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.
Rajoo Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-01-2003
Reported in: 2003(3)AWC1731
ORDERM. Katju and Prakash Krishna, JJ.1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned standing counsel.2. The petitioner has prayed for a writ of mandamus directing the Excise Commissioner, Uttar Pradesh and the District Magistrate, Mahrajganj to remove the country made wine shop of respondent No. 4. In our opinion, the petitioner has no locus standi in the matter. In Mithlesh Garg v. Union of India and Ors., AIR 1993 SC 443, the Supreme Court observed, following its own decision in Rice and Flour Mills v. State of U. P. and Ors., AIR 1971 SC 46 and Jaspal and Ors. v. State and Ors., AIR 1976 SC 578, that a rival businessman has no locus standi to file a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution even if grant of licence to his rival is illegal. This view has been followed by this Court in Hari Prasad Gupta v. Zila Panchayat. 1995 (2) AWC 929 : (1995) 2 UPLBEC 1171 and Supreme Court in North Plastic Castings Ltd. v. Hindustan Photo Film Company, JT 1997 (3) SC 101....
Shiv Prabhu Yadav Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-01-2003
Reported in: 2003(3)AWC1840; (2003)2UPLBEC1138
Anjani Kumar, J.1. The petitioner applied in response to the advertisement made in the year 1998-99 for the post of Village Development Officer. The respondents have prepared three select list for different categories. One for General Category, second for O.B.C. and third for Schedule Caste and few candidates in the waiting list also. The petitioners name finds place in the waiting list.2. It so happened that two of the persons amongst the O.B.C. category, who joined the post, have resigned and thus, according to the petitioner, there arose two vacancies, which, according to the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, ought to have been given to the petitioner, who is in the waiting list of O.B.C. category waiting for his turn to be given appointment in case any vacancy remain unfilled during the life of the waiting list. These are the admitted facts which are not disputed. It is also not disputed that the resignation of these to persons belonging to O.B.C. category ...
U.P. State Road Transport Corporation, Kanpur Region Vs. Babu Singh an ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-01-2003
Reported in: 2003(3)AWC2433; [2003(97)FLR1160]
B.S. Chauhan, J. 1. This writ petition has been filed against the Award of the labour court dated 2nd September, 1995 by which the application of the respondent to make correction in the earlier Award dated 19.9.1994 has been allowed and the matter has been decided afresh reviewing its earlier award and substituting the punishment of dismissal vide order dated 24.6.1989 by withholding the two annual increments without cumulative effect.2. Facts and circumstances giving rise to this case are that the respondent workman had been employed as a Conductor with the petitioner Corporation and he was served the charge-sheet for embezzlement of Rs. 9.70 as he had received the fare from the passenger and did not issue the tickets. After completing the departmental enquiry as he was found guilty, punishment of dismissal from service was awarded. The respondent workman raised the industrial dispute and the appropriate Government in exercise of its power under Section 4K of the Industrial Disputes ...
Dr. Arun Kumar Chand Vs. District Magistrate and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-01-2003
Reported in: 2003(3)AWC2431
M. Katju and Prakash Krishna, JJ.1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned standing counsel.2. The petitioner has challenged the impugned order dated 29.3.2003, Annexure-5 to the writ petition and has prayed for a writ of mandamus directing the respondents not to hold fresh auction of Taxi stand, Gola bazaar, Gorakhpur.3. It appears that the petitioner was one of the bidders in an auction having bid Rs. 1,70,000. The highest bidder did not deposit the auction money. The Chairman, Nagar Panchayat, made a recommendation to the District Magistrate, Gorakhpur vide letter dated 27.3.2003, Annexure-3 to the writ petition, recommending that the bid of the petitioner be accepted. However, the District Magistrate, by the impugned order has not accepted this recommendation and has ordered for fresh auction, which is going to take place tomorrow.4. Sri K.N. Mishra, advocate, has filed his vakalatnama on behalf of one of the bidders, Sri Vijay Kumar Verma and has stated that Sri ...
Shailendra Kumar Shukla (Dr.) Vs. State of U.P. and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-01-2003
Reported in: (2003)2UPLBEC1136
M. Katju , J. 1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel.2. In this writ petition on 22.2.2001 learned Standing Counsel was granted one month's time to file counter-affidavit. Thereafter on 1.5.2001 respondents were again granted three weeks' time to file counter-affidavit. Then on 23.9.2002 respondents were again granted three weeks' time to file counter-affidavit. Again on 27.11.2002 they were granted three weeks' time for this purpose. Ultimately on 19.12.2002 they were granted three weeks' time and no more to file counter-affidavit. Thus, the respondents were granted sufficient time to file counter-affidavit, as many as on five occasions and on the last occasion, i.e., on 19.12.2002 they were granted three week's further time and no more. Despite these orders and the stop order dated 19.12.2002 no counter-affidavit has been filed so far. We are not inclined to grant any further time for that purpose. Hence we are treating the allegations made in th...
- ‹ Prev
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- Next ›