Allahabad Court May 2007 Judgments

Dr. J.K. Singh S/O Late Jugul Vs. Union of India (Uoi) Through the

Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Allahabad

1. This is the second round of litigation. In the earlier round when the applicant approached the Tribunal for an order directing the respondents not to impose any damage rent, vide order dated 12th September, 2003 in OA 1094/03, at Annexure A13, the Tribunal directed the respondents to consider the representation of the applicant and pass a speaking order. The impugned order is in pursuance of the said Directions of this Tribunal. Aggrieved by the same the applicant has presented this OA.2. The Facts: The applicant is a serving Medical Officer and in the Junior Administrative Grade. He is entitled to a Type V accommodation.He was in occupation of Bungalow No. 7A in the Inspectors Colony, Gaya, which is a type IV Accommodation. Identical type of accommodation was Bungalow No. 3 of the said Colony with the same extent of licence fee of Rs. 273. The said Bungalow was under occupation of one Dr. M. Lal, who, on his transfer had vacated the same. Hence, the applicant took possession of th...

Ajay Khorana S/O Sri N.D. Khorana Vs. State of U.P. and Namita Khorana ...

Court: Allahabad

Reported in: I(2008)DMC286

Vinod Prasad, J.1. Applicant Ajay Khorana has prayed for quashing of, summoning order dated 10.1.2007 as well as the charge sheet dated 16.2.2006 filed in Crime No. 1713 of 2005 for offences under Sections 323, 504, 506, 498A I.P.C. pending before C.J.M. Basti against him.2. The necessary facts eschewing the unnecessarily details of the prosecution allegations are that the applicant was married with respondent No. 2 Namita Khorana on 28th September 1990 at Bhopal. After the marriage respondent No. 2 Namita Khorana was tortured because of demand of dowry and even was assaulted. Respondent No. 2 Namita Khorana was harassed and was turned out of her in-laws house. She lodged a/F.I.R. in respect of offences of demand of dowry and torture with police, which was got investigated and ultimately a charge sheet was laid in the court against the applicant and his parents, in the aforesaid crime No. 1713 of 2005 for offences under Sections 323, 504, 506, 498A I.P.C. on 16.2.2006. The said charge ...

Vanshu Son of Shiv Varan Vs. the State of U.P.

Court: Allahabad

Reported in: 2007CriLJ4677

Vinod Prasad, J.1. The revisionists Vishnu aged about 60 years and his two nephews Pancham Ram and Ram Kesh were assaulted by jawahar Lal, Som Raj, Ori Lal, Girdhari, Bhagwan Das Raju and Magala Prasad with bricks on 27.1.2007 and the malefactors also damaged the drain which was got constructed by the applicant When the revisionist entered into his house to save his life, assailants also entered into his house and bet him with lathi and dandas. Satya Narain, Ram Jay and co villagers witnessed this assault who saved the life of the revisionist. Accused persons left the spot hurling filthy, abuses and threatening. Revisionist got him self medically examined in the district hospital Basti where as his nephews got themselves medically examined in PHC Rudhauli. Police did not register FIR of victim inspite of application to the higher police officials and the police on the contrary arrested the nephews of the revisionist. Since the FIR of the revisionists was not registered he wielded the p...

Smt. Bilaso Devi Widow of Late Shri Vs. Union of India (Uoi) Through

Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Allahabad

1. The applicant is widow of late Shri Puttoo Lal, who was working as Group 'D' employee with the respondents since 16.9.1962. The applicant, while in service, made an application in the Railway after the death of her husband for retiral benefit to the applicant and also prayed for a job on compassionate ground for her son Ram Das. When Shri Puttoo Lal died his son was of 5 years of age and, therefore, the widow had to wait for him to attain the age of majority. The applicant has further stated that for a long time she did not get any intimation regarding retiral dues. Finally, she came to know through the correspondence dated 26.12.2001 (Annexure-6) that the case being highly belated, the respondents could not provide any job to her son and on the question of retiral benefits, she did not get any intimation.2. The respondents have denied the allegation in the counter affidavit stating that the applicant had opted for Provident Fund scheme and not for pension. At that time there were ...

Paras Nath Pal Son of Sri K.R. Pal and ors. Vs. State of U.P. Through ...

Court: Allahabad

Reported in: 2007(4)AWC3327

Sudhir Agarwal, J.1. Counter and rejoinder affidavits have already been exchanged between the parties and therefore as requested and agreed by learned Counsel of the parties all three writ petitions which involves common question of facts and law, have been heard and are being decided finally under the Rules of the Court at the admission stage.2. For the purpose of narration of facts we have taken the case of Paras Nath Pal and others, Writ Petition No. 18775 of 2007 as the leading case.3. Petitioners are candidates in Combined State/Upper Subordinate Service (Backlog/Special Recruitment) Examination, 2004 and have approached this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution challenging result of main written examination of the said selection declared by U.P. Public Service Commission (hereinafter referred to as 'Commission') on 24,3.2007 by applying scaling method known as 'Linear Standard Score Method'. They have sought a writ of certiorari for quashing the said result and have furthe...

Daya Ram Singh Son of Sri Phool Chand Singh Vs. State of U.P. Through ...

Court: Allahabad

Reported in: [2007(114)FLR855]

H.L. Gokhale, C.J.1. A reference has been made to the Full Bench, for deciding the following questions:(i) What is the correct interpretation of Clause No. 4 of the Government Circular dated 10.10.2005, issued by the Government of Uttar Pradesh?(ii) Whether the decision rendered in the case of Smt. Kanti Singh v. State of U.P. and Ors. Special Appeal No. 46 of 2007, decided on 15.1.2007 interpreting the said clause, is based on correct preposition of law?2. The facts leading to this reference are as follows. The appellant, herein was one of the candidates for the post of Shiksha Mitra (Friends of education), which are the posts created for spread of primary education under the Scheme, which was floated by the State Government initially on 1st of July, 2000, and which has been revised by subsequent Government Circular dated 10th of October, 2005. The rights of the teachers working under the Scheme are some what limited. Clause No. 4 of this Government Circular lays down the conditions o...

Jai Singh Yadav Son of Sri Shyam Lal Vs. Additional District Judge (Co ...

Court: Allahabad

Reported in: AIR2007All165

Sunil Ambwani, J.1. Heard Shri Ashok Khare, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Shri S.D. Shukla for petitioner and Shri Shashi Nandan, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Shri B.N. Misra for contesting respondent. Learned standing counsel appears for state respondents.2. With the consent of parties, the writ petition was heard at the admission stage and is being finally decided.3. A notification was issued on 29.7.2005 for elections of Gram Panchayat Sandwa Kalan, Development Block Chaka, District Allahabad. The petitioner and respondent Nos. 4 to 7 filed their nomination papers for the post of pradhan. The objections filed by the petitioner to the nomination papers of respondent Nos. 4 and 5 were rejected. In the elections the respondent No. 4 was declared elected on 28.8.2005 with maximum votes followed by respondent No. 5 and the petitioner.4. The petitioner filed an election petition in September 2005. The Sub Divisional Magistrate/Election Tribunal Karchhana, Allahabad by his jud...

Ram NaraIn Singh S/O Sri Kapil Dev Singh Vs. State of U.P. Through Sec ...

Court: Allahabad

Reported in: 2007(4)AWC3382

Anjani Kumar and Sudhir Agarwal, JJ.1. Aggrieved by the order dated 4.9.2003 passed by U.P. Public Serviee Tribunal, the petitioner has come for in this writ petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India assailing the said order only to the extent it denies back wages from 22.7.1996 to 4.9.2003.2. The fact giving rise to this petition, in brief, are that the petitioner was working as Lekhpal. He was placed under suspension on 14.6.1995 by the Sub-divisional Magistrate. A charge-sheet was issued on 28.8.1995 which was replied by him on 18.9.1995. The Enquiry Officer submitted his report on 14.12.1995. which was communicated to the petitioner. He submitted reply and, thereafter, the Sub-divisional Magistrate issued a show-cause notice on 15.12.1995 as to why he may be not dismissed. The petitioner replied on 2.1.1996. However, he was dismissed vide order dated 22.7.1996, whereagainst he filed writ petition No. 32357 of 1996, which was dismissed on the ground of alternative re...

Shikha Srivastava D/O Sri Ishwar Chandra Srivastava, Vs. State of U.P. ...

Court: Allahabad

Reported in: 2007(4)AWC3348

R.K. Agrawal, J.1. In respect of advertisement dated 7/13.10.2006 issued by the U.P. Public Service Commission, Allahabad (hereinafter referred to as 'the Commission') inviting applications from the eligible candidates for the post of Civil Judge (Junior Division), for appearing in the U.P. Judicial Service Civil Judge (Junior Division) Examinations, 2006 a Division Bench of this Court while hearing Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 69148 of 2006, noticed that there are two contradictory judgment of co-ordinate Benches of the same strength, i.e. two Division Benches of this Court, namely Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 59653 of 2006, J.P. Tiwari and Ors. v. State of U.P. and Ors., and other connected petitions, decided on 2.11.2006, on the one hand, and Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 69189 of 2006, Sanjay Kumar Pathak v. State of U.P. and Ors., decided on 15.12.2006, on the other hand, directed the matter to be placed before the Hon'ble Chief Justice for constitution of a larger Bench. Vide o...

Smt. Gayatri Mishra Wife of Shri Chandrama Mishra Vs. State of U.P. an ...

Court: Allahabad

Reported in: 2007CriLJ3887

R.K. Rastogi, J.1. This is an application for recall of the judgment and order dated 28.2.2007 passed in Criminal Revision No. 966 of 2003 Smt. Gayatri Misra v. State of U.P. and Ors.2. The facts relevant for disposal of this application are that the applicant had filed an application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. against the opposite parties No. 2 to 8 in the court of Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 10, Ballia., which was registered as Crl. Misc. Case No. 208 of 2002. That application was allowed by the learned Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate vide his order dated 8.7.2002 whereby he directed the Station Officer concerned to register a case against the accused and investigate the same Aggrieved with that order the accused of that case had filed Criminal Revision No. 292 of 2002 in the court of the Sessions Judge, Ballia, which was heard and decided by Sri Subedar Yadav. Addl. Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No. 3, Ballia vide his judgment and order dated 30.1.2003. After hea...