Court : Allahabad
1. The instant writ petition designed and styled as Public Interest Litigation has been filed by the petitioner Ajai Kumar Singh, a Practicing Advocate. It is directed against the auction of certain commercial plots situate at Vibhuti Khand, Gomti Nagar Scheme of Lucknow Development Authority. The petitioner has prayed for quashing of the allotment as held in pursuance of the auction notices. It is further prayed that a writ in the nature of mandamus be issued commanding the respondents to stop constructions on the allotted lands and a direction may be issued to the C.B.I. to inquire into the matter and submit its report to this Court.2. The petitioner has come with a case that as a practising Advocate he has opportunity of interacting with people belonging to different walk of life and incidentally he met some prospective bidders of the land in question who have filtered out certain informations which reveals deliberate activities of the respondents with an ulterior motive to fill up ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Additional Government Advocate.2. The petitioners by means of this writ petition under Article 226 of Constitution, have prayed for quashing FIR relating to case crime no. 435 of 2010 under Sections 323, 498-A & 506 IPC read with section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act of Police Station Inayat Nagar, district Faizabad.3. We have gone through the FIR as well as the divorce suit filed by petitioner No. 1 Durgesh Pratap Singh, who is the husband of opposite party no. 4 Dimple Singh, filed as far back as in the year 2007. Argument advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioners is that the dispute between the parties relates to matrimonial dispute and no serious allegations have been made in the FIR against the petitioners. It is further stated that petitioner no. 1 is ready to keep opposite party no. 4 as his wife provided she comes and resides with the petitioner and performs her marital obligations. Learned counsel for the pe...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the record.2. This petition under Section 482 of Cr. P.C. has been moved by the petitioner for quashing the summoning order dated 9.4.2004 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Lucknow by which the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, on the written complaint dated 1.4.2004 sent by Sri R.G. Shukla, the then Registrar, High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench, Lucknow, summoned the petitioner along with two others for the offence under Sections 409/465/467/471 and 420 IPC, P.S. Wazirganj, Lucknow. The petitioner has further prayed for quashing the order of non-bailable warrant passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate against him.3. The submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that a Writ Petition bearing No. 1286 of 1980 (Smt. Shanti Devi v. State of U.P. & Others) was decided by the High Court on 12.5.1987. The record of decided writ petition was sent t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.G.A. as well as perused the documents available on record.2. This petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been moved by the petitioners for setting aside the order dated 18.5.2010, passed by the learned Additional District & Sessions Judge, Court No.4, Lucknow whereby the learned Additional District & Sessions Judge has rejected the application filed by the petitioners for recalling Sri Vijendra Pal Singh, the Investigating Officer (P.W.5) for cross-examination.3. The submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners is that the Sessions Trial No. 447 of 2005; State v. Ram Saharey and others, under Sections 302, 201, 12-B I.P.C., Police Station Chinhat, District Lucknow was fixed on 1.4.2010. On that date, the Investigating Officer Sri Vijendra Pal Singh appeared before the court. He was examined by the prosecution and cross examined by the two accused. The rest of the accused i.e. petitioners moved an application for adjour...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
1. The petitioners, who had submitted applications for registration for the Ph.D Course in the Chaudhary Charan Singh University, Meerut (hereinafter referred to as the 'University') and had been registered in August, 2009, on the basis of the meeting of the Research Degree Committee held after 11th July, 2009 have filed this petition for setting aside the advertisement issued by the University which requires that such candidates who were registered for Ph. D. Course as per the Research Degree Committee meeting held on 11th July, 2009, shall have to qualify the Research Eligibility Test for their registration to Ph.D. Degree to be held on 11th April, 2010.2. It is stated in the writ petition that in accordance with the Ordinances framed by the University, the petitioners had submitted the application forms for registration and the Research Degree Committee which met after 11th July, 2009 registered the petitioners but now the University has issued the advertisement in view of the UGC (...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
1. Learned counsel for the applicant files rejoinder affidavit and learned A.G.A. files counter affidavit, which are taken on record.2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A for the State as well as perused the record. The accused applicant Vijay Kumar Dwivedi, Sub Inspector, S/o Shri Ram Kumar Dwivedi, R/o Devchali, Police Station Chandpur, District Fatehpur presently posted at Police Station Sahayal, District Auraiya, present address Mohallah Barra-II, House No. 107, LIC, P.S. Barra, District Kanpur Nagar is involved and detained in Case Crime No. 91/2010, under Section 7 and 13 (1) (d) read with Section 13 (2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, from P.S. Dibiyapur, District Auraiya and he has applied for bail. The prosecution case as borne out from the First Information Report, in brief, is that one Amar Singh, S/o Maujilal, R/o Village Karchala, P.S. Sahayal, District Auraiya on 10.5.2010 submitted a complaint to the Superintendent of Police, Anti Corrup...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
1. Heard Mr. S.K. Kalia learned Senior Advocate along with Dr. L.P. Mishra assisted by Mr. Sharad Pathak, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. S.G. Husnain, learned Additional Advocate General assisted by Mr. P. N. Gupta, learned Chief Standing Counsel for the State.2. By means of this writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the impugned order dated 17.06.2010 (Annexure-1 to the writ petition) passed by the opposite party no.1 in exercise of power provided under the proviso of Section 29 of U.P. Kshettra Panchayat and Zila Panchayat Act, 1961 (here-in- after referred to as the Act) by which the petitioner's administrative and financial powers have been seized on the ground that prima-facie the allegations leveled against the petitioner have been proved after fact finding enquiry conducted by the District Magistrate.3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that enquiry has been conducted by the subordinate officer of the District Magistrate whereas it is the District Mag...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
1. Heard Mr.Anil Kumar Tiwari, Senior Advocate assisted by Mr.Vikas Budhwar & Mr.K.S.Pawar, learned counsels for the Appellants as well as Mr.Yashowardhan Swaroop, learned counsel for the opposite parties.2. Briefly the facts of the case are that the parties entered into an agreement with the several terms and conditions. The main term and condition, which is relevant for the purpose of dealing with the order impugned passed by the District Judge on the application moved under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 is reproduced hereunder:-"1.The Carrier will provide the Company with 5 no. of Tank Trucks for transporting petroleum products as per LOI/Work Order issued by the Oil Company, Carrier has certified that it is the owner and/ or sufficiently entitled to operate these Tank Trucks throughout the Agreement period and these Tank Trucks are not under Agreement with any other party. Further these Tank Trucks shall remain under exclusive use with the Company througho...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA for the State and perused the record.2. It has been argued on behalf of the applicant that the dispute between the parties was purely of personal nature and they have compromised the same, therefore, the proceedings should be quashed since the compromise has been arrived at between the parties. In support of the argument reliance has been placed on 2008(4) SCC 582, Madan Mohan Abbot v. State of Punjab, 2008(15) SCC 704, Jagdish Chanana and others v. State of Haryana and another, and 2008(9) SCC 677, Nikhil Merchant v. Central Bureau of Investigation and another.3. To the above, it has been admitted by Mr. Nitin Srivastava, the learned counsel for private party the O.P. No. 2 that the parties have compromised the aforesaid case. In this regard an affidavit has also been filed from which it appears that the matter between the company and opposite party no. 2 have been compounded and the opposite party no. 2 has received all his i...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned AGA for the State and perused the material on record.2. This application u/s 482 Cr.P.C has been filed for the direction for providing security to the applicant till conclusion of criminal case no.20012 of 2006 State v. Satish and others pending in the Court of C.J.M, Ghaziabad and Sessions Trial no.1021 of 2007 (State v. Jogeshwar and others) pending in the Court of Additional District and Sessions Judge, F.T.C. No.6, Ghaziabad.3. It is submitted on behalf of the applicant that by means of this application, the applicant is praying for quashing the order dated 25.5.2010 passed by Additional District and Sessions Judge, F.T.C. No.6, Ghaziabad in Sessions Trial no.1021 of 2007 by which the learned Sessions Judge passed the order resting the security of the applicant on the Senior Superintendent of Police, Ghaziabad and forwarded the application of the applicant in this respect to the Senior Superintendent of Police, Ghaziabad...
Tag this Judgment!