Allahabad Court January 2010 Judgments

Usha Agrawal Vs. State of U.P. and ors.

Court: Allahabad

Shishir Kumar, J.1. Heard Shri V.K. Singh, learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel as well as Shri A.K. Gupta, Advocate appearing for the Committee of Management.2. This writ petition has been filed for a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to promote the petitioner on the post of Lecturer in Sanskrit in the institution. It appears that petitioner was appointed as Assistant Teacher in L.T. Grade in the year 1982 and in the year 1998, post of Lecturer in Sanskrit fell vacant due to the retirement of the permanent incumbent Smt. Sushila Devi Shashtri. Petitioner being Master of Arts in Sanskrit and B.Ed was fully qualified to be promoted on the post of Lecturer in Sanskrit on the said post. In the institution six posts of Lecturer have been sanctioned and out of six, three posts have already been filled up by way of direct recruitment, therefore, this vacancy was to be filled up under the 50% quota amongst the eligible candidate who were working in L.T. Gr...

Shree Ram Gupta Vs. Shafiquer Rahman and ors.

Court: Allahabad

Reported in: 2010(10)AWC2097

Rajes Kumar, J.1. This revision is directed against the order of the Judge, Small Causes Court dated 3.10.2009 by which he has rejected the amendment application filed by the petitioner, who was defendant in the suit.2. The respondent filed S.C.C. Suit No. 58 of 2004 for ejectment and arrears of rent in which the petitioner was defendant No. 1. The petitioner filed the written statement and contested the case. It appears that evidence of both the parties have been closed on 10.7.2007 and 26.7.2007 was fixed for hearing. Further an application under Order 15 Rule 5 C.P.C. was moved, which has not been replied by the defendants. On 25.1.2008 the petitioner-defendant moved an application seeking permission to deposit rent of Rs. 20,000/-, which has been allowed on 28.1.2008 and thereafter a date was fixed for disposal of the application under Order 15 Rule 5 C.P.C. On 2.4.2008, defendant No. 2 Shree Kant Gupta, filed amendment application which has been rejected on 7.8.2008. Shree Kant Gu...

Devender Vs. Union of India (Uoi) Thru. Secy. Min. of Defence and ors.

Court: Allahabad

1. All these writ petitions were heard together and are being disposed of by a common judgment.2. The argument was advanced with reference to the facts of the writ petition No. 27630 of 2008 and it was agreed by the learned Counsel for the parties that the judgment passed in the said writ petition will also cover the decision of the writ petition No. 7214 of 2008. None appeared to press the writ petition No. 3264 of 2008 even in the revised list. The said writ is, therefore, dismissed in default.3. The facts of the case may be noticed in brief.4. The Cantonment Board, Meerut is category -I Cantonment and is governed by the provisions of the Cantonments Act, 2006. Section 12 of the said Act provides the constitution of a Cantonment Board. It further provides that in Category I Cantonments, the Board shall consist of the following members, namely:(a) the Officer Commanding the station as ex officio or, if the Central Government so directs in respect of any cantonment, such other military...

Anju Devi Maurya Vs. State of U.P. and ors.

Court: Allahabad

Reported in: 2010(2)AWC2087

ORDERAmreshwar Pratap Sahi, J.1. The petitioner has relied upon a very ancient judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Rajendra Kumar v. Union of India decided on 18.4.1968. The law with regard to resignation has been explained subsequently in other decisions of the Supreme Court as well as by this Court reference whereof may be found in the case of Mrs. Rabia Sultana v. A.M.U., Aligarh and Ors. 2006 (1) ESC 34. The Supreme Court in an earlier decision in the case of Moti Ram v. Param Dev and Ors. : 1993 (2) SCC 725, has held that where resignation does not require any further action then the same is complete after having been submitted by the person tendering the resignation.2. The resignation in the present case does not require acceptance as no bilateral act is contemplated.3. Learned Counsel for the petitioner contends that in the absence of rules unless and until the resignation is accepted and intimated to the petitioner, it will be presumed that the petitioner has not resigned...

Nawab Jamshed Ali Khan and ors. Vs. State of U.P.

Court: Allahabad

Reported in: 2010(2)AWC1942

Sunil Ambwani, J.1. Heard Shri Ashish Kumar Singh, learned Counsel for the petitioners. Shri Bal Krishna, learned standing counsel appears for the State respondents.2. Nawab Jamshed Ali Khan and others, the petitioners in this writ petition have filed this writ petition for setting aside the judgment and order dated 2.7.2007, passed by the Rent Control and Eviction Officer/City Magistrate, Muzaffarnagar rejecting petitioners' Application No. 13/2003 dated 31.12.2003 under Section 21 (8) of U.P. Urban Building (Regulation of Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 (in short U.P. Act No. 13/1972) for enhancing the rent, according to the valuation of the property, and the judgment and order dated 14.12.2007, passed by the Additional District Judge, Court No. 7, Muzaffarnagar, rejecting Rent Control Appeal No. 8/2007 arising out of the order dated 2.7.2007. The appellate court has confirmed the findings of the Rent Control and Eviction Officer, that the applicants have not established themselves to b...

Katori Devi Vs. State of U.P. and ors.

Court: Allahabad

Ritu Raj Awasthi, J.1. Heard Sri Manish Kumar, learned Counsel for the appellant as well as Mrs. Sangeeta Chandra, Additional Chief Standing Counsel, Govt. of U.P. and perused the records.2. The special appeal has been filed against the impugned judgment and order dated 13.08.2002 passed in Review Petition No. 105/2001 as well as judgment and order dated 21.05.2001 passed in Writ Petition No. 5004 (SS) of 1998.3. As per the appellant she was initially appointed in the year 1964 and worked in various institutions viz Kanya Junior High School, Adeeng, Tehsil & District Mathura Kanya Primary Pathshala, Sureer, Tehsil Math, District Mathura, Rajkiya Kanya Kramottar Pathshala Dhangaon, Tehsil and District Mathura, Kanya Junior School, Sunaich, Tehsil Govardhan, District Mathura up to 30.06.1966 thereafter the appellant was sent for training in Rajkiya Dayawati Modi Prashikshan Mahavidyalaya, Modi Nagar where she underwent the teacher training for about two years i.e. up to April, 1968.4. It...

Akhilesh Kumar Awasthi Vs. Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. and anr.

Court: Allahabad

Reported in: 2010(2)AWC1345

Devi Prasad Singh and Devendra Kumar Arora, JJ.1. The present appeal under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, has been preferred against the impugned award dated 14.9.2007 passed in Claim Petition No. 93/2006 by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/Additional District Judge, Court No. 8, Sitapur.2. According to the appellant's counsel, the claimant respondent Shrawan Kumar, aged about 44 years, was an employee in a country liquor shop in Shah Jalalpur and having earning income of Rs. 5,000 per month. On 8.2.2006, the claimant respondent Shrawan Kumar was going from Jalalpur to Kamlapur in a tempo No. UP-34-B-4618. At about 9 : 15 a.m. when the tempo reached near village Sultanpur Kamaicha, it suffered with accident because of rash and negligent driving of the vehicle. The claimant respondent Shrawan Kumar suffered grievous injuries and during the course of his treatment, he lodged F.I.R. on 26.3.2006. However, on account of grievous injuries, left hand of the claimant respondent Sh...

Madan Mohan Vs. Arun Shourie and 11 ors.

Court: Allahabad

Devi Prasad Singh, J.1. Instant election petition has been filed challenging the result of biennial election of Rajya Sabha/Council of State, which was declared on 26.6.2004.The present Election petition was filed on 13.07.2004. Thereafter, the matter was placed before the Hon'ble Chief Justice for nomination of Bench and in turn thereof, Hon'ble Mr. Justice N.K. Mehrotra was nominated. Subsequently, Hon'ble Mr. Justice O.P. Srivastava was nominated and thereafter Hon'ble Mr. Justice Shri Narayan Shukla was nominated to deal with the matter but later on His Lordship released the case and in turn this Bench has been nominated by the Hon'ble Chief Justice.2. At the very threshold of arguments, Shri S.N. Shukla learned Counsel for the election petitioner had not pressed the relief with regard to the validity/vires of amended provision contained in Section 3 of the Representation of Peoples Act, hence, question with regard to validity of amended Section 3 of the Representation of Peoples A...

Girish Chandra Vs. Aligarh GramIn Bank and ors.

Court: Allahabad

V.K. Shukla, J.1. Present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner for declaring Regulation 13 (3) of Chapter III of Aligarh Gramin Bank (Staff) Service Regulations, 1981 as invalid and further for issuing a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing of the memo dated 13.07.1991 and the seniority list dated 31.12.1990 and 08.03.1990, in so far as they relate to the petitioner and respondent Nos. 4 to 7, and also for according consequential benefits.2. Brief background of the case as mentioned in the writ petition, is that the petitioner had been performing and discharging duties as clerk-cum-cashier at Pilkhana Branch of Aligarh Gramin Bank. Petitioner has contended that a general seniority list was published under the signature of respondent No. 2 on 01.01.1986 with covering memo dated 30.07.1986, wherein, petitioner was placed in the seniority list of Senior Clerk -cum- Cashier at serial No. 26 above respondent Nos. 4 to 7, who were placed at serial Nos. 27 to 30 respectivel...

Mahabir (Deceased) Through L.Rs. Vs. Deputy Director of Consolidation ...

Court: Allahabad

Reported in: 2010(3)AWC2194

Rakesh Sharma, J.1. This case of the year 1975 has come up for hearing before the Court after about 34 years of its filing. The matter relates to dispute of title in respect of shares of the contesting parties in Khata No. 18 situate in Village Sekhaunadih, Tappa Hirakpur, pargana Silhat, district Deoria.2. Heard Sri H. S. N. Tripathi, learned Counsel for the petitioners and Sri Dinesh Pathak, learned Counsel for the contesting respondents as well as perused the record.3. During the consolidation proceedings, the petitioner, now represented through his legal heirs/legal representatives, had filed objections under Section 9 of the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, inter alio, on the grounds that the property in dispute was acquired by the sons of one Phagu prior to the date of vesting. Before enforcement of the U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, the land in dispute was kastkari agricultural land and, therefore, it was joint property of the parties. For convenience, the ped...