspaper 'Danik Jagran'. The petitioner applied for the post of Inspector on pursuance of the Advertisement dated 31.12.1995. In paragraph Nos. 6 to 9, the petitioner has averred that he being an athlete participated in several tournaments. It is stated that he also participated in East Zone Inter University Athletics Meet commencing from 23rd to 25th January, 1993. He also participated In Atheletic Hammer Throw Championship 1991 and Inter University and Inter degree colleges championship in the year 1990-91, 1991-92, 1992-93 and 1993-94. 3....
Tag this Judgment!Balbir Singh Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-24-2002
Reported in: 2002CriLJ2927
M. Katju, J.1. This writ petition has been filed against the impugned detention order dated 16-2-2001 passed under the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act 1974. A large number of points have been taken in this writ petition, but it is not necessary to go into all of them since we are satisfied that this petition deserves to succeed on the very ' first point, namely, there was unreasonable delay in executing the detention order.2. Sri A.D. Giri, learned Senior Advocate, has pointed out that there are two periods of delay in executing the detention order which have not been explained. Firstly, the period from 16-2-2001, when the impugned detention order was passed, to 10-4-2001 when a stay order was passed in Writ Petition No. 2068 of 2001 i.e. a delay of about 55 days which has not been explained. Secondly he pointed out that the delay from 7-12-2001 when the aforesaid Writ Petition was dismissed till 12-1-2002 when the petitioner was arrested i.e...
Tag this Judgment!Raghunandan Goyal and ors. Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-23-2002
Reported in: 2002(2)AWC1646
M. Katju, J.1. This writ petition has been filed challenging the impugned notification dated 15.4.2000 by which the Government notification dated 16.4.1999 has been rescinded. True copy of the Impugned notification is Annexure-4 to the writ petition.2. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties.3. It has been alleged in paragraphs 4 and 5 of the writ petition that the petitioners were granted inter-State permit Nos. 303. 304 and 305 of 1989. by the State Transport Authority, U. P. on 24.10.1989 on inter-State route known as Meerut-Chandlgarh via Baraut via Kandhia. Shamli, Nanauta, Gangoh, Saharanpur, Sarsawa. Vamuna Nagar. Ambala route. It is stated in paragraph 5 of the writ petition that the petitioners were operating transport services on this inter-State route when the approved scheme was published on 29.5.1993 by means of which the State Government issued a notified scheme in respect of Delhi-Saharanpur and 38 other routes falling in Meerut and Dehradun region. True copy o...
Tag this Judgment!Shahjade Vs. Chairman, Rajya Krishi Utpadan Mandi Parishad, U.P., Luck ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-23-2002
Reported in: 2002(2)AWC1698; (2002)2UPLBEC1587
Rakesh Tiwari, J.1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.2. The petitioner was selected for the post of Secretary in Krishi Utpadan Mandl Samiti vide letter dated 25th January. 1985 by a selection committee by way of direct recruitment which is the only source of recruitment under Section 19 of the U. P. Krishi Utpadan Mandi Adhiniyam, 1964. The services of the petitioner are governed by the Centralised Services Rules after the services of the Secretaries of Mandi Samiti were merged vide order dated 1.8.1984. In the order of merger there was no classification of different kinds of Secretaries.3. The petitioner was posted as Secretary in Krishi Utpadan Mandf Samiti in the pay scale of Rs. 1,640-2,900. Subsequently his pay scale was fixed in the scale of Rs. 3,000-4,500 in the year 1992. The functions, duties and powers of all the Secretaries in all Mandi Samitis are the same under Rule 24 (6-B) of the Rules. The petitioner is a confirmed employee and his cadre is equivalent to that of ...
Tag this Judgment!Reserve Bank of India Vs. Kuber Mutual Benefits Ltd.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-23-2002
Reported in: 2002(2)AWC1666b
Sunil Ambwani, J. 1. This company petition has been filed under Section 45MC of Reserve Bank of India Act. 1934, to wind up respondent company and to appoint Official Liquidator, High Court, Allahabad or some other fit and proper person to be appointed as liquidator and further to appoint provisional liquidator to take chargeof company's properties and assets, its books of accounts, papers, vouchers etc. and to issue ad interim injunction restraining the respondent, its servants, agents and assignees from encumbering, transferring, alienating and disposing of any of the assets of the respondent company. 2. The Reserve Bank of India issued Non-Banking Financial Companies Acceptance of Public Deposits (Reserve Bank) Directions, 1998, to regulate acceptance of deposits by companies carrying on the business of non-banking financial institutions, in exercise of powers conferred by Sections 45J. 45K and 45L ofthe Reserve Bank of India Act. 1934. Respondent company, namely, Kuber Mutual Benef...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »