Allahabad Court March 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.
Mehmood Akhtar Vs. Shri Sobran Singh Yadav and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-04-2004
Reported in: 2004CriLJ2980; (2004)IIILLJ407All; (2004)2UPLBEC1281
Rajes Kumar, J.1. Present petition has been filed on the allegation that the opposite parties have violated the order passed by this Court dated 21 12.2001 in Writ Petition No. 19333 of 2000, Mehamood Akhtar and Ors. v. State of U.P. and Ors. and order dated 19.4.2002 passed on the Review Petition No. 33405 of 2002.2. Brief facts of the case are that the applicant was working in their respective department as confirmed employee. It would appear that on the creation of new department known as Backward Class Welfare Department w.e.f. 12.8.1995 an advertisement was issued in the newspaper to the effect that appointment for the functioning for the new Directorate in the new department will have to be made at the divisional/district levels on the gazetted and non-gazetted temporary posts indicated in the notification, for the period commencing from the date of notification or the date of appointment, whichever happens to be later and ending on 29.2.1996 unless terminated earlier. A letter d...
Life Insurance Corporation of India Vs. Presiding Officer, Central Gov ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-04-2004
Reported in: [2004(101)FLR338]; (2004)2UPLBEC1269
Rakesh Tiwari, J.1. Heard Counsel for the parties and perused the record.2. This petition is directed against the order dated 30.11.1987 (Annexure-5 to the writ petition) passed by the Central Govt. Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Kanpur (hereinafter referred to as the C.G.I.T., Kanpur) in L.C.A. No, 83 of 1986. By the impugned order the C.G.I.T., Kanpur has allowed the claim application of the workman for computation of monetary benefits filed under Section 33C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 amounting to Rs. 9559.88p.3. The workman claimed that he was appointed, as an Assistant by the management of L.I.C. at their Kasgaj Branch vide their letter No. Estt/per/83, dated 14.11.83. Initially for a period of 45 days, i.e., w.e.f. 15.11.1983 to 29.2.1983; that subsequently he was appointed vide letter dated 31.12.1983 for 45 days from 2.1.1984 which was extended for another 40 days w.e.f. 16.2.1984. He also claims that thereafter he was asked by the Branch Manager to continue...
Ashok Kumar Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-04-2004
Reported in: (2004)2UPLBEC1780
V.M. Sahai and Krishna Murari, JJ. 1. The petitioner is a registered contractor with Nagar Nigam, Aligarh. He took contract for construction of shops in the year 1981. After completion of constructions final payment was made to him in 1987. The State Government got vigilance enquiry conducted against the officers of Nagar Nigam, Aligarh and on the basis of ex-parte enquiry report directed Nagar Nigam, Aligarh on 5.9.1998 to blacklist the petitioner. In pursuance of this direction of the State Government, the Nagar Nigam passed an order on 6.10.1998 blacklisting the petitioner. Both the orders had been challenged in the instant writ petition.2. We have heard Sri A.P. Sahi learned Counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondent No. 1 and Sri Manish Goyal learned Counsel appearing for respondent Nos. 2 and 3.3. Sri A.P. Sahi learned Counsel for the petitioner has urged that without issuing any show cause notice or giving opportunity of hearing, the petitioner...
Ram Kripal Patel Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-04-2004
Reported in: (2004)2UPLBEC1758
Rakesh Tiwari, J. 1. Heard Counsel for the parties and perused the record.2. The petitioner has filed the present writ petition for direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to pay the arrears of wages to the petitioner with effect from 1.9.1991 till date and to pass necessary formal appointment letter appointing him as Office Assistant and further regularize him against vacancy to be caused in future.3. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner was working in the Accounts Section of respondent University with effect from 1.9.1991 on the basis of alleged instructions of some officers of the Accounts Branch/the Registrar of the University as daily wager.4. The State Government in the year 1998 sanctioned 215 posts including those of the Office Assistants to the University.5. The Vice Chancellor of the University constituted a Committee for examination of cases of the employees for appointment and regularization of the employees working on muster roll on da...
Laxmi NaraIn Jagdish Saran Kanya Inter College and anr. Vs. State of U ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-04-2004
Reported in: (2004)2UPLBEC1812
M. Katju, J. 1. These two writ petitions are being disposed of by a common judgment.2. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.3. Writ Petition No. 52305 of 2000 has been filed by the petitioner college through one Sri Ram Veer Singh who claimed to be the Manager of the said college. By means of that petition the petitioner has challenged the impugned order dated 26.7.2000/4.8.2000 (Annexure 14 to the writ petition) by which a notification was issued under Section 48(1) of the Land Acquisition Act releasing the land in question from acquisition under the Act.4. The petitioner is an Intermediate college imparting education to girl students up to Intermediate level in Moradabad city. Since the institution did not have a playground for its students it approached the State Government for acquiring a land for that purpose. Hence a notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act was published in the Official Gazette on 29.3.1980. After disposing of the objections under Section 5A the ...
Kamlesh Dwivedi Vs. State of U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-04-2004
Reported in: 2004CriLJ2709
Vishnu Sahai. J. 1. Through this appeal appellant Kamlesh Dwivedi challenges the judgment and order dated 27-9-1994 and 28-9-1994 passed by the Sessions Judge, Hardoi in Sessions Trial No. 311 of 1992 whereby he has been convicted and sentenced respectively to undergo imprisonment for life for the offence punishable under Section 302, I. P. C.2. Shortly stated, the prosecution case runs as under :--The deceased Ranjana was the wife of appellant Kamlesh. She was married to him on 26-6-1987. After marriage Ranjana lived for sometime at the house of the appellant in village Kaimau. When she used to go to the house of her parents she used to complain to her father and brother Aishwarya Prakash (PW 1) that the appellant was demanding a gold chain and a T. V. in dowry and since the said demand was not being fulfilled, he was harassing and misbehaving with her. In June, 1989 the appellant visited the house of informant Aishwarya Prakash and requested his elder brother Raju to keep Ranjana at ...
Suresh Chandra Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-04-2004
Reported in: (2004)2UPLBEC2095
Vineet Saran, J.1. The petitioner was appointed as a Peon on 29.9.1993 in Nagar Kshetra Samiti (now Nagar Panchayat), Mohanpur, District Etah. He continued to work in Nagar Panchayat, Mohanpur, However, on account of the fact that the petitioner was facing threat to his life at Mohanpur, he approached the District Magistrate, Etah for being attached to some other Nagar Panchayat of the District. By an order dated 13.2.2001 passed by the District Magistrate, Etah the petitioner was attached on a class IV post with Nagar Panchayat, Amapur, District Etah. By the impugned order dated 31.12.2003 passed by the Chairman, Nagar Panchayat, Amapur, District Etah the attachment of the petitioner at Nagar Panchayat, Amapur, District Etah has been cancelled and he has been asked to return back to Nagar Panchayat, Mohanpur, District Etah where he was originally appointed. In the said order it has been specifically stated that because of the attachment of the petitioner, the Nagar Panchayat, Amapur, ...
Rakesh S/O Mohan and ors. Vs. State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-04-2004
Reported in: 2004CriLJ3540
M.C. Jain, J.1. Four appellants, namely, Rakesh, Ram Babu, Rajendra Kumar alias Rajjan and Basant preferred this appeal against judgment and order dated 6-6-1980 passed by Sri D.K. Trivedi, the then VII Additional Sessions Judge, Kanpur in Sessions Trial No. 64 of 1979. Each, of them has been convicted under Section 302 I.P.C. read with Section 34 I.P.C. and sentenced to life imprisonment. It was one Prem Kumar alias Chillu who was murdered in this incident which occurred on 24-11-1977 at about 7.15 p.m. in Ahata Sawai Singh situated in Pheelkhana, District Kanpur Nagar. The distance of the police station from the place of occurence was only 4 Furlongs and the report had been lodged by Manoj Kumar Dixit P.W. 3 (nephew of the deceased), not an eye-witness.2. This appeal earlier came up for hearing, but none turned up from the side of the appellants even at the revision of the list, though they were represented on record by certain lawyers. This Bench, therefore, heard learned A. G. A. o...
Daljeet Singh Vs. State of U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-04-2004
Reported in: 2004CriLJ3950
M.C. Jain, J.1. Appellant Daljeet Singh has preferred this appeal against judgment and order dated 30-4-1981 passed by the then Vth Additional Sessions Judge, Kanpur in Sessions Trial No. 304 of 1979. He has been convicted under Section 302, I.P.C. read with Section 34, I.P.C. and sentenced to life imprisonment.2. The prosecution case, as unfolded from the F.I.R. and evidence adduced in the Court may be set forth briefly. The incident occurred on 22-8-1979 at about 12 O'clock noon in village Rahnas, P.S. Mahrajpur, District Kanpur and the deceased was one Pramod Kumar alias Lalji. The F.I.R. was lodged the same day at 1.30 p.m. by Swami Pratap Singh alias Gopal Ji PW-1, an eyewitness. The distance of the police station from the place of occurrence was about 3 miles. The deceased was the brother of the informant. On the fateful day and time, the informant and his deceased brother were in their house when their servant came and told that Jagnayak Singh had beaten up Jhandu, Pujari of the...
Moradabad Development Authority Vs. Chidda and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-03-2004
Reported in: 2004(2)AWC1525; (2004)2UPLBEC1825
M. Katju, J.1. This appeal has been filed by the Moradabad Development Authority against the judgment and decree of the Additional District Judge, Moradabad in L.A.R. No. 57 of 1995 and other connected cases decided on 17.12.1996. Copy of the impugned judgment is on page 30 of the Paper Book filed by the appellant.2. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have carefully perused the impugned judgment.3. The facts of the cases are that a notification under Section 4 read with Section 17 of the Land Acquisition Act was. issued, on 30.3.1990. The purpose of the acquisition was planned development by the appellant for housing purpose. The total area acquired under the notification is of 72.595 acres or 2,93,781.80 squire metres. Notification under Section 6 was issued on 14.12.1990, and thereafter, possession of the said land was taken on 21.6.1991. The date of the award under Section 11 of the Land Acquisition Act is 24/25.10.1994. The rate for the land awarded as per the award ...
- ‹ Prev
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 13
- 14
- Next ›
- Last »