Allahabad Court July 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.
Commissioner Trade Tax U.P. Vs. Advance Spectra Tec (P) Ltd.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-02-2010
1. Assessee-dealer is a Contractor registered in U.P. having one of its office outside the State of U.P.. For the purposes of execution of works contracts it procures material both by purchase from within the State of U.P. and by purchasing and importing material from outside U.P. or by transferring material from its office situate outside U.P.2. In the years in question i.e. 1996-1997 and 1997-98 the assessee transferred certain material from his office outside U.P. for the purposes of execution of works contracts in U.P. The assessing authority vide order dated 30.9.1999 imposed tax of Rs.10,87,479/- and Rs.7,44,745/- respectively by including the value of material so transferred from its office outside U.P. in the taxable turnover. On appeal before the Deputy Commissioner of Appeals, the matter was remanded to the Assessing Officer. The order of remand passed by the first appellate authority was challenged by the assessee as well as the Revenue before the Trade Tax Tribunal in secon...
Abdul Bari and Another. Vs. State of U.P. and Others.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-02-2010
1. The present petition has been filed for quashing of the notification dated 5.5.2010 and the Government Order dated 29.6.2002 and with a further prayer to remove the restriction imposed by the said Government Order. The petitioners in pursuance to the advertisement applied for the post of Nyay Panchayat Resource Coordinator and they were selected and thereafter appointment letters were issued in their favour. The petitioners joined in pursuance to the aforesaid appointment letters and continued to discharge their duties as Nyay Panchayat Resource Coordinator up till now. Thereafter, Government Order, which was issued on 1.9.2001, was amended by means of the Government Order dated 29.6.2002 making certain amendment in the procedure of appointment, wherein it was provided that all those teachers, who have worked as Coordinator of Block Resource Centre and Assistant Coordinator of Block Resource Centre for a period of two years, will not be selected again for the said post and new incum...
Hari Shankar Yadav. Vs. Union of India and Others.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-02-2010
1. Heard Sri R.N. Singh, Senior Advocate, assisted by Sri G.K. Singh, Advocate, for the petitioner. Sri Tarun Verma, Advocate has appeared for respondents No.1 to 4 and Sri Chandan Sharma, Advocate has appeared on behalf of respondent No.5.2. By this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for quashing the order dated 2nd April, 2010 passed by the Senior Divisional Commercial Manager, Agra by which order petitioner's Milk Stall and Toy Stall situated at Mathura Junction have been directed to be closed. The letter dated 8th March, 2010 of Senior Divisional Security Commissioner, Railway Protection Force, Agra written to Divisional Railway Manager, North Central Railway, Agra has also been prayed to be quashed. A writ of mandamus has also been sought commanding the respondents to remove the seal which has been put on the shops of the petitioner and restrain them from interfering in the running of the aforesaid shops by the petitioner.3. Brief facts, necessary for deciding the writ petit...
Jagveer. Vs. State of U.P. and Others.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-02-2010
1. This writ petition was filed by the petitioner for a writ of mandamus directing the respondents not to issue recovery certificate or employ coercive measures for recovering the amount of Rs. 80 lakhs during the pendency of the writ petition and to accept the amount in installments or in the time schedule as framed by the court.2. The writ petition was dismissed with the findings that the petitioner had unauthorizedly withdrawn Rs. 80 lakhs in excess to the amount to which he was entitled. The amount withdrawn by him was far beyond his entitlement to the compensation paid by the Special Land Acquisition Officer for acquiring the agricultural land of the petitioner. The learned counsel has appeared and thereafter requested to withdraw the writ petition. The prayer was rejected and the following order was passed: -"No one appears for the petitioner even in the revised call. Learned standing counsel appears for the State respondents. By this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for ...
M.D. / Member Secy. U.P. and ors. Vs. Appellate Authority and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-02-2010
1. These are eight writ petitions which were heard together and as agreed by the learned counsel for the parties are being disposed of by a common judgment.2. The learned counsel for the parties jointly agreed that the controversy factual and legal in all these petitions are identical. On the request, the writ petition no.50785 of 2006 was considered as leading case and the facts from that writ petition are being noted.3. The present writ petitions arise out of proceedings under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972, and are directed against the orders passed by the Prescribed Authority and the Appellate Authority, U.P. under the said Act in favour of the contesting respondent no.3, Sri Sushil Chandra Sharma, in the leading writ petition. The private contesting respondents who were the employees of the petitioner after reaching the age of superannuation moved the Prescribed Authority under the Payment of Gratuity Act by raising a grievance that the amount of gratuity paid to them is defici...
Mahfooz Ahmad Khan. Vs. State of U.P. and Others.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-02-2010
1. Heard Shri Anurag Khanna, learned counsel for the appellant and Shri M.S. Pipersenia, learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondent nos. 1 and 2 The writ petitioner appellant Mahfooz Ahmad is claiming salary from the date of his appointment, i.e. 21.01.2008 on the ground that his appointment stood already approved under the regulations but he has been denied salary without looking to the provisions, which entitle the appellant to receive salary from the date of his appointment.2. The controversy had come up before this Court earlier in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 65710 of 2008 and a learned Single Judge of this Court after traversing the facts came to the conclusion that the appointment of Mohd. Asif Iqbal on compassionate basis against the same post on which the appellant had been selected was illegal and accordingly the order of appointment of Mohd. Asif Iqbal was quashed by order dated 21st July, 2009.3. It has been pointed out by Mr. Anurag Khanna, learned counsel for the ...
Sudhir Prasad. Vs. State of U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-02-2010
1. This application under Section 482, Cr.P.C. has been moved for quashing the charge sheet no.47/99 submitted in case crime no.149/92, under Sections 420, 464, 465, 468, 471 & 120-B, IPC, P.S. Civil Lines, District Aligarh and the proceedings of case no.3281/99, pending before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Aligarh. It appears from the record that the applicant was a candidate for Civil Services (Preliminary Examination 1986) conducted by the Union Public Service Commission, New Delhi where he did not appear. He was again a candidate for civil services preliminary examination 1987 and civil services preliminary and main examination 1988 in which he appeared. He also appeared in civil services preliminary examination 1989. In all these years he appeared as General candidate, however, at the civil services preliminary and main examination 1990 he claimed to belong to scheduled caste and appeared in this examination in this capacity. At the time of interview of the examination of 1990 he...
Manish SharmA. Vs. Manish SharmA.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-02-2010
1. By means of this application under Section 482, Cr.P.C. the applicant has requested for quashing of the entire proceedings of criminal case no.1394/07, under Section 138, N.I. Act, pending before the Civil Judge (J.D.) III, Mathura. In order to appreciate the controversy, a few material facts may be stated thus: O.P. No.3, Pramod Kumar Garg, who filed the complaint against the applicant Manish Sharma and one Rajesh Kumar Agrawal is the sole proprietor of his Firm P.K. Industries. He deals in the sale of metal scrap. The applicant Manish Sharma and O.P. No.2 Rajesh Kumar Agrawal also run a partnership firm in the name and style of "M/s Satnam Udyog Kendra". They manufacture metal parts. Both are active partners of the firm and are responsible for each and every activity of their firm. The applicant Manish Sharma and O.P. No.2 Rajesh Kumar Agrawal brought a proposal before Pramod Kumar Agrawal for the purchase of metal scrap for their firm. It was agreed upon between the parties that ...
Narendra Road Lines Pvt. Ltd. Vs. State of Up, and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-02-2010
1. Heard Shri B.D. Mandhyan, Senior Advocate assisted by Shri Sanjeev Kumar; Shri Salil Kumar Rai, Shri Uma Nath Pandey; Smt. Sarita Shukla and others for the petitioners. Shri Satish Chaturvedi, Additional Advocate General assisted by Shri M.C. Chaturvedi, Chief Standing Counsel, Shri M.C. Tripathi, Additional Chief Standing Counsel and Shri J.N. Maurya, Standing Counsel have appeared for the State respondents. Shri Shashi Nandan, Senior Advocate assisted by Shri Ramendra Pratap Singh has appeared for 'Yamuna Expressway Industrial Development Authority' (in short, 'YEIDA'). Shri Navin Sinha, Senior Advocate assisted by Shri Yashwant Varma has appeared for Jaypee Infratech Ltd.2. In these writ petitions, the land owners, bhumidhars, lessees and persons having variety of rights over the subject land, have challenged the notifications issued by the Government of U.P. under sub section (1) of Section 4, applying the provisions of sub section (1) of Section 17 of the Land Acquisition Act, ...
Ashiq Ali and Another. Vs. State of U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-01-2010
1. This Criminal Appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 9.2.1982 passed by IV Additional Sessions Judge, Hamirpur in Sessions Trial No.278 of 1980 whereby the appellants Ashiq Ali, Om Prakash and one Tutiyan were held guilty under Section 25 (1) (a) of the Arms Act and were sentenced to undergo six months R.I. The appellants were, however, acquitted for the offences under Sections 399, 402 I.P.C.2. Incident took place on 14.2.1980 at 11:40 p.m. within the area of Village Baswari, P.S. Muskara, District Hamirpur. F.I.R. was lodged on 15.2.1980 at 2:45 a.m. by Hari Das Singh Niranjan, Station Officer, P.S. Muskara.3. In brief, the prosecution story is that on 14.2.1980 at about 9:15 p.m., Station Officer Hari Das Singh Niranjan received information that a gang of dacoits was to assemble in the field of Baddu Lodhi near Village Baswari at about 11:00 p.m. to commit dacoity in the house of Nand Ram Lodhi. The Station Officer took the necessary force with him and proceeded ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »