Allahabad Court July 2007 Judgments

P.K. Kalia Vs. Canara Bank Ltd. and anr.

Court: Allahabad

Reported in: [2007(115)FLR113]

Anjani Kumar and Sudhir Agarwal, JJ.1. The petitioner by means of present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has prayed for the following reliefs:(i) to issue a suitable writ, order or direction commanding the respondents to bring up the records of the case and get the orders dated 7.5.1991, 16.4.1991 and 3.4.1991 (Annexures-17, 15 and 14) and the appellate order dated 3.5.1989 (Annexure 10) to the extent two punishments have .boon given to the petitioner and the order of dismissal dated 29.1.1988 (Annexure 9) quashed.(ii) to issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other writ, direction for order commanding the respondents to make any recovery from the pay of the petitioner in pursuance of the aforesaid orders.(iii) to issue any other writ, order or direction or grant such other and further reliefs as may be deemed fit and proper on the facts and circumstances of the case and to order for costs.2. The brief facts giving rise to the present dispute are th...

Sunil Kumar Srivastava S/O Sri Vijay Bahadur Srivastava and Anil Kumar ...

Court: Allahabad

Reported in: [2008(118)FLR629]

Rakesh Tiwari, J.1. Heard Sri Sharad Kumar Srivastava for the petitioners and Sri C.K. Parekh for the respondents.2. By means of this writ petition the petitioners have prayed for a writ of certiorari quashing the order dated 6.1.1997 passed by the Up Nagar Adhikari, Nagar Nigam, Varanasi, respondent No. 4 besides a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to allow them to work upon their respective posts and to pay their salary regularly month to month.3. The facts of the case, in brief, are that petitioner No. 1 was appointed as Paid Apprentice Vaccinator on 18.12.1984 for three months which was extended twice and thereafter he was appointed on ad-hoc basis w.e.f. 3.10.1985 with the approval of the Administrator. One of the conditions of his appointment was that his services may be terminated at any time without prior notice. Thereafter on the basis of recommendations of Selection Committee he was promoted on the post of Vaccinator on ad-hoc basis w.e.f. 24.3.1988.4. Petitioner No...

Arnuesh Kumar S/O Late Sri Prabhat Vs. Union of India (Uoi) Through

Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Allahabad

1. It is prayed that the respondent nos. 2 & 3 be directed to prepare a proposal for revision and up- gradation of pay-scales of Library staff of Indian Council of Forestry Research & Education (in short ICRFE) and place the same before the Board of Governors for its consideration in the meeting to be held in the month of October, 2006.2. The applicant was appointed as Assistant Library Grade-II on 10.2.1984 in National Forest Library and Information Centre, Dehradun.It is said that at that time this centre was governed by the department of the Central Government. On the basis of the recommendations made by the 4th Central Pay Commission and by a committee headed by Prof. D.P.Chattopadhaya, the Government of India issued Office Memorandum dated 24.7.1990 (at page 18) introducing the revised pay structures for Library staff under the purview of the Central Government. Detailed instructions were given in this Office Memorandum as to how these revised pay scales were to be made a...

Smt. Nirmala Devi Vs. Additional Commissioner and ors.

Court: Allahabad

Reported in: AIR2007All184

ORDERS.U. Khan, J.1. Original respondent No. 8 Lallan (since deceased) had two daughters i.e. Smt. Nirmala Devi the petitioner and Smt. Bittan Devi mother of respondents 4 to 7 Vijay Nath and others. It is alleged that Lallan executed a memorandum of family settlement on 6-2-1989 stating therein that earlier he had given his entire agricultural land to his two daughters i.e. Nirmala Devi and Bittan Devi. It appears that on the basis of the said alleged family settlement names of both the daughters were mutated in the revenue records on 22-1-1991. This was done in pursuance of order dated 10-1- 1991 passed in case No. 413 by Additional Tehsildar, Manikpur, Kunda District Pratapgarh. Thereafter, Lallan executed a sale deed in favour of respondents 4 to 7 on 15-12-1989. Respondents 4 to 7 filed application before Naib Tehsildar. Naib Tehsildar heard all the parties concerned. Lallan stated that he had not executed the memo- randum, of family settlement. NaibTehsildar Manikpur Kunda Pratap...

Manik Chandra Son of Sri Shiv Sagar Yadav Vs. State of U.P. Through Se ...

Court: Allahabad

Reported in: [2007(115)FLR205]

Vineet Saran, J.1. The petitioner was appointed on the post of Survey on 6.1.1979. After completing his training of Lehhpal, he was confirmed on the said post. In the years 1986 and 1988 certain promotions were granted form the post of Lekhpal to Survey Kanoongo. Since, ignoring the case of the petitioner, certain persons junior to him had been promoted as Survey Knoongo, the petitioner filed a representation before the respondent No. 1. On 30.2.1991 the Assistant Record Officer, Mirzapur which were also in favour of the petitioner but still the petitioner was not also in favour of the petitioner but still the petitioner was not granted promotion. He then filed Writ Petition No. 27365 of 1995 in which initially an interim order was granted to the effect that the respondents be restrained from conferring any promotion to the post of Survey Kanoongo without considering the candidature of the petitioner. However, the said writ petition was finally disposed of on 22.4.1977 with the directi...

Keshav Ram (D.) Through L.Rs. Vs. Deputy Director of Consolidation and ...

Court: Allahabad

Reported in: 2007(4)AWC3404

S.U. Khan, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.Original respondent Nos. 4 and 5 Smt. Chando and Sita Ram were tenure holders of plot No. 2902. They sold the said plot on 24.1.1973 to Sri N.D. Chaudhary father of respondent Nos. 6 and 7 Sunil Kumar and Anil Kumar.2. Petitioner was tenure holder of plot Nos. 2863 and 2888. Through registered deed dated 2.3.1974, petitioner and Sri N.D. Chaudhary exchanged their plots. As a result of the said deed Plot No. 2902, which had been purchased by Sri N.D. Chaudhary was given to the petitioner and petitioner's plot Nos. 2863 and 2888 were given to Sri N.D. Chaudhary.3. In consolidation proceedings, petitioner filed application that plot No. 2902 be recorded in his name as the same had been purchased by Sri N.D. Chaudhary and thereafter given by Sri N.D. Chaudhary to the petitioner in exchange. Sri N.D. Chaudhary filed application fully supporting the case of the petitioner. Smt. Chando raised certain objections regarding validity of the sa...

Chandan Kumar Son of Late Ram Sewak Vs. Registrar, B.H.U. and Head of ...

Court: Allahabad

Reported in: 2008(1)AWC740; [2007(115)FLR855]

S.N. Srivastava, J.1. The matter relates to appointment of petitioner under the Dying in Harness Rules as Sweeper in Banaras Hindu University. Petitioner's father-Ram Sewak was working as Safaiwala in Physics Department. He died in harness. Petitioner being the son has applied for appointment under the Dying in Harness Rules after death of his father. He was given temporary appointment on Daily Wage basis. He moved an application for substantive appointment by regularising his services, but his claim for regular appointment was denied and his application was rejected by the impugned order dated 23rd/24th August, 1994 on the ground that petitioner's mother is in employment of Nagar Nigam, Varanasi.2. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.3. Learned Counsel for the petitioner urged that petitioner's father died in 'harness on 20.5.1994. He was appointed on 14.6.1994 on Daily Wage basis whereas he was entitled to get regular appointment under the Dying in Harness Rules. His claim for appo...

Madan Lal Gupta Vs. Xviith Additional District Judge and ors.

Court: Allahabad

Reported in: 2007(4)AWC3812

Rakesh Tiwari, J.1. Heard counsel for the parties and perused the record.2. This writ petition has been filed challenging the validity and correctness of the judgment and orders dated 26.10.1991 and 6.1.1995 passed by the Prescribed Authority/VIIth Additional Civil Judge, Meerut, respondent No. 2 and XVIIth Additional District Judge, Meerut, respondent No. 1.3. The petitioner filed an application under Section 21(2) of U. P. Act No. 13 of 1972 for release of the surplus land before the Prescribed Authority, Meerut which was registered as P.A. Case No. 208 of 1988 on the ground that respondent No. 3 is the tenant of ahata with two rooms each measuring 12ft. 6' x 8 ft. 3', i.e' 103.1250 sq. ft. ; that the total area covered under the tenancy of respondent No. 3 is 206.25 sq. ft.; that respondent No. 3 is entitled to retain only double of the covered area, i.e., area of the room viz., 412.50 sq. ft. only plus area of the two rooms viz., 206.25 sq. ft. and the remaining area out of the aha...

Satish Chandra Mittal Vs. Assistant Commissioner (Assessment)

Court: Allahabad

Reported in: (2009)22VST202(All)

ORDER1. We have heard both sides. Counter and rejoinder affidavits have been exchanged.2. The petitioner is a city booking agency at Hapur, District Ghaziabad. It appears that certain consignments of goods amenable to the trade tax were received in Hapur and were released by the petitioner from the petitioner's agency office to the persons carrying counterfoil of the goods receipts, against which such goods are normally released by railways. Later, the Trade Tax Department of U. P. Government required the petitioner to supply the particulars of consignees of Hapur to whom the goods had been released. These addresses of the consignees as mentioned in the goods receipts were supplied by the petitioner to the Trade Tax Department.3. Upon verification, the Trade Tax Department found that some of the consignees were not residing or carrying on business at the addresses mentioned in the goods receipts. Thereupon, the Trade Tax Department has given notice to the petitioner asking for further ...

Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd. and anr. Vs. Ram Bharosey Lal Gup ...

Court: Allahabad

Reported in: AIR2007All220

ORDERTarun Agarwala, J.1. The plaintiff executed a lease deed dated 1-2-1960 for a period of twenty years in favour of M/s Caltex India Ltd. on a monthly rent of Rs. 50/- for the purpose of erecting a petrol pump. By The Caltex (Ac quisition of Shares of Caltex Oil Refining (India) Limited and of the Undertakings in India of Caltex (India) Limited) Act 1977, being Act No. 17 of 1977, (hereinafter referred to as the Caltex Act), M/s Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd. became the successor in the interest of the original lessee. The plaintiff mortgaged its property on 12-1 1962 to Shri Ram Gopal and since then he was receiving the rent from the lessee and continued to receive the rent till April 1983 when the mortgage was redeemed by the plaintiff and the rights on the land reverted to the plaintiff. It is alleged that the redemption of the mortgage was intimated to the defendant No. 1. It was also alleged that in terms of paragraph No. 3 (d) of the lease deed, the defendant No. 1 did n...