Allahabad Court February 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.
Vijitendra Kumar Gupta Vs. State of U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-11-2003
Reported in: 2003CriLJ4101
K.N. Sinha, J. 1. The present revision has been filed against the order dated 19-10-2002 passed by Sessions Judge, Etah in Sessions Trial No. 691 of 2002 rejecting the application for summoning the documents and record before hearing on the charges.2. The brief facts giving rise to this revision are that the revisionist was facing trial in Session Trial No.691 of 2002 wherein date was fixed for framing of the charge. On that data the revisionist moved an application for summoning certain documents which was rejected. Being aggrieved by the said order the present revision has been filed.3. I have heard learned counsel for the revisionist and learned AGA,, perused the impugned order.4. Learned counsel for revisionist has submitted that the revisionist made a request for summoning the record of ballistic expert report, Chemical analysis report, Radio Transmission Set message and Case Diary of Case Crime No. 739 of 2002 before hearing on the framing of the charges but the same was rejected...
Vijay Prakash Misra Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-11-2003
Reported in: 2003CriLJ2717
Vishnu Sahai, J.1.Through this petition preferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, petitioner-detenu Vijay Prakash Misra alias Darhi Misra has impugned order dated 7-9-2002 passed by the second opposite party Sri Suresh Chand Sharma, District Magistrate, Pratapgarh detaining him under Section 3(2) of the National Security Act.The detention order along with the grounds of detention, which are also dated 7-9-2002, was served on the petitioner-detenu on 7-9-2002 itself and their true copies have been annexed as Annexures 1 and 2 respectively to the writ petition.2. The prejudicial activities of the petitioner-detenu which impelled the second opposite party to issue the Impugned order against him are contained in Annexure No. 2 (grounds of detention). A perusal thereof would show that the impugned order is founded on three CRs. lodged at P. S. Sangramgarh, district Pratapgarh, namely:--(i) C. R. No. 59 of 2002 under Sections 302/506. I.P.C. lodged on 11-6-2002 on the basis o...
National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Smt. Kalu Devi and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-11-2003
Reported in: II(2003)ACC350
ORDER1. Learned Counsel for the appellant states that the claimants have realised the compensation amount in execution of the impugned decree. Learned Counsel for the claimants/respondents, Smt. Kamla Misra, Advocate, however, states that the amount received by the claimants is short by Rs. 25,000/- (i.e. the amount which has been deposited by the appellant under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act). A statement is made at the Bar that the claimants had applied for execution of the amount.2. Since the claimants have put in appearance through their Counsel and were forced to contest the appeal in this Court, we deem it appropriate that out of Rs. 25,000/- deposited in this Court, a sum of Rs. 20,000/- be allowed to be withdrawn by the appellant and the remaining sum of Rs. 5,000/- shall be refunded to the claimants.3. Subject to the above directions, the appeal stands dismissed as not pressed....
Shyama Charan Gupta Vs. Asstt. Cit
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-11-2003
Reported in: [2003]128TAXMAN669(All)
ORDERM. Katju, J. This is an appeal under section 260A of the Income Tax Act by which the impugned order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal dated 26-8-1999 Annexure 3 to the appeal has been challenged.2. We have heard the learned counsel for the department as well as of the assessee and have perused the impugned order and find no illegality in the same.3. The respondent assessee is a partner in a firm M/s Shyam Bidi Works. The original assessment of the firm as well as of the partners was completed. Subsequently there was a search under section 132 of the Income Tax Act in connection with the firm, its partners and Director of the Company of this group in November 1998 (sic). As a result of this search the firm filed a revised return on 27-3-1989 disclosing an income of Rs. 9,00,890 as against the income of Rs. 4,07,380 declared in the original return furnished on 26-9-1984. The assessment of the firm on the basis of the revised return was completed on an income of Rs. 9,00,890 as de...
Shri Bhagirathi Ram, Through His Vs. Income-tax Officer
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-10-2003
Reported in: (2004)89ITD642(All.)
1. Both these appeals by the assessee are directed against two different orders of the CIT(A), Varanasi, dated 25th March, 1993 for the assessment year 1972-73 by which penalties Under Sections 271(1)(a) and 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act were confirmed.2. During the course of the proceedings, legal heirs of the assessee filed an application stating therein that the assessee had died on 6th January, 2001 leaving behind his legal representatives, namely, Smt.Gangotri Devi, Shri Devilal Jaiswal, Shri Shambhoo Saran Jaiswal, Shri Ramnivas Jaiswal and Shri Om Prakash Jaiswal. It was prayed that legal heirs may be impleaded in accordance with law. In view of this matter, the deceased assessee is substituted through his legal representatives mentioned above. Since both the appeals are based upon the same set of facts, therefore, both are decided by this common consolidated order.3. For the sake of convenience, we first take up I.T.A.No. 1076 (Alld) of 1993.I.T.A.No. 1076(Alld) of 1993 (Und...
General Manager, Eastern Railway and ors. Vs. Central Administrative T ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-10-2003
Reported in: 2003(2)AWC1110
M. Katju, J. 1. This writ petition has been filed against the impugned order of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Allahabad dated 10.7.2001, Annexure 10 to the writ petition.2. We have heard learned counsel for the parties. 3. The respondent No. 2 was initially appointed as a Signaler in Eastern Railway in the year 1957. One J. P. Kushwaha who was working as Senior Inspector, Telegraph Traffic (hereinafter referred to as Senior I.T.T.) in the pay scale of 1600-2660 retired on 31.7.1992 and hence the post fell vacant. To fill up the above post, a selection committee was formed by the Railway Board and the selection was under process. It is alleged in paragraph 4 of the writ petition that in the meantime, the Station Superintendent Engineer, Moghal Sarai who had no authority in the matter directed the respondent No. 2. Sharda Prasad Gupta, to take over the charge of Senior I.T.T. vide order dated 7.8.1992 Annexure-1 to the writ petition.4. In paragraph 5 of the writ petition, it is st...
R.B.S. Chauhan Vs. Reserve Bank of India and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-10-2003
Reported in: 2003(2)AWC1007; [2003(97)FLR359]; (2003)IILLJ634All; (2003)3UPLBEC2543
M. Katju, J.1. This writ petition has been filed for a writ of certtorari to quash the impugned order dated 7.5.2002 Annexure-7 to the writ petition by which the petitioner has been compulsorily retired.2. Heard learned counsel for the parties.3. The petitioner was selected in the service of Reserve Bank of India vide appointment letter, copy of which is Annexure-2 to the writ petition, and he was granted promotions vide Annexures-3, 4 and 5 to the writ petition. It is stated in paragraph 10 of the petition that the petitioner's retirement age is 60 years but he has been compulsorily retired at the age of 55-1/2 years. The relevant extract of the relevant rules providing for compulsory retirement is Annexure-8 to the writ petition.4. The Regulation 26 of the R.B.I. (Staff) Regulations, 1948 states ;'26. Superannuation and Retirement.--(1) An employee shall retire at 60 years of age but no extension shall be given to any employee beyond 60 years of age : Provided that an employee who at...
Azizul Hasan Vs. Director General of Police (Training) and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-10-2003
Reported in: 2003(2)AWC1373
S.P. Srivastava, A.C.J.1. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant.2. The petitioner-appellant is facing a regular disciplinary enquiry wherein the Deputy Commandant, 41 Bn. P.A.C., Ghaziabad, Smt. Aabha Singh has been appointed as an Enquiry Officer. A perusal of the charge-sheet, a copy of which has been filed as Annexure-4 to the writ petition, indicates that the petitioner stands charged for having received house rent allowance for residing in a rented accommodation disclosed to be House No. 211C. Tulsi Niketan, police station Sahibabad, district Ghaziabad, where he never resided.3. It may be noticed that during the preliminary enquiry, it was found that the petitioner-appellant had received an amount of Rs. 47,130 as house rent allowance during the period from April, 1997 to July, 2002 on the ground that he was residing in the aforesaid house which had been taken on rent by him for residential purposes but in fact, the aforesaidhouse had never been let out to the petitioner. Th...
Vijai Kumar Mishra Vs. State of U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-10-2003
Reported in: 2003CriLJ3429
ORDERR.C. Deepak, J. 1. This is a bail application for the release of the accused-applicant Vijai Kumar Mishra son of Late Ram Deo Mishra of village Khaptiha P. S. Handia, District Allahabad, on bail during the pendency of his trial in Case Crime No. 111 of 2002 registered against the seven accused persons including the accused-applicant under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302/34 and 504, IPC read with Section 7, Criminal Law Amendment Act, P. S. Gopiganj, District, Sant Ravi Das Nagar to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sant Ravi Das Nagar, Distt. Bhadohi or to pass any such or other order as may be deemed fit and proper in view of the facts and circumstances of the case.2. The accused-applicant has filed an affidavit and certain documents including cross First Information Report regarding a Criminal Case registered against nine accused/persons as Case Crime No. 111A of 2002 under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, IPC in support of his bail application. Ram Krishna Pandey, the ...
Onkar Madhav (Dr.) Vs. Uttar Pradesh Higher Education Services Commiss ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-10-2003
Reported in: (2003)2UPLBEC1020
M. Katju, J.1. This writ petition has been filed against the impugned order dated 29.12.2001 Annexure 12 to the writ petition passed by the Director of Higher Education, U.P. respondent No. 3.2. In Para 9 of the writ petition it is stated that the petitioner was appointed part time Lecturer in Dharam Samaj College, Aligarh on 13.11.91 and since then he had been functioning as Lecturer.3. The petitioner applied for regularisation by representation dated 11.8.97 Annexure 2 to the writ petition claiming the benefit of Section 31-C of the U.P. State Universities Act.4. It is alleged in Para 13 of the writ petition that thereupon he made several representations and the last representation was made on 23.5.2001 vide Annexure 3. It is further alleged in Para 14 of the writ petition that the Secretary of the Management of the College has sent a recommendation in favour of the petitioner for his regularisation vide order dated 10.4.2000 and 8.7.2001 Annexures 4 and 5. When no heed was paid to t...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 10
- 11
- 12
- Next ›
- Last »