Allahabad Court April 2008 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.
Banarsi Ram Son of Badri Ram Vs. State of U.P. Through Secretary, Food ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-24-2008
Reported in: [2008(117)FLR928]
Vineet Saran, J.1. The petitioner retired on 31.2.1997 as Senior Supply inspector in the department of Food and Civil Supplies of the State Government. When he was not paid his retiral dues, he filed Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 31936 of 1998 which was disposed of by this Court on 7.10.1998 directing the authorities to decide the representation of the petitioner in this regard. When the representation of the petitioner was not decided, he filed a contempt petition. It is stated that in the year 1999 certain dues were paid to the petitioner but his entire retiral dues had not been paid to him. However, in the year 2005 his entire retiral dues including gratuity and arrears have been paid. Now by means of this writ petition the petitioner has prayed for payment of 18% interest per annum on the delayed payment of retiral dues.2. I have heard Sri A.S.Diwekar, learned Counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents. Pleadings have been exchanged...
Surendra Mohan Srivastava Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-24-2008
Reported in: 2008(3)AWC2196
R.N. Misra, J.1. By way of this writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the Notification No. N-838/VII-Nayaya-3-924 (65)/1994-LKO/August, 2004 issued by the respondent No. 1 appointing the respondent No. 4 Shri Raj Kumar Jaiswal as Public Notary for Padrauna, district Kushinagar. He has sought writ of certiorari for quashing the aforesaid notification.2. We have heard Smt. Durga Tiwari, learned Counsel for the petitioner, Shri P.S. Baghel, learned Counsel appearing for the respondent No. 4 and learned standing Counsel for the respondents No. 1 to 3.3. It appears from the contents of the writ petition that Shri Badri Prasad, the father of the respondent No. 4 was working as public notary in Padrauna, district Kushinagar, who died and in his place the respondent No. 4 applied to be appointed. His application was forwarded by the then District Judge, Kushinagar vide letter No. 384/XV dated 18.5.2004. The respondent No. 1 appointed the respondent No. 4 as Public Notary. vide impugned ...
Smt. Swarn Prabha Singh Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-24-2008
Reported in: 2008(3)AWC2684
Anjani Kumar and Sudhir Agarwal, JJ.1. The petitioner, who is elected Chairman/President of Nagar Panchayat Sahatwar, district Ballia (hereinafter referred to as 'Municipal Board') has challenged the order dated 27.3.2008, passed by respondent No. 1, a copy whereof is annexed as Annexure-'8' to the writ petition, whereby the petitioner was asked to show cause as to why for the charges mentioned in the aforesaid show cause notice she be not removed from the office of the Chairman/ President of the 'Municipal Board' as contemplated under Section 48(2) of the U.P. Municipality Act, 1916 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). Petitioner is asked to submit reply within a period of one fortnight from the date of receipt of the notice, failing which the petitioner shall be removed from the office of the Chairman/ President of the 'Municipal Board'. The petitioner was also served with an order dated 29.3.2008, passed by respondent No. 3, a copy whereof is annexed as Annexure-'9' to the writ p...
Committee of Management Shanti Niketan Inter College Through Its Manag ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-24-2008
Reported in: AIR2009All7
Rakesh Tiwari, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner, learned Counsel for the respondents, learned Standing counsel for the State and perused the record.2. This petition has been filed by the petitioner for issuance of direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents not to take any action against the petitioner under the Right to Information Act, 2005 for not providing information sought by respondent No. 6 in the aforesaid Act.3. Shanti Niketan inter College, Barhi District Ghazipur is recognized institution. The provisions of High School and Intermediate Education Act as well as Payment of Salary Act to the teachers and other staff, 1971 are applicable to it. Respondent no. 6 has sought certain information under the Right to information Act, which is being resisted by the institution on the ground that the said act is not applicable and the institution is not bound to give information to respondent No. 6.4. The petitioner has relied upon an interim order passed...
Kehri Singh and ors. Vs. Km. Laxmi Devi and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-24-2008
Reported in: AIR2009All9
ORDERPoonam Srivastav, J.1. Heard Sri Rajesh Kumar Chauhan and Sri A. K. Gupta, learned Counsel for the defendant-appellants IInd set and Sri M. K. Gupta Advocate for the plaintiff-respondents.2. Learned Counsel for the parties state that the questions involved are legal questions and, therefore, the record of the lower Court is not required to ascertain the facts of the case; consequently this appeal is heard and decided at the stage of admission itself.3. The instant second appeal is preferred against the judgment and decree dated 28-1-2004 passed by the Additional District Judge, Court No. 4, Aligarh allowing Civil Appeal No. 108 of 1997 arising out of Original Suit No. 546 of 1989. The trial Court dismissed the suit for specific performance but allowed refund of the earnest money along with 12% interest. The judgment and decree passed by the trial Court was challenged in appeal by the plaintiff. The suit was instituted for specific performance. Shiv Kumar defendant Ist set was the ...
Ram Narayan Vs. Consolidation Commissioner and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-24-2008
Reported in: [2008(118)FLR601]
Pradeep Kant and Narayan Shukla, JJ. 1. Heard the learned Counsel for the appellant, Sri Amit Bose and Sri Anuj Kudesia, learned Counsel for the respondents.This special appeal challenges the order passed by the learned Single Judge dated 14th March, 2008, by means of which the claim of the appellant that his date of birth was incorrectly recorded in the service book because of which he was retired approximately four years before he could actually reach the ago of superannuation i.e. 58 years has been rejected.2. The claim has been rejected mainly on the ground that the appellant did not raise any objection against the entry of dale of birth recorded in the service book though it was reflected in the gradation list also, till the fag end of his career and therefore, he was not entitled to any relief.3. It is true that a Government servant who enters into service with open eyes and full knowledge that he is to retire at the age of superannuation as may be prescribed for such Government ...
Noor Ali Ansari Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-23-2008
Reported in: 2008(3)AWC2429
B.S. Chauhan and Arun Tandon, JJ.1. This writ petition has been filed for quashing the minimum marks fixed by the Selection Committee constituted by the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad for filing up the vacancies in U.P. Higher Judicial Service, i.e., 50 percent in the written examination for being called for interview for all category of candidates including the candidates of reserved category.2. Facts and circumstances giving rise to this case are that 160 vacancies of Higher Judicial Officer were advertised under the U.P. Higher Judicial Service Rules, 1975 (hereinafter called the 'Rules, 1975'). Out of the said vacancies, 84 vacancies were to be filled up by direct recruitment. In view of the provisions of Rule 18 of the Rules, 1975, the Selection Committee fixed the bench mark of 50 percent in the written examination for the candidates to be called for interview for all categories of candidates. The said bench mark is under challenge.3. Shri Prabha Shanker Pandey, learned Co...
National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Smt. Ramwati and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-23-2008
Reported in: 2008(4)AWC3372
Amitava Lala, J.1. This appeal is arising out of an order dated 14.1.2008, passed by the concerned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal. Bareilly, fixing the liability of payment of compensation of Rs. 1.89.500 alongwith the interest upon the owner to be paid to the claimants on account of death of the deceased but as a stop gap arrangement the direction was given upon the insurance company to pay the amount of compensation and recover such amount from the owner.2. No application under Section 170 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') was allowed. By preferring this appeal, the appellant contended before this Court that since the case is arising out of breach of policy, the statutory requirement to make an application under Section 170 of the Act is not required. In other words, the case is covered under Section 149(2) of the Act. He has further contended before this Court that since it has been proved beyond doubt under issue Nos. 5 and 6 that the driver and...
State of U.P. and ors. Vs. Brajendra Singh and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-23-2008
Reported in: [2008(117)FLR925]
Yatindra Singh and Ran Vijay Singh, JJ.1. Sri Brijendra Singh respondent No. 1 (the contesting respondent) was a constable in PAC. He was found in state of intoxication on 9.11.1997. He was suspended on 21.11.1997 and; thereafter a charge-sheet dated 14.1.1998 was served upon him. An inquiry was conducted and inquiry report was submitted. The contesting respondent was given a show cause notice. Considering his reply he was dismissed from service on 21.3.1998. He filed an appeal which was dismissed on 23.12.1998. The contesting respondent filed claim-petition No. 767 of 1999. It was allowed on 28.5.2004, hence the present writ petition.2. We have heard the Standing Counsel for the petitioner and Sri S.N. Yadav for the contesting respondent.3. The Tribunal has allowed the claim petition of the contesting respondent on the ground that:(i) The contesting respondent was not given the statement of the witnesses;(ii) The principles of natural justice has been violated;(iii) The doctor's repor...
Jagdish Saran Vs. Ixth Addl. District Judge and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-22-2008
Reported in: 2008(3)AWC2592
Dilip Gupta, J.1. It was only a fortnight ago when this Court expressed its deep anguish at the conduct of a tenant who had resisted dispossession from the premises under his tenancy for a period of more than two years by raising frivolous objections before the Executing Court despite specific directions of this Court that the tenant must handover peaceful possession of the accommodation to the landlord within three months.2. The facts of the present petition are far more disturbing and reveal how an unscrupulous tenant in his attempt to cling on to the tenanted premises has been able to resist the decree of eviction passed against him in 1969 and that too when this Court, as far back as on 10th February, 1987, had directed the Executing Court to take immediate steps for executing the decree and get the possession delivered to the decree-holder without any further delay after noticing the 'fraudulent' conduct of the judgment-debtors.3. The Court is reminded of the note of caution sound...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »