Allahabad Court January 2003 Judgments
S.A.K. Roy Vs. District Magistrate and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-31-2003
Reported in: 2003(2)AWC916
M. Katju, J. 1. We have heard learned counsel for the parties. The writ petition has been filed praying for a writ of certiorari to quash the auction notice dated 7.3.2000, Annexure-6 to the writ petition and the auction held in pursuance thereof on 15.3.2000 and all other proceedings in pursuance thereto. 2. It is alleged in paragraph 2 of the writ petition that the father of the petitioner was owner of House Nos. 8 and 8A, Muir Road, Allahabad, 12 Kutchery Road, Allahabad and House No. 1 Sir Suleman Road, Allahabad. He submitted a return under Section 6 of the U. P. Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation), Act 1976. The competent authority declared 15560.13 sq. metre total land as surplus land out of the aforesaid premises. Out of House Nos. 8 and 8A, Muir Road, Allahabad 11997.68 sq. metre land was declared surplus. Out of House No. 12 Kutchery Road, Allahabad an area of 397.92 sq. metre land was declared surplus and out of land of House No. 1 Sir Suleman Road, Allahabad an area of 3164...
Tag this Judgment!Hari Prasad Singh Vs. Superintendent of Police (Railways) and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-31-2003
Reported in: 2003(2)AWC1157; (2003)1UPLBEC682
ORDERM. Katju and Prakash Krishna,JJ. 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.2. The petitioner is challenging the impugned order of termination of service dated 14.11.1992 Annexure-1 to the writ petition which has been upheld in appeal by order dated 11.6.1993- vide Annexure-2 and in further appeal by order dated 23.11.1993 vide Annexure-3. Against this order the petitioner had approached the U. P. Public Service Tribunal but the Tribunal has rejected his claim petition vide order dated 21.6.2001 Annexure-4 to the writ petition.3. We have carefully perused the impugned order and find no illegality in the same.4. The petitioner was a Head Constable who was posted in the G.R.P. in Jhansi Division on 25.2.1991. When the petitioner was on duty in the Bombay Janta Express Train, a dacoity was committed on the train the same night and it is this incident which resulted in the action against the petitioner.5. The allegations against the petitioner are that when the train left Manda Road Sta...
Tag this Judgment!Jitendra Singh Vs. District Judge and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-31-2003
Reported in: 2003(2)AWC1168b; (2003)2UPLBEC1065
ORDERA.K. Yog and Ghanshyam Dass, JJ. 1. We have perused the impugned Judgment and order dated 19.12.2002 passed by learned Sessions Judge in Writ Petition No. 54389 of 20O2 giving rise to the present special appeal. By means of the said judgment, aforesaid writ petition has been dismissed.2. We have perused the record of the Special Appeal, which includes copy of the writ petition as well.3. Petitioner was appointed on the post of Stenographer in Fast TrackCourt in the Judgeship of Etah on 27.8.2002 ; copy of appointment letter has been filed as Annexure-1 to the affidavit filed in support of the Stay application. The appointment letter, particular page 18 to the paper book, itself mentions : 'You are hereby temporarily appointed as Steno.................for a period till theFast Track Courts run. It is made clear that as soon as Track-Courts cease to run, your services shall also cease accordingly.....................'4. The appointment letter itself mentions that appointment of the ...
Tag this Judgment!District Co-operative Bank Ltd. Vs. Vth Additional District Judge and ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-31-2003
Reported in: 2003(2)AWC1170; [2003(97)FLR66]; (2003)IILLJ496All; (2003)1UPLBEC799
D.P. Singh, J. 1. Heard Sri N.D. Shukla, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Indal Singh, learned counsel for the workman at length. 2. The writ petition arises out of proceedings under Section 15 of the Payment of Wages Act, It is admitted position that the respondent No. 3 who was posted as Peon-cum-Guard with the petitioner Bank worked at least from 24th October, 1979 to 30th June, 1981 when his services were terminated on 1.7.1988. The aforesaid termination resulted in a reference under Section 4K of the U. P. Industrial Disputes Act. The labour court passed an award dated 29th January, 1986 whereby the respondent workman was reinstated with full back wages and restored to his position as on 1.7.1981 with the same salary. The petitioner challenged the award through a writ petition before this Court. However, the writ petition was dismissed by this Court by an order dated 17th July, 1986. Thereafter, since the salary was not being paid to the respondent workman, he lodged a c...
Tag this Judgment!Committee of Management, Lala Ram Kumar Agarwal Uchchatar Madhyamik Vi ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-31-2003
Reported in: 2003(2)AWC1391
D.P. Singh, J.1. Heard Sri S.D. Kautilya, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri N.A. Khan, learned counsel for the respondent No. 5.Both these parties have exchanged their pleadings. Though, no counter-affidavit has been filed on behalf of respondent Nos. 1 to 4 the learned standing counsel has been heard on behalf of respondent Nos. 1 to 3. No one appears on behalf of respondent No. 4, even though service is sufficient on him and no counter-affidavit has been filed by him, even though time was granted to file counter-affidavit.2. Both the parties agree that the writ petition itself may be disposed of under the Rules of the Court.3. The facts as revealed from perusal of the record, provides a classical example as to how the atmosphere of an educationalinstitution is polluted. A self-righteous Principal and an adamant Manager, put in a political player with an obliging District Inspector of Schools and a Police Officer, the result is catastrophic. Though the interest of the student...
Tag this Judgment!Rajesh Kumar Singh Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-31-2003
Reported in: 2003(2)AWC1659
A.N. Verma, J.1. Through the instant writ petition the petitioner has assailed the order dated 13.1,1989 as contained in Annexure-1 whereby he was intimated that the Director General (Post) New Delhi has not agreed to grant him the Disability Pension as well as orders dated 14.3.1990 and dated 15.3.1991 as contained in Annexures-2 and 3 whereby the appeal and the second appeal preferred by him against the order refusing him to grant disability pension have been rejected.2. The controversy in the instant writ petition arises in the following circumstances :'The petitioner who was under the employment of the Superintendent of Post Offices, Barabanki Division, volunteered himself for Army Postal Services. He appeared in the prescribed test for the Group Cadre of Volunteers for recruitment in Army Postal Services in April, 1995, and qualified the same and was declared successful. After having been selected, he was required to undergo Basic Military Training as required under the Rules. The...
Tag this Judgment!Satya Prakash Vs. Smt. Jawahar Devi
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-31-2003
Reported in: 2003(3)AWC1889
S.P. Mehrotra, J.1. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, inter alia, praying for quashing the Judgment and order dated 2.5.1997 (Annexure-8 to the writ petition) and the judgment and order dated 24.1.2003 (Annexure-11 to the writ petition).2. The dispute relates to a shop situated in Molalla Kot West, Main Market, Hasanpur, district Moradabad, the details whereof have been given in the release application referred to hereinafter. The said shop has, hereinafter, been referred to as 'the disputed shop'.3. From the allegations made in the writ petition, it appears that the respondent filed a release application under Section 21 (1) (a) of the U. P. Act No. 13 of 1972 (in short 'the Act') against the petitioner for the release of the disputed shop.4. It was, inter alia, alleged by the respondent in the said release application that the petitioner was tenant in the disputed shop since 1989 at a monthly rent of Rs. 500 and that t...
Tag this Judgment!Rakesh and ors. Vs. State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-31-2003
Reported in: 2003CriLJ3446
M.C. Jain, J. 1. There are four appellants, namely, Rakesh, Ram Babu, Rajendra Kumar alias Rajjan and Basant who have preferred this appeal against judgment and order dated 6-6-1980 passed by Sri D.K. Trivedi, the then VII Additional Sessions Judge, Kanpur in Sessions Trial No. 64 of 1979. Each of them has been convicted under Section 302 I.P.C. read with Section 34 I.P.C. and sentenced to life imprisonment. It was one Prem Kumar alias Chillu who was murdered in this incident which occurred on 24-11-1977 at about 7.15 P.M. in Ahata Sawai Singh situated in Pheelkhana, District Kanpur Nagar. The distance of the police station from the place of occurrence was only 4 Furlongs and the report had been lodged by Manoj Kumar Dixit P.W. 3 (nephew of the deceased), not an eye-witness.2. The allegation was that the victim was caught hold of by the accused Ram Babu and Rakesh and he was stabbed by the other two accused Rajendra Kumar alias Rajjan and Basant on the stairs leading to the Chabutra of...
Tag this Judgment!Lalta Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-31-2003
Reported in: 2003CriLJ2739
S.K. Agarwal, J.1. The present petition was filed by the petitioner Lalta before this Court against his detention, vide Annexure 'I', under the National Security' Act (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act').2. By this petition the detention order was challenged ipso facto on the grounds that there, is enormous delay in making the F. I. R., which constituted the basis for detention of the petitioner, in Crime No. 100 of 2002 under Section 143/377/323/500/504/ 506 I.P.C. registered at P.S. Mursan at the instance of one Bhudeo son of Atar Singh. He was a witness against the petitioner and his cohorts in the said criminal matter. Bhudeo son of Atar Singh lodged this F. I. R. on 20-1-2002. All the cases prosecuted against the petitioner and his companions were launched after registration of Crime No. 52 of 1997, the F. I. R. of which was lodged against Suresh Chaudhary. These cases were brought against the petitioner at the instance of Suresh Chaudhary who is an influential politician belong...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Span International
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-31-2003
Reported in: [2004]270ITR538(All)
M. Katju, J.1. This is a reference under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, in which the following questions have been referred to us for our opinion :'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned Tribunal was legally correct in holding that the order of the Income-tax Officer had got merged in the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) and, therefore, the Commissioner of Income-tax had no jurisdiction to revise that order 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned Tribunal was right in law in holding that even on merits, the assessee was entitled to deduction under section 80HH of the Act ?'2. The assessee is a firm and the relevant assessment year is 1976-77. For this year, the Income-tax Officer allowed deduction under section 80HH of the Act and held that all the requirements of the said section had been satisfied. The Commissioner of Income-tax was of the opinion that the order of the Income-tax Offi...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »