Allahabad Court August 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.
Kalpana Palace Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-18-2004
Reported in: (2004)191CTR(All)466; [2005]275ITR365(All)
R.K. Agrawal, J. 1. In IT Ref. No. 46 of 1995 the Tribunal, Allahabad, has referred the following question of law under Section 256(1) of the IT Act, 1961, hereinafter referred to as the Act, for opinion to this Court :'Whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in holding that the grant-in-aid of Rs. 3,06,711 received by the assessee under the scheme of State of U.P. introduced with the object to promote the construction of permanent cinema buildings in the backward areas as revenue receipt in the hands of the assessee ?' 2. In the IT Appeal No. 5 of 2001, the appellant had raised five questions of law which, according to it, are substantial questions of law. However, the decision on the question referred by the Tribunal under Section 256(1) of the Act would also decide the aforementioned IT Appeal. The reference and the appeal, as they raise a common question of law, have been heard together and are being decided by a common judgment.3. For...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Girish Chand Amar Nath
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-18-2004
Reported in: (2004)192CTR(All)61; [2005]274ITR236(All)
R.K. Agrawal, J.1. The Tribunal, Allahabad, has referred the following questions of law under Section 256(1) of the IT Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), for opinion to this Court :'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in holding that the omission to sign the declaration under Section 184(7) on Form No. 12 by two out of five partners was treatable as a defect within the meaning of Section 185(3) of the IT Act, 1961 ?2. If the answer to question No. 1 be in the affirmative, whether the Tribunal was also justified in taking the view that the said defect could be removed even beyond 28th Feb., 1980, i.e. beyond one month of the service of the notice dt. 25th Jan., 1980, pointing out the defect ?'2. Briefly stated, the facts giving rise to the present reference are as follows.;The assessee was a registered firm till the asst. yr. 1978-79 when renewal of registration was granted to it under Section 184(7). For the as...
Provincial Medical Services Association and ors. Vs. State of U.P. and ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-18-2004
Reported in: (2004)3UPLBEC2975
B.S. Chauhan, J.1. This special appeal has been preferred against the orders dated 17.5.2004 and 30.4.2004, passed by the learned Single Judge while dealing with the Contempt Petition No. 820 of 2002, Rajesh Kumar Srivastava v. A.P. Verma and Ors., by which earlier order dated 28.1.2004, passed in the same contempt petition is being endorced directing the State Government to frame the transfer policy and implement the same for the Doctors,2. The facts and circumstances giving rise to this case are that the Hon'ble Apex Court decided the public interest litigation D.K. Joshi v. State 'of U.P. and Ors., (2000) 5 SCC 80, issuing certain directions to the State Government to restrain the unqualified/unregistered Doctors to indulge in any kind of medical practice. Subsequently, a Contempt Petition No. 292 of 2002, Rajesh Kumar Srivastava v. A.P. Verma, Chief Secretary, V.P., was filed before the Hon'ble Apex Court raising the grievance that the directions issued by their Lordships in the sa...
Union of India (Uoi) and anr. Vs. Bhikham Singh
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-18-2004
Reported in: (2004)3UPLBEC2969
Umeshwar Pandey, J.1. By this intra Court appeal, the appellant-Union of India has challenged the judgment and order dated 10.9.2002 passed by the learned Single Judge granting relief of quashing the dismissal order of the petitioner-respondent and directing the authorities to reinstate him in service with all consequential benefits etc.2. The brief facts arc that the petitioner while on earned leave for some time, was involved in a criminal case under Sections 376, 452 and 323 of IPC at his home police station of district Agra. He was said to have entered the house of Smt Roopam Devi, the prosccutrix of a criminal case and committed rape against her and also assaulted her family members. After his return from leave, the petitioner did not inform his immediate authorities about registration of the criminal case against him and then had proceeded for 40 days earned leave. In that criminal ease the petitioner was taken into police custody during the investigation proceedings and was late...
State of U.P. and anr. Vs. Sudha Chaturvedi (Smt.) and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-18-2004
Reported in: 2005(2)AWC1902; (2004)3UPLBEC2965
M. Katju, J.1. This special appeal has been filed against the judgment of the learned Single Judge dated 5.2,2003;2. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.3. Before dealing with the issues involved in this appeal it is necessary to mention certain back ground facts. Adarsh Kariya Intermediate College, Sikhar, Mirzapur is a School recognised under the U.P. Intermediate Education Act and is. imparting education to girls only. On 30.6.94 the post of Head Mistress of the institution fell vacant. On 1,7.94 Smt. Veena .Mishra. senior most L.T. Grade teacher was promoted as Head Mistress on ad hoc basis. On 17.12.1994 the Committee of Management of the institution decided of fill up the short, term vacancy which had occurred in L.T. Grade on account of ad hoc promotion of Smt. Veena Mishra as Head Mistress. This vacancy was advertised in two news paper 'Aaj' and 'Dainik Jagran. The petitioner and others .applied for the post. On 21.1,96 the Committee of Management selected the petitioner and ...
Maqsood Ahmad Vs. Executive Engineer and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-18-2004
Reported in: 2005(2)AWC1180
ORDERM. Katju and Umeshwar Pandey, JJ. 1. This special appeal has been filed against the impugned judgment of the learned single Judge (Hon'ble S. L. Sarraf, J.) dated 30.9.1997 by which he dismissed the writ petition. 2. The impugned judgment is very cryptic which does not even give reasons. 3. The impugned judgment states : 'Heard learned counsel for the parties. I have gone through the petition and find no merit. The writ petition is dismissed accordingly. There will be no order as to costs.' 4. A perusal of the impugned judgment shows that it has given no reasons for dismissing the writ petition. It has repeatedly been held by the Supreme Court that the High Court cannot dismiss a writ petition without giving reasons. It has been held by the Supreme Court in Arun Mohadeorao Damka v. Addl. Inspector General of Police and Anr., AIR 1986 SC 1497 and Gram Panchayat, Bart v. Collector, Sonepat and Anr., AIR 1991 SC 1082, that a writ petition should not be dismissed without giving reason...
Smt. Savinay JaIn Vs. Motor Accident Claim Tribunal
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-18-2004
Reported in: III(2004)ACC893; 2005(2)AWC1287
Ashok Bhushan, J.1. Heard counsel for the petitioner.2. By this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for quashing order dated 31.7.2004 passed by Motor Accident Claim Tribunal by which the application of the petitioner for release of the amount deposited with Tribunal has been rejected.3. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal vide its, award dated 3.10.2001 awarded a compensation of Rs. 1,50,000 along with 9% interest from the date of filing of the claim petition. In pursuance of the award an amount of Rs. 2,24,250 was deposited. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal after receipt of the money passed order dated 15.3.2004 that an amount of Rs. 1,24,000 be invested for one year in a fixed deposit. Petitioner on 15.7.2004 moved an application praying that petitioner be paid the entire amount. The petitioner in the application vaguely stated that she required the amount for business and other important works. The Tribunal by the order impugned in the writ petition dated 31.7.2004 rejected t...
Narendra Kumar Singh Yadav Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-17-2004
Reported in: (2004)3UPLBEC2710
M. Katju, J.1. This writ petition has been filed for a writ of certiorari for quashing the impugned order dated 6-10-2003 passed by the Director, Higher Education vide Annexure 6 to the writ petition. The petitioner has also prayed for a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to pay U.G.C. pay scale to the petitioner as provided in the G.O. dated 29-2-1996 and 28-12-1998 with arrears and interest.2. We have heard the learned Counsel for the parties and have perused the record.3. The petitioner was selected for the post of Librarian in Samta Post Graduate College, Ghazipur which is affiliated to Purvanchal University in the pay scale of Rs. 2000-3200 and the Director, Higher Education by order dated 5-3-1990 approved the appointment vide Annexure 1 to the writ petition. Thereafter the appointment letter dated 13-3-1990 was issued by the College to the petitioner vide Annexure 2 to the writ petition. The petitioner has been functioning thereafter as Librarian in the College.4. The St...
Managing Director, U.P. State Ware Housing Corporation and anr. Vs. Ra ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-17-2004
Reported in: 2004(4)AWC3298; (2004)3UPLBEC2864
M. Katju and Umeshwar Pandey, JJ.1. This special appeal has been filed against the impugned judgment of the learned Single Judge dated 9.7.2004.2. We have heard the learned Counsel for the parties and have carefully perused the impugned judgment and find no infirmity in the same.3. The facts are set out in greet detail in the judgment of the learned Single Judge and hence we are not repeating the same. However, we may mention that a charge-sheet dated 21.3.1993 in respect of caste certificate was issued to the petitioner but the enquiry in this regard was subsequently dropped. Thereafter a fresh charge-sheet dated 2.2.1999 was issued to the writ petitioner to which the writ petitioner did not give any reply. Thereafter no enquiry was held against the writ petitioner and instead the enquiry report dated 29.7.1999 was submitted by the Enquiry Officer, copy of which is Annexure 28 to the writ petition. A perusal of the enquiry report shows that all that is stated therein is that since sev...
U.P. Rajya Vidyut Utpadan Nigam Ltd. and anr. Vs. Smt. Urmila Devi Sax ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-17-2004
Reported in: 2004(4)AWC3289; (2005)1UPLBEC52
M. Katju, J.1. This special appeal has been filed against the impugned interim order of the learned single Judge of this Court dated 27.5.2004.2. We have carefully perused the impugned judgment and have heard the learned counsel for the parties.3. The respondent (writ petitioner) filed the writ petition for quashing the order dated 4.3.2004 retiring her at the age of 58 years and for a mandamus directing the respondent appellants to continue her in service till the age of 62 years as assistant teacher in Vidyut Parishad Bal Vidyalaya Montessori School, Kasimpur, Aligarh and pay her salary.4. The aforesaid institution is under the overall control of Harduaganj Thermal Power Project, Kasimpur, Aligarh and runs classes from class I to class V. The aforesaid school is recognised under the provisions of U. P. Recognised Ba'sic School (Recruitment and Conditions of Service of Teachers and other Conditions) Rules, 1975, The writ petitioners were appointed in the said school from 11.9.1980 and...
- ‹ Prev
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- Next ›
- Last »