Allahabad Court July 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.
Garg Plastics Vs. Presiding Officer, Labour Court V and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-09-2004
Reported in: 2004(4)AWC3116; [2004(102)FLR791]; (2005)ILLJ619All; (2004)3UPLBEC2666
ORDERAnjani Kumar, J. 1. This is a petition by the employer against the order passed by the Presiding Officer, labour court, dated 28th April, 1993, whereby in pursuance to the direction issued by the State Government the labour court has recalled the order dated 10th July, 1981 and maintained the award dated 2nd March, 1981. The employer approached this Court by means of this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.2. The facts leading to filing of this writ petition are that the State Government referred the following dispute for adjudication to the Labour Court V. U. P., Kanpur which was registered as Adjudication Case No. 293 of 1973 :'Kyo, seva yojakon dwara parishisht men ullikhit shramikon ko dinank 25.11.1972 se 8.12.1972 tak karya se uanchit rakhna tatha dinank 11.1.1973 se punah karya se vanchit rakhna uchit tatha/athua vaidhanik hat? Yadi nahin to sambandhit shramik kya labh/kshatipurti pane ka adhikari hai tatha anya kis uiuran sahit?'3. The employers h...
Kanwal Industrial Corporation Vs. Supra Business (P.) Ltd.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-09-2004
Reported in: 2004(4)AWC3114
Anjani Kumar, J.1. The revisionist-defendant, who is admittedly a tenant of the accommodation in question, when faced with the challenge during the proceedings of a suit for eviction on the ground mentioned in Section 20 of the U. P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972, (U. P. Act No. 13 of 1972), hereinafter referred to as the Act, read with Order XV Rule 5 of the Code of Civil Procedure, wherein an application has been Hied on behalf of the plaintiff-landlord that since the tenant-defendant in suit did not comply with the provisions of Order XV Rule 5 of the Code of Civil Procedure, inasmuch as he has not deposited the admitted rent on the first date of hearing and has further not complied with the provision of depositing the rent in each month as contemplated under Order XV Rule 5 of the Code of Civil Procedure, as advance is therefore liable to be struck off.2. The tenant-defendant raised a point before the trial court that the plaintiffs company is...
Smt. Savita Gupta Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-09-2004
Reported in: 2004(4)AWC3119; (2004)3UPLBEC2739
Sunil Ambwani, J. 1. Heard Sri Ashok Khare, senior advocate assisted by Sri V. K. Singh for petitioner and Sri S. K. Verma for respondent No. 7. Sri R. S. Parihar learned standing counsel appears for rest of the respondents.2. The Raghunath Girls Inter College, Meerut is a recognised and aided Intermediate College, and is governed by the provisions of U. P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921, U. P. Secondary Education and Selection Boards Act No. 5 of 1982 and U. P. Act No. 24 of 1971. The petitioner applied and was selected in April, 2004, for ad hoc appointment against a vacant post of assistant teacher in L.T. grade. The appointment letter was issued on 24.4,1993. The petitioner Joined on 27.4.1993 and is serving since thereafter in Trained Teacher's grade. She claims to be regularised under Section 33C of U. P. Act No. 5 of 1982, as amended on 30.4.1998 providing for regularisation of ad hoc teachers appointed prior to 6.8.1993. The Joint Director of Education, Meerut Region, Meerut,...
Union Bank of India Vs. Kanhaiya Lal Rupani and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-09-2004
Reported in: 2004(4)AWC3060; [2004(102)FLR865]; (2005)ILLJ542All; (2004)3UPLBEC2552
ORDERAnjani Kumar, J.1. The employer-petitioner aggrieved by an order passed by the Presiding Officer, Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Kanpur, U. P. dated 5th May, 1988, copy whereof is appended as Annexure-5 to the writ petition, allowing the application of the workman concerned under Section 33C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act. 1947 (Central Act), hereinafter referred to as the Act, approached this Court by means of present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.2. The fact as emerges from the writ petition as well as from the order impugned in the present writ petition is that the workman-respondent was working with the employer-Bank as Cashier at Mau Nathbhanjan Branch. Thereafter on 20th December. 1978. he was suspended and during the period of suspension, he was paid subsistence allowance, as would be clear that this suspension order was recalled vide order dated 24th September, 1981. The operative portion whereof is as under :'His...
Sushila Chitra Mandir Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-09-2004
Reported in: 2004(4)AWC3075
B.S. Chauhan, J.1. This writ petition is an example to show as to what extent a litigant can stake his claim to rob the public exchequer, that's too through a writ court. Petitioner claims that when there is a tax holiday as the order is issued to that effect, the concerned dealer does not have to apply for exemption. He gets the relief automatically and the exemption is only between the Revenue and the dealer and not between the dealer and the consumer. The dealer has a right to collect the tax from the consumer and pocket it, and there is no obligation on this part to make the payment of the said amount to the State.2. By means of the Petition No. 885 (Tax) of 2004 petitioner prays for quashing the sale proceedings dated 1.7.2004 in which the cinema hall of the petitioner along with the buildings and land has been auctioned in favour of the respondent No. 2 for nonpayment of entertainment tax collected by the petitioner.3. The case has a chequered history as petitioner has approached...
Methodist Church and anr. Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-09-2004
Reported in: 2004(4)AWC3157b
M. Katju, J.1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.2. These petitions reveal a deplorable state of affairs and the high handedness of the authorities.3. The petitioner No. 1 is a society registered under the Societies Registration Act and the petitioner No. 2 is its secretary. Petitioner No. 1 is the owner of a building along with open space of land forming part of Khasra No. 424 situate at village Chawnl Tehsil and district Moradabad. The said property was purchased by the petitioner No, 1 by way of a sale deed dated 26.12.1859 [vide Annexure-1 to the writ petition). True copy of the site map of property is Annexure-2 to the petition.4. Khasra No. 424A is an area of 4.853 hectare which is equal to 12.07 acre. The area of Khasra No. 424B is 2.578 hectare which is equal to 6.40 acres. Thus, the total area of Khasra No. 424 is 7.431 hectare which is equal to 18,47 acres. Out of the aforesaid land 11.99 acres of land is recorded as Nazul land in the records of the Nagar Nigam, Moradabad...
Janaganavadi Bharat Vs. Govt. of India and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-09-2004
Reported in: AIR2004All427; 2004(4)AWC3356
ORDER1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri K.C. Sinha, learned counsel for the Central Government.2. The prayer in this petition is that once a person is appointed as Prime Minister or Minister in the Central Government he has to vacate his seat in Parliament.3. We cannot accept this contention. Under our Constitution we have followed the Parliamentary system of democracy as in England, and not the President system as in the United States of America. In England a Minister has also to be a Member of Parliament, whereas in America a member of the U.S. Congress (the Parliament of America) cannot be a member of the President's Cabinet. Thus there is strict separation of powers in America but there is no strict separation of powers in England. We have followed the British system and not the American system under our Constitution.4. In fact Article 75(5) of the Constitution states :'A Minister who for any period of six consecutive months is not member of either House of Parliam...
Bhabhuti Singh (Deceased by Lr) Vs. Bhagauti Prasad (Deceased by Lrs) ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-09-2004
Reported in: AIR2004All439; 2005(1)AWC646
Anjani Kumar, J.1. This is a defendant's appeal. The plaintiff Bhabhuti Singh, filed a suit for cancellation of sale deed dated 14th February, 1977 with the allegation that the plaintiff and defendant No. 2. Ram Singh are real brothers and when their father became fairly old he by a family settlement dated 13th March, 1958, partitioned the entire agricultural land between his two sons, the plaintiff and defendant No. 2 and according to 1958 family settlement plot No. 657 area 87 decimal, plot No. 464 area 0.1 decimal and plot No. 466 area 04 decimal came to the share of both the brothers jointly along with plot No. 92. After the family partition of 1958 was acted upon, both the brothers are in possession on their respective plots. It is admitted case of the parties that thereafter the consolidation operation started and the plots in dispute were jointly recorded in the name of their father as at that time their father was alive. During the consolidation operation nobody, neither the pl...
Budh Singh and Sons and ors. Vs. the Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-09-2004
Reported in: AIR2004All428; 2004(4)AWC3363
M. Katju, J.1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.2. This writ petition has been filed against the impugned order dated 28-4-1998 Annexure 1 to the writ petition enhancing the licence fee payable by the petitioner by 600%. It has also been prayed that the respondents be directed to place the Meerut City Railway Station under the category of medium station instead of its placement in the large category of station as per order dated 31-10-1997. The petitioners have further prayed for a mandamus directing the respondents not to interfere in any manner in their operating the stalls and trollies in pursuance to the existing agreements and provide all privileges e.g. passes and medical benefits etc. to the staff of the petitioners. The petitioner has also prayed that the respondents be directed to review the agreement for running the stalls and trollies at Meerut City Railway Station on the expiry of the existing agreement.3. The petitioners were engaged in the business of vending at Meer...
Balwant Ram Chaudhary Vs. Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-09-2004
Reported in: 2004(4)AWC3335
B.S. Chauhan, J.1. This writ petition has been filed for quashing the allotment of dealership made in favour of the respondent No. 3, in pursuance of the advertisement dated 22.2.2004.2. The facts and circumstances giving rise to this case are that the respondent No. 1 Bharat Petroleum Corporation issued an advertisement on 22.2.2004 regarding the appointment of distributor/dealership of L.P.G. concerned at Sakaldeeha, Varanasi, reserved for Scheduled Caste. Petitioner applied for the said dealership in pursuance of the said advertisement along with other persons. The interviews were held on 16.4.2004 for that purpose. However, the dealership has been made in favour of the respondent No. 3. Hence this petition.3. Shri G. C. Singh, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner was more qualified than respondent No. 3. The selection had been made in an arbitrary and whimsical manner adopting a mala fide attitude towards the petitioner, therefore, the sele...
- ‹ Prev
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 16
- Next ›
- Last »