Allahabad Court July 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.
Bhagwan Deen Verma, Son of Sri Mullu Vs. State of U.P. Through Princip ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-06-2005
Reported in: 2005(4)AWC3281; 2005(3)ESC2106
Arun Tandon, J.1. Heard P.N. Saxena Senior Advocate, assisted by Sri Amit Saxena Advocate on behalf of the petitioner, Standing Counsel on behalf of respondent nos. 1 to 3 and Sri A.N. Verma Advocate on behalf of respondent no. 4. Parties agree that the writ petition may be finally decided at this stage itself. 2. Petitioner Bhagwan Deen Verma is the elected Pradhan of Gram Panchayat Artara, Block Maudaha, District Hamirpur. The District Magistrate vide order dated 31st March, 2004 ceased the financial and administrative powers of the Pradhan under Section 95(1)(g) proviso of the Panchayat Raj Act. Feeling aggrieved by the said order, petitioner had filed Writ Petition No. 14474 of 2004. The writ petition so filed was disposed of vide judgment and order dated 1,3.2005 with a direction that the District Magistrate may pass fresh reasoned order after considering the reply of the petitioner.3. It appears that during this period Project Director. District Rural Development Authority was ap...
St. Mary's School thru It's Manager and Diocese of Varanasi Education ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-06-2005
Reported in: AIR2005All353; 2005(4)AWC3311
Rajes Kumar, J.1. All the petitioners claimed to be the educational institution imparting education at different levels and owns vehicles for the transportation of their students from their residence to the Schools. The claim of the petitioners are that they are neither liable for additional tax under Section 6 of the Act nor surcharge under Section 6 (3) of the U.P. Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, 1997 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). In the counter affidavit, it has been accepted by the respondents that in view of the notification issues under Rule 29 (v), additional tax under Section 6 (i) of the Act is not chargeable from the vehicles owned by the recognized institution and, therefore, the petitioners are not liable for additional tax and are only liable to pay surcharge under Section 6 (3) read with Section 8 of the Act.2. Heard Sri Aroop Banerjee and Sri Manish Goyal, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri S.P. Kesharwani, learned Standing Counsel for the respondents.3. ...
Smt. Srikanti Nishad Wife of Sri Paras Nath Vs. State of U.P. Through ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-06-2005
Reported in: AIR2005All356; 2005(4)AWC3863C
B.S. Chauhan, J.1. This writ petition has been filed for quashing the order dated 8th November, 2004 passed by the District Magistrate, Deoria rejecting the representation filed by the petitioner for grant of mining lease and for a direction upon the respondent; to grant the mining lease to the petitioner on the basis of the Government Order dated 25th May, 1995.2. The facts and circumstances, giving rise to this case are that the petitioner discovered a mining area measuring 7.50 acres in Mahal Nadi of Chhoti Gandak situate in Majhauliraj, Tahsil Salempur, District Deoria and on the basis of the Government Order dated 25th May, 1995, submitted an application on 4th June, 1996 for grant of mining lease in her fevour. However, instead of granting mining lease to the petitioner, the District Magistrate, Deoria passed an order granting the mining lease in favour of one Shri Mundrika Prasad Nishad for a period of three years. This order was challenged by the petitioner in Writ Petition No....
Shyam Sunder Agrawal Vs. Smt. Gyanwati Devi and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-06-2005
Reported in: 2005(4)AWC3858K
ORDERAnjani Kumar, J.1. By means of present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner, who is said to be in occupation of the accommodation in dispute, has challenged the order passed by the Rent Control and Eviction Officer, Aligarh, whereby a vacancy has been declared in the accommodation in dispute.2. Heard learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the parties.3. In view of the decision of Apex Court in Achal Misra v. Rama Shanker Singh and Ors., 2005 (2) AWC 1585 (SC) : JT 2005 (4) SC 428, paragraph 13 relied upon by learned Counsel for the contesting respondents is reproduced below :13. It is thus clear that an order notifying a vacancy which leads to the final order of allotment can be challenged in a proceeding taken to challenge the final order, as being an order which is a preliminary step in the process of decision making and in passing the final order. Hence, in a revision against the final order of allotment which is provided for by the Act, ...
Commissioner of Wealth-tax Vs. Nidhipati Singhania
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-06-2005
Reported in: (2006)203CTR(All)569; [2006]281ITR49(All)
1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Allahabad, has referred the following question of law under Section 27(1) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957, hereinafter referred to as 'the Act', for opinion to this Court :Whether, in law and on facts of the case the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in excluding the amount deposited under C.D.S. from the net wealth of the assessee 2. The present reference relates to the assessment year 1978-79.3. Briefly stated the facts giving rise to the present reference are as follows :4. The respondent-assessee is an individual. He has been assessed to wealth-tax for the assessment year in question. He had filed his return of wealth declaring the net wealth at Rs. 19,07,100. During the course of the assessment proceeding the only point in dispute raised before the assessing authority was regarding valuation of jewellery. The assessing authority has estimated the value of jewellery at Rs. 2,50,000 as was done by him in the previous assessment year 1977-7...
Chaudhary Chandan Singh Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-05-2005
Reported in: AIR2005All280; 2005(4)AWC3862H; 2005(4)ESC2423
ORDER1. This writ petition has been filed for quashing the order dated 6th April, 2005 which has been passed by the Regional Director, Samajik Vaniki Van Prabhag, Fatehpur (hereinafter referred to as the 'Regional Director') rejecting the application filed by the petitioner for grant of Saw Mill licence. The said order was passed pursuant to the directions issued by this Court on 21st January, 2005 in Writ Petition No. 27395 of 2004.2. The facts stated in the petition reveal that earlier the Saw Mill belonged to Sri Ram Agarwal who had been granted a licence to run saw mill. The saw mill was sold to one Sri Narendra Kumar Singh on 2nd February, 1989 and thereafter it was sold by Sri Narendra Kumar Singh to the petitioner for a consideration of Rs. 25,000/-. The petitioner then submitted an application dated 2nd April, 1989 to the Range Officer for transfer of the licence in his favour and for permission to deposit the renewal licence fee. It appears on the basis of the aforesaid applic...
Chaman Lal JaIn Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-05-2005
Reported in: 2005(3)ESC2040
N.K. Mehrotra, J.1. By means of this writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the dismissal order dated 22.9.2001 as contained in Annexure 1 to the writ petition.2. The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner has not been afforded full opportunity of hearing. The punishment order reveals that the entire inquiry proceedings have been concluded in utter disregard of Articles 14 and 311 of the Constitution of India as well as the opposite parties have mechanically concluded the entire proceedings without permitting the petitioner to cross-examine the witness and without providing the necessary documents. It is also submitted that while concluding the inquiry proceedings, the inquiry officer has not fixed the date, time and place of the inquiry and the petitioner was not duly associated with the same as such the entire inquiry proceedings vitiate. The petitioner had applied for certain copies of the documents and for permission to take assistance of some advocate/colleague Govern...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Himalaya Cutlery Works
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-05-2005
Reported in: (2006)201CTR(All)167; [2006]287ITR485(All)
R.K. Agrawal and Rajes Kumar, JJ.1. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Allahabad has referred the following question 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 the Tribunal was justified in law in holding that incentives received by the assesseee are part of the export turnover and therefore, entitled to relief Under Section 80HHC despite the foreign exchange realizations being nil.?'2. Briefly stated the facts giving (sic) to the present Reference are as follows:-The present Reference relates to the Assessment Years 1988-89 the previous years relevant to the assessment year in question is the calendar year. The I.T.O. in the course of the assessment proceedings rejected the claim for deduction made by the assessee Under Section 80 HHC primarily on the ground that the same had been claimed on the amounts received as duty draw back, cash incentive and transfer of import licence there being no export...
Dev Raj Singh Son of Shri Sheo Raj Singh Vs. Fatehpur District Co-oper ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-05-2005
Reported in: [2006(111)FLR449]
Shishir Kumar, J.1. As the similar questions of law and facts are involved in the aforesaid writ petitions, therefore, they are being decided together.2. By means of the present writ petition (27256 of 1996) the petitioner has approached this Court for issuing a writ of mandamus directing the respondents Bank to pay to the petitioner's gratuity calculated at the rate of one month wages (inclusive of dearness allowance) per year of the service and also interest at the rate of 18% on the ground of delay in the payment of the total money due to the petitioner.3. The controversy involved in the present writ petition is that whether payment of gratuity on the retirement of the petitioner was payable at the rate of one month wages per year service or it was payable at the rate of 15 days wages per year of service as provided in the Payments of Gratuity Act, 1972 It may be stated that the State Government in exercise of its powers under Section 4-K of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (herein...
District Cooperative Federation Ltd. Through Its Secretary T.N. Singh ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-04-2005
Reported in: AIR2005All286; 2005(4)AWC3219
Yatindra Singh , J.1. The main question involved in this writ petition is, whether an auction sale can be set aside for the reason that estimated value of the auctioned property was not mentioned in the sale proclamation.THE FACTS2. District Cooperative Federation Ltd (the petitioner) is a central cooperative society registered under the UP Cooperative Societies Act. The petitioner operates a cold storage and has property situate at Arazi no. 182 Cantonment, Varanasi. The cold storage was not successful and there were arrears. Two portions (area 17200 Sq feet and 13200 sq: feet total 30400 sq feet) of open land in Arazi no. 182 of the petitioner were attached on 6th June 2003 for payment of labour dues amounting to Rs, 5,04,177.80.3. A sale proclamation in respect of attached land was issued on 6.11.2003 fixing 15.12.2003 for the auction but no auction was held on that date. In the meantime, the Collector received intimation of some more dues (labour as well as electricity) to be recov...
- ‹ Prev
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 14
- 15
- Next ›
- Last »