Allahabad Court September 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.
Dharam Pal Vs. Executive Engineer Public Works Department
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-02-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)AWC242; [2005(104)FLR143]; (2005)1UPLBEC643
R.B. Misra, J.1. Heard Sri Anurag Upadhyay holding brief of Sri Ramesh Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned standing counsel.2. It appears that petitioner was engaged as daily wager in the Public Works Department on 26th December, 1991. He was assigned the work of Walah-cum-Chowkidar and he was doing satisfactory service, however an order dated 20.7.1991 issued by Executive Engineer. Temporary Division, P.W.D., Etawah, to all the Assistant Engineer of relevant area whereby the maintainability and deployment of daily wagers were being against such modalities of deployment. The petitioner has approached and filed this writ petition.3. Counter-affidavit has been filed. According to the respondent, the petitioner was engaged as a daily wager on the need of work and deployment of petitioner being a daily wager was on temporary basis. The service of the daily wager commences in the morning and comes to an end in the evening. The deployment of petitioner as a daily wager ...
State of U.P. Vs. District Judge and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-02-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)AWC540
ORDERAnjani Kumar, J.1. The petitioner, aggrieved by an order dated 26.10.1983 passed by the revisional court whereby the revisional court reversed the order dated 10.3.1983 passed by the trial court, approached this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.2. The relationship between the petitioner and respondent is not disputed that the petitioner is tenant and respondent is landlord. It is also not disputed that provisions of U.P. Act No. 13 of 1972 are not applicable to the premises in question. The landlord filed a suit for arrears of rent and ejectment by giving notice which is a composite notice under Section 106 of Transfer of Property Act read with Section 80 of Code of Civil Procedure. The trial court, on the ground that there cannot be composite notice, dismissed the suit. On revision the revisional court relied upon a decision in State of U. P. v. D.C. Gupta, 1983 ACJ 263, wherein this Court held that composite notice under Section 106 of Transfer of Property Ac...
Sheo Pujan Vs. Deputy Director of Consolidation and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-02-2004
Reported in: 2005(2)AWC1265
Krishna Murari, J.1. This writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is directed against the judgment of the Deputy Director of Consolidation dated 21.7.1983 allowing the revision filed by respondent No. 2 and setting aside the order passed by the Settlement Officer Consolidation as well as Consolidation Officer.2. The facts are that during consolidation proceedings chak Nos. 210 and 161 were carved out in favour of one Mangaru s/o Tulsi. He died in 1975. After his death petitioner moved an application under Section 12 of the U. P. Consolidation of Holdings Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') for mutation of his name as a legal heir claiming himself to be the brother of deceased Mangaru. Two more applications were filed ; one by respondent No. 2 claiming mutation of her name as daughter of the deceased and another by one Raghunath claiming himself to be the son of the brother of deceased. Both the aforesaid applications were moved on 24.10.1975. Undispute...
Nandani Devi (Smt.) Vs. Ist Additional District Judge and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-02-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)ARC58
S.U. Khan, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.This is landlord's writ petition arising out of eviction/release proceedings by him against tenants respondents on the ground of bona fide need under Section 21 of U.P. Act No. 13 of 1972.2. Property in dispute is a shop. Release application was registered as P.A. Case No. 36 of 1978 on the file of prescribed authority/1st Additional Munsif, Varanasi, The landlady petitioner pleaded that she required the shop in dispute for establishing his sons in business. Prescribed authority by order dated 12.4.1982 allowed the release application, against which tenants respondents filed appeal under Section 22 of the Act being Rent Control Appeal No. 239 of 1982. 1st Additional District Judge, Varanasi through judgment and order dated 30.11.1983 allowed the appeal, hence, this writ petition by landlady.3. Landlady had specifically stated that her sons intend to start the business of Swarnkari. The Appellate Court mainly allowed the appeal on th...
Shiv Kumar Sharma Vs. Deputy General Manager, Central Bank of India an ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-02-2004
Reported in: (2005)2UPLBEC1455
Rakesh Tiwari, J.1. Heard Counsel for the parties and perused the record.2. By means of this petition, a prayer has been made for a direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the Order dated 9.2.1998 passed by the Regional Manager, Central Bank of India, Meerut and also the Order dated 28.3.2003 passed by the Deputy General Manager, Central Bank of India, Zonal Office, Agra respectively. It is further prayed that the respondents be directed to restore the petitioner on his post with all consequential benefit along with arrears of salary.3. In brevity the fact of the case are that the petitioner was appointed on 12.5.1981 as Clerk-cum-Cashier/Godown Keeper in the Central Bank of India, Bulandsahar Branch. He was placed under suspension on the basis of F.I.R. lodged against him in case Crime No. 660 of 1995, which was registered at Kotwali Nagar, District Bulandshahar under Section 468/4290/409-B IPC.4. It is submitted by the Counsel for the petitioner that during the pendency of the...
Ganesh Shanker Vidyarthi Memorial Society (a Registered Society) and a ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-01-2004
Reported in: 2004(4)AWC3642; (2004)3UPLBEC2697
Arun Tandon, J.1. Heard Sri Ashok Khare Senior Advocate, assisted by Sri S.C. Dwivedi, on behalf of the petitioners, Standing Counsel on behalf of respondents 1, 2, 3 and 4. Sri Adeel Ahmad Khan Advocate has been heard on behalf of caveator, Sri Amar Nath Misra.2. Ganesh Shankar Vidyarthi Smarak Inter College, Maharajganj is a Society registered under the Societies Registration Act. Dr. Balram Bhatt claiming himself to be the President/Manager of the said Society has filed this writ petition against the order dated 9.7.2004 passed by the Commission, Gorakhpur Division, Gorakhpur in Appeal No. 117-G/1996 (Ganesh Shanker Vidyarthi Smarak, Inter College v. Deputy Registrar, Firms, Societies and Chits, Faizabad) 3. The relevant facts for adjudication of the controversy raised in the present writ petition are that certain objections were filed by Amar Nath Misra pertaining to continuation of certain office bearers of the Society. The objections so filed were pending consideration before the...
Kanhaiya Lal Vs. Principal Secretary, Higher Education, Government of ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-01-2004
Reported in: (2005)1UPLBEC47
Arun Tandon, J.1. Petitioner Kanhaiya Lal, who was student of B.A.-III year in the Session 1977-98 of the Allahabad University, could not under take the said examination because of reasons beyond his control namely mental ailment. After expiry of more than 5 years, there petitioner moved an application for being re- admitted in B.A.-III year. The application for re-admission in B.A.-III year has been rejected by the University. Hence the present writ petition.2. On behalf of the respondent it has been stated that under Chapter XXXV of the University Ordinance re-admission can be granted under Clause l(ii), which reads as follows :'Clause l.(ii) Provides that a student can appear in subsequent examination within five years following the year in which he failed last or failed to appear.'3. In view of the aforesaid statutory provisions, it cannot be disputed that the petitioner is not entitled for re-admission in B.A.-III year in the year 2004 as more than 5 years have been lapsed, since ...
Yogendra Rai Vs. Sadhan Sahkari Samiti No. 2 Nagar and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-01-2004
Reported in: 2005(3)AWC2246; (2005)1UPLBEC103
Umeshwar Pandey, J.1. This Second Appeal arises out of the judgment and decree dated 8.8.1977 passed by the District Judge, Ghazipur.2. The brief facts giving rise to this appeal are that the appellant-plaintiffs suit was for permanent injunction to restrain the respondent-defendant from recovering the certain sums of money under an award duly decided and confirmed by the Arbitrator under Section 71 of U.P. Co-Operative Societies Act, 1965 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'). According to the plaint case, the entire amount due against him in the award was paid by him to the Co-operative Amin. As such, he had no liability of any such further payment. The defendant Co-operative Society contested the suit and filed the written statement. It was pleaded that the suit was barred under Sections 102 and 111 of the Act. The learned trial Court framed an issue on this point and gave its finding in affirmative holding that the suit was barred under Sections 102 and 111 of the Act. On appeal t...
Anil Kumar Prajapati Vs. Additional Managing Director, U.P. State Road ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-01-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)AWC101; [2005(104)FLR146]; (2005)1UPLBEC45
R.B. Misra, J.1. Heard Sri Prakash Padia, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Sri Shamir Sharma on behalf of the respondents.2. In this petition, prayer has been made to quash the order dated 6.7.2001 passed by the Chief Manager (Karmik), U.P. State Road Transport Corporation, Head Quarter, Lucknow, whereby in compliance to the order dated 9.4.2001 passed in earlier Writ Petition No. 13105 of 2000, the representation of the petitioner was considered and rejected.3. Undisputed facts arc that 500 posts of Conductors in U.P. State Road Transport Corporation (in short called as 'Corporation' hereinafter) were to be filled up for which an advertisement dated 18/19.1.1995 was published inviting applications from eligible candidates. The candidates were to produce their testimonials, original certificates and papers in respect of their other qualifications for the said selection of Conductors which was to be finalized on the basis of interview only. It appears that about 1100 candidates in...
Laxman Singh Vs. Director General, Railway Protection Force (Rpf), Rai ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-01-2004
Reported in: (2005)1UPLBEC48
R.B. Misra, J.1. Heard Sri A.B. Singh, learned Counsel for the petitioner, and Sri Tarun Verma, learned Counsel for the respondents.2. In this petition prayer has been made for quashing the impugned order dated 31.10.1995 passed by the Divisional Security Commissioner, Railway Protection Force, Varanasi terminating the service of the petitioner on the allegations of absence from duty without proper intimation and also for overstaying without sanctioned leave without sufficient cause.3. It appears that the petitioner was appointed in the Railway Protection Special Force (hereinafter in short called as 'RPSF') on 1.5.1967 and he was transferred to Railway Protection Force (hereinafter in short called as 'R.P.F') on 5.9.1981. As per his service record, during tenure of his service in R.P.S.F. and R.P.F. the petitioner was punished on nine occasions. The petitioner was given weekly rest on 16.11.1994 and he was to present on duty on 17.11.1994, however, he absented himself from duty withou...
- ‹ Prev
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 19
- 20
- Next ›
- Last »