Allahabad Court October 2010 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.
Km. Maya Vs. State of U.P. and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-06-2010
1. The brief facts of the case are that the appellant has acquired the land in village Ismaliganj, Pargana Tehsil and district Lucknow for Arjan Ram Sagar Misra Extension Scheme. For the purpose, the notices under Sections 4 and 6 were issued on 17.3.1979 and 20.5.1980 respectively. The land of the respondents were also acquired and possession was taken over on 7.8.1981. The Special Land Acquisition Officer has passed an award and estimated the cost at the rate of Rs. 1.88/- sq. ft. Not being satisfied, the respondents have filed the appeal before the Tribunal and demanded compensation at the rate of Rs. 10/- per sq. ft. However, the Tribunal has awarded the compensation at the rate of Rs. 3/- along with solatium and interest. Being aggrieved, U.P.Avas Evam Vikas Parishad has filed the present appeal. 2. With this background, Sri Madan Gopal Misra, learned counsel for the appellant, submits that in determining the compensation the learned Tribunal has applied incorrect principle of law...
Ram Murat and Another. Vs. State of U.P. and Others.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-06-2010
1. This writ petition has been filed with a prayer to issue mandamus commanding the respondent nos. 1 to 4 to take action and to maintain law and order in accordance with law in compliance of the judicial orders passed by civil court from time to time and to restore possession of the petitioner over the land in question by demolishing construction raised by respondent nos. 5 to 8 and his associates. 2. The admitted position is that there is a civil suit pending before the appropriate civil court for injunction, wherein the petitioners have obtained an order of injunction. It is also an admitted fact that they have filed an application under Order XXXIX, Rule 2 A of the Code of Civil Procedure for disobedience or the breach of the order of injunction. Having all sorts of remedies available to them and in spite of filing civil suit as well as application for injunction, the writ petition has been filed before this Court to obtain similar order as would be passed by civil court. 3. Learne...
Dr. Mrs. Renu JaIn Vs. Smt. Savitri Devi and Another
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-05-2010
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 2. The present application under section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the proceeding of Case No.818 of 1995 pending in the court of IInd Class Judicial Magistrate, Jhansi. On 20.5.1988, notice was issued and further proceeding was stayed. Counter affidavit on behalf of the opposite party no.1 has already been filed. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant being qualified Surgeon, conducted operation, by surgery of sterilisation of opposite party no.1. The complaint was filed by opposite party no.1 with the allegation that the applicant was consulted and the complainant opposite party no.1 was operated upon for ligation. Further allegation was that the applicant assured the complainant and her husband that the latest techniques were available in her Nursing Home and she was Specialist of Surgery of sterilisation. The complainant was admitted who was operated upon and certificate was iss...
V.K. Pathak. Vs. Food Corporation of India and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-05-2010
1. Heard Sri Vikas Budhwar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri Satya Prakash appearing for the Food Corporation of India. 2. Counter and rejoinder affidavits have been exchanged between the parties and with the consent of the parties, the writ petition is being finally disposed of. 3. By this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for quashing the order of punishment dated 22/23rd May, 1995 passed by respondent No.2, the appellate order dated 8th December, 2010 modifying the punishment order and the order dated 26th February, 2001 rejecting the review application. 4. Brief facts necessary for deciding the writ petition are; the petitioner was appointed as Assistant Grade-III (D) on 3rd May, 1969. He was subsequently promoted as Assistant Manager (Depot). A show cause/memorandum dated 30th April, 1992 was received by the petitioner which was replied. The respondents initiated departmental inquiry and charge-sheet dated 5th April, 1994 was issued under Regulation 58 o...
Takreem Ahmad Khan and ors. Vs. Vice Chancellor, Aligarh Muslim Univer ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-05-2010
1. Admit. 2. With the consent of parties, heard finally. 3. Respondent no.3 had filed the petition before this Court, being Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 14695 of 2010. The appellants herein were admittedly not parties to the writ petition. Respondent no.3 had sought the following reliefs:- "(a) Call for the record of the case and may kindly be pleased to issue a writ, order rule or direction in the nature of certiorari and may kindly be pleased to quash impugned order passed by the respondent no.2 vide OM-D. No. 91/LD/Reg. dated 31.8.2007 (Annexure no.3 to the writ petition) and also the impugned order dated 11.03.2010 vide D. No. SB& PS/09-10/2695 passed by the respondent no.1 on the appeal of the petitioner (Annexure no.10 to the petition). (b) to issue a writ, order rule or direction in the nature of Mandamus and may kindly be pleased to stay the effect, operation and consequences of the impugned order passed by respondent no.2 vide OM-D. No. 91/LD/Reg. dated 31.8.2007 (Annexur...
Atma Ram Shukla Vs. Rent Control and Eviction Officer. Addl. City Magi ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-05-2010
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 2. House No. 10/220 Khalasi Line, P.S. Gwaltoli, Kanapur Nagar, having several rooms, verandah at it's ground floor, first floor and third floor, is an old construction to which U.P. Act No. 13 of 1972 applies. The petitioner claims himself to be a tenant in one room having an area of 8 x 10 feet situated at first floor which was taken on rent by his father-in-law Salig Ram prior to 1970 who was an employee of Victoria Mill Kanpur. After the marriage of his daughter Somwati with the petitioner, Salig Ram started residing in his village-Damraj, District-Jalaun. 3. The case of the petitioner is that after his marriage with the daughter of Sri Salig Ram, he began to live along with his father-in-law as he belongs to the village Gauhani, District-Auraiya since 1970-71 in the aforesaid one room. At present, petitioner is posted as clerk in the office of Animal Husbandry Department at Lakhimpur Khiri where he is residing with h...
Jagat NaraIn Tripathi Vs. State of U.P. and Others.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-05-2010
1. The petitioner, who was a Lab Assistant with the respondents, has filed the present writ petition with the following prayers:- (A) Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing respondents to provide him pensionery benefit of his respective post. (B) Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to decide the representation of the petitioner pending since 10.02.2010 (Annexure no. 7 ) before respondents. 2. The facts giving rise to this case are that the petitioner was engaged as Lab Assistant on 01.03.1982, in work charge establishment of Public Works Department Ghaziabad. Later on the petitioner's appointment was made on substantive post of Lab Assistant on 07.02.2007, from where he retired from service on 31.01.2010. It is stated in the writ petition that the petitioner's case for regularisation was sent before the State Government by the recommendation of the departmental authorities to regularise the petitioner on the p...
Shivani Gupta Vs. the State of U.P. and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-05-2010
1. The petitioner-respondent no. 6, Sushil Kumar Tiwari challenged the orders of appointment of Shivani Gupta, the respondent-appellant by the Deputy Secretary of U.P. Secondary Education Service Selection Board, Allahabad (in short, the Board), as Lecturer in Sociology in Bilhour Inter College, Bilhour dated 11.8.2008. She was selected by the Board in pursuance to the advertisement No. 2 of 2004 for the post of the Lecturer in Sociology. Shri Sushil Kumar Tiwari is claiming promotion on the post after it fell vacant on 30.6.2007. 2. Learned Single Judge found that Shivani Gupta was selected in pursuance to the advertisement No. 2 of 2004 by the Board. She was given placement in Yuvraj Dutt Inter College, Lakhimpur Kheri. There was no vacancy in the College in the year 2006, and thus she could not be given appointment. She filed a Writ Petition No. 227 of 2006 in Lucknow Bench of this Court, which was disposed of on 27.3.2006 with directions to consider her appointment on any vacancy i...
Om Prakash and Another Vs. State of U.P.Through Prin. Secy. to the Gov ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-05-2010
1. This bunch of writ petitions impugns four set of grievances, namely (i) illegal addition or deletion of the names of voters in electoral rolls, (ii) shifting or non-shifting of polling booths, (iii) rejection/acceptance of nomination papers and (iv) non-issuance/cancellation of caste certificates required for filing nomination papers in respect of reserved constituencies. Thus these writ petitions in bunch are being disposed of by this common order. 2. As regards the first set of grievance relating to addition or deletion of the names in voters' lists, learned counsel for petitioners, Sri C. B. Pandey, referred to the judgment of 5 Judges Bench in the case of Indrajit Barua and others v. Election Commission of India and others, reported in AIR 1986 SC 103. Para 12 of the aforesaid judgment which appears to have a direct bearing on this issue reads as: "12. From the materials placed by the parties and the Election Commission, we have come to the conclusion that the Election Commissio...
Cm Cutting Memorial Inter College and Another Vs. State of U.P. and Ot ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-05-2010
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Standing Counsel. 2. Petitioners are aggrieved by the order impugned dated 23.03.2010, by which petitioners-Committee of Management has been recognized and a direction to that effect has been issued to attest the signature of petitioner No.2, but a condition has been put that petitioners will stop running the English Medium School, which is being run in the premises of the institution and will further stop to use the field of the institution for commercial purposes. A further direction has been made that the income will be utilized in the repairs of some portion of the building which has become dilapidated. 3. There is an institution in the name of Cutting Memorial Inter College, Varanasi, which is a recognized and aided institution governed by the provisions of the U.P. Intermediate Education Act. The last election of the Committee of Management was held on 28.06.2009. The papers were submitted to the District Inspector of Schoo...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 10
- 11
- 12
- Next ›
- Last »