Allahabad Court September 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.
Khursheed Alam S/O Late Sri Mohd. Husain, Vs. State of U.P. Through th ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-05-2007
Reported in: [2007(115)FLR1125]
Rakesh Tiwari, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties and perused the record.2. This petition has been filed by the petitioners for a direction to the respondent Nos. 3 and 4 to pay them the salary which is being paid to the other employees and to consider the case of the petitioners for regularization by deciding representation dated 23.5,2007 against the existing vacancies or the vacancies which may be created c for which sanction may be obtained from the State Government.3. The case of the petitioners is that they are continuously working as a Clerk in the office of Nagar Palika Parishad, Mugghal Scrai, District Chandauli on daily wages basis since 1991.4. It is alleged that petitioner No. 1 filed Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 32405 of 1993 which was disposed of vide order dated 19.1.2004 directing the petitioner No. 1 to make a representation within a period of two weeks along with a certified copy of the order. Nagar Palika may pass appropriate orders preferably within three m...
Sri Ram Agencies and ors. Vs. Union Bank of India
Court: DRAT Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-03-2007
Reported in: I(2008)BC86
1. In this appeal order dated 10th October, 2006 passed by D.R.T., Allahabad in M.A. No. 12/06 is under challenge.2. In short the appellants have contended that the respondent Bank filed an Original Application No. 133/01 against them and on 29th November, 2002 that Original Application was decided ex parte by the Tribunal. An application for recalling the ex parte order dated 29th November, 2002 under Section 22(2)(g) of the RDDBFI Act, 1993 had been filed by the appellants. On the basis of above ex-parte decree, the recovery proceedings were taken up against the appellants. The appellants pleaded that they were making efforts to compromise with the Bank by submitting a proposal for payment of the amount of ledger balance accordingly on the basis of information given by the Bank the total amount payable was communicated to be Rs. 5,01,073.36 including legal expenses, etc. The proposal given by appellants to the Bank was approved. According to the appellants they were allowed 90 days'...
Chander S/O Buddhu Vs. State of U.P. Through Its Secretary (Revenue),
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-03-2007
Reported in: AIR2008All6; 2008(1)AWC600
S.N. Srivastava, J.The common question mooted in the above batch of writ petitions relates to agricultural loan advanced by different Banks and therefore, all the petitions have been heard and are disposed of by a composite judgment.1. Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 4177 of 2007: A brief resume of necessary facts in this writ petition is that the State Bank of India Meja Branch District Allahabad sanctioned a sum of Rs. 2,98000/- to the petitioner against purchase of Tractor on 30.7.2004 and in connection with the aforesaid loan, agricultural land admeasuring 1.232 hectares situated in village Banwari Khas Post Shukulpur P.S.Manda Tahsil Koraon District Allahabad and also land admeasuring .560 situated in village Unchdah was pledged to the Bank. The total land pledged to the Bank admeasures 1.792 hectares. It would appear from the record that the petitioner repaid certain amount details of which are enumerated in the writ petition. It would further appear that Bhola Singh Patel and Dhar...
S.P. Singh S/O Late Sri N.P. Singh, Assistant Excise Commissioner/Dist ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-03-2007
Reported in: 2008(2)AWC1779
B.S. Chauhan, J.1. The petitioner was employed as an Assistant Excise Commissioner in the Excise Department in the State of U.P. In respect of his posting at Raebareilly in the year 2002-2003, he was served with a charge-sheet dated 25/2/2003 containing two charges. The petitioner submitted reply to the charge-sheet and denied the allegations made therein. After conclusion of departmental enquiry, report was submitted to the Disciplinary Authority. The Disciplinary Authority, in turn, issued notice dated 05/4/2004 calling upon the petitioner to show cause as to why appropriate punishment be not imposed. A copy of the inquiry report was also forwarded to the petitioner. After reply was submitted by the petitioner to the said show cause notice, the Disciplinary Authority in terms of Rules 16 of The Uttar Pradesh Government Servant (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1999 (hereinafter called the Rules of 1999) read with Uttar Pradesh Public Service Commission (Limitation of Function) Regulatio...
Employees' State Insurance Corporation Vs. Akhtar
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-03-2007
Reported in: [2007(115)FLR1131]; (2008)ILLJ833All
Pankaj Mithal, J.1. Heard P.K. Asthana, learned Counsel for the appellant. No one has put in appearance on behalf of the claimant-respondent despite the service of notice being sufficient upon him.2. The appeal is directed against the order of the Employees Insurance Court dated April 29, 1988 passed in appeal No. 65 of 19SSAkhtar v. Employees State Insurance Corporation, Kanpur.3. The claimant respondent was an employee of the Elgin Mill. It is said that he suffered injury in his right knee while on duty on June 29, 1987. Admittedly, the said injury is non-schedule injury. The Medical Board disallowed the claim of the claimant-respondent vide order dated December 16, 1987. The said order was impugned in the appeal. The appellate Court has allowed the appeal partly and has determined the loss of earning capacity of the claimant-respondent to the extent of 5%.4. Learned Counsel for the appellant has raised a substantial question of law as to whether the appellate Court was justified in ...
Ashok Kumar and ors. Vs. U.P. State Warehousing Corporation Ltd. and o ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-03-2007
Reported in: [2008(116)FLR107]
S.S. Chauhan, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Counsel for the U.P. State Warehousing Corporation.2. The petitioners by means of the present writ petition are claiming regularization on different posts as they allege that they are working continuously since 2000 and the opposite parties are bound to consider their claim for regularization.3. Submission of the learned Counsel for the petitioners is that some of the petitioners belong to the reserved category i.e. S.C. and O.B.C., but an advertisement has been made with respect to filling up of backlog vacancies of reserved category and the claim of the petitioners is not being considered. The petitioners claim that they may be considered ignoring the age bar and due weightage should be given in regard to their past services.4. In support of his contention, learned Counsel for the petitioners has placed reliance on the case of Yamuna Shanker Sharma v. State of Rajasthan and Ors. 2007 (52) AIC 231 (SC) : 2007 ...
Ram Chandra Son of Sri Daulat Prasad Vs. State of U.P. Through the Sec ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-01-2007
Reported in: 2008(2)AWC1782; [2007(115)FLR208]
S.U. Khan, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.2. The question to be decided in this writ petition is as to whether one of the two dates of birth of petitioner as entered in his service book i.e. 10.10.1948 was rightly scored off? The age of retirement of Class of employees to which petitioner belongs is 60 years. According to the petitioner he should have been permitted to continue in service until 10.10.2008, however, he was wrongly retired on 1.8.1998. Original service book was summoned and perused by the court. Photostat copy of the first page of original service book was directed to be filed by learned standing counsel who has filed the said Photostat copy. On the first page of the service book, certificate issued by C.M.O dated 1.8.1986 was annexed. Photocopy of the said certificate has also been filed. These two copies have also been filed along with other affidavits. The certificate was issued under Rule 10 of Fundamental Rules on the proforma given there under. The titl...
Radhey Shyam Jaiswal Vs. Commissioner of Trade Tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-01-2007
Reported in: (2008)16VST224(All)
Rajes Kumar, J.1. This revision is directed against the order of the Tribunal dated July 11, 2002 for the assessment year 1990-91.2. The assessing authority initiated proceeding for the assessment year 1990-91 on the basis of the information received that the applicant provided bus No. U.P. -70/A9081 to IFFCO Phulpur on hire and received the hire charges. On the basis of the information, an ex parte order was passed on March 31, 1995 and tax was levied on the hire charges under Section 3F of the U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). The first appeal filed by the dealer was rejected and the second appeal has also been rejected by the Tribunal.3. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.4. Learned Counsel for the applicant submitted that the assessing authority has passed the ex parte order without giving proper opportunity of hearing to the applicant. He further submitted that the copy of the contract, which is annexure 1 to the revision, reveals that vehicle was...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Next ›