Allahabad Court February 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.
Mool Chand Vs. State of U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-10-2006
Reported in: 2006CriLJ2594
ORDERR.K. Rastogi, J.1. This is a revision against the judgment and order dated 18-9-1986 passed by Sri N.S. Shamsheri then Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge, Meerut in Criminal Appeal No. 140 of 1985, Mool Chand v. State of U.P. and Anr.2. The facts relevant for disposal of this revision are that on 4-10-81 Mr. O.P. Agarwal then Food Inspector, Meerut took a sample of curd from the appellant who was selling it claiming to have been made from buffalo milk, the sample was sent to the Public Analyst who reported that the sample was deficient in non-fatty solids by 9%. Then a complaint was filed against him by the Food Inspector after obtaining sanction from the Chief Medical Officer, Meerut. A copy of the report of Public Analyst was sent to the accused from the officer of the C.M.O. by registered post. However, no steps were taken by the accused for re-examination of the sample.3. The Accused pleaded not guilty. He was charged under Section 7/16(1)(a)(i) of the Prevention of Food ...
Sarvjeet Singh Vs. Baba Lal Kranti Das and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-09-2006
Reported in: 2006(2)AWC1792
Poonam Srivastava, J.1. Heard Sri H. M. Srivastava, learned Counsel for the appellant and Sri Shahroze Khan, learned Counsel appearing for the caveator/respondent No. 1.2. This is defendant's second appeal against the judgment and decree dated 21.3.2002 passed by the Civil Judge (Senior Division) Siddharth Nagar in original suit No. 234 of 1985 and also the judgment and decree dated 23.1.2006 passed by the Additional District Judge, Court No. 1, Siddharth Nagar in Civil Appeal No. 21 of 2002.3. The dispute is in respect of the Temple situated at Tetari Bazar named as Hanuman Garhi Temple. It is stated that the Temple was renovated in the year 1960 and this Temple was being maintained by the Ajama Akhara of Nepal. A dharamshala was also constructed along with the Temple. The construction of the Temple as well as dharamshala was from the money donated by the people of Nepal, who were members of the Ajama Akhara. The defendant claimed that one Ram Tahal Das was appointed as Sarvarakar of ...
Executive Engineer, Vii Construction Division, U.P. Jal Nigam, Vs. Pre ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-08-2006
Reported in: (2006)IILLJ1076All
Rakesh Tiwari, J.1. Heard Counsel for the parties and perused the record.2. This petition has been filed for quashing the impugned award dated 31.10.1984 passed by the Labour Court, Allahabad in Adjudication Case No. 34 of 1982. 3. The workman claimed that he was illegally terminated from service on 9.12.1980. He raised an industrial dispute with regard to validity and correctness of the termination of his services. A reference was made by the State Government as to whether the termination of the services of the workman w.e.f 9.12.80 was legal and justified, if not to what reliefs/benefits is the employee entitled to. 4. On receipt of summons the parties filed their written statements before the labour Court. The workman claimed in the written statement that he carne in service on 1.6.1976 as Pump Attendant on muster roll and thereafter he was appointed as Work charge cm, loyee w.e.f. 1.6.1977.He further claimed that as he was the acting member of the trade union and on account of his ...
Suresh Shahi S/O Late Mangal Shahi Vs. State of U.P. and
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-08-2006
Reported in: 2006CriLJ1780
R.K. Rastogi, J.1. This is an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing the proceedings of complaint case No. 1114 of 2005, State through Sri Rakesh Kumar, S.D.M. Deoria v. Suresh Sahi and Anr. under Sections 193, 419, 420, 467, 468 and 471 I.P.C.2. The facts relevant for disposal of this application are that a case under Section 107/116 Cr.P.C. was pending in the court of Sri Pankaj Kumar, S.D.M. Deoria against applicant No. 2 KausbaLand in that case he filed bail bonds executed by Suresh Sahi, applicant No. 1. Thereafter an application was moved by Nagesh Pratap Dubey (first party in that case) in the court of S.D.M. Deoria on 7.3.2005, (which is Annexure No. 1 of the affidavit- filed in support of the application under Section 482 Cr.P.C). It was stated therein that Suresh Sahi had filed Jot Bahi of deceased Shyam Badan impersonating himself as Shyam Badan affixing his own-photo in place of Shyam Badan on the bond. It was further stated that in this way Suresh Sahi and Kaus...
Bhagwan Yadav and Jitendra Yadav Both Sons of Vishwanath Yadav Vs. Dep ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-08-2006
Reported in: 2006(3)AWC2545
S.N. Srivastava, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Standing counsel.2. By order-dated 24.6.2003, Deputy Director Consolidation rescinded the proceeding under the Consolidation of Holdings Act and directed initiation of consolidation proceedings de novo after verification of Khatauni. Learned counsel for the petitioner argued that thereafter, under the amended provisions of the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, the Consolidator passed an exparte order dated 1.7.2005 leaning in favour of Manoj son of Brij Narain although he drew attention to the fact that the petitioner is a transferee from Brij Narain through sale deeds dated 9.3.1983 and 19.3.1983 and further that the orders were passed by Asstt. Consolidation officer on 14.7.1998 in his favour. The learned Counsel further argued that since the order in question is an exparte order, the same could not be challenged and taking advantage of helplessness of the petitioner, the Opp. party is now making unst...
Mahesh Son of Sheopal @ Shishupal Singh Vs. State of U.P. and Naresh C ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-08-2006
Reported in: 2006CriLJ1778
R.K. Rastogi, J.1. This is an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing the order dated 2.7.2005 passed by Sri O.P. Agrawal, then learned Addl. Session Judge Court No. 2, Etah in Session Trial No. 320 of 2004, State v. Mahesh and Ors., under Section 302/34 I.P.C.2. The facts relevant for disposal of this application are that on 17.12.2002 at about 9.10 A.M. Sri Naresh Chandra lodged a F.I.R. at police station Kotwali, Etah with these allegations that on 16.12.2002 at about 8 P.M. the accused Mahesh, Seesram Lekhpal, and Bilsan came on a motor cycle, and Seesram and Bilsan after getting down from the motor cycle went inside a P.C.O. and fire at Raju son of the informant from pistols in their hands. Raju received one bullet injury on his body and the other bullet passed away touching his body. Thereafter the accused went away on the motor cycle. Thereafter Naresh Chandra took Raju to the district hospital Etah but as his condition was serious, the doctor advised that he should b...
Raghvendra Singh S/O Satyendra Singh Vs. State of U.P. Through Princip ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-08-2006
Reported in: 2006(3)AWC2152
Arun Tandon, J.1. Learned counsel for the petitioner is permitted to implead Inspector General of Police, Kanpur Zone, Kanpur as respondent No. 3 during the course of the day.2. Heard Sri M.P. Rai, Advocate on behalf of the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel on behalf of respondents.3. The petitioner, who is working as Constable in civil branch of the U.P. Police Subordinate Services, is aggrieved by an order of transfer, dated 23rd January, 2006, passed by the Senior Superintendent of Police, Agra where under the petitioner has been transferred, for a period of six months, to the armed branch of U.P. Police.4. On behalf of the petitioner ft is contended that the impugned order of transfer, runs contrary to Regulation 525 of the U.P. Police Manual and therefore, is unsustainable in the eyes of law. The petitioner has put in more than ten years of service in CMI Police, therefore he cannot be transferred to any other branch.5. For considering the controversy raised by the petitione...
Ravi Shankar S/O Shri Kailash Misra Vs. State of U.P. and Ved Prakash ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-08-2006
Reported in: 2006CriLJ2245
R.K. Rastogi, J.1. Both these applications have been moved under Section 482 Cr.P.C. and since they have been filed against the same proceedings, I have heard them together and now I am deciding them by a common order.2. The facts relevant for disposal of both these applications are that on 16.2.2001 at about 3.30 A.M. a report was lodged by Ravi Shanker, applicant in Criminal Misc. Application No. 12679 of 2004 against Mukteshwar and 14 other persons, applicants in Criminal Misc. Application No. 14839 of 2004, with these allegations that he himself and 15 accused persons named therein are residents of village Pipra Bhulli police station Barhaj district Deoria. There are chaks of Ravi Shanker towards east of the village and thereafter there are chaks of Umapati and Ram Nagina and towards south of these chaks, there is a chak road, there was a dispute between the parties in respect of that chak road. Umapati etc. had filed a civil suit in respect of chak road and for correction of map. ...
Daya Ram Saroj Son of Sri Sanatan Saruj and ors. Vs. State of U.P. Thr ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-08-2006
Reported in: 2006(3)AWC2225
Ajoy Nath Ray, C.J.1. These appeals are from several judgments of Hon'bie Single Judges passed both at Lucknow and Allahabad. In all these matters in the first Court, the State employees have lost their battle and the writ petitions have been dismissed in each case. In every appeal, therefore the appellant is the State employee and the respondent is the State.2. The magnitude of these appeals is very large. The fate and future of some Twenty Two thousand State employees is involved in these appeals. These employees have to be introduced, if a little inadequately and a little inaccurately, in the beginning as Tubewell Operators and Part Time Tubewell Operators. They were all originally employed in the Irrigation Department of the State of Uttar Pradesh.3. The principal government directive with which they are aggrieved is dated 19.7.2005 issued by the Chief Secretary of the State, then Ms. Neera Yadav.4. By that order, all these employees were being sent back to the Irrigation Departmen...
Sahara Airlines Ltd. and ors. Vs. Director General of Income Tax (inve ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-08-2006
Reported in: (2006)202CTR(All)1; [2006]286ITR33(All)
Pradeep Kant, J.1. This is a bunch of writ petitions filed by different assessees belonging to Sahara Group, consisting of several companies, firms and individuals, challenging the order passed under Section 127(2) of the IT Act, 1961, transferring the cases of Sahara Group from their respective AOs at Lucknow to the Asstt. CIT, Central Circle-6, New Delhi.2. Though the orders in respect of all the assessees have been passed individually and separately, which have been challenged in the writ petitions filed by them, but since the ground of transfer and the questions of fact and law, which have been raised and require determination, are one and the same, we have proceeded to decide the petitions by one common order, with the consent of the parties' counsel. The writ petition No. 5395 (MB) of 2005: Sahara Airlines Ltd. v. Director General of IT (Inv.) North, and Ors. is being taken as the leading petition.The pleadings exchanged in one or more writ petitions shall form the basis of chall...
- ‹ Prev
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 11
- 12
- 13
- Next ›
- Last »