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. Anisun Nisa Azmi Wife of Shri Abdul Ahad Azmi Vs. District Inspec ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-21-2005
Reported in: 2005(2)ESC1470
Vineet Saran, J.1. By an order dated 15.9.2003 passed by Hon'ble the then Chief Justice, all these three petitioners have been assigned to this Bench for hearing. Counter and rejoinder affidavits have been exchanged and with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties, these petitions are being disposed of at the stage of admission itself Since the three petitions are co-related and involve the same controversy, they all have been heard together and are being disposed of by a common judgment.2. The respondent-institution, namely, Jawwad Ali Shah Imam Bara Girls Post Graduate College, Gorakhpur is a recognized institution. It was brought under the grant-in-aid list of the State Government with effect from 1.10.1990. The dispute in these writ petitions relates to the appointment of Head Clerk in the institution. Km. Shahnaz Fatma (petitioner in writ petition No. 8661 of 2003) was initially appointed on 1.9.1981 as the first Clerk of the institution. On 20.7.1988, an advertisement ...
Gyan Pratap Singh S/O Bachchraj Singh Vs. the State of Uttar Pradesh a ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-21-2005
Reported in: 2005(2)AWC1399; 2005(2)ESC1199
1. This appeal is taken up and disposed of.2. It is from an order of an Hon'ble Single Judge dated 10.2.2005 wherein his Lordship has quashed the selection and appointment of one Gyan Pratap Singh, who was respondent no. 5 in the Court below. The only reason for quashing is his relationship to the Village Pradhan. It is an admitted case that the appellant at the material time was the husband's brother's son, i.e. the brother-in-law's son of the Village Pradhan, who was a lady.3. The only provision of law which is material for our consideration, is the explanation of Sub-rule (5) of Rule 165 of the U.P. Panchayat Raj Rules, 1947. sab-rule (4) prohibits the appointment of a Panchayat member's 'Relation' to any post ((SIC) servants (SIC)). 4. The said explanation is set out below:-'Explanation-- The word 'relation' in the proviso means father, grand-father, father-in-law, maternal or paternal uncle, son, grandson, son-in-law, brother, nephew, first cousin, brother-in-law, sister's husband...
Dr. Pradeep Kumar S/O Shri Radha Krishna Katiyar Vs. Regional Ayurvedi ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-21-2005
Reported in: 2005(2)ESC1197; [2005(105)FLR777]; (2005)2UPLBEC1774
B.S. Chauhan, J.1. This writ petition has been filed for restraining the respondents from excluding the petitioner from consideration for the post in issue in view of the advertisement which provides for preference to the candidates who had acquired post-graduate degree from the Universities of the State of U.P. 2. Petitioner apprehends that in view of the aforesaid condition No. 1 incorporated in the advertisement, his candidature itself may not be considered. Hence, the present petition.3. Shri C.K. Rai, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents has submitted that the apprehension of the petitioner is totally misconceived for the reason that 'preference' does not mean rejection of the candidature of any other person; it comes into play only if other qualities of candidates are equal. Thus, the petition is liable to be dismissed.4. We have considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and persused the record.5. In Sher Singh v. Union of India, AIR 198...
Bank of Baroda Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-21-2005
Reported in: 2005(1)ARC800
1. The grievance sought to be raised in the present petition is that the petitioner Bank is not being permitted by the respondent Landlords to collect the documents from the premises which had been leased to it since the landlords have locked the premises.2. We have heard learned Counsel for the petitioner Shri Ashok Trivedi; learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondent Nos. 1 to 5 and Shri Umesh Vats for respondent Nos. 6 and 7.3. From the records it transpires that the petitioner Bank executed a lease agreement with respondent Nos. 6 and 7 for opening its branch in the First Floor of House No. 106, Mohalla Ruhatta, Jaunpur City. Pursuant to the aforesaid agreement, the petitioner Bank too possession of the property on a monthly rent of Rs. 6000/- and started its business. However, in the year 2002, the Government of India took a decision to merge the petitioner Bank with Bank of Baroda and a notification in this regard was issued on 19th June, 2002. The petitioner Bank, therefor...
Amod Prakash Gupta Son of Sri Vinai Prakash Gupta Vs. Senior Divisiona ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-21-2005
Reported in: 2005(4)AWC3249
Shishir Kumar, J.1. The amendment application has been filed by the petitioner for adding following grounds and the reliefs-(B) After ground(c) the following be added as grounds (d) to (k) namely-(d) Because there was no material to show, nor was the petitioner responsible for alleged embezzlement.(e) Because the concerned peon and Section Head are responsible for alleged embezzlement.(f) Because the respondents have failed to apply their mind in passing the impugned orders.(g) Because the appellate authority failed to apply its mind and had passed non-speaking discriminatory order.(h) Because the impugned order are against the facts and circumstances of the case and against the law.(i) Because the National Industrial Tribunal failed to consider the violation of Section 33(2)(b) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. (j) Because the respondents are not illegally releasing the amount of provident fund and gratuity to the petitioner.(k) Because the respondents have wrongly ignored the fin...
Supdt. Engineer, U.P.S.E.B. and the Additional Chief Engineer, U.P. St ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-18-2005
Reported in: 2005(2)ESC1212; [2005(105)FLR619]
Rakesh Tiwari, J.1. This writ petition is directed against the impugned award dated 28.2.1984, passed by Labour Court IV, Kanpur in Adjudication Case No. 90 of 1982. By the impugned award, the Labour court has directed the Superintending Engineer, Electricity Transmission Circle, U.P. State Electricity Board, Kanpur and the Additional Chief Engineer, U.P. State Electricity Board, Allahabad to give the disgnation of Fitter to Sri Bairagi Prasad, -workman and corresponding wages of the post of Fitter from 1.7.1967 less wages already paid to him, within a month of the award becoming enforceable.2. The award was enforced by publication on the Notice Board on 28.4.1984 and became enforceable on 27.5.84 after expiry of 30 days, as provided under Section 6-A of the U.P. Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. At the time of admission, the following interim order was passed :-'Hon. H.N. Seth, J Issue notice.I direct that until further orders, the respondents will not take steps to implement the award d...
U.P. Power Corporation Limited Through Its Chairman/Managing Director ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-18-2005
Reported in: 2005(2)ESC1246; [2005(105)FLR900]; (2005)2UPLBEC1779
Ajoy Nath Ray, C.J. and Ashok Bhushan, J.1. This is an appeal from an order of Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sabhajeet Yadav passed on 10.11.2004 allowing the respondent's writ petition and quashing the office order dated 31.12.2003 whereby the respondent was sought to be retired with retrospective effect from 31.10.2001.2. His Lordship has ordered that the respondent should be treated as in service up to 30.9.2004 and the effect of this order is that the period of about nine months at the end of this period, when the respondent was not allowed to work, would not go as salariless for the respondent and the respondent would be entitled to receive salary and all other benefits for this period also.3. Since it is an age determination matter, in a writ application, the basic facts need to be clearly looked into and understood. The writ petitioner joined service on 22.10.1961 as a Cleaner. For about 16 years he worked without any material event occurring.4. The service book was written up for the fir...
Pramod Kumar Gupta Son of R.C. Gupta Vs. Central Government Industrial ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-18-2005
Reported in: 2005(2)ESC1152; [2005(105)FLR758]; (2005)IIILLJ291All
V.C. Misra, J. 1. Sri Manu Khare, learned counsel on behalf of the petitioner, learned standing counsel on behalf of respondent No. 1 and Sri Ashok Trivedi, learned counsel on behalf of the respondents No. 1 & 2-Bank are present.2. By means of this present writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the award dated 23.4,2001 passed by the Labour Court, Kanpur- respondent No. 1 arising out of the Industrial Dispute No. 15 of 1999 seeking reinstatement in service on the post held by him with all consequential benefits of continuity of service along with arrears of salary and promotion.3. The facts of the case in brief are that the petitioner was appointed as a probationary clerk with the respondent-Bank in the year 1980 and thereafter he was confirmed in the service during the year 1981. The petitioner was posted at Jeoni Mandi Agra Branch of the Bank. The petitioner remained absent from duty without leave since 12.11.1991. He was asked vide notice dated 13.5.1992 by the respondent-Bank...
Umesh Chandra Pandey Son of Sri Kuldeep Pandey Vs. State of U.P. Throu ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-18-2005
Reported in: 2005(2)ESC1444
Tarun Agarwala, J.1. An advertisement appeared in the newspaper inviting applications from the public for appointment to the post of a Sub Inspector (Civil police) for the session 1987-88. The petitioner applied and qualified for the interview in which he was also declared successful. However, the petitioner was prevented from being sent for training, at the Police training College, Moradabad whereas other persons of his batch were sent for training and thereafter were posted at various police stations in he State of U.P. Since the petitioner was discriminated he and other Similarly situated persons filed Writ Petition No. 18039 of 3989 before his Hon'ble Court. This petition was allowed by a judgment dated 15.3.1991. This Court held that the remaining 39 vacancies for the session 1987-88 shall be filled up from the remaining candidates of the Select List from Sl. No. 414 onwards. The operative portion of the judgment is quoted herein:-'All these writ petitions are therefore disposed o...
FakharuddIn Son of Abdul Mazid Vs. Nagar Palika Parishad Through Its E ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-18-2005
Reported in: 2005(3)AWC2966; 2005(2)ESC1204; [2005(105)FLR751]
Vineet Saran, J.1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Sri Prem Chandra, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondents. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner does not wish to file any rejoinder affidavit. With consent of the learned counsel for the parties this writ petition is being disposed of at this stage.2. The petitioner was in the service of respondent-Nagar Palika Parishad Sikandrabad, District Bulandshahr. He was initially appointed on a class IV post on 8.2.1966 and was thereafter confirmed in service on 1.9.1970. Admittedly in the service book of the petitioner maintained by the respondent-Nagar Palika Parishad his date of birth has been entered as 21.1.1948 and it has also been indicated that the age of superannuation of the petitioner would 21.1.2008. On 29.11.2004 the petitioner had received an order passed by Respondent No. 3 (who, according to the petitioner...
- ‹ Prev
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- Next ›
- Last »