Allahabad Court July 2007 Judgments

Smt. Lalita Wife of Late Lalit Vs. Union of India (Uoi) Through

Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Allahabad

1. In this O.A, the application No. 1 is seeking direction to the respondents for appointment on compassionate grounds in favour of applicant No. 2.2. Brief facts of the case are that the applicant No. 1 is widow of Late Lilit Kumar Singh and the applicant No. 2 said to be adopted son of applicant No. 1. The husband of the applicant No. 1 was appointed in the Railways on 04.10.1964 and he died on 12.10.1989 while in service.Admittedly, the deceased has not left any legal heir. Thereafter, the applicant No. 1 made a request for appointment on compassionate grounds in favor of applicant No. 2. Earlier it is stated that the applicant No. 2 shall be taken in to consideration as Nephew of the applicant No.1 and subsequently it is stated that the applicant no. 2 to be treated and accepted as adopted son. Later on it is stated that the applicant No. 2 is adopted son of applicant No. 1. Based on these facts, the applicant No. 1 is making request to the respondents authorities for appointment ...

Bhagwan Das S/O Shri Pardesi Ram and ors. Vs. District Judge and Regis ...

Court: Allahabad

Reported in: [2007(115)FLR860]

Vineet Saran, J.1. Selections were held in the year 1986 for appointment on six vacant class IV posts in the Judgeship of Azamgarh. Besides declaring a select list of six candidates, a waiting list of 43 candidates was prepared. After giving appointment to the selected candidates, from 1986 to 1990, 19 such other candidates who were placed in the waiting list have also been accommodated. Then on 26.10.1990, the waiting list was cancelled by the respondent-District Judge. Challenging the said order, writ petition No. 30407 of 1990 was filed, which was allowed vide Judgment and Order dated 23.7.1992. The petitioners, who claim themselves to be in the waiting list prepared on 17.5.1986, filed representations to the respondents for being given appointment on class IV posts. By order dated 5.10.1995 the representation of the petitioners has been rejected. Writ petition No. 36622 of 1995 has been filed by the petitioners challenging the order dated 5.10.1995 whereby their representation has ...

Manish Sirohi Vs. Smt. Meenakshi

Court: Allahabad

Reported in: AIR2007All211; 2007(4)AWC3824

ORDERAmitava Lala, J.1. The fact of the case is that the appellant/husband was the petitioner in the court below in making an application in the nature of Section 12 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') for the purpose of divorce since immediately after the marriage there was no relationship amongst themselves, i.e., the husband and the wife. The respondent/wife filed a written statement also specifically stating under paragraph 17 that she is not inclined to continue marital relationship with her husband.2. Inspite of the same, the Court was not pleased to pass decree/order for divorce taking a plea that as per Section 14 of the Act, Court cannot entertain any petition for dissolution of a marriage by a decree of divorce, unless at the date of the presentation of the petition one year has elapsed from the date of the marriage.3. Against this background an appeal was preferred. In the appeal learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent/wife al...

Deepak Salotri Vs. Anwar Shah

Court: Allahabad

Reported in: 2008(1)AWC717

Rakesh Tiwari, J.1. Heard counsel for the parties and perused the record.2. This writ petition has been filed for quashing the order dated 8.2.2007 passed by XIIth Additional District Judge, Agra, in J.S.C.C. Revision No. 34 of 2004, whereby he confirmed the order dated 21.4.2004 passed by Judge, Small Causes Court, Agra, in J.S.C.C. Suit No. 13 of 2003, decreeing the suit in favour of the respondent landlord.3. The respondent filed J.S.C.C. Suit No. 13 of 2003, before the Judge Small Causes Court, Agra against the petitioner for recovery of water tax for the period of three years amounting to Rs. 360, mesne profits and ejectment from the disputed shop in property No. 8/372A, Shah Taj Market situate at Bhogalpura Shahganj, Agra, alleging that the petitioner is tenant in the premises in question since 22.1.1997 and he has sublet the shop in question to one Sandeep Sharma son of Sri Murari Lal Sharma.4. Written statement was filed by the petitioner denying the allegations of sub-letting ...

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Lalit Kumar Goel

Court: Allahabad

Reported in: [2008]303ITR466(All)

1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi, has referred the following questions of law under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), for opinion to this Court:1. Whether, on facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was legally correct in deleting the addition of Rs. 4,58,000 for the assessment year 1987-88 in respect of the credits shown from various parties despite the non-satisfaction of the conditions laid down under Section 68 of the Income-tax Act by the assessee in respect of the credits?2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was legally correct in deleting the addition of Rs. 3,83,000 for the assessment year 1986-87 in respect of the credits shown from various parties despite the non-satisfaction of the conditions laid down under Section 68 of the Income-tax Act by the assessee in respect of the credits?3. Whether, on the facts and in the ci...

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Shri Ram Enterprises

Court: Allahabad

Reported in: [2009]182TAXMAN170(All)

1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Allahabad, has referred the following questions under Section 256(1)/(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act'), for the opinion of this court:1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the hon'ble Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in law in deleting the addition of Rs. 3,38,000 made under Section 68 of the Act and interest thereon of Rs. 52,493 on the ground that the assessee had discharged its onus of proving the genuineness of the deposits and had explained the nature and source of the deposits satisfactorily?2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and keeping in view the provisions of Rule 29 of the Income-tax (Appellate Tribunal), Rules, 1963, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in law in admitting the additional evidence produced by the assessee in terms of its letter dated April 24, 1995?2. The reference relates to the assessment year 1990-91.3. Briefly stated the facts which g...

Shrimal Plantation and ors. Vs. State Bank of India

Court: DRAT Allahabad

Reported in: I(2008)BC155

1. R-615/2005 is an appeal filed by Shri Shrimal Plantation praying for setting aside an order dated 13th October, 2005 passed by the D.R.T., Jabalpur in review application No. 2/2002, wherein prayer was for setting aside the judgment dated 8th March, 2002 passed in Original Application No. 188/2000. The other Appeal No. R-616/2005 has been filed by the same appellant challenging the judgment dated 8th March, 2002 passed by the D.R.T., Jabalpur in Original Application No.188/2000. In Appeal No. R-616/2005 there is an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act also requesting to condone the delay of 1290 days in filing this appeal on the ground that review application was filed before the Tribunal, but the same was dismissed on 13th October, 2005, against which order another appeal has been preferred apart from this appeal.2. Briefly stated the history giving rise to these two appeals is that the respondent Bank filed Original Application No. 188/2000 for recovery of Rs. 82,92,8...

Anurag Sharma Son of Sri Om Prakash Vs. Union of India (Uoi) Through

Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Allahabad

1. Since the facts and the reliefs sought for in both the applications are similar in nature, therefore, both the OA's are decided by a common order. (i) to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the letter dated 23.7.2003 as well as order of regularization of applicants in Group 'D' category. (ii) to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to screen and regularize the applicants in technical Group C category as has been done with regard applicants counterpart working in other Railway Divisions from the date applicants have been regularized in Group D.3. The brief facts of the case are that the applicant No. 1 is a diploma holder in Mechanical Engineering and was appointed under respondent No. 1 on 01.06.1989 as a Mason Mistri on casual basis and he was granted temporary status on 01.06.1990. Later on the Mason Mistri change to Supervisor (Works) in the year 1996 from the beginning the appointment of the appl...

Anil Kumar (Kureel) S/O Late Vs. Union of India (Uoi) Through

Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Allahabad

1. The applicant, Anil Kumar "(Kureel)", has prayed for quashing order dated 21.2.2004 (Annexure 1) by which General Manager, Small Arms Factory, Kanpur declined to give him compassionate appointment under Dying in Harness Rules and for directing them to consider him for such appointment.2. There is no dispute that applicant's father namely late Dhani Ram was the employee of the respondents and he died on 19.3.2002, while still in service, leaving behind him the applicant and others as mentioned in para 4 (3) of the O.A. There is further no dispute that applicant gave application 3.4.2002 (copy of which is Annexure 4) for giving him compassionate appointment in accordance with relevant Rules regulating such appointments. It appears that respondent No. 2 sent a letter dated 21.2.2004 to the applicant informing him that under Rules such appointments was not possible.2. The applicant is challenging this letter on several grounds and one of the grounds is that it is non-speaking. Responde...

Govind Prakash Saini S/O Daya Ram Vs. Mandal Rail Prabandhak, Uttar

Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Allahabad

1. The applicant in this O.A is an Ex Casual Labour , who had worked with the Railways from 01.04.1987 for a period exceeding 120 days. As per submission made by the applicant and as per Annexure A- 3 (Pg. 27), he had worked for 565 days. Some Ex casual laboureres including the applicant went to the Labour Court under Industrial Dispute Act for settlement of their claim. After the decision of Labour Court, the matter came before Hon'ble High Court, Allahabad for consideration in Writ Petition. In pursuance of the direction of the Hon'ble High Court, the respondents under took the exercise for special drive for considering the cases of ex casual laboureres for screening and subsequent regularization. The circular for special drive was issued from the office of DRM, Jhansi on 30.08.2001 (Annexure A- 7, pg. 40).As per circular, the last date for furnishing the applications with necessary details was 30.09.2001.2. The applicant says that he had submitted his application quite in time, a c...