Allahabad Court February 2005 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.
Constable - 2051 C.P. Jagannath Prasad Sharma, son of Late Bhawani Sha ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-10-2005
Reported in: 2005(3)ESC1711; [2005(106)FLR431]
Tarun Agarwala, J.1. On 26.4.2003 the petitioner was placed under suspension on the charges of bigamy. The petitioner challenged the suspension order which was stayed in a writ jurisdiction. On the basis of the preliminary inquiry conducted by the department, the petitioner was charge-sheeted on 16.6.2004 on the charges of bigamy. The petitioner has filed the present writ petition for the quashing of the charge-sheet dated 16.6.2004 issued by the disciplinary authority on the ground that the same was based on a criminal complaint filed in the year 2000 which is pending in the court of Additional Judicial Magistrate, Meerut under Sections 420, 494, 406 and 500 of the Indian Penal Code.2. The petitioner alleges that the subject matter of the charge-sheet in the domestic inquiry proceedings and that pending before the Criminal Court is one and the same and further contended that the evidence in both the proceedings would be the same and that if the departmental proceedings are allowed to ...
Gulab Chandra and Harish Chandra Sons of Sita Ram and ors. Vs. Additio ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-09-2005
Reported in: 2005(3)AWC2526
Arun Tandon, J.1. Heard Sri Sankatha Rai, Advocate assisted by Sri Ajay Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri M.P. Srivastava, learned counsel for the respondent No. 5 and Learned Standing Counsel for the respondent Nos. 1 to 3. Nobody is present on behalf of the respondent No. 4 even in the revised reading of the cause list.2. Respondent No. 5, Bhuidhar alias Jairam son of Basanta alias Mataru, filed Original Suit No. 821 of 1997 under Section 229-B of the U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act for declaration that he was the Bhumidhar of Plot No. 977 Ka area 1.18 acre corresponding to old Plot No. 1157 situated in village Kariyanw, Pargana Ghisuwa, Tehsil Machhlishahr, Jaunpur. The suit so filed was directed to proceed ex parte under order dated 28th July, 1998 and thereafter the Sub-Divisional Officer dismissed the suit even after ex parte proceedings by means of the order dated 28th August, 1998. The plaintiff filed an application for review of the order of th...
Pachpeda Rice Mill and anr. Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-09-2005
Reported in: 2005(2)AWC1709; 2005(1)ESC766
B.S. Chauhan, J.1. This writ petition has been filed for quashing the Demand Notice dated 24.1.2005, issued by the District Food Marketing Officer, Pilibhit.2. The petitioner was granted the licence for running the rice mill. The petitioner was delivered Paddy for hulling/milling on contract basis. The petitioner however, failed to deliver the standard percentage of rice from the paddy receipt. This led to the issue of Demand Notice dated 24.1.2005.3. We have heard Shri Pramod Bhardwaj, learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that it was because of the poor quality of paddy that was supplied to him that he could not deliver the standard percentage of rice.4. Learned Standing Counsel however submitted that the agreement dated 12.10.2003 entered between the State Government and the petitioner clearly indicates that under Clause 12, the petitioner could take recourse to arbitration proc...
Committee of Management, Bahu Dhandhi Inter College and ors. Vs. State ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-09-2005
Reported in: 2005(2)ESC1040
Janardan Sahai, J. 1. The dispute relates to the committee of management entitled to manage Bahu Dhandhi Inter College, Sonahita, Jaunpur an institution governed by the Intermediate Education Act. The last undisputed elections of the committee of management of the institution were held in the year 1991 in which the petitioner No. 2 Dukhi Shukla was elected as the Manager. The tenure of the committee of management under the scheme of administration is three years. According to the petitioner the elections of the committee of management were held in the year 1994 and 1997 and the committee of the petitioner No. 2 Dukhi Shukla was elected. The petitioners case is that fresh elections were held on 27.8.2000 in which the committee of the petitioner No. 2 Dukhi Shukla was again elected but it is not in dispute that these elections were not recognised. The case of the respondent No. 4 Nanhkoo Ram Yadav is that elections were held on 27.8.2000 but in this election the committee consisting of N...
Km. Kirti Sharma Vs. Civil Judge, Senior Division and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-09-2005
Reported in: AIR2005All197; 2005(2)AWC1741
ORDERD.P. Singh, J.1. Heard Sri K. P. Agrawal, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Sri S.K. Mishra for the petitioner and Sri V. C. Mishra, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Vivek Mishra for the respondent No. 3.2. The plaintiff respondent No. 3 filed suit No. 761 of 2004 against the petitioner for restitution of conjugal rights and incidental relief. Along with the suit, an application for temporary injunction was also filed but instead of granting any ex parte injunction, the trial Court issued notice to the petitioner. Against the said order dated 2-12-2004, the plaintiff respondent No. 3 filed revision No. 167 of 2004 wherein an interim injunction restraining the petitioner from contracting her second marriage was passed on 6-12-2004. This order has been impugned in the present writ petition.3. The case as set up in the petition is that when the petitioner was going to Firozabad by bus from her residence in Jalesar, District Etah to appear in her examination along with her co...
Dr. Archana Srivastava Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-09-2005
Reported in: 2005(3)ESC1631
Dilip Gupta, J.1. This writ petition has been filed for quashing the order dated 19.1.2005 of the Chancellor of the Dr. Bhim Rao Ambedkar University, Agra (hereinafter referred to as the 'University') by which the appointment of the petitioner in a substantive capacity made by the Executive Council of the University in the meeting held on 7.12.2003 under Section 31(3)(b) of the U.P. State Universities Act, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') has been cancelled.2. The petitioner submitted an application dated 20.7.1998 for appointment as a Guest Lecturer in the Department of Sociology in the Institute of Social Sciences of the University (hereinafter referred to as the 'Institute') in the leave vacancy of Dr. K. Chaudhary. On the basis of the aforesaid application, a communication dated 1.9.1998 was sent to the petitioner intimating her to come to the Institute and take down from the time table the work assigned to Dr. K. Chaudhary. The appointment was, however, subject to the f...
State of U.P. and ors. Vs. Lala Ram Chaturvedi and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-09-2005
Reported in: 2005(4)AWC3508; (2006)ILLJ659All
Pradeep Kant and N.K. Mehrotra, JJ.1. The State has filed this writ petition challenging the order passed by the State Public Services Tribunal dated 7.7.1993, by means of which the punishment of dismissal from service inflicted upon respondent No. 1 has been set aside. The respondent No. 1, who was suspended in contemplation of disciplinary proceedings, was served with a charge-sheet to which he submitted the reply and thereafter the order of punishment was passed.2. Learned Counsel for the State has urged that the charges are serious but the Tribunal has set aside the order of punishment only on technical ground without giving any due weight to the gravity of the charges.3. The Tribunal has recorded a finding that though the petitioner in his reply while disputing the charges levelled against him had asked for opportunity to cross-examine the witnesses but that prayer was rejected by the enquiry officer on the ground that the respondent has not given names of the witnesses whom he wa...
Shri Bhaironji Sugar Industries Vs. Chief Commissioner of Income Tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-09-2005
Reported in: (2006)200CTR(All)601
1. The Tribunal, Allahabad, has referred the following question of law under Section 256(2) of the IT Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), for opinion to this Court :Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that Section 154 of the IT Act, 1961, was not applicable The reference relates to the asst. yrs. 1977-78 to 1980-81.2. Briefly the facts giving rise to the present reference are as under :The applicant is assessed to income-tax in the status of a firm. In the original assessment for the assessment years in question the loss of the firm and unabsorbed depreciation allowance, investment allowance, deductions under Sections 80HH and 80I were allocated to the partners for being carried in their individual assessments. After the original assessment had been made, the assessing authority noted that the aforesaid order was erroneous in as much as in view of the decision of this Court in the case of K.T. Wire Products v. Union of Indi...
Cit Vs. Laxmi Chand and Sons.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-09-2005
Reported in: [2005]147TAXMAN616(All)
ORDERBy the Court The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi has referred the following question of law under section 256(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') for opinion to this Court.'Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was in law justified in cancelling the order of the Income Tax Officer passed under section 154 of the Income Tax Act, 1961?'2. The reference relates to the assessment years 1981-82 and 1982-83. The respondent is a company assessed to income-tax in the status of firm. It had purchased a generator ending Diwali 1980 for a sum of Rs. 2,76,640. It claimed depreciation, additional depreciation and investment allowance on the aforesaid amount, which was allowed by the assessing officer by passing original assessment under section 143(3) of the Act. Subsequently, it was noticed by the assessing officer that the respondent had received capital subsidy from the Government of India for purchase of generator. He...
Cit Vs. Ceekay Associates (P) Ltd.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-09-2005
Reported in: [2005]147TAXMAN624(All)
ORDER By the Court The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi has referred the following question of law under section 256(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') for opinion to this Court.'Whether, on facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was in law, justified in holding that the assessee was an industrial undertaking?'2. The reference relates to the assessment year 1985-86.3. The respondent/assessee is a private limited company and is engaged in undertaking contracts for construction of building etc. It had claimed investment allowance under section 32A and deductions under sections 80HH and 80J of the Act. The assessing officer had disallowed the exemptions and deductions on the ground that it is not an industrial undertaking. However, in appeal the CIT(A) has allowed the claim which order has been upheld by the Tribunal.4. Heard Sri A.N. Mahajan, learned Standing counsel for the revenue. Sri P.K. Singhal has filed his appearance on beh...
- ‹ Prev
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 18
- Next ›
- Last »