Allahabad Court August 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.
Vinod Kumar JaIn Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-26-2002
Reported in: I(2003)DMC249
M. Katju, J.1. This writ petition had been filed with the prayer for quashing the First Information Report dated 15.7.2002, Annexure 1 to the petition Under Sections 498A/223/506/307, I.P.C. (which was subsequently converted to Section 302, I.P.C.) of Police Station New Mandi, District Muzaffarnagar. The First Information Report has been filed by Hari Om Agarwal, father of the deceased Smt. Anita @ Anju.2. In the First Information Report it is mentioned that the first informant had given a lot of dowry on his daughter's marriage. On several occasions Smt. Anita was harassed by her in-laws who demanded more dowry and often beat her and gave her tortures. Smt. Anita has two daughters and had no son and this was another reason why she was abused by her mother-in-law. On 14.7.2002 at about 4.00 p.m. Smt. Anita informed her father that her husband Vinod Jain, husband's brother Rajneesh Jain and mother-in-law Javitri Devi had beaten Smt. Anita and demanded Rs. 50,000/- as dowry failing which...
Vijai Sugar Industries and ors. Vs. Special Secretary/Appellate Author ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-23-2002
Reported in: 2002(4)AWC2899
R.H. Zaidi, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned counsel appearing for the contesting respondent Nos. 2 to 7. 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 10.9.1999 (signed on 9.9.1999) passed by the appellate authority and the order dated 13.1.1999 passed by the licensing authority under the U. P. Khandsari Sugar Manufacturers' Licensing Order, 1967 (for short 'the Order') and to treat the petitioners to be the licence holders for the years 1997 to 1999. Prayer for quashing the order dated 3.12.1998 passed by the licensing authority has also been made. Besides the general prayer, prayer to pass any other order or orders as this Court may deem fit under the circumstances of the case and the submissions made before it, has also been made. 3. The relevant facts of the case giving rise to the present petition, in brief, ...
Ram Rakshapal Singh Vs. Superintendent of Police, Railways and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-23-2002
Reported in: 2002(4)AWC3201
Sunil Ambwani, J.1. Heard Shri Daya Shankar Misra, learned counsel for the petitioner, and learned standing counsel.2. With the consent of both the parties, this writ petition is being decided at the admission stage. Petitioner was selected and appointed as Constable in Civil Police, Uttar Pradesh in January, 1985. In November, 1996, while he was still posted at G.R.P., Shahjahanpur, he was suspended from service on the charge of registration of a Criminal Case No. 659 of 1996 under Section 302, I.P.C., police station Majhaula, district Moradabad. In Sessions Trial No. 207 of 1997, State v. Sanjay and Ors., under Section 302/34, I.P.C. the Additional District Judge-7, Moradabad convicted petitioner Ram Rakshapal Singh having found him guilty for offences punishable under Section 302/34, I.P.C. and sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for life. The Superintendent of Police, Railways, Lucknow, by his order dated 22.6.2001 dismissed petitioner under Rule 8 (2) (A) of U. P. Subordinate Po...
Ashish Kumar Vs. Superintendent of Police, (Railways)
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-23-2002
Reported in: 2002(4)AWC3231
Sunil Ambwani, J. 1. By this writ petition, petitioner has challenged orders passed by Superintendent of Police (Railways), Agra dated 17th February, 2001, by which petitioner has been dismissed from service as Constable Civil Police, posted in Government Railway Police in exercise of powers under Rule 8 (2) (b) of Uttar Pradesh Police Subordinate Ranks (Punishment and Appeals) Rules, 1991 (in short Rules, 1991) which provides that a police officer of subordinate ranks, could be dismissed, removed or reduced in rank if the authority is satisfied that for reasons to be recorded in writing, it is not reasonably practicable to hold an enquiry.2. I have heard Sri R.G. Padia, senior advocate, assisted by Sri Prakash Padia and Sri S.N. Shrivastva. Shri Ravi Ranjan, learned standing counsel for respondent.3. Petitioner was appointed as constable in civil police on 1.8.1989. He joined duties in Government Railway Police in the year 1998. By an order dated 26.12.2000, petitioner was suspended o...
Capital Power Systems Limited Vs. Commissioner of Trade Tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-23-2002
Reported in: [2003]131STC445(All)
R.B. Misra, J.1. This present trade tax revision has been preferred under Section 11 of the U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948 (in short called 'the Act') against the order dated June 26, 2002 passed in Second Appeal No, 332 of 2002 (2002-2003)--Section 13-A(6) of 'the Act'.1. Heard Sri Kunwar Saxona, learned counsel for the applicant/ revisionist and Sri B.K. Pandey, learned Standing Counsel for the Commissioner of Trade Tax/Revenue and with the consent of the parties, this revision is disposed of finally at this stage under second proviso to Rule 2 of Chapter XXII of the Allahabad High Court Rules, 1952.2. The facts necessary for adjudication of the present revision are that the applicant is a public limited company and is registered under U.P. as well as Central Sales Tax Act as also Central Excise Act and is engaged in the manufacture and sale of energy measuring instruments (electric meters) of State Electricity Board and other public sector enterprises as the buyers. It appears that the ap...
Smt. Munesh Kumari Vs. Shri Sheo Raj Singh and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-23-2002
Reported in: 2003(1)ALT(Cri)2; 2003CriLJ215; I(2003)DMC137
ORDERM.A. Khan, J.1. This is revision against the judgment and order dated 13-12-1983 passed by the learned VI Additional Sessions Judge, Aligarh in Criminal Revision No. 295 of 1983, thereby upsetting the judgment and order dated 14-4-1983 passed by the learned Special Judicial Magistrate, Aligarh under which a petition under Section 125, Cr. P. C, moved by the wife against her husband was allowed and the wife was granted maintenance to the tune of Rs. 100/- per month. In revision the learned Additional Sessions Judge reverse the finding and dismissed the petition under Section 125, Cr. P. C. moved by the wife. For setting aside the aforesaid judgment and order, the present revision has been filed.2. None appears for the parties and I have myself gone through the impugned judgment and order passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge and I find that it is absolutely illegal and improper.3. In case of Mustafa Shamsuddin Shaikh v. Shamshad Begum Mustafa Shaikh, 1991 Criminal Law Jou...
Ram Kinkar Tripathi Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-23-2002
Reported in: [2002(95)FLR492]; (2002)3UPLBEC2764
Sunil Ambwani, J. 1. Heard Counsel for petitioner and learned Standing Counsel.2. By the impugned order dated 19.6.2002, the Appointing Authority/ Assistant Record Officer, Mirzapur has compulsorily retired petitioner working as Peshi Moharrir under Fundamental Rule 56(c) of U.P. Fundamental Rules, Vol. II, Part 2, in public interest making him entitled to three months pay. It is submitted that order does not disclose any reason as to why petitioner shall be retired. Petitioner claims to be medically fit and active in his work. He further stated that no opportunity of hearing or any notice was given to petitioner and that the order is wholly illegal, arbitrary and against the provisions of law. By an amendment application, allowed by this Court, petitioner has sought to challenge the validity of Fundamental Rule 56(c). Fundamental Rules as arbitrary as against Article 14 of the Constitution of India. The validity of Article 465A, Note-1, in Civil Service Regulation, 1920 providing for ...
Constable 5814 Ashish Kumar Vs. Superintendent of Police (Railways)
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-23-2002
Reported in: (2002)3UPLBEC2765
Sunil Ambwani, J. 1. By this writ petition, petitioner has challenged orders passed by Superintendent of Police (Railways), Agra dated 17th February, 2001 by which petitioner has been dismissed from service as Constable Civil Police, posted in Government Railway Police in exercise of powers under Rule 8(2)(b) of Uttar Pradesh Police Subordinate Ranks (Punishment and Appeals) Rules, 1991 (in short Rules, 1991) which provides that a Police Officer of subordinate ranks, could be dismissed, removed or reduced in rank if the authority is satisfied that for reasons to be recorded in writing, it is not reasonably practicable to hold an enquiry.2. I have heard Sri R.G. Padia, Senior Advocate, assisted by Sri Prakash Padia and Sri S.N. Srivastava, Shri Ravi Ranjan, learned Standing Counsel for respondent.3. Petitioner was appointed as constable in Civil Police on 1.8.1989. He joined duties in Government Railways Police in the year 1998. By an order dated 26.12.2000, petitioner was suspended on ...
Sri Sant Prakash Singh and ors. Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-22-2002
Reported in: AIR2003All15
Vineet Saran, J.1. By means of this writ petition, the petitioners have challenged the order dated 22-10-1977 passed by the Collector, Etawah, issuing the 'parwana amaldaramad' for recording the name of contesting respondent No. 6 Hindu Educational Society, Etawah (hereinafter referred to as the Society) over the plots in dispute in the revenue records; and also the order dated 3-5-1982 passed by the Additional Commissioner, Allahabad dismissing the revision filed by the petitioners.2. Briefly, the admitted facts of this case are that the Society had on 9-5-1949, applied for acquisition of 15.08 acres of land for construction of a hostel for its College students. Regarding this, a notification for acquisition of land under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) was issued by the State Government on 13-3-1954 followed by a notification under Section 6 on 9-5-1956, after having made the requisite enquiries under Section 5A of the Act. Admittedly, the a...
Gyan Prakash Singh Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-21-2002
Reported in: 2002(4)AWC2957; (2002)3UPLBEC2652
Rakesh Tiwari, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 2. By means of this writ application the petitioner has claimed relief of fixation of his salary in the pay scale of Rs. 1,400-2,300 i.e., the salary payable to the post of Instructor, arrears of salary and emoluments from aforesaid date after taking into account the full length service. 3. The brief facts of the case are that the respondent No. 2, U. P. Anusuchit Jati Vitta Evam Vikas Nigam is a Government company incorporated under the provisions of the Companies Act, 4. The petitioner holds a diploma in engineering from Indian Institute of Handloom Technology. In the year 1988, respondent No. 2 invited applications for making appointment on the post of Instructors in Typing, Handloom and Carpentry trades in the training centres established by it. In pursuance thereto, the petitioner applied for the said post, was selected and appointed in the company vide Annexure-3. His appointment was purely tempora...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »