Allahabad Court January 2004 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.
Tej Prakash Jaiswal and anr. Vs. Mukhya Nagar Adhikari, Nagar Nigam an ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-27-2004
Reported in: (2004)2UPLBEC1182
R.B. Misra, J.1. Heard Dr. R.G. Padia, learned Senior Advocate for the petitioners and Sri S.D. Kautilya, learned Counsel for the respondents.2. In this petition prayer has been made to quash the order dated 7.10.1997 (Annexure-8 to the writ petition) whereby the services of the petitioners were terminated as they could not achieve in the prescribed proficiency Hindi Typing test.3. The petitioner, petitioner No. 1 was B.Com. and petitioner No. 2 was B.A. and both were appointed as Dailywagers in Nagar Nigam on 1.9.1988 and 28.9.1988 respectively as a clerk as a dailywage employee and have rendered service. The petitioners were required to appear in Hindi Typing Test where petitioner No. 1 had 25 w.p.m. (words per minute speed) and petitioner No. 2 had 30 w.p.m. as acknowledge: by the respondent authorities, therefore, on the recommendation of the selection Committee and on the basis of marks achieved, they were declared successful. The petitioners were regularised by an order dated 20....
Verma Service Station, Through Its Proprietor and anr. Vs. Presiding O ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-27-2004
Reported in: [2004(102)FLR138]; (2004)2UPLBEC1325
Rakesh Tiwari, J.1. Heard Counsel for the parties and perused the record.2. This writ petition is directed against the award dated 4.4.84 passed by respondent No. 1.3. Brief facts of the case are that respondent No. 2 made a complaint to the Regional Conciliation Officer, Agra stating the he has been illegally removed from service. On his complaint a notice was issued to the petitioner by the Labour Inspector directing the petitioner as well as respondent No. 2 to appear in his office on 17.3.1981 for the purposes of making enquiry. The enquiry could not be made by the Labour Inspector on 17th March, 1981 and the case was fixed on 30th March, 1981. On the said date, the workman appeared and he made his statement and stated that he was in service of the petitioner since 5.10.1980 and worked till 8.1.1981. He was paid salary on 8.1.1981. The Labour Inspector recorded his statement and Netra Pal. The respondent put his signature on the statement as well as on the report which was submitte...
Indian Oil Corporation Limited and anr. Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-27-2004
Reported in: AIR2004All277; [2004]137STC399(All)
M. Katju, J. 1. These two writ petitions alongwith connected and similar writ petitions are being disposed off by a common judgment.2. Heard Shri Bharatji Agarwal, Senior Advocate, Sri Piyush Agarwal, Advocate, and other learned counsel for the petitioners, and Shri S.P. Gupta, Senior Advocate and learned standing Counsel for the respondents.3. By means of this writ petition the petitioners are challenging the constitutional validity of the U. P. Tax on Entry of Goods Act, 2000 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') on the ground inter alia that it is violative of Articles 301 and 304 of the Constitution of India.4. The petitioner No. 1 in writ petition No. 251 of 2003 is a public sector corporation, being a Government of India undertaking. It has various units in the country, but in this case we are only concerned with its refinery unit at Mathura where the petitioner is manufacturing various petroleum products which are sold by the petitioner within and outside the State of U. P. The...
Managing Director, Lark Laboratories (India) Ltd. and anr. Vs. Prescri ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-27-2004
Reported in: [2004(102)FLR179]; (2004)IIILLJ984All
Rakesh Tiwari, J.1. Heard counsel for the parties and perused the record. The petitioner firm is a registered company registered under the Companies Act. Its registered office as well as factory are o situated at A-105/2 Okhla, Industrial Area, Phase-II, New Delhi. Respondent No. 2 was taken as a Trainee Medical Representative for period of 12 months by the Director of the petitioner Company. His appointment was made at New Delhi and he was paid salary there. He moved an application under the Minimum Wages Act before respondent No. 1 inter alia, alleging that he was working as Medical Representative of the petitioners and they were not paying him minimum wages as provided by the State Government of U.P. The petitioners raised preliminary objection disputing the question of jurisdiction of respondent No. 1 alleging that the registered office of the Company and its factory are at ; New Delhi. The appointment of respondent No. 2 was also made at New Delhi, therefore, the application was n...
Lark Laboratries (India) Ltd. Through Its Manager Anil Kumar Gupta Vs. ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-27-2004
Reported in: (2005)IIILLJ480All
Rakesh Tiwari, J.1. Heard counsel for the parties and perused the record. The petitioner is engaged in the business of manufacturing of medicine having its factory at A-105/2, Okhala Industrial Area, Phase-II, New Delhi. Respondent no.2 was employed with the petitioners as Medical representative and was deputed to look after the area of Bulandshahar. The main work of respondent no.2 was to promote the sale in Bulandsharhar area. However, his work had never been satisfactory and there had been several complaints against him. On 28.12.1996 respondent no.2 filed an application under the Minimum Wages Act, 1948 before the authority under the Minimum Wages Act/ Assistant Labour Commissioner, Bulandshahar which was registered as M.W.A. Case No.7/1997. Along with the aforesaid application, the respondent no.2 also moved an application for condoning the delay in filing the application. In the application respondent no.2 has stated that his salary was Rs. 1000/- per month whereas his salary oug...
Ram Naresh Raikwar Vs. Divisional Manager, Life Insurance Corporation ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-23-2004
Reported in: (2004)1UPLBEC983
R.B. Misra, J. 1. Heard Sri Madan Lal Pal holding brief of Sri Rajesh Prasad Tiwari, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Sri Prakash Padia, learned Counsel for the respondents.2. The petitioner has challenged the order dated 20.12.1997 (Annexure-10) removing the name of petitioner from waiting list after noticing discrepancies in date of birth and qualification the order dated 15.12.1995 (Annexure-13) and order dated 29.9.1999 (Anneexure-15) of respondent rejecting the representation in the light of order dated 9.2.1999 of High Court.3. The petitioner applied for recruitment to the post of sub-staff under Life Insurance Corporation Ltd (in short called 'Corporation') and on the basis of his application dated 14.7.1995 and the certificate and documents enclosed therein the petitioner was called for written test was held on 10.9.1995 and petitioner was interviewed on 27.9.1995 and on being declared successful he was included in the panel of O.B.C. Sub-staff for the purpose of giving a...
Committee of Management, A.S. (Post Graduate) College Vs. Director of ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-23-2004
Reported in: (2004)2UPLBEC1472
M. Katju and Poonam Srivastava, JJ.1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.2. The petitioner is the Committee of Management of A.S. Post Graduate College, Mawana, District Meerut. It is affiliated to Chaudhary Charan Singh University. (Meerut University, Meerut).3. The respondent No. 4 Dr. Poonam Rani was appointed as ad-hoc Lecturer in Commerce by resolution of the Committee of Management dated 28.10.1988 and Vice-Chancellor granted approval to the appointment of the respondent No. 4 as temporary Lecturer in Commerce vide Annexures-1 and 1-A. She was initially appointed for a period of three months vide letter dated 28.10.1988 which is Annexures-2 and 2-A to the writ petition. Thereafter by resolution of the Committee of Management the appointment was extended upto 31.3.1989 vide Annexures-3 and 3-A. Subsequently the respondent No. 4 filed a Writ Petition No. 1706 of 1989 in which an order was passed directing that she will be continued in service till a regularly selected candidate ...
Pankaj Deo Mishra Vs. State of U.P. and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-23-2004
Reported in: 2004CriLJ4477
ORDERGhanshyam Dass, J. 1. The instant revision has been filed against the order dated 10-8-2001 passed by the then 1st Additional Sessions Judge Bahraich in Sessions Trial No. 260 of 1994 (State of U.P. v. Pankaj Deo Mishra and Ors.) whereby the permission to withdraw the case under Section 321 of the Criminal Procedure Code was refused by the learned trial Judge. 2. The sessions trial in question was pending before the Court below in which charge against the accused had been framed on 23rd April 1997. The public prosecutor first moved an application Paper No. 45B and when it was opposed to another application was moved as Paper No. 59B and request was made by the public prosecutor for withdrawal of the case in view of the sanction accorded by the Government in this regard and that eye witnesses were not supporting the prosecution. The request made by the public prosecutor has been rejected by the Court below on the ground that there is a cross case of the same incident which is still...
Academy of Business Management and anr. Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-22-2004
Reported in: 2004(2)AWC1647; (2004)2UPLBEC1469
ORDERVineet Saran, J. 1. The petitioner institution filed an application dated 14.12.2001 before respondent No. 3, National Council for Teachers Education, (Northern Regional Committee), A-46, Shanti Path, Tilak Nagar, Jaipur, Rajasthan for grant of recognition under Section 14 of the National Council for Teachers Education Act, 1993 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) for running B.Ed, courses for the Session 2002-2003. It has been submitted that no objection certificate had been obtained from Chaudhary Charan Singh University, Meerut on 31.12.2001. However, since the formalities as stipulated under the Act as well as Regulations framed thereunder had not been completed within time for the Session 2002-2003, the said application of the petitioner was forwarded for the Session 2003-2004. Under Regulation 7 of the Regulations framed under the Act the time limit for making the application has been clearly given. According to the said Regulation the application form as well as all necess...
Drig Pal Singh Vs. Director General of Police and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-22-2004
Reported in: (2004)1UPLBEC970
R.B. Misra, J.1. Heard Sri C.B. Yadav, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Sri M.C. Chaturvedi, -Addl. Chief Standing Counsel along with Sri S.S. Sharma, learned Standing Counsel for the State.2. In this petition prayer has been made to quash the order dated 6.2.1992 (Annexure-5 to the writ petition) whereby the petitioner after completing 58 years of service in consonance to his date of birth (4.5.1934 as entered in the service book and in the forms for recruitment for constable) was indicated for being superannuated with effect from 31.5.1992.3. The petitioner entered into service in Department of Police, State of U.P. on 4.5.1954 and on his statement 4.5.1934 was recorded the date of birth in service book. According to the petition as per his High School certificate, his dated of birth is 22.9.1939 and the benefit of this date of birth entered in the High School be given and by treating the date of birth the petitioner could be retired in the year 1997 only as keeping in view the...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »