Allahabad Court March 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.
Saraya Sugar Mills Limited Through Its General Manager Sanjeev Tyagi V ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-23-2007
Reported in: [2007(113)FLR659]
Tarun Agarwala, J.1. By means of this petition, the petitioner has challenged the validity and legality of the award, passed by the Labour Court directing reinstatement of the workman with stoppage of two yearly increments for two years and denial of back wages. The brief facts leading to the case is, that on account of an incident which took place on 19.6.1998, the petitioner was charge-sheeted for threatening a superior officer with dire consequences and for using abusive language on a superior officer. The workman, denied the charge and accordingly, the management conducted an oral inquiry, in which, the workman was given full opportunity to defend himself. The inquiry officer submitted his report and found that the charges levelled against the workman stood proved. Based on the aforesaid inquiry report, an explanation was called from the workman. The management considered his explanation and thereafter, vide an order dated 21.10.1998, terminated the services of the petitioner. This...
Shree Baidyanath Ayurvedh Bhawan Ltd. Vs. Presiding Officer, Industria ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-23-2007
Reported in: [2007(114)FLR21]
Tarun Agarwala, J.1. By means of this writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the validity and legality of the award passed by the Industrial Tribunal directing the petitioner to reinstate the workman with full back wages and other consequential benefits including interest on unpaid wages and cost of Rs. 5000/-. For facility and convenience, the petitioner is called the 'management' and the respondent is called the 'workman'.2. The petitioner is one of the 5 units of M/s Sri Baidyanath Ayurvedh Bhawan Ltd., which is a Limited Company incorporated under the Companies Act 1956, having its Head Office at Kolkata. The petitioner is engaged in the business of manufacture and sale of Ayurved medicines. The present dispute relates to the Naini unit of the petitioner Company. It is alleged, that all the units are independently managed and administered separately and that there is no inter unit transfer and, it is only in exceptional circumstances that an employee is sent on a deputation t...
Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Surendra Umrao and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-22-2007
Reported in: 2008ACJ293; 2007(2)AWC2104
Amitava Lala, J.1. The appeal has been preferred by the insurance company on two grounds. Firstly, as per the evidence of the Doctor pain and injury is ordinary in nature, i.e., fracture on the right palm and injuries on the neck and knee. But he was declared as 50% disabled on the basis of the disability certificate. The disability certificate was not proved through the Doctor/s issued the same. Secondly, calculation of the award is not at par with the Schedule II under Section 163A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.2. The appeal was heard on informal papers upon issuance of the notice to the caveator/claimant/ respondent No. 1, both the parties agreed hearing on such terms.3. Learned Counsel appearing for the respondents contended that in view of the judgment of Rajasthan High Court in Rajasthan State Transport Corporation and Anr. v. Devilal and Ors. 1990 (1) TAC 672, the certificate issued by the medical team is a public document, therefore, there is no necessity of the examining the...
Sheo Ram Singh (D) Through L.Rs. and ors. Vs. Additional Commissioner ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-22-2007
Reported in: 2007(78)AWC2441
S.U. Khan, J.1. Earlier ceiling proceedings were finalised in favour of the petitioner and through order dated 25.4.1977 passed by the appellate court/A.D.J. Hamirpur in ceiling Appeal No. 691 of 1976, it was held that petitioner did not possess any surplus land. After more than 5 years second notice was issued to the petitioner under Section 10(2) of U.P. Imposition of Ceiling on Land Holdings Act. In the said notice, it was proposed to declare that petitioner possessed about 24 acres of land as surplus land. The said notice was issued on 26.8.1982. Matter was decided by the prescribed authority against the petitioner which was challenged by the petitioner through ceiling Appeal No. 73 of 1984. Civil Judge Hamirpur decided the appeal on 12.3.1985 copy of the said judgment is Annexure-3 to the writ petition. Matter was remanded by the appellate court to the prescribed authority. After remand prescribed authority through order dated 27.1.1987 copy of which is Annexure-4 to the writ peti...
Nav Financiers (Registered) Automobile Financiers a Partnership Firm T ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-22-2007
Reported in: [2007(113)FLR741]; (2007)IIILLJ218All
Tarun Agarwala, J.1. The petitioner is a partnership firm, duly registered under the provision of the Indian Partnership Act and is engaged in the Hire Purchase business. The petitioner is aggrieved by the application of the Employees Provident Fund and Misc. Provision Act and the action of the respondents in clubbing three other Companies incorporated under the Companies Act with the petitioner's firm treating all the four entities as one unit.2. It transpires that notices were issued by the respondents under Section 7A for the determination of the money due from the petitioner under the Act. It transpires that the petitioner contended that the Act was not applicable, and therefore, an enquiry was constituted under sub clause 2 of Section (7-A) to enquire, as to whether the Act was applicable on the petitioner's firm or not. The Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner by an order dated 21.8.2006, held that the Act was applicable to the petitioner's firm and that the coverage was also ex...
Naveen Kumar Misra, Advocate and anr. Vs. Bhuvan Chand Pandey and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-22-2007
Reported in: 2007(4)AWC3797
Shiv Charan Sharma, J.1. The present writ petition has been instituted under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuing a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari for quashing the order dated 17th of May, 2000, passed by the then VIIth Addl. District Judge, Lucknow in S.C.C. Revision No. 112 of 1998, Naveen Kumar Mishra and Anr. v. Bhuvan Chand Pandey. Petitioners, Naveen Kumar Misra and another instituted a S.C.C. Suit No. 193 of 1986, Naveen Kumar Misra v. Bhuvan Chand Pandey for ejectment of the respondents from the property in dispute, recovery of arrears of rent and damages for the use and occupation. The said suit was decreed by the J.S.C.C, Lucknow, vide the judgment and order dated 5th of May, 1998. Aggrieved from this judgment and decree, the respondents-defendants instituted a S.C.C. Revision No. 112 of 1998 and this S.C.C. revision was allowed by the then VIIIth Addl. District Judge, Lucknow, vide the judgment and order dated 17th of May, 2000. The judg...
Shiv Shanker Ram Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-22-2007
Reported in: [2008(116)FLR104]
Pradeep Kant and Ajai Kumar Singh, JJ.1. The petitioner, feeling aggrieved by his transfer order dated 9.7.2004 transferring him from Lucknow to Jhansi as Joint Director, Technical Education, has filed this writ petition alleging that this transfer was managed only to accommodate and retain respondent No. 3 Smt. Sushma Gaur at Lucknow, who otherwise had been at Lucknow since the very inception of her service in the department but for a few breaks of few months or days, whereafter she again managed to come to Lucknow and has stayed till dated.2. Learning all other facts, which have not been disputed by the private respondent and cannot be disputed, as the record itself speaks that the private respondent, who was appointed in Lucknpw in the year 1979 has been allowed to continue at Lucknow and till date only three transfer orders were passed against her and those transfer orders were cancelled and she was again brought to Lucknow. She worked only at Barabanki, a nearby district of Luckno...
Braham Singh S/O Kadam Singh and Jitendra Kumar S/O Braham Singh Vs. S ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-21-2007
Reported in: 2007(3)AWC2132
Anjani Kumar and Dilip Gupta, JJ. 1. The petitioners who are resident of village Titawi situate in Pargana Baghra, Tehsil Sadar, District Muzaffarnagar have filed this petition as they apprehend that the Power Corporation will install towers on their land for the purposes of High Tension 132 KV lines. Their contention is that the towers cannot be fixed on their lands in contravention of the provisions of the Electricity Act, 2003 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act').2. We have heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and Sri Anil Mehrotra, learned Counsel appearing for the respondent Power Corporation.3. Sri Anil Mehrotra, learned Counsel appearing for the Power Corporation has placed before us the provisions of Section 164 of the Act hand the decision of this Court rendered in Deva Raj v. U.P. State Electricity Board, Lucknow and Ors. : AIR1977All452 and contended that such towers can be fixed as the provisions of Section 10 of the Telegraphs Act are applicable and all that the peti...
Satya NaraIn Kapoor Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-21-2007
Reported in: 2007(78)AWC2379
B.S. Chauhan, J.1. This case has a chequered history, as it has earlier been decided by this Court and the Hon'ble Supreme Court has set aside the said judgment and order and remanded the case for deciding afresh. This petition has been filed for seeking the relief of quashing the order dated 31.10.1991 passed by the A.D.M. [Nazul), Allahabad to put the property in dispute for auction for the purpose of allotment rejecting the application of the petitioner for allotment on the ground of his continuous possession, as the original lessee has violated the terms of the lease inducting the petitioner illegally.2. Facts and circumstances giving rise to this case are that the shop in dispute was originally allotted to Smt. Wahidun Bibi (Now deceased) widow of late Sri Abdul Aziz by nazul department Nagar Mahapalika Allahabad. In 1973, she inducted the petitioner in the said shop to meet her expenses and since then the petitioner claims to be in possession of the said shop. The said lessee Smt...
Sri Shri Shanker Bajpai S/O Sri Subh Karan Bajpai Vs. State of U.P. Th ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-21-2007
Reported in: 2007(3)AWC3165
Rakesh Tiwari, J.1. Heard counsel for the parties and the Standing counsel.2. The petitioner has been visited with a major punishment of dismissal from service just prior to three months from his date of retirement from service.3. The case of the petitioner is that he had been assigned duty for disbursement of cash amount which is the duty of the Cashier. It is stated that the petitioner was class IV employee working on the post of Potdar. The qualification of the petitioner is High School and the work assigned to him was only to accept the money from the public and deposit the same to the cashier or to the Assistant Cashier on daily wages. A Potdar is only a helping hand to the cashier for day to day work and works under the direction of the cashier or the Assistant cashier with whom he may be attached on day to day basis.4. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that office memorandum dated 22.9.94 prescribes the work of maintenance of cashbook and other things to the account cl...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »