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.
Committee of Management of Saint Andrews Inter College Through Its Man ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-27-2006
Reported in: 2006(2)AWC1794
Vineet Saran, J.1. Both these writ petitions arise out of the same cause of action and hence they have been heard together and are being decided by a common judgment. Pleadings in both the writ petitions have been exchanged and with consent of the learned Counsel for the parties, these petitions are being decided at the admission stage itself, or convenience, the subsequent writ petition No. 30710 of 2003 shall be treated as the leading writ petition in which the facts relating to the case have been stated more comprehensively.2. Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 437 of 2003 has been filed challenging the order dated 20.12.2002 passed by the Joint Director of Education, Respondent No. 2, whereby an Authorized Controller has been appointed, with the direction to hold the elections of the Committee of Management within three months. A further prayer for a direction in the nature of Mandamus has been made for commanding the respondents not to interfere in the peaceful functioning of the petit...
Radhey Shyam Jaiswal Vs. Vith A.D.J. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-27-2006
Reported in: 2006(2)AWC1779
S.U. Khan, J.1. This Is landlord's writ petition arising out of eviction/release proceedings filed by Ved Prakash Jaiswal, respondent No. 6 and Radhey Shyam Jaiswal, the petitioner, against respondents No. 3 to 5 Krishna Kumar Singh and Ors., the tenants. Release application was filed on the ground of bonafide need under Section 21 of U.P. Act No. 13 of 1972 in the form of P.A. Case No. 22 of 1979 before Prescribed Authority/J.S.C.C., Allahabad. Accommodation in dispute consists of three rooms on the ground floor in which tenants were carrying the business of Typing Institute. It was stated that the accommodation in dispute was required for occasional residence of family of the petitioner who was in service at that time and posted outside Allahabad. It was also stated that building in dispute was also required for establishing/ expanding typing Institute run by the other applicant-landlord Ved Prakash Jaiswal as the accommodation in which he was running the said Institute was quite ins...
Manoj Kumar Pandey Son of Sri Daya Ram Pandey and ors. Vs. State of U. ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-27-2006
Reported in: 2006(3)AWC2968
B.S. Chauhan and Dilip Gupta, JJ.1. This petition has been filed for a direction upon the U.P. Public Service Commission, Allahabad to recommend the names of the waiting list-candidates against the existing vacancies of Assistant Prosecuting Officers, which had been advertised by Advertisement No. A-5/E-1/1997-98.2. Learned Counsel for the petitioners has submitted that all the petitioners had appeared in the written examination and were also called for interview. The final select list was declared on 20th March, 1999 and even though the names of the petitioners were not included in the main select list, but they are hopeful that their names would be included in the waiting list. The State Government had sent a requisition to the Commission to recommend the names of the Candidates next in order of merit, as certain candidates did not join the post, but the Commission expressed its inability as the life of the waiting list had expired. This decision of the Commission was challenged by 1...
Chetan Prakash and anr. Vs. A.D.J. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-27-2006
Reported in: 2006(3)AWC2220
Anjani Kumar, J.1. By means of present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners, who are tenants of accommodation in question have challenged the order dated 27th January, 2006, passed by the appellate authority, under the provisions of U.P. Act No. 13 of 1972 (in short 'the Act') whereby the appellate authority allowed the appeal filed by the respondent-landlord against the order of the prescribed authority under the Act dated 30th August, 2003 by which release application filed by the landlord was dismissed by prescribed authority, the copy whereof is annexed as Annexure-13 to the writ petition.2. The brief facts of the present case are that respondent No. 3 Smt. Hema Agrawal filed an application under Section 21(1)(b) of the Act before the prescribed authority for release of the accommodation in question in her favour on the ground that the petitioners-tenants are residing on the first floor portion of the accommodation in question, which is in d...
Kamal Kumar Vs. Hari Shankar
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-27-2006
Reported in: 2006(4)AWC3450
Anjani Kumar, J.1. By means of present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner-tenant of shop in dispute has challenged the order dated 26.10.2004, passed by the prescribed authority under the provision of U. P. Act No. 13 of 1972 (In short 'the Act') and the order dated 16.2.2006, passed by the appellate authority under 'the Act', whereby the appellate authority dismissed the appeal filed by the petitioner-tenant against the order of the prescribed authority by which release application filed by the respondent-landlord was allowed, the copies whereof are annexed as Annexures-7 and 9, respectively to the writ petition.2. The brief facts are that initially father of the petitioner, namely Banarsi Das was tenant of the accommodation in question, which is a shop, which was let out by the father of the respondent, namely Lala Ram Gupal. The landlord Lala Ram Gupal had earlier filed an application under Section 21(1) (a) of the U. P. Act No. XIII of 1972...
Smt. Samapika Charterjee Wife of Sri Ashok Kumar Chaterjee Assistant T ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-24-2006
Reported in: 2006(4)AWC3408
Ashok Bhushan, J.1. Heard Shri V.K. Singh, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Shri N.P. Pandey, learned standing counsel appearing for the respondents. Counter and rejoinder affidavits have been exchanged and with the consent of the parties, the writ petition is being finally decided.2. By this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for quashing order dated 26.8.1999 passed by Regional Inspectress of Girls School rejecting the representation of the petitioner claiming fixation of salary in the L.T grade. A writ of mandamus has also been sought directing the respondent No. 2 to pay the salary to the petitioner along with arrears with effect from 1.1.1986 in L.T grade.3. Brief facts for deciding the writ petition are; the petitioner was appointed vide appointment letter dated 31.10.1973 in B.T.C grade in the Primary Section of Indian Girls Inter College, Allahabad. The appointment of the petitioner was also approved by the Regional Inspectress of Girls School vide order dated 18.12...
U.P. State Road Transport Corporation Through the Managing Director Vs ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-24-2006
Reported in: 2006(2)AWC1861
Arun Tandon, J.1. The Uttar Pradesh Road Transport Corporation has been constituted under the Road Transport Corporation Act, 1950. A proposal for nationalization of route Shergarh Gaht-Orai-Divyapur-Tirva under Section 68-C of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 was published in the official gazette on 20.11.1961. The above route was notified for exclusive operation of the State Transport undertaking by a scheme published under Section 68-D(3) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 vide notification No. 480-65 dated 26.8/1970, published in official gazette on 5.9.1970,2. Under clause 4 and 8 of the aforesaid scheme, the route was reserved for exclusive operation of the Corporation and the permits of the existing private operators, including that of respondent No. 1 Smt. Shanti Devi, were cancelled. Writ Petition No. 4707 of 1970 was filed before this Court Challenging the scheme of nationalization of the route in question. An interim order was granted in favour of the existing private operators by ...
Dewan Sugars Ltd. Through Its General Manager (Sugarcane) Vs. Appellat ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-23-2006
Reported in: 2006(3)AWC2320
Vineet Saran, J.1. Heard Sri Vivek Chaudhary, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as Sri S.M.A. Kazmi, learned Additional Advocate General on behalf of respondents No. 1 and 2 and Sri Yashwant Varma, assisted by Ms. Rohma Hameed on behalf of contesting respondent No. 3. Sri R.D. Khare has accepted notice for respondent No. 4 and Sri Atul Mehra for respondent No. 5. Counter affidavit on behalf of contesting respondent No. 3 has been filed, to which a rejoinder affidavit has also been filed today. With the consent of the learned counsel for the parties, this writ petition is being disposed of at this stage.2. By the cane reservation order dated 15.10.2005 for the crushing season 2005-06, the three centres in dispute, namely, Nanhera-A, Nanhera-B and Sultanpur were reserved in favour of respondent No. 4, Amroha unit of the State Sugar Corporation, but were assigned in favour of the petitioner Dewan Sugar Mill. Aggrieved by the said order of assignment, the respondent No. ...
Vortex Builders Private Limited Through Its Director Sri Raghvendra Ga ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-23-2006
Reported in: 2006(3)AWC2531
Vikram Nath, J.1. We have heard Sri U.N. Sharma senior advocate assisted by Sri Anoop Trivedi for the petitioner.2. The petitioner is merely the highest tenderer, which does not, by itself, give him any right to have his tender accepted. In all, there were only three tenders received, one from the Bareilly Development Authority, one from the Avas Vikas Parishad and the third one from the petitioner, which is a private concern. The tenders were subject to approval by the Assets Sale Committee, which has refused to accept and grant approval to any of these tenders. The impugned order dated 26.10.2005 does not disclose any reasons.3. Normally, in all the tender documents there is a condition, which, in the present case, an be found as a condition No. 4 at page 16 that the right to reject all or any tender 'without assigning any reason' is reserved.4. In substance the argument of he learned Counsel for the petitioner is that merely because (1) the petitioner was the highest tenderer, (2) t...
R.K. Agarwal and ors. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-23-2006
Reported in: (2006)201CTR(All)520; [2006]283ITR532(All)
1. Heard Shri Ravi Kant, senior advocate, assisted by Shri R.S. Agrawal, advocate for the petitioners and Shri Bharat Ji Agrawal, senior advocate along with Shri Ashok Kumar, advocate for the respondents.2. The above writ petitions are decided finally as all the respondents are represented by the standing counsel representing the Department. Initially the respondents did not file counter-affidavit, on the understanding that these writ petitions are to be decided on the basis of three documents, i.e., notice dt. 26th Oct., 2005/Annex. 2, reply of the assesses/Annex. 3 dt. 27th Oct., 2005 and the impugned order of transfer dt. 16th Dec., 2005/Annex. 4 to the writ petition, the authenticity of which was not disputed before the Court.3. Petitioners have approached this Court through aforementioned writ petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and seek to challenge transfer of their case by a common order dt. 16th Dec., 2005 passed by CIT-I, Kanpur in exercise of powers, ves...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »