Allahabad Court March 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.
Smt. Vimala Devi W/O Late Banwari Lal, Vs. the State of U.P. Through I ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-02-2005
Reported in: 2005(2)ESC1098; [2005(107)FLR42]
Tarun Agarwala, J.1. By means of the present writ petition, the petitioners have prayed that a writ of mandamus be issued to the respondents to regularise their services under the U.P. Regularisation of Daily Wagers Appointment on Group 'D' Posts Rules, 2001 and to grant all consequential benefits as admissible under law. The petitioners alleged that they have been engaged since 1985-86 as daily wage employees and are working as Malis [Gardeners] in Rajkiya Udyan [Company, Bagh], Government Garden, Allahabad and are currently deployed to work in the lawns of i the High Court. The petitioners have submitted that they have been appointed against the substantive- posts, but they are not being regularised for the reasons best known to the respondents. The petitioners further submitted that they have the requisite qualifications for being regularised on the post of Maalies. and that in any case, they have gained the requisite experience and expertise of the work of a Mali on account of havi...
Ramvyas Vishwakarma Son of Pannu Vishawakarma Vs. District Magistrate,
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-02-2005
Reported in: 2005(3)AWC2197
Arun Tandon, J.1. Heard Sri A.K. Srivastava on behalf of the petitioner, Sri K.P. Srivastava on behalf of respondent Nos. 1 and 2.2. Respondent No. 3, Shiv Devi, is admittedly the elected Pradhan of Gaon Sabha Jhamsheela, Block Myorpur, district Sonbhadra. The financial and administrative powers of respondent No. 3 were ceased under the order passed by the District Magistrate Sonbhadra dated 30.11.2002. Against the said order dated 30.11.2002 the Pradhan filed Writ Petition No. 54444 of 2002 (Smt. Shiv Devi v. District Magistrate, Sonbhadra and Ors.)3. The Hon'ble High Court did not grant any interim order in the said writ petition. Subsequently the District Panchayat Raj Officer passed an order dated 31.03.2002 and dated 05.04.2003 whereby the Pradhan was required to deposit a sum of Rs. 39,708,00 said to be the loss caused to the Gram Panchayat due to the illegal acts of administrative powers of the Pradhan were restored. The order dated 23.12.2003 was challenged by the present petit...
Cit Vs. Friends Sugar Works
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-02-2005
Reported in: [2006]154TAXMAN563(All)
1. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi has referred the following questions of law under section 256(1) of the Income Tax 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, in law, justified in directing the income tax officer to allow depreciation and investment allowance on the generating set without deducting the amount of subsidy from its cost ?2. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was, in law, justified in holding that the amount of Rs. 1,27,330 receivable as subsidy from the government did not directly or indirectly go to meet the cost of the generating set ?"2.The reference relates to the assessment year 1982-83.Briefly stated the facts giving rise to the present reference are as follows:The respondent-assessee had purchased and installed a generator in the assessment year 1982-83, when it started functioning. It claimed depreciation...
J.S. Gupta and Sons Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-01-2005
Reported in: 2005(100)ECC121; 2007(212)ELT22(All)
R.K. Agrawal, J.1. By means of the present writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner, M/s J. S. Gupta and Sons, seek the following reliefs:'(i) issue suitable writ, Order or direction quashing the Order dated 5th January 2005 (Annexure -- XVIII to this writ petition) passed by the respondent No. 2;(ii) suitable writ, Order or direction quashing the Order dated 19th/20th April 2004 whereby the permission granted to sub-contract production to job work was cancelled;(iii) Suitable writ, Order or direction commanding the respondents to restore the facility of procuring goods without payment of duty forthwith;(iv) Suitable writ, Order or direction commanding the respondents to permit the petitioner to sub-contract the production on job work basis as was being permitted prior to the Order dated 19th/20th April 2004;(v) suitable writ, Order or direction restraining the respondent Nos. 2 and 3 from harassing the petitioner and prohibiting investigation ...
Smt. Ram Dulari Agrawal and Brijendra Kumar Agrawal Vs. the Commission ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-01-2005
Reported in: (2005)197CTR(All)232
P. Krishna, J.1. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal has referred the following question of law under Section 26(2) of the Gift Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) for opinion to this Court:-'Whether on the facts and the circumstances of the case the Tribunal is justified in holding that a taxable gift was made by the assessee during the accounting period corresponding to the assessment year 1979-80.'2. Since the facts of the case of Smt. Ram Dulari Agrawal are identical to the facts of the case of Shri Brij Prasad Agrawal, (as stated by the Tribunal in the statement of case) we are noticing the relevant facts of the case of Smt. Ram Dulari Agrawal only. The assessee, the donor, is an individual. Her accounting period for the assessment year 1979-80 ended on 24.10.1978.3. The assessee, Smt. Ram Dulari Agrawal by an oral declaration created a Trust on 8th of April, 1977 known as Bee Kay Family Trust for the benefit of M/s. Eskay Paper Industries Pvt. Limited. Smt. Ram Dular...
Bhaskar Parashari S/O Sri Deo NaraIn Parashari Vs. Board of Directors, ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-01-2005
Reported in: 2005(2)ESC1501
Vineet Saran, J.1. The petitioner was a Cashier working with the respondent-Bank. On the basis of a complaint made by one Noor Mohammad on 29.9.1987, the respondent-Bank issued a charge sheet to the petitioner on 22.3.1988. The charge against the petitioner was of temporary embezzlement of a certain amount which was said to have been handed over to the petitioner by the complainant and had been deposited by him, not on the date when it was handed over but, on a subsequent date. Relying on the enquiry report, on 19.1.1990, the disciplinary authority passed an order imposing the punishment of removal of the petitioner from service. The appellate authority rejected the appeal of the petitioner on 23.4.1990. Against the said orders, the petitioner preferred Writ Petition No. 13242 of 1990. On the ground that while rejecting the appeal no reasons had been assigned by the appellate authority, this Court allowed the writ petition vide judgment and order dated 17.5.1993. The matter was thus re...
Vijay Prakash (Minor), Son of Sri Hari Lal Through Hari Lal Son of Lat ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-01-2005
Reported in: 2005(2)ESC1048; (2005)2UPLBEC1511
Janardan Sahai, J. 1. It is hard to get an admission in a State Medical College but to lose it when it had virtually been granted would be a pity. The petitioner was selected in the Combined Pre Medical Test 2004 in the SC/ST Physically Handicapped Category. His general rank was 4113 self-rank 29 and rank 1 in SC category physically handicapped. All that he required to get an admission was to produce a medical certificate from a Special Medical Board certifying what in lay language means that he was physically handicapped but the degree of his disability was not such as would hinder his performance. On 16.7.2004 the day fixed he appeared for counseling. He also had with him a medical certificate of the Chief Medical Officer in proof of his eligibility in the category in which he was selected but he was sent away without admission, as the certificate which he possessed did not have the status of a certificate of the special medical board. In that fateful round of counseling candidates l...
Smt. Saraswati Devi Wife of Shri Rama Kant Gond Vs. the Commissioner, ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-01-2005
Reported in: 2005(3)AWC2407
S.N. Srivastava, J.1. Present petition has been instituted assailing the orders dated 29.6.1996, 30.6.1997 and 20.3.1998 passed by Sub Divisional Officer, Sadar Maharaj Ganj, and the Commissioner Gorakhpur Division Gorakhpur.2. The dispute in the petition in hand revolves round plot No. 347 admeasuring .025 acres situated in village Mednipur Soha Sonari Patti Tappa Biraicha Pargana Haveli Sadar District Maharajganj. From the materials on record it would appear that originally the land in question belonged to one Jogi who sold his share in favour of petitioner vide sale deed dated 28.8.1995 and on the basis of which, the petitioner was delivered possession. Subsequently, Radhey Shyam who is arrayed as respondent No. 3 in the instant petition wrote some letter on 30.8.1994 for recording his name as Bhumidhar in the revenue record against property Plot No. 347 in view of the provisions of Section 164 of the U.P.Z.A. & L.R.Act. The grounds urged were that he got possession over the propert...
Commissioner of Wealth Tax Vs. Mohan Das
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-01-2005
Reported in: (2005)196CTR(All)204
1. The Tribunal, Allahabad, has referred the following two questions of law under Section 27(1) of the WT Act, 1957 (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 correct in law in holding that the assessments were reopened under Section 17 on the basis of change of opinion of the WTO ?(2) Whether, on facts and in circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in law in holding that assessment framed under Section 16(1) of the WT Act cannot be reopened under Section 17 of the WT Act on the ground of change of opinion on the part of the WTO ?'2. The reference relates to the asst. yrs. 1982-83 to 1985-86.3. Briefly, stated the facts giving rise to the present reference are as follows :The respondent/assessee has been assessed to wealth-tax in the status of an individual. He owns property No. 89/331, Deputy Ka Padao, Kanpur, which is being used for commercial purpose having been let ou...
Prakashak, Madhu Prakashan Vs. District Judge and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-01-2005
Reported in: 2005(30)PTC617(All)
D.P. Singh, J.1. Pleadings are complete and the counsels for the parties agree that the petition may be finally disposed of under the rules of the court.2. Heard counsel for the parties.3. This petition is directed against concurrent orders dated 23.2.2000 and 22.5.2000 by which his objection under Section 47 C.P.C. has been rejected by the executing court and the revision has also been dismissed.4. It appears that the plaintiff respondent filed original suit No. 672 of 1998 under Order 1 Rule 8 C.P.C. with the allegations that the defendants be restrained from publishing books with the trade name 'Bal Bharti' with any other or similarly described similar names. The suit was decreed and the decree was also upheld in Special Leave Petition No. 14217 of 1999 vide order and judgment dated 4.10.1999 and has become final. The plaintiff respondent filed an execution application No. 25 of 1999 against the petitioner as according to them the petitioner was publishing books, which was similarly...
- ‹ Prev
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 18
- 19
- 21
- Next ›
- Last »