Allahabad Court December 2003 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.
Devi Deen Verma Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-08-2003
Reported in: 2004(2)AWC1150
ORDERPradeep Kant and K.S. Rakhra, JJ.1. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the learned counsel appearing for the respondents. Perused the record.2. The appellant's application for restoration has been dismissed vide the impugned order dated 21.5.2003. The appellant has challenged the order of compulsory retirement which petition has been dismissed in default on 15.11.1995. The restoration was moved after a considerable delay and it appears that the appellant was required to submit medical certificate as the ground for absence was shown the illness of the appellant. However, medical certificate was not filed.3. The learned single Judge dismissed the application for restoration on the ground that no evidence has been filed in support of the appellant's version about his illness.4. Technically the view taken by the learned single Judge could not be taken as erroneous, but in a case where the matter is pending in the High Court, the illness of the client or the appellant, nor...
Aryan Institute of Management and Computer Studies Vs. Vice Chancellor ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-08-2003
Reported in: 2004(2)AWC1688; (2004)2UPLBEC1603
V.M. Sahai, J.1. Aryan Institute of Management and Computer Studies, Agra (in brief the institute) is affiliated to Dr. B. R. Ambedkar University, Agra. The institute applied to the State Government for grant of no objection certificate for starting B.Ed. course under self-financing scheme. The State Government granted no objection certificate to the petitioner for starting B.Ed. course under self-financing scheme on 10.2.2000 for the session 2000-2001. Thereafter National Council for Teachers Education, on 8.8.2000, granted recognition to the petitioner institute for one year for the academic session 2000-01 with the annual intake of 60 students. The Slate Government, by its policy decision dated 11.11.1997, fixed the number of seats for self-financing institutes. 50% of the seats of the total intake was to be filled by normal category candidates, 35% seats were to be filled under self-supporting category and the remaining 15% seats were to be filled from NRI/NRI sponsored category. T...
Kiran Traders Vs. Judge Small Cause Court and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-08-2003
Reported in: 2005(1)ARC246
S.P. Mehrotra, J.1. The present Writ Petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, interalia, praying for quashing the order dated 7.10.2003 (Annexure-6 to the Writ Petition) passed by the learned Judge, Small Cause Court/Prescribed Authority, Meerut on an application (Paper No. 44 Ga) filed in P.A. Case No. 31 of 2000.2. The dispute relates to a shop, the details whereof are given in the Release Application referred to hereinafter. The said shop was hereinafter been referred to as 'the disputed shop'.3. From a perusal of the averments made in the Writ Petition and the Annexures thereto, it appears that the respondent Nos. 2, 3 and 4 herein filed a Release Application under Section 21 (1) (a) of the U.P. Act No. XIII of 1972 (in short 'the Act') against the petitioner herein and others for the release of the disputed shop. The said Release Application was registered as P.A. Case No. 31 of 2000. Copy of the said Release Application has been filed as Annexure-1 ...
Radhey Shyam Gupta and ors. Vs. First Addl. Civil Judge
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-05-2003
Reported in: AIR2004All183; 2004(1)AWC234; III(2004)BC328
D.P. Singh, J.1. Five partners of a partnership firm namely ; M/s. Lallo Mal Hardeo Das Cotton and Spinning Mill, Hathras, instituted a Suit No. 67 of 1944 against other partners for dissolution of the firm arid rendition of accounts. The suit was dismissed for relief of dissolution but certain damages were allowed. This led to filing of three appeals, namely ; First Appeal Nos. 2, 40 and 92 of 1959. In First Appeal No. 40 of 1959 applications were moved and after hearing the parties, this Court passed an order on 22nd March, 1965 dissolving the firm from the date of the suit itself and fixed the share of the partners and totalling to the tune of Rs. 24 lakhs. This Court also appointed four partners as receiver to implement the directions and remitted the records to the Civil Judge, Agra for complying with the directions. On death of one of the receiver, the Civil Judge appointed his son, Ajai Kumar Garg in his place. The immovable property of the firm was situated at Mathura and Hathr...
Udai and ors. Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-05-2003
Reported in: 2004(1)AWC641; (2004)2UPLBEC1775
M. Katju and Umeshwar Pandey, JJ.1. Through this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India the petitioners challenge the Impugned orders dated 16.10.2003 (Annexures-3, 4 and 5 to the writ petition) passed by respondent No. 2, U. P. Public Service Commission separately against them.2. It is contended in the petition that the petitioners had applied through their applications meant for selection to the posts for which the competitive test of Combined State/Subordinate Services (Preliminary) Examination, 2003, is proposed. The applications were duly filled and sent by the petitioners to the Commission and subsequently it was intimated to them that their candidatures have been rejected. The petitioners claim themselves to belong to 'Bhar' community which is treated to be Scheduled Caste and they were categorized as denotified tribes. According to them, they had filled up their computerized form, but their candidatures have been rejected vide the aforesaid Annexures-3, 4 and 5...
K.B. Thakur Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-05-2003
Reported in: 2004(1)AWC636; (2004)1UPLBEC847
ORDERM. Katju, J.1. This writ petition has been filed against the Impugned order dated 26.6.2000, Annexure-7 to the petition.2. Heard learned counsel for the parties.3. The petitioner was initially appointed in 1963 as U.D.C. in the National Coal Development Corporation Ltd., Ranchi. Subsequently, he was promoted as Accountant, then Assistant Accounts Officer, Accounts Officer and lastly as Finance Manager.4. The Board of Directors of Coal India Limited had approved a scheme known as 'Executive Voluntary Retirement Scheme, 1998', copy of which is Annexure-1 to the petition. The petitioner applied under that scheme vide Annexure-2. He mentioned in his application that his eyesight is weak on account of old age and ill-health. This application was forwarded to the Chairman-cum-Managing Director on 4.12.1998 vide Annexure-3. However, the application was rejected and he was communicated that decision by the order of the Chief Personal Manager, Khadia Project by order dated 28.1.1999, Annex...
D.S. Bishnoi Vs. State Bank of India and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-05-2003
Reported in: 2004(1)AWC640; (2004)IILLJ543All
M. Katju and Umeshwar Pandey, JJ.1. This writ petition has been filed against the impugned order dated 19.7.1996 (Annexure-12 to the writ petition) and the order dated 14.7.1997 (Annexure-13 to the writ petition).2. Heard learned counsel for the parties.3. The petitioner was a Branch Manager of the State Bank of India. He was given a charge-sheet dated 14.9.1993, vide Annexure-6 to the petition. He submitted his reply on 19.8.1995. vide Annexure-8 to the petition. Thereafter an inquiry was held in which he was given an opportunity of hearing. True copy of the inquiry report is Annexure-9 to the petition. A perusal of the same shows that charge Nos. I, II and IV have been proved by the Inquiry Officer but charge Nos. III and V have not been found proved. A perusal of charge Nos. I. II and IV which have been proved show that they are serious in nature. They indicate blatant irregularities committed by the petitioner. By letter dated 10.11.1995 vide Annexure-9 to the petition, the petitio...
Shri Niwas Vs. Deputy Director of Consolidation and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-05-2003
Reported in: 2004(1)AWC706
ORDERS.N. Srivastava, J.1. By means of the present petition, the petitioner has assailed the judgment dated 20.5.2002 passed by the Deputy Director of Consolidation.2. The main grievance of the petitioner is that the petitioner was not assigned any of the plots including plot Nos. 1598 and 1605 of valuation of 60 paise consisting in his original holding in contrariety of the conditions laid down in Section 19 (1) of the U. P. Consolidation of Holdings Act. It appears from the record that after the death of Ram Swarup, the father of the petitioner, the property devolved upon petitioner and respondents 8 to 10. During consolidation proceeding, the Assistant Consolidation Officer proposed plots which according to the petitioner were Udan chak. The father of the petitioner ventilated his grievance by way of objection before the Consolidation Officer seeking Chak on Gate No. 1598. It would appear that the petitioner was recipient of very nominal relief and hence appeal was preferred and the...
Ram Kumar Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-05-2003
Reported in: 2004(1)AWC696; (2004)1UPLBEC609
ORDERM. Katju and Umeshwar Pandey, JJ.1. By means of this petition, the petitioner has prayed for a mandamus directing the respondents not to interfere in his working as Assistant Engineer in Rural Engineering Service's, Maharajganj Division, Maharajganj.2. Heard learned counsel for the parties.3. It is alleged in para 3 of the writ petition that the petitioner was selected by the U.P. Public Service Commission in 1986 on the post of Junior Engineer in the Rural Engineering Service. It is alleged that the petitioner possesses the requisite qualification for appointment/promotion as Assistant Engineer. However, there is nothing to show that the petitioner has been regularly selected as Assistant Engineer in accordance with the relevant rules. On the other hand, in paras 6 and 9 of the writ petition, it is alleged that the petitioner is working and discharging the duties of Assistant Engineer, as there was shortage of Assistant Engineers. This itself implies that the petitioner was never...
Shyam Babu Vaishya and Co. and anr. Vs. Assistant Commissioner, Trade ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-05-2003
Reported in: [2005]139STC397(All)
M. Katju, J.1. This writ petition has been filed for a writ of prohibition quashing the proceedings under Section 21 of the U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948 in pursuance of the permission/authorisation granted by the respondent No. 2 under the proviso to Section 21(2) of the U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948.2. Heard learned counsel for the parties.3. The petitioner No. 1 is a registered firm doing the business of civil construction and supply of building material to Government departments especially railways. The petitioner No. 2 is a partner of the firm. During the assessment year 1996-97 the petitioner-firm received payment of Rs. 17,22,771 from different Government departments in respect of construction work carried on by the firm. It is alleged in paragraph 4 of the writ petition that after making the deductions towards the trade tax, water charges, etc., the petitioner-firm received a sum of Rs. 12,53,358. After deducting labour charges and the amount of security the net amount received by the pe...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »