Allahabad Court January 2006 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.
Faujdar Son of Nagar Vs. Deputy Director of Consolidation and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-06-2006
Reported in: 2006(3)AWC2243
1. Faced with conflicting opinion expressed by different 'benches' of co-ordinate strength (All Single Judges), Learned Single Judge referred the matter for consideration by a larger bench and the Hon'ble Chief Justice as contemplated under Rules of Court 1952 (as amended upto date) has nominated this Bench to resolve the conflict and set at rest the legal position. Consequently the matter has come up for before this Bench for adjudication.2. Can a party to the Proceedings under U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) directly invoke 'Revisional' jurisdiction of DDC Under Section 48 of the Act by passing statutory remedy of Appeal under Section 12 of the Act.3. The pith and substance of the issue in 'controversy' can be summarized, for ready reference as follows:-4. Following two questions have been framed and referred by Learned Single Judge for decision:-A. Whether the Deputy Director of Consolidation can exercise revisional jurisdiction under Se...
Anshuman Singh Bhadoria Son of Late Sri Lakhanpal Singh Bhadoria Vs. D ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-06-2006
Reported in: 2006(3)AWC2457
D.P. Singh, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.2. This petition is directed against an order dated 3rd September, 2002 by which the claim of the petitioner for compassionate appointment has been rejected.3. Pandit Sunder Lal Memorial Post Graduate College, Kannauj, is affiliated to Dr. B.R. Ambedkar University, Agra, wherein Lakhan Pal Singh Bhadoria father of the petitioner, was working as clerk and expired in harness on 25.3.2002. The petitioner claimed compassionate appointment in pursuance of a Government Order dated 21.11.1995 by which the rules of compassionate appointment have been made applicable to aided non-governmental Degree Colleges. The claim of the petitioner has been rejected by the impugned order as admittedly his mother Smt. Indira Bhadoria is working as an Assistant teacher in Gomti Devi Girls Inter College, Kannauj.4. Petitioner has firstly urged that in the scheme there is no such bar placed and, therefore, the impugned order cannot be sustained.5. The rule...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Sahara India Mutual Benefit Co. Ltd.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-06-2006
Reported in: [2006]287ITR8(All)
1. Heard learned Counsel for the appellant Sri Pradeep Agarwal and Sri P. J. Pardiwalla, learned Counsel for the respondents.2. This appeal under Section 260A of Income-tax Act, 1961 has been filed by the Revenue challenging the order passed by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) as well as by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, by means of which the penalty imposed under the Interest-tax Act by the assessing authority has been set aside.3. The admitted facts as emerged from the record and stated by learned Counsel for the parties are that the assessee-financial company was required to file a return up to December 31, 1995. Since the return was not furnished a notice under Section 10(a) of the Act was issued to the assessee on April 15, 1996, requiring it to furnish a return of chargeable interest within 30 days. But finding failure on the part of the assessee which did not comply with the aforesaid direction, a second notice was issued on September 24, 1996. The assessee-company f...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Sahara India Finance Corporation Ltd.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-06-2006
Reported in: [2006]287ITR318(All)
1. Heard the learned Counsel for the appellant, Sri Pradeep Agarwal and Sri P.J. Pardiwalla, learned Counsel for the respondent.This appeal under Section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 has been filed by the Revenue challenging the order passed by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) as well as the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, by means of which the order passed by the assessing authority which has assessed the amount of total chargeable interest at Rs. 68,10,23,228 was under Section 8(1) of the Interest-tax Act and directed for initiating penalty proceedings under Section 13 of the Interest-tax Act, has been set aside. This amount of total chargeable amount allegedly was much in excess of the total chargeable income furnished by the assessee-company in its return, namely, Rs. 2,28,11,919.2. Against the assessment so made the assessee-company had gone in appeal and the appellate authority not agreeing with the assessing authority deleted the additions and confirmed the return fur...
D.K. Tiwari Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-05-2006
Reported in: (2006)(3)SLJ353CAT
1. Judicial interference is limited to testing whether the administrative action has been fair and free from the taint of unreasonableness and has substantially complied with the norms of procedure set for it by rules of public administration.Fertilizer Corporation Kamgar Union v. Union of India .2. The case of the applicants has to be tested on the touchstone of the above dictum of the Apex Court. (i) To issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari for quashing the order dated 20.1.2004 duly communicated vide letter dated 5.2.2004 (Annexure A-1 to the petition) whereby the request for permanent absorption on new Railway zone i.e. North Central Railway has been rejected by the Board due to late submission of the option. (ii) To issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent No. 1 Secretary, Ministry of Railways, Railway Board to consider the option of the applicant for North Central Railway against the vacancy and interpolate the na...
Engineering Kamgar Union Mill Committee Modi Steels Through Its Presid ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-05-2006
Reported in: [2006(108)FLR824]
Bharati Sapru, J.1. The present writ petition has been filed against an order of the Industrial Tribunal dated 30.8.1996 passed in adjudication case No. 94 of 1994.2. The facts of the case are that the workmen of the petitioner Union went on an illegal strike on 23.1.1993 without due compliance of Section 6 S (2) of U.P. Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as the Act).3. On the next date i.e. 24.1.1993 a lock out was declared by the employer. Aggrieved, the workmen Union sought a reference. A reference was made under Section 4K of the Act in terms as given below:KYA SEVAUPKLP DWARA DINAK 24.1.93 SE 14.10.93 TAK KE GAI TALABANDI UCHIT ATHWA VAIDHANIK HAI YADI HA/NAHI TO SAMBANDHIT SHRAMIK TATHA HITLAB PANE KA ADHIKARI HAI, TATHA ANYA KIS KIN VIVRAN SAHIT4. Learned Industrial Tribunal while dealing with reference has come to the conclusion that reference itself was bad in law because it was not a complete reference and it was completely silent on the issue of strike wh...
Mangesh Kumar S/O Nemi Chand (In Jail) Vs. State of U.P. and Munna Lal ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-05-2006
Reported in: 2006CriLJ1436; II(2006)DMC175
Amar Saran, J.1. This application has been filed by the applicant Mangesh Kumar for setting aside the order dated 30.8.2005 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge-VI/Special Judge (EC Act), Agra in S.T. No. 523 of 2003 (State v. Sanjay and Ors.) under Sections 498A/304B IPC and for directing the trial court to again summon P.W. 1, Munna Lal and permit the applicant to cross examine him.2. P.W. 1, Munna Lal was the informant in the aforesaid case in which the allegations were that the applicant, who was the husband of the deceased Smt. Madhu, and other accused including the lather and mother of the applicant had sprinkled kerosene oil and set her on fire and thereafter the report was registered on 29.5.2003 at about 12.30 P.M. After committal of the case, the informant was examined as P.W. 1 and eight other witness, which included the uncle of the deceased, mother of the deceased and the formal witnesses, such as Doctor, Station Officer, Circle Officer etc. have also been examined. The...
The Aligarh Muslim University Through Its Vice-chancellor Vs. Malay Sh ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-05-2006
Reported in: 2006(1)AWC992
Ajoy Nath Ray, C.J.1. The short basic issue in all these appeals is whether the Aligarh Muslim University is a minority Institution. The point arises because suddenly some eighty five years after incorporation, they chose for the first time to reserve a Muslim quota, by way of a 50% reservation of post-graduate course seats meant for qualified MBBS doctors. The judgment under appeal before us has been delivered by an Hon'ble Single Judge of our Court on the 4th of October, 2005. Both sides, to be more accurate, all parties, felt aggrieved, and came up in appeal. The appeals will all be disposed of by this common order.2. On the one side, who spoke first were, the Aligarh Muslim University, represented by Mr. S.S. Ray, leading Dr. Dhawan, the Union of India and the learned Attorney General on whose behalf Mr. Gopal Subramaniam addressed us, two individuals one of whom is a member of the Court of the University, which is its administrative body, the Minority Commission whose case was put...
Smt. Ashok Lata Mittal W/O Late Mukand Swarup Mittal, Vs. District Can ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-05-2006
Reported in: 2006(3)AWC2344
ORDERAnjani Kumar, J.1. This writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the landlords with the following prayers:-i. to issue a writ order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the order dated 10.1.2005 (Annexure-10) passed by R.C. & E.O. And order dated 27.10.2005 (Annexure-14) passed by appellate court so far as it relates to return of the file of trial court ad quash the proceeding of Misc. Case No. 4 of 2005 State of U.P. and Ors. v. Smt. Sarita Goel pending before Rent Control and Eviction Officer Muzaffarnagar;ii. to issue any other writ order or direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case; andiii. award costs of the petition to the petitioners.2. It appears that landlord filed an application before the Rent Control and Eviction Officer under Section 21(1)(8) of U.P. Act No. 13 of 1972 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) for enhancing the rent which is allowed by the Rent Control & Ev...
Holy Cross School Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh Through Principal Secreta ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-05-2006
Reported in: 2006(3)AWC2462
A.K. Yog and Prakash Krishna, JJ.1. Petitioner before us, Holy Cross School has approached this Court by filing present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for following reliefs:(i) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of CERTIORARI quashing the impugned order/notice dated 3.9.2001 passed by respondent No. 3 (Ann. 2 to the writ petition);(ii) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of MANDAMUS, commanding the respondents not to detain the bus of the petitioner till the disposal of the writ petition;(iii) issue a writ, order or direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper under the facts and circumstances of the case;(ii) and to award the cost of the petition in favour of the petitioner.2. The aforementioned reliefs have been claimed on the basis of the pleadings in the petition to the effect that the petitioner is an Educational School which is known as Holy Cross School which is being owned by a Society registered under t...
- ‹ Prev
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 12
- 13
- Next ›
- Last »