Allahabad Court April 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.
Hamdard (Waqf) Laboratories Vs. Deputy Labour Commissioner, Government ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-09-2003
Reported in: [2003(97)FLR1053]; (2003)2UPLBEC1567
Anjani Kumar, J.1. These two writ petitions, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India filed by the employer, are directed against the orders passed by the Labour Court Under Section 6-H(1) of the U.P. Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, hereinafter called the 'Act'. Since, the common question of facts and law are involved, therefore, both the writ petitions were heard together and after hearing the learned Counsel for the parties, the writ petitions were dismissed on 9th April, 2003 for the reasons to be recorded later on. Now here are the reasons for dismissing the aforesaid writ petitions.2. 17 Workmen, whose services were terminated, have raised dispute, which has been referred to the Labour Court and ultimately, the award was given by the Labour Court in favour of the workmen for reinstatement of service with continuity and 50% of back wages. This award was challenged by the petitioners-employer by means of separate writ petitions earlier to the present writ petitions. This Court ...
Rajesh Kumar Upadhyay Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-09-2003
Reported in: (2003)2UPLBEC1884
Tarun Chatterjee, C.J. and Vineet Saran, J. 1. In our view, this appeal has no merit as it is concluded by a decision of the Full Bench of this Court in the case of Gopal Dubey v. District Inspector of Schools, Maharajganj, (1999) 1 UPLBEC 1.2. The writ-petitioner was appointed by a Committee of Management to take Intermediate Classes in English. It is true, that the writ petitioner-appellant has been working and functioning as an English Teacher since then. It is admitted position even today that without taking prior approval Under Section 9 of U.P. Act No. 24 of 1971 from the Director the writ petitioner-appellant was appointed to the English classes in the aforesaid College. The writ petitioner-appellant had moved the writ application praying for payment of salary since 1985.3. In view of Section 9 of U.P. Act No. 24 of 1971, we are unable to accede to the claim made by the writ petitioner-appellant as no prior approval of the Director for creation of post to teach English classes w...
Qazi Hifzur Rahman Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-09-2003
Reported in: (2003)2UPLBEC1420
S.N. Srivastava, J. 1. Present petition has been canvassing the validity of impugned order of termination dated 23.7.2002 (Annexure 1).2. Facts draped in brevity are that the petitioner who was at the relevant time serving as Clerk in the Nagar Palika Parishad, Ghazipur was charged with defalcation of public money inasmuch as the rent realised by him from the year 1996, onwards was appropriated to his use and was not deposited with the Nagar Palika Parishad and as such he was imputed with misappropriation of public money and occasioning loss to the exchequer of the Nagar Palika Parishad. The precise allegation contained in Charge No. 1 is that M.A.C. 5 i.e., receipt Book Nos. 14/1 -100 was issued to the petitioner on 13.11.1996 which he deposited back with the Nagar Palika Parishad on 30.3.2002. The six charges relate to the interpolation/overwriting in the rent receipts and misappropriation of amount of rent realised by him from the year 1996 upto the year 2002. On 5.3.2002, the petit...
Cownpore Engineering Stores Vs. Cegat and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-08-2003
Reported in: (2003)IILLJ341All
Prakash Krishna, J.1. Heard Shri A.P. Mathur, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Subodh Kumar, Learned Standing Counsel for Union of India.2. The present writ petition has been filed for quashing the order dated 22.11.2001 read with order dated 10.11.1997 passed by Customs Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi in Appeal No. E/ROA/199-2000-B in E/4191/89-B.3. The petitioner filed the aforesaid appeal before Customs Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi. The notice for hearing of appeal was issued to the petitioner, but the case was adjourned on the application of the petitioner. After seeking few adjournments the last date was fixed as 10.11.1997. On that date one month's further time was granted to the petitioner. It appears that no firm date was fixed in the appeal and in any view of the matter the petitioner was not informed about the firm date of hearing in appeal. Consequently the Tribunal vide its order dated 10.11.1997 dismissed the ap...
Km. Manglesh (Minor) Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-08-2003
Reported in: 2003(3)AWC2311
K.N. Sinha, J.1. The present writ petition has been filed on behalf of Km. Manglesh through her father and natural guardian Vijai Singh on the ground that the petitioner Km, Manglesh was born on 15.7.1987 and she passed High School Examination from Sri Ganesh Higher Secondary School, Kutumbpur district Etah in the year 2001. She was a regular student of Class IX in Rani Awanti Bai Inter College, Marhara district Etah. Km. Manglesh being a minor was not in a position to take her independent decision. It is alleged that one Nem Singh, respondent No. 3, is a notorious person and he kidnapped Km. Manglesh on 12.12.2001. The respondent Nos. 3 to 7 are highly influential persons, who have illegally detained Km. Manglesh against her free-will and wishes. Km. Manglesh went to school on 12.12.2001 at 9 a.m. but she did not return about which a report was lodged under Sections 363 and 366. I.P.C. at P.S. Marhara district Etah. The same was registered as Crime No. 118 of 2002 (Annexure-2 to the p...
Shakil Ahmad and anr. (In Jail) Vs. State of U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-08-2003
Reported in: 2004CriLJ91
M.C. Jain, J.1. There are two appellants, namely, Shakil Ahmad and Raju who have preferred this appeal against the order of conviction and sentence of life imprisonment passed against them under Section 302 read with Section 34, I.P.C. on 18-7-1981 by Sri J.M. Srivastava, the then III Additional Sessions Judge, Fatehpur in S. T. No. 311 of 1980. There was third accused, namely, Ajai Kumar alias Chemin who was tried with the appellants but was acquitted having been given the benefit of doubt.2. We have heard Sri R.B. Singh learned counsel for the appellant No. 1 Shakeel Ahmad and Sri I. M. Khan learned counsel representing the other appellant Raju. From the side of the State, Srt Shekhar Yadav learned A.G.A. has been heard.3. The report of the incident was lodged on 31-3-1979 by Rais Ahmad PW-2 -- elder brother of the deceased Munna alias Shamim Ahmad. The prosecution case as unfolded by the F.I.R. taken together with the evidence of the witnesses was that the deceased and the informant...
Usha Kumari (Smt.) Vs. District Magistrate and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-08-2003
Reported in: (2003)2UPLBEC1102
Sushil Harkauli, J.1. I have heard learned Counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Counsel for the caveator, whose name is Ramesh Kumar Singh, son of Ranjit Singh.2. The petitioner is the Pradhan of a Gram Panchayat. The impugned order dated 28.2.2003 (Annexure-8), has found the petitioner prima facie guilty of financial and other irregularities on the basis of a preliminary inquiry conducted by the District Development Officer, Mirzapur, and on that basis the financial and administrative powers of the petitioner have been ceased Under Section 95(1 )(g) of the U.P. Panchayat Raj Act, 1947 and a three Member Committee has been constituted to submit a final inquiry report. It has also been directed by the same order that the final inquiry should be completed within one month.3. The petitioner has challenged this order on basically two grounds.4. The first ground is that the complaint upon which the preliminary inquiry was instituted was not in accordance with Rule 3 of the U.P....
Manisha Palace Vs. State of U.P. and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-07-2003
Reported in: 2003(3)AWC1697
M. Katju, J. 1. This writ petition has been filed for a writ of certiorari to quash the impugned G.O. dated 14.5.1992 Annexure-4 to the writ petition and the order of the District Magistrate, Hamirpur of May, 1992 Annexure-5 to the writ petition.2. We have heard the learned counsels for the parties. 3. The petitioner constructed a Cinema Hall named 'Manisha Palace' for the purpose of exhibiting cinema. He applied for a licence under the Cinematograph Act, 1918 and the District Magistrate, Hamirpur, granted a licence under Section 3 of the aforesaid Act for a period from 1.5.1992 to 31.3.1993. Photocopy of the licence is Annexure-1 to the writ petition. After the grant of the aforesaid licence, the petitioner started showing cinemas in the Cinema Hall regularly w.e.f. 5.5.1992. 4. In paragraph 4 of the writ petition it is alleged that with a view to encourage the construction of new Cinema Halls in the small towns of the State, the State Government on 18.7.1989 issued a G.O. providing f...
Mahant Prasad Singh Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-07-2003
Reported in: 2003(3)AWC2261
Vineet Saran, J.1. Heard Sri Arun Tandon, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner ; learned standing counsel for the State for respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 3 ; Sri A.P. Tiwari, learned counsel for the respondent No. 4 Committee of Management ; Sri V.K. Singh, learned counsel for respondent No. 5 Prem Narain Singh and Sri R.P. Dubey, learned counsel for respondent No. 6, U.P. Secondary Education Service Selection Board. Allahabad.2. By means of this writ petition the petitioner has challenged the order dated 5.10.2002 passed by the Director of Education (Secondary), U.P., Lucknow whereby it has been directed that being the senior most teacher of the college, respondent No. 5 Prem Narain Singh be appointed as officiating Principal of the college. A further prayer has been made for a direction to the respondents not to interfere in the working of the petitioner as officiating/ad hoc Principal of the College.3. The impugned order is the result of long-drawn litigation going on between the...
State of U.P. and ors. Vs. State Public Services Tribunal and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-07-2003
Reported in: 2003(3)AWC2323; (2003)2UPLBEC1123
Dr. B.S. Chauhan and Ghanshyam Dass, JJ.1.This writ petition has been filed against the judgment and order dated 13.12.2002 (Annexure-1), passed by the respondent No. 1 Tribunal allowing the claim petition of the respondent employee and setting aside the order of termination dated 25.5.1988.2. Facts and circumstances giving rise to this are that the said respondent employee was involved in a criminal case under Section 409, I.P.C. During the pendency of the criminal case, enquiry was held against him and his services were terminated on the basis of the enquiry report vide order dated 25.5.1988. Respondent was discharged by the criminal court in view of the provisions of Section 169, Cr.P.C. and in view of the submission of the final report by the Investigating agency. He submitted an application for reinstatement which was rejected as his termination was based oh enquiry report. Being aggrieved, he preferred the Writ Petition No. 17710 of 1988. During the pendency of the writ petition,...
- ‹ Prev
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 16
- Next ›
- Last »