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.
Vijay Kumar Yadav Son of Late Hari Nath Yadav Vs. State of U.P. Throug ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-25-2005
Reported in: 2006(1)AWC717; [2005(107)FLR120]
Tarun Agarwala, J.1. The petitioner's father Hari Nath Yadav was given an adhoc appointment as a Tube-well Operator in the year 1981. By an order dated 18,12.1982, he was appointed as a part time Tube-well Operator on a temporary post and, on this basis, he continued to work till he died in harness on 25.8.2000. In the year 1996, 'U.P. Irrigation Department Regularisation of Part Time Tube -Well Operator, on the post of Tube Well Operator Rules, 1996' [hereinafter referred to as the 1996 Rules] were formulated, which stipulated, that the services of a part time tube-well operator, appointed before 1.10.1986 and continuing in service, would be regularised. Since, the petitioner's father was working since 1981, on a temporary post and was working continuously, the respondent No. l, by an order dated 3.5.1997, regularised the services of Sri Hari Nath Yadav, but for reasons best known to the respondents, the said order was withdrawn by an order dated 10.6.1997 and the petitioner's father ...
Allahabad College of Engineering and Management Through Its Co-ordinat ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-25-2005
Reported in: 2005(4)ESC2298
Dilip Gupta, J.1. An important issue concerning most of the Universities established under the U.P. State Universities Act, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') has come up for consideration in this petition. The controversy that needs to be decided is whether such Universities can establish Study Centres to start the degree/diploma/certificate courses through the Distance Learning .. Programme under the provisions of the Act and the Statutes of the University as they presently exist.2. This writ petition has been filed for quashing the order dated 3rd June, 2005 passed by the learned Chancellor of the University by which he has directed the Universities to immediately stop the running of all the courses at the Study Centre through distance learning. A further direction has been sought to restrain the respondents from interfering in any manner with the teaching through the system of distance learning and other consequential reliefs have also been sought. The petitioner No. 1 is ...
Commr. of C. Ex. Vs. Vijay Silk House
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-25-2005
Reported in: 2009[15]STR482
R.K. Agrawal, J.1. This appeal, filed under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944 is against the order dated 30th November, 2004 : 2005 (181) E.L.T. 220 (Tri. - Del.) passed by the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi dismissing the appeal filed by the Commissioner of the Central Excise, Allahabad.We have heard Shri A.K. Rai, learned Standing Counsel for the appellant and have perused the impugned order of the Tribunal.2. It appears that a demand of interest has been raised by the Revenue on the ground that as per the provisions of Section 47 of the Customs Act, the duty was to be paid within two days excluding holidays on which the bill of entry was returned to the respondent for payment. The demand of interest has been raised on the ground that the TR-6 challan showing the payment of duty in respect of the bill of entry Nos. 0002/01 and 0003/-1 both dated 1-2-2001 was made after delay of five days and seven days whereas in respect of bill entry No. 004/01...
Shiv Devi Wife of Sri Rama Shanker Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh Through ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-23-2005
Reported in: 2005(4)AWC3186
Arun Tandon, J.1. Heard Sri M.P. Srivastava, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Ashok Srivastava, learned counsel for the respondent No. 3 and learned Standing counsel on behalf of respondent Nos. 1 and 2.2. Respondents are granted three weeks time to file counter affidavit. Rejoinder affidavit may be filed within a week thereafter.3. List on 31st August, 2005.4. The financial and administrative of the elected Pradhan, namely, Shiv Devi (petitioner) were ceased under order of the District Magistrate, Sonbhadra dated 20th November, 2002. Feeling aggrieved by the aforesaid order of the District Magistrate the petitioner filed Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 5444 of 2002. In the said writ petition the Court did not grant any interim order to the petitioner, the writ petition is still pending. Subsequently the District Panchayat Raj Adhikari, Sonbhadra passed orders dated 31st March, 2003 and dated 5th April, 2003, whereby the Pradhan as well as two other persons namely, District Pancha...
United India Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Sudha Devi and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-23-2005
Reported in: I(2007)ACC768
ORDER1. These four appeals challenge the similar award on identical questions with respect to an accident in which different claims were lodged. Two appeals, namely, F.A.F.O. No. 290 of 2000 and F.A.F.O. No. 272 of 2001, have been filed by United India Insurance Company Ltd., whereas the remaining two appeals bearing Nos. 322 of 2000 and 321 of 2000 have been filed by the Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. The awards are dated 25.3.2000.2. We have heard Mr. Anil Srivastava, Advocate in the appeals filed by the Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. and Mr. Ravindra Pratap Singh for the claimant-respondents.3. The only ground attacking the award is that the driver of the offending vehicle Truck No. URS 9675 was not having a valid driving licence on the date of accident and, therefore, the liability could not have been fastened upon the insurer of the said truck, namely, the appellant. Further submission is that the Tribunal has simply presumed the valid driving licence of the driver of the said vehicle t...
Deepak Kumar Shukla Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-22-2005
Reported in: 2005(3)AWC2748
ORDERS.N. Srivastava, J.1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.2. Learned counsel for the petitioner urged that petitioner has already deposited the entire additional stamp duty of Rs. 14,690 plus Registration Charges of Rs. 2,940. He further urged that he has also deposited some amount towards penalty. Learned counsel for petitioner further urged the additional stamp duty as well as penalty imposed by authorities below is unsustainable in law. In alternative, he prayed that as petitioner has already deposited the entire additional stamp duty, same may be accepted and document may be registered.3. Learned standing counsel in reply urged that impugned order does not suffer from any error of law apparent on the face of record.4. Considering the material on record and having heard learned counsel for the parties. I am of the view that order imposing additional stamp duty of Rs. 14,690 and registration charges of Rs. 2,940 was rightly passed against the petitioner. There is no error of l...
Prem Shanker Srivastava and ors. Vs. Ivth A.D.J. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-22-2005
Reported in: 2005(4)AWC3176
Vikram Nath, J.1. This petition has been filed by the tenant for quashing the judgment and order dated 19.9.1985, passed in Civil Revision No. 245 of 1982 whereby the respondent No. 1 allowed the revision filed by the respondents 2 to 4 and decreed the suit for recovery of arrears of rent and ejectment.2. The dispute relates to the portion of residential house situate in Mohalla Sumer Sagar, Gorakhpur City, Gorakhpur, of which the respondent before this Court is the landlord and the petitioner is the tenant. The petitioner having committed default in payment of rent the respondent after giving notice of demand and ejectment filed suit for recovery of arrears of rent and ejectment which was registered as J.S.C.C. Suit No. 77 of 1981 claiming rent at the rate of Rs. 20 per month. The tenant petitioner contested the suit and alleged in the written statement that the rate of rent was only Rs. 10.50p. and that they had tendered the rent by money order after receipt of notice and therefore, ...
Hamdard (Wakf) Laboratories Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-22-2005
Reported in: 2005(188)ELT476(All)
ORDER1. By means of the present writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, petitioner M/s. Hamdard (Wakf) Laboratories, Ghaziabad seeks the following relief :'(i) to issue a writ of mandamus, or other writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus, to respondent No. 3 to pay interest, to the petitioner, on the amount of Rs. 3,74,00,000/- sanctioned to it, with effect from 25-11-1999, at such rate as it deems fit and proper in the interests of justice,(ii) to grant costs of this Writ Petition to the petitioner herein, and (iii) to pass such other order or orders as may be deemed fit and proper in the interest of justice.'2. Briefly stated the facts giving rise to the present writ petition are as follows:The petitioner is a Wakf and is engaged in the business of manufacture and sale of various items including Rooh Afza which is non-sweetened alcoholic beverage and has been classified by it under the sub-heading 2201.90 of the Schedule to the Central Excise Ta...
Wasi Ahmad Vs. Iind A.D.J. and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-22-2005
Reported in: 2005(4)AWC3738
Vikram Nath, J.1. This petition has been filed by the landlord for quashing the order dated 26.8.86 passed by IInd Additional District Judge, Gorakhpur in Misc. Appeal No. 98 of 1984 whereby the appeal filed by the tenant (respondent 2) was partly allowed to the extent that after demolition the landlord shall make construction of a shop so as to allow the tenant to have right of re-entry under Section 24 (1) of U. P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 (hereinafter referred to as the Act).2. The shop in dispute is in the tenancy of Satya Narain respondent No. 2 and the petitioner is the landlord and owner of the same. The petitioner filed an application under Section 21(1)(b) of the Act for release of the shop in dispute on the ground that the construction had become very old and were dilapidated and therefore, required demolition and new construction. The application was registered as P. A. Case No. 4 of 1983, Wasi Ahmad v. Satya Narain. The tenant con...
Smt. Shahjahan Begum and anr. Vs. Xith A.D.J. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-22-2005
Reported in: 2005(4)AWC3859M
D.P. Singh, J.1. List has been revised but none appears for the respondents.2. Heard Sri Prakash Gupta, learned Counsel for the petitioners.3. This writ petition is directed against a revisional order dated 28.10.1996 by which an application under Order VII, Rule 11, C.P.C. filed by the defendant-respondents that the suit was barred by Section 32 of the Arbitration Act has been allowed.4. Dr. Mohd. Afzal was the owner of disputed properties. On his death differences between his two wives arose with regard to the properties left behind by him. It appears that the dispute with regard to the shares amongst the wives and other heirs was settled by the intervention of their well wishers which was reduced in writing and signed by the parties. It is alleged that they took respective possession of their shares but as the respondents were raising some dispute, the plaintiff-petitioners filed a Suit No. 30 of 1980 for declaration of her title. The defendant respondents filed their written statem...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »