Allahabad Court September 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.
Committee of Management, Baba Ram Sahai Shiksha Samiti and anr. Vs. As ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-11-2009
Reported in: 2010(1)AWC39
Tarun Agarwala, J.1. Heard Shri Sudhakar Pandey, the learned Counsel for the petitioner and Shri K.N. Rai, the learned Counsel for the respondent.2. The facts leading to the filing of the writ petition, as alleged by the petitioner is, that the respondent No. 3 was removed as a member of the Society by a resolution dated 20th February, 1982, which information, was sent to the Assistant-Registrar. On 3rd January, 1991, an election was held, in which one Gorakh Nath Yadav was elected as the Secretary and the petitioner Kamleshwar Prasad Yadav was elected as the Deputy Secretary. It is stated that Gorakh Nath died on 17th April, 1992, and by a resolution dated 10th May, 1992, the petitioner No. 2 was allowed to work as the Secretary. It is further alleged that on 20th of February, 2001, fresh elections were held in which Kedar Nath Yadav was elected as the President and the petitioner No. 2 was elected as the Secretary. Relevant papers were submitted on 23rd October, 2001 and the Registra...
Jagdev Vs. Commissioner Gorakhpur Division and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-11-2009
Reported in: 2010(1)AWC210
A.P. Sahi, J.1. Heard Sri R.C. Singh learned Counsel for the petitioner and Sri R.N. Bhakta for the respondent Nos. 5 and 6 and the learned standing counsel for the respondent Nos. 1 and 2.2. A counter-affidavit has been filed on behalf of the contesting respondents as also on behalf of the Gaon Sabha. However, no counsel is present for the Gaon Sabha when the matter is taken up by this Court.3. The challenge in the present petition is to the order passed by the Additional District Magistrate (Finance and Revenue) dated 6.12.2007 whereby the authority has refused to take action on the proceedings initiated by the petitioner under Section 122C of the U.P.Z.A. and L.R. Act. The application was moved under Clause (6) of Section 122C praying that the allotment be cancelled keeping in view the provisions of Rule 115-Q of the rules framed under the aforesaid Act. The same is quoted below:115-Q. The person to whom the housing site is allotted shall be required to build a house and begin to re...
Anil Kumar Singh Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-11-2009
Reported in: 2010CriLJ717
ORDER1. By these petitions under section 96 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (in short the 'Code') Notification No. 1232 P/vi-Pu-6-2008-6(Vividh)/ 2008 dated May 5, 2008 issued by the Government of Uttar Pradesh under Sub-section (1) of Section 95 of the Code ordering the forfeiture of. the book titled 'Jatiraj' penned by Shri Laxmi Kant Shukla, is under challenge.2. Heard Shri Satya Nayaran Shukla and Shri K.C. Shukla, learned Counsel for the petitioners, Shri J.N. Mathur, learned Additional Advocate General appearing on behalf of the respondents and have perused the material on record.3. The petitioners are Secretary of 'Meydha' a registered society and publisher of the book titled 'Jatiraj' and readers of the said book written by Laxmi Kant Shukla, a P.C.S., Officer. The book was published in December 2006. On May 5, 2008 the Government of Uttar Pradesh, the respondent made art older under section 95 of the Code forfeiting the book captioned 'Jatitraj'.4. The petitioners have...
Ram Sajeevan Singh Parihar and ors. Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-09-2009
Reported in: 2009(4)AWC4196
Rakesh Tiwari, J.1. Heard counsel for the petitioner and the standing counsel.2. The petitioner is aggrieved by impugned order dated 27.8.2009, by which the Joint Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Allahabad Region, Allahabad has issued three directions, i.e., (i) for lodging a first information report against the petitioners at concerned police station, (it) for holding domestic enquiry against concerned five persons who were involved in the embezzlement, and (iii) to complete enquiry under Section 68 (1) of U.P. Co-operative Societies Act, 1965 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), for assessing the loss suffered by the society/bank.3. It appears that certain financial irregularities/embezzlement had taken place in Kisan Seva Sahkari Samiti Limited Shah. Fatehpur during the period 1994 to 1999, which were reported to the authorities. After holding enquiry under Section 68 (1) of the Act, petitioner No. 4 was found to be guilty. He has been dismissed from service and the remaining pet...
Commissioner of Income-tax-i Vs. Pradeshiya Industrial and Investment ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-08-2009
Reported in: [2010]186TAXMAN131(All)
Rajes Kumar, J. 1. The present appeal at the instance of the revenue under Section 260A of the Income-tax Act (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') is against the order of the Tribunal dated 16-3-2007 in Income-tax Appeal No. 138/LUCK./2005 for the assessment year 1996-97.2. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee-opposite party (hereinafter referred to as the 'Assessee') was a Company and was a recognized financial institution. The assessee derived income from interest on finances and financial assistance given to medium and large scale industries in U.P. It also derived income from dividend, securities, deposits, leasing operations, sale of shares and office premises, etc. The assessee filed return of income on 29-11-1996 declaring total income at Rs. 2,07,07,980. The return was processed under Section 143 (1)(a) of the Act on 17-11-1997 determining income at Rs. 2,13,88,621 after making certain adjustments. Subsequently, assessment order under Section 143(3) of the Act wa...
Keshav Tiwari (D) Through L.Rs. Vs. Chief Revenue Officer and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-08-2009
Reported in: 2010(1)AWC37
A.P. Sahi, J.1. Heard Shri Mahendra Rai holding brief of Shri A.K. Mishra, learned Counsel for the petitioner, Shri Abishek Kumar, learned Counsel for the respondent No. 3 and the learned standing counsel for the respondent Nos. 1 and2. The present writ petition questions the correctness of the order dated 13.2.1992 whereby the Chief Revenue Officer while setting aside the order dated 13.1.1992 has remanded the matter back to the Assistant Collector for decision afresh on the merits of the application that had been moved on behalf of the Gaon Sabha for review of the order passed on 13.1.1992 itself.3. In proceedings under Section 122B of the U.P.Z.A. and L.R. Act. 1950, the notice issued against the petitioner after contest was discharged by a detailed reasoned order dated 13.1.1992. The Gaon Sabha through its counsel moved an application for review on the same day which was allowed and the order was set aside. This order, which was passed on the review application was taken up in a re...
Nav Nirman thekedar Kalyan Assn. and anr. Vs. State of U.P. and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-08-2009
Reported in: 2010(1)AWC74
Ashok Bhushan, J.1. Heard Sri S.P. Pandey, learned Counsel for the petitioners and Sri S.C. Chaturvedi, Additional Advocate General assisted by Sri Satyendra Nath Srivastava, learned standing counsel for the respondents.2. By this writ petition, the petitioners have prayed for a writ of certiorari quashing the Government order dated 30th June, 2009 by which Government order 20% reservation for Scheduled Caste and 2% reservation for Scheduled Tribe have been provided in the contract awarded by the Government, Corporation, Development Authority and Local Bodies value of which contract is up to Rs. 5,00,000.3. The petitioner No. 1 is a society registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860 constituted to look after the welfare of the contractors of the Public Works Department, who are its members. Petitioner No. 2 is a registered contractor in Public Works Department, Gorakhpur. The petitioners have challenged the above mentioned Government order dated 20th June, 2009 on the ground...
Dina Nath Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-08-2009
Reported in: 2010(1)AWC34
S.U. Khan, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and Sri S.R. Yadav, learned Counsel for the respondent No. 3, who has appeared through caveat.2. The case of the petitioner is that land in dispute was allotted to his mother in the year 1968 by Gaon Sabha. However, in the revenue records, name of Smt. Kalawati Devi, mother of the petitioner was recorded for the first time in the year 1997 through order alleged to have been passed by C.O. on 12.2.1997, copy of which is Annexure-1 to the writ petition. In Annexure-1, it is mentioned that in the basic year, i.e., the year when consolidation proceedings started, land in dispute included in khata khatauni No. 304 was entered as usar land. It is not mentioned that what was the basic year. It is further mentioned in the said order that Smt. Kalawati filed belated objection alongwith delay condonation application claiming that patta was granted to her in 1968 however due to ignorance, she could not apply for entry of her name in the rev...
Ram Prakash Singh Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-07-2009
Reported in: 2010(1)AWC97
A.P. Sahi, J.1. Heard Sri Rahul Sripat learned Counsel for Ram Prakash Singh the petitioner and Sri Yatindra for Bhedjeet Singh respondent No. 3 as well as learned standing counsel for the respondent Nos. 1 and 2. 2. This writ petition questions the legality of the order dated 12.12.2008 passed by the Deputy Registrar, Firms, Societies and Chits, Agra whereby he has proceeded to hold that the petitioner has failed to establish that he is a valid member of the Society and consequently he did not have any authority to get the list of office bearers registered or get the amendments made in the bye-laws of the Society, and further proceedings consequential thereto have also been rejected keeping in view the background of the case. 3. The facts in brief, are that the dispute appears to have arisen in respect of the membership of the general body of the society as well as the consequential elections periodically. The matter came up before this Court and a direction was issued to the Prescrib...
Babu Lal Vs. Deputy Director of Consolidation and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-07-2009
Reported in: 2010(1)AWC33
S.U. Khan, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner.2. This writ petition is directed against order dated 15.7.2009, passed by D.D.C., Mathura Camp Mahamaya Nagar in Revision No. 429, Nasaruddin v. Babu Lal and Ors.. Through the said order, revision was allowed. Order of S.O.C. dated 1,4.2005 against which revision was directed was set aside and matter was remanded to him to decide the appeal again after hearing the parties and making spot inspection.3. Gaon Sabha has not been impleaded as party in this writ petition.4. S.O.C. had passed the order on the basis of compromise.5. The allegation of Nasaruddin, respondent No. 2 in this writ petition and revisionist in the revision was that on the basis of some fake (forge) compromise, S.O.C. had passed order against the Gaon Sabha. The dispute relates to plot No. 63/3, area 0.250 hectare. As per the case of respondent No. 2 taken by him before the revisional court, the said plot was Gaon Sabha property and , was reserved for abadi for ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »