Allahabad Court February 2009 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.
Shiv Kumar Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-11-2009
Reported in: 2009(2)AWC1655
Vineet Saran, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner as well as learned standing counsel appearing for the respondents and have perused the record.2. An election petition was filed by the respondent No. 4, Rajendra Prasad challenging the election of respondent No. 5, Rekha (Kinner) to the post of Chairman, Nagar Palika Parishad. In the said petition, the petitioner, Shiv Kumar, who was also a candidate for the said post, was also impleaded as a party. He claims that he had secured the third highest votes in the election. From the record, it appears that notice on the petitioner was served on 16.12.2006. In response thereto, the petitioner appeared in the Court on 25.1.2007 but thereafter he did not appear on any date. Then, on 7.11.2008 he filed an application that election petitioner may be required to provide a copy of the election petition and that he may be granted time to file his written statement. Such application of the petitioner has been rejected by an order dated 23.1...
Sushil Kumar Singh and anr. Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-11-2009
Reported in: 2009(85)AWC1852
Shashi Kant Gupta, J.1. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioners for quashing the order dated 2.1.2006, whereby the representation of the petitioners for sending them on Special B.T.C. Training Course, 1998 has been rejected by the respondent No. 2.2. The brief facts in a nutshell are as follows:3. The respondent No. 2 published an advertisement on 8.3.1998 inviting applications from eligible and qualified candidates for filling up the post of Assistant Teachers in the Primary Schools through Special B.T.C. Training Course. The petitioners applied for the same within time enclosing all necessary documents. On the meantime petitioner appeared in the back paper examinations of B.Ed. for improving their marks in the theory papers and the result whereof was declared and the petitioner secured better marks therein. Therefore, the petitioners made request through representation dated 28.8.1998 and 2.9.1998 to the respondent No. 2 to entertain the new mark-sheet for recalculating ...
U.P. State Bridge Corporation Ltd. Vs. Prescribed Authority, Labour Co ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-10-2009
Reported in: 2009(2)AWC1698
Tarun Agarwala, J.1. Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner.2. The petitioner has filed the present writ petition praying for a writ of mandamus declaring that the award dated 16.3.99 passed by the labour court, Varanasi in Adjudication Case No. 87 of 1998 which was published by the State Government on 5.8.99 be rendered unenforceable. The submission raised by the learned Counsel for the petitioner is, that in view of the provision of Section 6C of the U.P. Industrial Disputes Act, the 'award remains in operation only for a period of one year from the date of its publication and after the expiry of one year, the said award could not be enforced: The learned Counsel for the petitioner consequently submitted that a writ of mandamus should be issued holding that the award passed by the labour court in the year 1999 is not enforceable in law.3. In my opinion, the submission raised by the learned Counsel for the petitioner is patently misconceived and is bereft of merit. For facility,...
Chhote Lal Vs. Regional Manager, Bank of Baroda and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-09-2009
Reported in: 2009(2)AWC1332; [2009(121)FLR191]; (2009)IILLJ625All
Tarun Agarwala, J.1. Heard Sri Dharmendra Singh, holding the brief of Sri Kuldeep Jauhari, the learned Counsel for the petitioner and Sri Ashish Srivastava, holding the brief of Sri Vipin Sinha, the learned Counsel for the respondent bank.2. The petitioner has challenged the validity and legality of the award whereby his claim with regard to the validity of his order of termination was rejected by the Industrial Tribunal, New Delhi. The facts leading to the filing of the writ petition is, that the petitioner was appointed as a peon allegedly w.e.f. 10.6.1991 and worked for a limited period of time and thereafter his services was dispensed with. It is alleged that the petitioner was re-engaged and eventually worked till 14.11.1994 when his services was terminated without any prior notice. The petitioner contended that he had worked for more than 240 days in a calendar year and therefore, his services could not be terminated without complying with the mandatory provisions of issuing noti...
Laxmi Pat Singhal Vs. Smt. Naseema and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-06-2009
Reported in: 2009(2)AWC1092; [2009(121)FLR83]; (2009)IIILLJ626All
Amitava Lala, J.1. The fact remains that the deceased was appointed as cleaner by the owner of the truck No. H.R.-38-F-0201. He was going by the said truck to Anjar, Gujarat and when the truck reached to Sojat City near Parihar hotel, the truck met with accident with truck No. R.J.-142-G-7869 and the deceased died on the spot. The insurance of the truck was valid at the time of accident. He was aged about 23 years. The claimant/respondent, mother of the deceased, had stated in the court of Commissioner of Workmen's Compensation that the deceased was getting salary about Rs. 4,000 per month from the owner. But the owner of the truck had said therein that he was paying Rs. 1,800 per month to the deceased. The claimant did not submit any document as evidence in support of the salary. However, the Commissioner fixed the compensation of Rs. 3,04,560. The Commissioner also held that the owner of the truck caused delay in paying the compensation to the claimant, therefore, he is liable to pay...
Smt. Murti Devi and ors. Vs. Vth Additional District Judge and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-06-2009
Reported in: 2009(2)AWC1535
Sunil Ambwani, J.1. Heard Shri M.K. Gupta, learned Counsel for the petitioners, Shri Ravi Agrawal appeared on behalf of respondents.2. This writ petition arises out of an order passed by Civil Judge, Ghaziabad on 20.1.1989 in Misc. Case No. 301 of 1988, Smt. Maya Devi v. Smt. Murti Devi, in which the objections under Section 47 read with Section 151 of Code of Civil Procedure were partly allowed and the decree of ejectment was held not to be executable. By the judgment and order dated 23.11.1990 the Vth Additional District Judge, Ghaziabad, dismissed Civil Revision No. 32 of 1989 under Section 25 of the Provincial Small Causes Court Act read with Section 115 of C.P.C.3. Brief facts, giving rise to this writ petition are that Smt. Murti Devi filed a J.S.C.C. No. 976 of 1997 against Smt. Maya Devi for eviction. The suit was decreed on 20.1.1978. In Execution Case No. 712 of 1988, Smt. Maya Devi filed objections under Section 47 of the Code of Civil Procedure (Misc. Case No. 48 of 1988) c...
Ram Ashish Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-06-2009
Reported in: 2009(2)AWC1670
Rajes Kumar, J.1. Heard Sri Anil Kumar Tiwari, learned Counsel for the petitioner, learned standing counsel appearing on behalf of respondent Nos. 1 to 3.2. By means of the present writ petition, petitioner is challenging the order of the Commissioner, Gorakhpur Division, Gorakhpur dated 26.7.2007, by which he has dismissed the appeal of the petitioner filed against the order of Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Sadar Deoria dated 31.1.2007. By the aforesaid order, Sub-Divisional Magistrate has cancelled the licence of the fair price shop of the petitioner.3. It appears that on the various allegations the licence of the petitioner has been suspended by Sub-Divisional Magistrate vide order dated 18.9.2006. It also appears that no separate show cause notice has been issued before cancelling the licence of the petitioner. However, petitioner has filed the reply on the allegations made in the suspension order. On the consideration of the reply, the licence of the petitioner has been cancelled vid...
Nishit Sharma Vs. Vice-chancellor, Aligarh Muslim University and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-06-2009
Reported in: 2009(2)AWC1715
Rakesh Tiwari, J.1. Heard Sri Divakar Rai Sharma, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Smt. Sunita Agarwal, learned Counsel for respondent Nos. 1 to 5. Perused the record.2. The petitioner passed his High School from Delhi Public School, Aligarh in 2008 and obtained 92% marks. He appeared in combined entrance examination for class XIth and Diploma in Engineering on 2.6.2008 opting Physics, Chemistry and Biology as his first choice. The petitioner had applied under two categories for admission in the University, i.e., under the special categories of S.M. category which is for outstanding sportsman and under C.A. category which is for children of alumni or old students of the University and as such the petitioner was not admitted by the University in either of the aforesaid two categories of S.M. and C.A. His name did not find place in the list of selected candidates. On receipt of an unconfirmed information that cut-off mark of the last student admitted in the aforesaid category of al...
State of U.P. Vs. Allied Construction Engineers and Contractors
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-06-2009
Reported in: 2009(85)AWC1953
Amitava Lala, J.1. This appeal has been preferred by the State of U.P. under Section 39 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 (hereinafter in short called as the 'Act, 1940') challenging the judgment and order dated 20th February, 2001 passed by the learned District Judge, Bulandshahr in Original Suit No. 6 of 2000, State of U.P. v. Allied Construction, under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter called as the 'Act, 1996'). By the order impugned the Court below dismissed the application for setting aside the arbitral award dated 8th May, 1998 passed by one Sri K.K. Sahanan Chief Engineer, Irrigation Department, U.P.2. The State-appellant has already acted upon the award by paying the principal sum, so determined by the arbitrator, to the respondent-contractor but raised a dispute with regard to interest. As per the award, rate of interest for the pre-reference period is fixed @ 15% per annum, whereas for the pendente lite and subsequent period is fixed @ 18% per ...
Northern India Textile Research Association Vs. Presiding Officer and ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-06-2009
Reported in: (2009)IIILLJ12All
Tarun Agarwala, J.1. Heard Sri Navin Sinha, the learned senior counsel duly assisted by Sri Syed Ali Murtaza, the learned Counsel for the petitioner and Sri Y.K. Sinha, the learned Counsel for the contesting respondent No. 2.2. The brief facts leading to the filing of the writ petition is, that the workman/respondent No. 2 was charge sheeted on November 15, 1986 on various misconducts committed by him. An enquiry was made and, the management, by an order dated April 2, 1987, passed an order of dismissal to be made effective from April 27, 1987. The management issued a cheque dated April 24, 1987 for a sum of Rs. 3643/- with instructions to their bankers to credit the cheque, vis-a-vis the amount, in the account of the workman. It has come on record that the bank credited the amount of Rs. 3643/- in the account of the workman on the same date. Since another dispute was pending before the Industrial Tribunal, the management, simultaneously moved an application under Section 6-E(2)(b) of ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »