Allahabad Court February 2007 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.
SharifuddIn @ Banwari Vs. Labour Court and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-19-2007
Reported in: [2007(113)FLR784]
S.P. Mehrotra, J.1. The present writ petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, has been filed by the petitioner, inter-alia, praying for quashing the Award dated 2.11.1998, published on 19.2.1990, passed by the Labour Court, U.P. Agra (respondent No. I) in Adjudication Case No.110 of 1988.Copy of the said Award has been tiled as Annexure 7 to the writ petition.It appears that Reference under Section 4-K of the U.P. Industrial Disputes Act,1917 was made to the Labour Court to the effect as to whether the termination of, services of the petitioner (workman) on the post of Cook on 15.3.1986 was proper and/or legal, and if not, to what relief the petitioner (workman) was entitled.2. The case of the petitioner before the Labour Court was that he was employed by the respondent No. 2 on regular basis on the post of Cook since 1980; and that his services were terminated without any notice etc. on 15.3.1986; and that the provisions regarding retrenchment were not complied with.3...
Committee of Management, Surjo Bai Balika Inter College Through Its Ma ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-15-2007
Reported in: 2007(2)AWC1487
B.S. Chauhan and Prakash Krishna, JJ.1. All the above three special appeals were heard together and as jointly agreed by the parties, are being disposed of by a common judgment. The facts of the appeals are interlinked and are interwoven and as a matter of fact, the special appeal No. 1153 of 2002 and 1189 of 2002 arise out of a common judgment of learned Single Judge disposing of seven writ petitions.2. The facts giving rise to these intra court appeals in brief are as follows:Smt. Manju Keshi Dixit, the respondent No. 4 (hereinafter referred to as the writ petitioner) was working as a teacher in the institution known as Surjo Bai Balika Inter College, Hathras, District Hathras having been appointed as an Assistant Teacher (English) in L.T. grade on October 1, 1974. Her case is that she was being paid salary as admissible to an Assistant Teacher in L.T. grade throughout for a considerable period of time. She also filed experience certificates dated 26.4.1983 and 11th January, 1996 in ...
The Trivedi Engineering and Industries Ltd. Through U.C. Shukla, Perso ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-15-2007
Reported in: [2007(113)FLR1044]
Arun Tandon, J.1. Heard Sri C.P. Ghildyal, Advocate on behalf of the petitioner, Sri K.P. Agarwal, Senior Advocate assisted by Smt. Sumati Rani Gupta, Advocate and Sri Shyam Narain, Advocate on behalf of workmen.2. Petitioner is a Company duly incorporated under the Companies Act. It has established a sugar industry in the name and style of M/s Triveni Engineering & Industries Ltd. Sugar Unit Khatauli. On 19th September, 1991, an inspection of the petitioner's factory was made and certain violations were noticed by the Factory Inspector. Accordingly, a notice was issued to the employers to submit their explanation vide letter dated 8th October, 1991. A reply was filed to the notice so issued by the petitioner on 25th November, 1991.3. Not being satisfied with the explanation furnished, the Factory Inspector filed a report under Section 15 of the Payment of Wages Act, before the Prescribed Authority, wherein it was stated that 11 workers (respondent Nos. 3 to 13 in the present writ peti...
Commissioner of Trade Tax Vs. Agrawal Trading Company
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-15-2007
Reported in: (2009)20VST669(All)
Rajesh Kumar, J.1. These two revisions under Section 11 of the U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') are directed against the order of Tribunal dated January 31, 2000 relating to the assessment year 1994-95 under the U.P. Trade Tax Act as well as under the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 respectively.2. Heard learned Standing Counsel.3. Despite the service of notice, no one appears on behalf of the opposite party/dealer.4. Learned Standing Counsel submitted that the Tribunal has accepted the claim of the dealer in respect of the purchases made for and on behalf of ex-U.P. principal for Rs. 16,84,197.74 and has deleted the tax levied under Section 3D(1) of the U.P. Trade Tax Act as well as under the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956. He submitted that the dealer had purchased and dispatched the same outside the State of U.P. Dealer had admitted liability of tax on the aforesaid amount treating the said purchases on his own account in the return, but during the assessment...
Bal Krishna Son of Sri Guru Prasad Vs. the State of U.P. Through Its S ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-14-2007
Reported in: 2007(3)AWC2715
A.K. Yog and R.K. Rastogi, JJ.1. Heard learned Counsel representing their respective parties.2. Present writ petition arises out of proceedings under 'The Urban Land (Ceiling & Regulations) Act, 1976' (called the Principal Act) and this Court is required to decide consequences of The Urban Land (Ceiling & Regulations) Repeal Act, 1999' (called the Repeal Act) which became applicable in the State of U.P. in March, 1999.3. The petitioner, has pleaded, inter-alia amongst others that he is the owner/tenure holder of Khasra plot No. 491 (7272.17 Sq. Meters), village - Bara Sirohi Pargna, Tahsil and District Kanpur Nagar; upon commencement of the Principal Act Draft statement in Form III prescribed under Rule 5 of the Rules framed under the Principal Act prepared; in the Draft statement -1000 Sq. Meters of area of said plot is left within ceiling limit and 6272.17 Sq. Mts. was held surplus; the petitioner claims no notice as required under Rule 5 was served upon the petitioner (see paras No....
Sarla Devi and ors. Vs. Ravindra Kumar and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-14-2007
Reported in: 2007(2)AWC1363
Rakesh Tiwari, J.1. The case is listed peremptorily today.2. On 12.1.2007, when the case was taken up on the request of the counsel for the respondents, the office was directed to list the matter in the next cause list peremptorily. Thereafter it was listed on 22.1.2007. On that date, the case was passed over on the request of the counsel for the respondents and it was directed to be listed in the next cause as peremptorily. When the case is taken up today, the counsel for the respondents is not present even in the revised list.3. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioners and perused the record.4. The petitioners have prayed for a writ of certiorari quashing the impugned orders dated 17.10.2006 and 20.9.2006 passed by the District Judge, Muzaffarnagar and the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Kairana, Muzaffarnagar respectively besides a writ of mandamus for striking off the defence of the respondent for nonpayment of rent by him for four months, i.e., January, 2005 to April, 2005.5. Resp...
Srichand JaIn Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-14-2007
Reported in: 2007(2)AWC1507
B.S. Chauhan and Dilip Gupta, JJ.1. This petition has been filed for quashing the order dated 19th September, 2001 passed by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate attaching the land in question, order dated 10th November, 2001 passed by the Principal Secretary (Revenue), Government of U.P. and for setting aside the auction proceedings. The petitioner has also sought a direction from this Court for deciding the objections filed by the petitioner under Order XXI, Rule 58 of the Code of Civil Procedure (hereinafter called the 'C.P.C.').2. The dispute in present petition relates to Khasra Plot No. 233 measuring 4-13-0 bighas in village Pathanpura in Saharanpur. Two sale deeds were executed on 24.4.1992 and 1.4.1992. The Additional Collector (Finance and Revenue), Saharanpur initiated proceedings under Section 33/47A of the Indian Stamp Act in respect of both the sale deeds and an order was passed for payment of the deficient stamp duty and penalty amounting to Rs. 1,64,140 in respect of sale deed ...
Santosh and ors. Vs. Harish Chander and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-14-2007
Reported in: II(2007)ACC749
ORDERG.P. Srivastava, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the appellant and learned Counsel for the respondents.2. It is argued by learned Counsel for the appellant that the Workmen's Compensation Commissioner vide order dated 12.2.2001 has not directed that the interest shall be paid on the compenation award to the appellant. Under Section 4A(3)(a) of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 it is mandatory that the employer shall in addition to the amount of the arrears, pay simple interest thereon at the rate of twelve per cent per annum or at such higher rate not exceeding maximum of lending rates of any scheduled bank as may be specified by the Central Government, by notification in the Official Gazette, on the amount due.3. In the instant case the Workmen's Compensation Commissioner has awarded a sum of Rs. 2,01,660 as there is no observation regarding interest. The appeal is allowed.4. The impugned order passed by Workmen's Compensation Commissioner is modified and added that the employe...
S.N. Lal Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-13-2007
Reported in: 2007(2)AWC1491
A.K. Yog and R.K. Rastogi, JJ.1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.2. Background. - The petitioner, Sri S.N. Lal has filed above writ petition with the pleadings, contending inter alia amongst others, that he is 'tenant' under U.P. Rent Control Act (Act XIII of 1972 ) of the house situated at 8/12, Lyall Road (Now Patrika Marg), he is living with his family members as such since 21st July, 1973 on the basis of allotment order dated 18th December, 1972; the petitioner retired in the year 1993 from the post of Administrative Officer in the office of Director of Education, the premises held by the petitioner as tenant is situate on Nazul land numbered as plot No. 213A, Civil Station, Allahabad in the records of Nagar Nigam, Allahabad; lease of the said 'Nazul land' expired on 3rd February, 1962; fresh lease was sanctioned in 1968 in favour of B.P. Rai by the then Commissioner, Allahabad - Division, Allahabad; but fresh lease deed was never executed; after the death of B.P. Rai, (erstw...
Radhey Shyam Rastogi Vs. Ashish Kumar and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-13-2007
Reported in: 2007(3)AWC3111
Rakesh Tiwari, J.1. Heard counsel for the parties and perused the record.2. The petitioner is tenant of northern portion of the accommodation claiming, to be the tenant of Sri Hari Ram. Smt. Leelawati widow of late Sri Babu Ram moved an application under Section 21 (1) (b) of U. P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act No. 13 of 1972 inter alia that the house in dispute No. 124 situate in Mohalla Chaukasi, Shahjahanpur was purchased by her on 19th September, 1980, from its erstwhile owners, Sri Radhey Lal, Sri Hari Ram Srivastava, Smt. Sharda Devi, Sri Adhey Lal and Sri Ravi Kiran. The house in dispute was more than 80 years old and was in dilapidated condition, as such required demolition and reconstruction.3. After receipt of the notice the petitioner-tenant filed his written statement stating therein that no inspection had even been made by the Rent Control Inspector in pursuance of the release application filed by the landlord and an incorrect report was gi...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »