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.
State of U.P. and ors. Vs. Sanjay Kumar Pandey
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-13-2004
Reported in: 2004(4)AWC3299; (2004)3UPLBEC2835
M. Katju, J.1. This bunch of special appeals has been filed against the impugned judgment of a learned Single Judge dated 10.7.2003. We have perused the impugned judgment and heard learned Counsel for the parties.2. The writ petitioners filed Writ Petitions for regularisation on the post of Junior Clerk in the office of the Chief Electoral Office, Lucknow. They have also prayed for a writ of certiorari to quash the order of the District Chief Electoral Officer by which petitioner's representation regarding their claim for regularisation has been rejected.3. The facts of the case are that the writ petitioners were appointed initially against temporary posts of Junior Clerk in the office of the District Election Officer temporarily for certain periods according to the exigency and the work load in connection with the election of Lok Sabha for short spells. The details arc given below:Special Appeal Petitioners names Total Period of service in differentNo. short term spellsY.M.D.1. 703 of...
Rama Shankar Shukla Vs. Nagar Mahapalika and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-13-2004
Reported in: (2004)3UPLBEC2801
Tarun Agarwala, J.1. The petitioner was initially appointed as a daily wager in the Nagar Mahapalika, Allahabad in the year 1984. His services were regularised in the year 1992 and on 5.6.1992, the petitioner was appointed as a Tax Collector. It transpires that on the basis of a preliminary enquiry it was found that large sums of money collected by the petitioner was not deposited in the Trcasuiy. Accordingly, the petitioner was placed under suspension vide an order dated 22.2.1994. A charge sheet dated 13.2.1995 was issued in which it was stated that large sums of money collected by the petitioner was not deposited in the Treasury, which he had misappropriated for his own use and therefore, caused a loss to the dcpaitmisnt. The charge-sheet further stated that when this fact was brought to the notice of the petitioner, the said amount was deposited subsequently but there was a short fall of Rs. 100.60. The petitioner, vide his reply, admitted that whatever amount was found short was d...
Beltek India Ltd. Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-13-2004
Reported in: AIR2005All21; 2004(4)AWC3294
M. Katju, A.C.J.1. This Is an application to recall the judgment dated 31.3.2004 by which petition was dismissed following the decision of this Court in Writ Petition No. 27317 of 2001, Kaloo Ram v. State of U. P. and Ors..2. In paragraphs 5 and 6 of the affidavit filed in support of this application it is stated that the writ petition was dismissed in the absence of the learned counsel for the petitioner who could not attend due to his illness. Hence we have heard the counsel for petitioner again on merits of the case but we are not inclined to recall the judgment dated 31.3.2004.3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has alleged that actual physical possession of the land was not taken from the petitioner as stated in paragraphs 27, 32 and 33 of the writ petition. However, in a counter- affidavit it has been stated in paragraphs 18, 24 and 25 that possession was taken by the respondents on 27.11.1999. True copy of the possession memo is Annexure-C.A. 1 to the counter- affidavit.4. In ...
Munni Devi @ Rajeswari Vs. Kshetra Pal Singh
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-13-2004
Reported in: II(2004)DMC820
S.N. Srivastava, J.1. This writ petition is directed against the order dated 18.1.2003, Annexure-9 to the writ petition, passed by Additional District Judge, Bijnore and the judgment and order dated 29.11.1999, Annexure-8 to the writ petition, passed by the Trial Court.Plaintiff-respondent filed a suit for dissolution of marriage before the Civil Judge, Bijnore. Suit was decreed ex parte by judgment and decree dated 1.1.1994. Defendant-Smt. Munni Devi, wife of plaintiff, moved an application under Order IX Rule 13 supported by an affidavit to set aside ex parte decree on the ground that notices were not served to her and ex parte decree was passed without notice to her. An objection to the restoration application as well as to application under Section 5 of the Indian Limitation Act was filed by plaintiff-respondent denying allegations made in applications of defendant asserting that summons were personally served. Trial Court by the order dated 29.11.1999 dismissed application of peti...
Sipector Alias Inspector Vs. State of U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-13-2004
Reported in: 2005CriLJ343
M.C. Jain, J.1. The appeal has been preferred by one Sipector alias Inspector Kachhi against the judgment and order dated 2-3-1981 passed by Sri M. P. Singh I, the then V Additional Sessions Judge, Etah in S. T. No. 289 of 1980. He has been convicted under Section 302 read with Section 34 I. P. C. and sentenced to life imprisonment.2. We first give a brief resume of the relevant facts. The incident took place in between the night of 19/20-8-1979 at about 3.00 A. M. outside the house of the complainant Abdul PW 1 in village Manauta, Police Station Kasganj, District Etah. The report was lodged by Abdul PW 1 on 20-8-1979 at 9.30 A. M. The deceased was Abdul's father Ismail Khan and the culprits were allegedly four including the present accused-appellant. In between the fateful night, the complainant's father Ismail was sleeping outside his house on the raised platform covered by a hut. At about 3.00 A. M., the complainant and his brother Islam, sleeping in the house, heard the alarm calli...
Aneesa Begum (Smt.) Vs. Central Administrative Tribunal Through Its Re ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-13-2004
Reported in: (2004)3UPLBEC2980
R.B. Misra, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Counsel for the respondents.2. By means of the present writ petition the petitioner has prayed for quashing the order dated 21.4.2004 (Annexure-4 to the writ petition) passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Allahabad (hereinafter in short called as the 'Tribunal') and further for issuance of a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to appoint the son of the petitioner, namely, Nasir Khan, on compassionate ground on the death of her husband under the Dying-in-Harness Rules prevailing in the Railway Department.3. The brief facts necessary for adjudication of the present writ petition are that the husband of the petitioner, namely, Zahid Hussain Khan while working in the Railway department died on 26.10.1974, when her only son Nasir Khan was 26 days old as he was born on 1.10,1997 and when he became major in the year 1992. the application dated 15.10.1992 followed by reminder applications dated 12.2....
Smt. Ram Rani (D) Through L.R. Vs. Deputy Director of Consolidation an ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-13-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)AWC955
S.N. Srivastava, J.1. Subject matter of impugnment in the instant petition is the judgment and order dated 15.7.1974, passed by Deputy Director, Consolidation, Ballia whereby revision was allowed and order of Settlement Officer of Consolidation dated 20.3.1970 was set aside.2. The dispute in the instant petition centres round plot Nos. 497 and 876. It would appear from a perusal of record that Opp. Party No. 4 namely Mathura (since deceased) was recorded as sirdar in the baste year. Upon commencement of consolidation proceeding, petitioner preferred objection under Section 9 of the U.P.C.H. Act for the relief of declaring her as bumidhar of both the plots. The claim of the petitioner, it would further transpire from the record, was founded on the ground that plot No. 497/2/2 was grove land which had descended on her from the time of her ancestor Manager Rai and further that she was a disabled person within the definition of Section 21 of the U.P. Z.A. & L.R. Act and also that even if, ...
Jai Ram Dass Vs. Iind A.D.J. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-13-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)AWC549
Tarun Agarwala, J.1. The respondent Nos. 3 and 4 filed a suit for ejectment and for realization of rent and damages alleging that the petitioner was in arrears of rent since 1.1.1978 and that the water charges was also due against him from 1.10.1973. The respondents served a notice of demand for arrears of rent and also terminated the tenancy. Inspite of the service of the notice, neither the arrears of rent was paid nor the petitioner vacated the shop in question.2. The Judge Small Cause Court issued summons fixing 26.5.1982. According to the petitioner, the said summons were duly received, but was not accompanied by a copy of the plaint nor any date was indicated in the summons for appearance. The petitioner, thereafter, made an enquiry and appeared on the next date, i.e., 21.7.1982 and moved an application indicating that he was not served with a copy of the plaint nor any date was indicated in the summons and, therefore, he could not appear earlier. The application of the petitione...
Bhaskara Nand Giri Vs. Basant Lal and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-13-2004
Reported in: 2005(2)AWC1173
Anjani Kumar, J. 1. Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the revisionist and Sri C. K. Rai, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the contesting respondents.2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the revisionist argued that the Order impugned in the present revision is an Order whereby the trial court has directed to decide the issue Nos. 16 and 18 together, which were preliminary issues, before proceeding for trial. It is further submitted that both the issues relate to the Jurisdiction of the Court, therefore the view taken by the trial court on these two additional issues, which raise the question of jurisdiction and issue of law, the same can be connected by revisional court in exercise of power under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure by means of present revision. Learned counsel for the revisionist contended that from the Order sheet it appears that the Court has already expressed its opinion to decide these two issues, therefore, according to the provision of...
Roshan Singh Vs. Rent Control and Eviction Officer and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-13-2004
Reported in: 2005(2)AWC1886
Anjani Kumar, J.1. Heard Sri K.N. Saxena, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and learned standing counsel for the State as well as learned counsel for the contesting respondent.2. The petitioner-tenant, by means of present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, has challenged the order dated 16th April, 1990, passed by the Rent Control and Eviction Officer/City Magistrate, Jhansi, copy whereof is annexed as Annexure-2 to the writ petition, whereby a deemed vacancy has been declared under Section 12 (3A) of U. P. Act No. 13 of 1972 and thereafter the accommodation in question has been released in favour of the landlord-contesting respondent.3. The facts leading to the filing of the present writ petition are that petitioner Roshan Singh, who was employed in Railway Protection Force, was posted at Jhansi and the accommodation in dispute was occupied by him. It is not disputed that the accommodation in question is covered by the provision of U. P. ...
- ‹ Prev
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 18
- Next ›
- Last »