Allahabad Court May 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.
Noida Rickshaw Chalak Vikas Samiti and anr. Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-27-2010
Ashok Bhushan, J.1. The petitioner, a registered society consisting of rickshaw pullers of district Gautam Budh Nagar, challenges the decision of the respondents prohibiting cycle-rickshaw pulling in Sector-18 and six main roads of city of New Okhla Industrial Development Authority (NOIDA), district Gautam Budh Nagar.2. We have heard Sri Dharam Pal Singh, learned Senior Advocate, assisted by Sri S. Niranjan for the petitioners and Sri R.B. Singhal, learned Senior Advocate, assisted by Sri Ramendra Pratap Singh for respondents No. 2 and 5. Learned Standing Counsel appears for State-respondents.3. The brief facts, as emerge from the pleadings of the parties, are; the petitioner is a registered society under the Societies Registration Act, 1860 consisting of about 300 members who are rickshaw pullers (cycle-rickshaw) in the district Gautam Budh Nagar. The society has been constituted with the object of making all efforts for the welfare of rickshaw pullers. The petitioners' case in the wr...
Syed Naseem Muzaffar and ors. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-27-2010
S.S. Chauhan, J.1. C.M. Application No. 5681 (W) of 2000 moved by the opposite parties for recalling the ex-parte judgment dated 14.12.1999 passed by Hon'ble Bhanwar Singh, J. (as his Lordship then was) interalia on the ground that the opposite parties were not afforded any opportunity of hearing and the judgment was passed ex-parte and the correct facts could not be brought to the notice of the Court.2. The present writ petition has been filed arraying the main opposite party, which was the appointing authority of the petitioners. The Union of India is only a profarma party. The opposite parties were informed suddenly about the judgment of this Court dated 14.12.1999 and when the enquiry was made from the counsel engaged, it was informed that the case was decided ex-parte and the then counsel could not appear before this Court as his name was not shown in the cause list. Against the said judgment Special Appeal No. 22 of 2000 was filed, which was decided on 2 1.02.2000 and was dispose...
Govind Vs. Dy. Director of Consolidation and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-26-2010
Poonam Srivastav, J.1. Heard Sri V.C. Mishra Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Vivek Mishra learned Counsel appearing for petitioner and Sri K.R. Sirohi Senior Advocate assisted by Sri R.B.D. Mishra learned Counsel appearing for respondent No. 3.2. Counter and rejoinder affidavits have been exchanged. Counsels for respective parties agree that since pleadings are complete, writ petition may be decided finally.3. The dispute arises out of proceedings of allotment of chaks. Petitioner is aggrieved by orders dated 21.1.2003 passed by Dy. Director of Consolidation, Baghpat, and 7.12.2002 passed by Settlement Officer Consolidation Baghpat, which has resulted in change of chaks.4. Grievance of petitioner is that he has been deprived of his private source of irrigation and shape of his chak has also become irregular which has rendered cultivation difficult and impractical. Settlement Officer Consolidation Baghpat, while deciding appeals of different chak holders disturbed chak carved out at the...
Brahma Wati and ors. Vs. Jai Prakash and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-26-2010
Sanjay Misra, J.1. This is a defendants second appeal under Section 100 CPC. It has been filed against the judgment and decree dated 30.10.1984 in Civil Appeal N0. 212 of 1983 passed by the First Additional District Judge, Bijnor whereby the judgment and decree passed by the Trial Court in Suit No. 131 of 1979 between Jai Prakash v. Birmawati and Ors. has been affirmed.2. At the time when this appeal was admitted the substantial question of law contained in paragraph 2 and 3 had been formulated. They are quoted hereunder:1. Whether the finding that there was an oral family partition in 1960 in which the property in dispute came to the Qurah of the plaintiff respondent is erroneous in law inasmuch as the plaintiff respondent was not able to give the material particulars relating to the alleged partition in his testimony?2. Whether this admission of Jai Prakash plaintiff respondent that he was a party in objection of Ghasita against the decree passed in original Suit No. 478 of 1967, has...
Commissioner of Income Tax (Central) Vs. Smt. Swapna Roy
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-24-2010
ORDER46. Their Lordships of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case reported in : JT 2010(4) SC 35 Assistant Commissioner, Commercial, Tax Department, Works, Contract and Leasing, Quota v. Shukla and Brothers has held that it shall be obligatory on the part of the judicial or quasi judicial authority to pass a reasoned order while exercising statutory jurisdiction.47. The aforesaid view to pass reasoned order by the authorities which includes quasi-judicial authorities is consistently reiterated by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in earlier judgments. It has been held by their Lordships that the authorities have to record reasons, otherwise it may become a tool for harassment vide K.R. Deb v. The Collector of Central Excise, Shillong : AIR 1971 SC 1447; State of Assam and Anr. v. J.N. Roy Biswas AIR 1975 SC 2277; State of Punjab v. Kashmir Singh 1997 SCC (L&S;) 88; Union of India and Ors. v. P. Thayagarajan : AIR 1999 SC 449; and Union of India v. K.D. Pandey and Anr. : (2002) 10 SCC 471.48. In vi...
Virendra Singh Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-24-2010
Uma Nath Singh, J.1. Affidavit on behalf of State to crave leave of Court for holding D.P.C for promotion to the post of Members of Commercial Tax Tribunal and also the Office Memo (Sang.Vi.Kaa.Ni-1-CM-82/11-2010-1035(20)/10)dated 28.4.2010 passed by the Principal Secretary Shri D.S. Misra, both filed in Court, are taken on record.2. This writ petition has been filed with prayers to seek issuance of (i) a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari for quashment of the impugned order dated 5.4.2010 passed by Principal Secretary, Institutional Finance, Tax & Registration (opposite party No. 1) and the impugned order dated 19.03.2010 (Annexure Nos. 1 & 2 herein); (ii) a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the Principal Secretary and Commissioner, Commercial Tax (opposite party Nos. 1 & 2) to make promotion against 15 available vacancies of Additional Commissioner (Grade-I), Commercial Tax, in the recruitment year 2010 by earmarking at least 3 posts for S...
Kanpur Development Authority Vs. Shyama Swasthya Kendra
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-24-2010
Rakesh Sharma, J.1. Heard Sri R.N. Singh, learned Senior Counsel, assisted by Sri Ajit Kumar Singh, learned Counsel for the Appellant-Kanpur Development Authority and Sri Ashwani Kumar Misra, learned Counsel appearing for the plaintiff-respondent, Shyama Swasthya Kendra, a Registered Charitable Society.2. Through this Second Appeal, the Appellant, Kanpur Development Authority (hereinafter referred to as the KDA) has sought to challenge the judgment dated 9.5.2001 and decree dated 28.5.2001, rendered by the Additional District Judge, Kanpur Nagar, arising out of judgment dated 7.5.993 and the decree dated 17.5.1993, passed by the 1st Additional Civil Judge, Kanpur. The Trial court and the Lower Appellate court have recorded concurrent findings of fact in decreeing the Suit filed by the plaintiff-respondent and dismissing the First Appeal preferred by the KDA.3. It emerges from the record that the plaintiff-respondent, Shyama Swasthya Kendra, a Registered Society through its Secretary Sh...
Surendra Prasad Agnihotri and Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-20-2010
Amitava Lala, A.C.J. 1. By means of Special Appeal No. 1987 of 2009 (Surendra Prasad Agnihotri v. State of U.P. and Ors.) and Special Appeal No. 1991 of 2009 (Abu Mohd. Khan v. State of U.P. and Ors.), the matter has been referred to a larger Bench to decide the following question:Whether a teacher of Intermediate College who has already been appointed as officiating principal of the Institution by virtue of his seniority on attaining the age of superannuation in the extended period of his service shall continue as officiating principal or simply as a teacher?2. The Bench has been accordingly formed and carefully heard all the parties to come to an appropriate conclusion.3. Admittedly, Regulation 21 of Chapter III framed under the U.P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921, is relevant for due consideration herein. The same is quoted herein below:21. Superannuation age of Principal, Headmaster, Teacher and other employees would be 60 years. If above said superannuation age of any Principal,...
Anoop Kumar and Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-20-2010
1. Heard Shri T.P. Singh, Sr. Advocate assisted by Shri Ajal Krishna for the petitioner in Writ Petition No. 29235 of 2009. Shri S.K. Vishwakarma and Shri R.K. Misra have appeared for the petitioner in Writ Petition No. 30443 of 2009. Shri Satish Chaturvedi, AAG assisted by Shri S.N. Srivastava appears for the State respondents. Shri Triloki Singh and Shri Shashi Sekhar Tiwari, Standing Counsel appear for the Central Government-respondent No. 2.2. The petitioners were appointed on the substantive post of Senior Instructors in the Department of Rural Development, Government of U.P. They were promoted as District Training Officer and at present they are working as 'Extension Training Officers' under Deen Dayal Upadhyay State Institute of Rural Development, Baxi Ka Talab, U.P. Lucknow under the Department of Rural Development, Government of U.P. Lucknow. By these writ petitions they have challenged their final allocation by the State Advisory Committee, constituted by the Government of In...
Hemant Krishna Maurya and ors. Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-20-2010
Dilip Gupta, J.1. Five candidates, who had appeared at the U.P. Post Graduate Medical Entrance Examination 2010 (hereinafter referred to as the U.P.P.G.M.E.E.-2010) for admission to the State Quota Seats of Post Graduate MD/MS/MDS/PG Diploma Course in various State Medical Colleges and Medical/Dental Faculty of C.S.M. Medical University, Lucknow, have filed this petition for quashing the order dated 6th April, 2010 issued by the Principal Secretary, U.P. Government and for a direction upon the respondents not to permit the candidates belonging to reserved categories, who have secured less than 40% marks at the Entrance Examination, to participate in the counselling scheduled to commence from 11th April, 2010. A further direction has been sought that the respondents should also not admit any student under the reserved categories who has obtained less than 40% marks at the Entrance Examination.2. The State Government, by the order dated 30th October, 2009 authorised the CSM Medical Unive...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »