Allahabad Court February 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.
Raghubir Bal Mandir Vs. Assistant P.F. Commissioner and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-19-2004
Reported in: [2004(101)FLR335]; (2004)IILLJ787All
S.N. Srivastava, J.1. Present petition arises out of proceedings under the provisions of the U.P. Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). By an ex-parte order dated March 8, 2003, passed under Section 7-A of the aforestated Act, the petitioner was asked to deposit a sum of Rs. 23,33,370/-. As a sequel thereto, the petitioner filed application under Section 7-A(4) of the Act attended with the prayer to set aside the same on the premises that the order was ex-parte studded with a further prayer that the matter may be heard and decided on merits after affording opportunity of filing reply. The affidavit accompanying the said application embodying reasons for non-appearance was also filed.2. By the impugned order (Annexure-1 to the petition), the application filed by the petitioner came to be rejected ostensibly treating the application to be under Section 7-B of the Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Ac...
U.P. State Road Transport Corporation Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-19-2004
Reported in: 2004(3)AWC2400
R.B. Misra, J.1. Heard Sri Sameer Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri M.C. Chaturvedi Additional Chief Standing Counsel along with Sri S.S. Sharma, learned standing counsel for the State.2. Initially on 5.2.1988 notice was issued, one counsel was engaged for respondent No. 3 who has subsequently been elevated as Hon'ble Judge of this Bench therefore, another notice was issued on 12.11.2003 to engage another counsel in place of earlier counsel for and on behalf of respondent No. 3 and despite notice, no counsel was engaged. In these circumstances the writ petition is disposed of on the available documents.3. In this petition labour court award dated 2.2.1987 is under challenge. The brief facts necessary for adjudication of the present writ petition are that the respondent No. 3 was appointed as temporary employee as conductor against short term vacancy. On 27.7.1974 and while plying Bus No. 9107 on Chandrawat-Mahoba route, on checking Sri R.P. Srivastava, Assistant Region...
Majister Alias Budhpal Vs. State of U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-19-2004
Reported in: 2004CriLJ3523
ORDERUmeshwar Pandey, J.1. This Criminal Revision, under Section 397 and 403 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, has been directed against the judgment and order dated 20-8-1985 passed by the Sessions Judge, Pilibhit dismissing the appeal of the revisionist accused, Magister alias Budhpal.2. The brief facts giving rise to this revision are that the accused in the morning of 23-11-1979 was found by P.W. 1 Kripal Singh Kambojh, the Food Inspector, selling cow & buffalo mixed milk. On the suspicion about the milk being adulterated, the Food Inspector purchased 660 ml. of milk and did spot formalities of preparing samples of the same for the purpose of its analysis. Three samples were prepared in separate containers. The documents exhibits KA-1 to KA-3 were also prepared. One of the samples taken was sent to the Public Analyst, Lucknow who after analysis sent his report exhibits KA-4, in which the milk taken from the revisionist accused was found 24% deficient in milk fat and 26% deficient ...
Jhunjhunwala Vanaspati Ltd. Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax a ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-17-2004
Reported in: (2004)188CTR(All)434; [2004]266ITR657(All)
M. Katju, J.1. This writ petition has been filed for quashing the impugned directions and notice dated March 23, 1994 (annexures 5 and 6 to the petition), under Section 142(2A) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The petitioner has also prayed for a mandamus restraining respondent No. 1, the Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, Central Circle I, Varanasi, from proceeding in pursuance of the aforesaid directions and notice.2. Heard learned counsel for the parties.3. The petitioner is a company registered under the Indian Companies Act. The petitioner established a vanaspati manufacturing unit at Varanasi. It maintains its account on mercantile basis. For the assessment year 1990-91, the petitioner filed a return under the Income-tax Act on December 31, 1990, declaring a loss of Rs. 24,61,860. Notice under Section 143(2) of the Act dated June 18, 1991, was served on the petitioner on June 21, 1991. Thereafter also several notices dated July 15, 1991, July 30, 1991, November 7, 1991, November 9...
Salil Chandra and ors. Vs. Collector/District Magistrate and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-17-2004
Reported in: AIR2004All187; III(2004)BC342; (2004)2UPLBEC1144
M. Katju, J.1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.2. Writ Petition No. 7822 of 1999 was filed against the recovery certificate dated 6-11-1998 and citation dated 18-2-1999 (vide Annexures 10 and 9 to the writ petition. This recovery and citation was regarding recovery of huge amount of money towards the loan taken by the petitioners which had not been re-paid as scheduled.3. The aforesaid writ petition was dismissed on merits by the judgment of a Division Bench of this Court dated 24-2-1999. The aforesaid judgment dated 24-2-1999 states as follows :--'The petitioners mention nothing about a notice under Section 29 in the present writ petition, but has taken a ground that the notice which was issued for taking over the possession was without any opportunity. The Court mentions this fact because during the course of consideration of the petition at admission, the Court was giving an indulgence to the petitioners to come to terms with the U.R Financial Corporation under a one time sett...
Subhash Chandra Singh Vs. District Inspector of Schools and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-17-2004
Reported in: (2004)2UPLBEC1084
D.P. Singh, J.1. Heard Counsel for the parties and perused the record. Pleadings have been exchanged between the parties and they agree that the petition may be disposed of finally under the Rules of the Court.2. This writ petition is directed against an order dated 22.9.2000 passed by the respondent No. 1 by which the representation of the petitioner has been decided in pursuance of an order of a learned Single Judge dated 15.12.1999 passed in Writ Petition No. 52013 of 1999. By the said order, the respondent No. 1 has rejected the approval application for the appointment of the petitioner as L.T. Grade teacher in the institution. Further relief for payment of current and arrears of salary has been sought.3. Brief facts giving rise to this writ petition are that Rameshwar Mahadev Inter College, Krishna Nagar, Christ Nagar, Varanasi is duly recognised intermediate college governed by various educational enactments. A Lecturer in Economics, Sri Naveen Kumar Shukla, died in harness resul...
Vishambhar Singh Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-17-2004
Reported in: (2004)2UPLBEC1213
Rakesh Tiwari, J.1. The petitioner was appointed on the post of Collection Amin on 29.1.1965 in Tahsil Sadar, District Varanasi. The petitioner passed his Junior High School in year 1985. In the School Leaving Certificate his date of birth is noted as 6.6.1946 which was also mentioned in the Service Book of the petitioner. On 6.1.2004 respondent No. 2 removed the petitioner from service with the allegations that the petitioner has tampered the Service Book and fabricated his date of birth 6.6.1946 instead of 6.7.1943. On 5.1.2004 respondent No. 2 passed an order directing the respondent No. 4 for lodging F.I.R. against the petitioner and to recover the amount of salary paid to the petitioner.2. From the perusal of Annexure-3 it appears that the petitioner has made interpolation in the Service Book and taken benefits of 2 years service. He is said to have also embezzled huge amount of money recovered from the creditors by loan. By the aforesaid order dated 5.1.2004 the District Judge ha...
Committee of Management of Virendra Singh Yadav Inter College and ors. ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-17-2004
Reported in: (2004)2UPLBEC1288
Rakesh Tiwari, J.1. Heard Counsel for the parties and perused the record.2. There was an examination of the Elementary Mathematics in Virendra Singh Yadav Inter College, Ballampur, Mainpuri on 1.4.2000. Question papers were sent to it. It is claimed that 100 a packet containing 100 question papers bearing Code No. 832 of Elementary Mathematics was opened but it contained 50 question papers of Sanskrit and 50 of Elementary Maths. It was repacked and sealed before the Block Development Officer who was acting as temporary Magistrate and information was sent about the incident to the Board. On 4.4.2000 details of opening repackating were again sent to the Board and it was also informed as to how examination was managed. On 25.11.2000 the impugned order was passed suggesting departmental enquiry and punishment to the Centre Manager and the Invigilators in that incident and scraping of the college from being examination center again.3. This writ petition has been field in 2001. According to ...
Smt. Bimla Gaindher Vs. Smt. Usha Gaindher and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-17-2004
Reported in: AIR2004All329; 2004(2)AWC1855
A.K. Yog, J.1. Above First Appeal From Order under Section 299 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 (called 'the Act'), filed by Smt. Bimla Gaindhar Is against the judgment and order dated March 12th, 1996 passed by IIIrd Additional District Judge, Saharanpur, deciding issue No. 3 ; viz., (whether a 'Hindu' is required to obtain a probate in the State of U. P. in case of a 'Will' in his favour?)2. Smt. Bimla Gaindhar (appellant before us) had filed a petition under Section 276 of the Act for grant of probate on the basis of purported Will, an unregistered document (paper No. 10A1 on original record).3. We are omitting to give other details as the same is not required for the purpose of deciding the issue in hand and for disposal of the present first appeal from order.4. According to the impugned Judgment and order dated March 12, 1996, learned Additional District Judge came to the conclusion, relying upon two single Judge reported decisions by the Bench of learned single Judge, Bhaiya Ji...
Jaiprakash Singh Vs. Presiding Officer Labour Court (i) and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-17-2004
Reported in: 2004(3)AWC1930; [2004(101)FLR833]
Rakesh Tiwari, J.1. This writ petition has been filed challenging the award dated 2.1.1997 given by the Labour Court (1), U.P. Kanpur in Adjudication Case No. 68 of 1993 holding that the petitioner was not a workman under the U.P. Industrial Disputes Act.2. The petitioner was initially appointed as Dairy Supervisor and was promoted as the Manager Grade-IV on 1.7.1986 and was posted at Barabanki in the grade of Rs. 2,200-4,000. He was charge sheeted and after domestic enquiry he was reverted to his original grade of Rs. 1,400-2,600 on 29.10.1990. The petitioner raised an industrial dispute which was referred for adjudication by the State Government by G.O. dated 11.3.1993.3. Before the Labour Court the employers raised objection in their written statement that the petitioner was not a workman as he was performing managerial functions.4. Both the parties led evidence about the duties and functions of the petitioner. Besides other documents the employers filed duty chart of the petitioner...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »