Allahabad Court January 2011 Judgments
Managing Director, U.P.State Handloom Corporation Ltd., Hathkargha Bha ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-29-2011
1. BY THE COURT: Special Appeal No.1141 of 2009 as also Special Appeal No.299 of 2003 have been filed by the U.P.State Handloom Corporation Ltd. through its Managing Director (respondent-appellant) assailing the judgment dated 8.9.1999 passed in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No.31202 of 1992 (Ashok Kumar Pandey v. State of U.P. and others) as also the judgment dated 3.1.2003 passed in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No.52715 of 2000 (Roop Narain Mishra v. State of U.P. and others) by a learned single Judge of this court. 2. The petitioner-respondent in Special Appeal No.1141 of 1999 claims to have been appointed as Production Inspector on 22.8.1983 and vide order dated 24.6.1988 he was transferred from Raebareli to Rishikesh. It is alleged that he was relieved from Raebareli on 5.1.1989 for joining at Rishikesh. However, he claims to have fallen ill on 6.1.1989 and hence he moved a representation dated 13.1.1989 praying that his transfer be cancelled. He alleges that an order dated 21.1.1989 was...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income Tax-ii, Lucknow Vs. Ms Jugal Kishor and Sons, L ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-28-2011
1. Income Tax Appeal No.113 of 2010 is in respect of the Assessment Year 2005-06 and Income Tax Appeal No.112 of 2010 is in respect of Assessment Year 2006-07. These are appeals by the Revenue against the orders of ITAT. They had framed several questions. In our opinion, questions 3, 4 and 5 are purely questions of fact and considering the concurrent findings recorded by the CIT (A) as also ITAT and questions 3, 4 and 5 as framed, no substantial question of law arises therein and consequently, those questions do not arise. 2. Insofar as questions 1 and 2 are concerned, in our opinion, question no.1 will cover both the questions and the appeals are admitted on the said question, which reads as under in both the appeals:- "1. Whether the learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal has erred in law and in facts in ignoring the conditions laid down in the provisions of Section 40 (b) (i) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and explanation 4 thereto with regard to the disallowance of salary paid to partn...
Tag this Judgment!Union of India Thru Secy Defence and Others Vs. Central Administrative ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-28-2011
1. Heard Smt. Archana Singh, Advocate holding brief of Sri Ajit Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the Union of India and Sri I.P. Srivastava, learned counsel for the respondent no.2. 2. The challenge in this writ petition is to the order of the Central Administrative Tribunal whereby the claim of the respondent no.2 for compassionate appointment has been allowed and the orders dated 14.9.1998 and 4th July, 2002 have been set-aside. 3. The petitioners contend that the Tribunal has committed an error by allowing the claim petition in view of the fact that the claim of the respondent no.2 had already been rejected as he himself had voluntarily refused to take up the job of a Sweeper and, therefore, the respondent no.2 cannot claim compassionate appointment as a matter of right. It is further submitted that several reasons have been given while passing the order dated 4th July, 2002, namely, that vacancies were not available within the 5 % quota and the appointment on compassionate ground i...
Tag this Judgment!United India Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Smt. Bano and Others.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-28-2011
1. The present Appeal has been filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, against the Judgment and Order/Award dated 13.5.2010 passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Meerut in Motor Accident Claim Case No. 381 of 2003 filed by the claimant-respondent nos. 1 to 7 under Section 163A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 on account of the death of Sabir in an accident which took place on 26th May, 2003 at 11.35 A.M. 2. The case of the claimant-respondent nos. 1 to 7 was that on 26th May, 2003, the said Sabir with his wife and other passengers was going from Sisauli to Meerut on a Tempo bearing Registration No. UP15 K-1902; and that when at about 11.35 A.M. the said Tempo reached near Hasanpur Chauki, it stopped on its side for taking passengers; and that at that time, a Truck bearing Registration No. UP12-2730 coming from the direction of Garh, hit a Roadways Bus bearing Registration No. UP 15 C-5271 coming from the side of Meerut, and thereupon, having lost control, the s...
Tag this Judgment!Ram Das and Others Vs. Munna Lal and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-28-2011
1. Heard Sri S.K. Verma, learned Senior Advocate, assisted by Sri Vipin Lal Srivastava, on behalf of the petitioners, Sri W.H. Khan, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Sri J.H. Khan, Advocate on behalf of respondent no. 3 and learned Standing Counsel for the State respondents. 2. Petitioners before this Court seek quashing of the order passed by the Additional District Judge dated 14.05.1994 in M.A. Case No. 24 of 1992 on an appeal filed against an order of the Forest Settlement Officer, Chopan, District-Sohnebhadra date 08.10.1991. 3. Facts in short giving rise to the present writ petition are as follows: 4. Various plots of land, as mentioned in paragraph 1 of the writ petition, situate in village Mahuaon Kala, Pargana Agori, Tehsil Rabartsganj, District Sonebhadra were subject matter of notification under Section 4 of the Indian Forest Act, 1927 (hereinafter referred to as 'Act, 1927'). Objections were filed in response to the notification by the petitioners as well as by responden...
Tag this Judgment!Committee of Management, Sri Lal Bahadur Shastri Purva Madhyamic Vidya ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-28-2011
1. The petition questions the legality of the order dated 31st December, 2010 passed by the Registrar, Firms, Societies and Chits, Lucknow whereby he has treated the election proceedings as set up by the petitioners to be highly disputed and has concluded that since the tenure of the Committee of Management has already expired, therefore, the Assistant Registrar, Firms, Societies and Chits, Azamgarh should hold the elections under the provisions of sub-section (2) of Section 25 of the Societies Registration Act, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as 'the 1860 Act'). The Registrar has further directed that the elected Committee shall accordingly proceed to consider passing of any appropriate amendments in the procedure relating to the enrollment of members of the general body. 2. Sri H.N. Singh, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the Society namely Lal Bahadur Shastri Purva Madhyamic Vidyalaya is a society registered under the 1860 Act and also runs a Junior High School imparti...
Tag this Judgment!Ashok Kumar Abrol and Others Vs. Sahil Mahajan
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-28-2011
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 2. This writ petition has been filed challenging the validity and correctness of the judgment and order dated 25.5.2004 passed by the Prescribed Authority/JSCC, Meerut in P.A. Case No. 32 of 2002, Sahil Mahajan versus Ashok Kumar Abrol and another and the judgment and order dated 15.12.2010 passed by the Additional District Judge, Court No.3, Meerut in Misc. Appeal No. 91 of 2004, Ashok Kumar Abrol and another versus Sahil Mahajan. 3. The dispute relates to shop no. 40-C situated at Saraswati Mandir, Suraj Kund Road, Meerut City, Meerut ( hereinafter referred to as the shop in dispute ). Petitioner no.2 is the tenant of the shop in dispute at the rate of Rs.35/- per month and the father of the applicant respondent namely Sri Kuldeep Mahajan is the landlord. SCC suit no. 96 of 1990, Kuldeep Mahajan versus Ashok Kumar Abrol was filed by Sri Kuldeep Mahajan father of sole respondent Sri Sahil Mahajan in the Court of District...
Tag this Judgment!United India Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Dharamvir Singh Tomar and Othe ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-28-2011
1. The present Appeal has been filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, against the Judgment and Order/Award dated 13.5.2010 passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Meerut in Motor Accident Claim Case No. 54 of 2004 filed by the claimant-respondent no. 1 under Section 163A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 on account of the injuries sustained by him in an accident which took place on 26th May, 2003 at 11.35 A.M. 2. The case of the claimant-respondent no. 1 was that on 26th May, 2003, the claimant-respondent no. 1 was going from Sisauli to Meerut on a Tempo bearing Registration No. UP15 K-1902; and that when at about 11.35 A.M. the said Tempo reached near Hasanpur Chauki, it stopped on its side for taking passengers; and that at that time, a Truck bearing Registration No. UP12-2730 coming from the direction of Garh, hit a Roadways Bus bearing Registration No. UP 15 C-5271 coming from the side of Meerut, and thereupon, having lost control, the said Truck hit the said...
Tag this Judgment!U.P.State Elelctricity Board and Anothers Vs. P.O. Labour Court and An ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-28-2011
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. This writ petition is directed against award dated 02.02.1989 given by Presiding Officer, Labour Court, U.P. Agra in Adjudication Case No.8 of 1986. The matter, which was referred to the labour court, was as to whether the action of the petitioner employer of not giving the post and designation of R.G.C. (Routine Grade Clerk) to its workman Badri Singh Yadav son of Narain SinghYadav (represented by Union, respondent No.2 in this writ petition) was just and valid or not. The case taken by the Union on behalf of the workman was that the workman was appointed on the post of Mate on 04.10.1973, however with effect from the date of appointment the work of R.G.C. was taken from him. The dispute was raised in the year 1984 {being C.P. Case No.205 (Agra) of 1984}. The labour court held that since the time of his appointment, the workman was doing the work of R.G.C., hence he must be given designation and pay-scale of R.G.C. with effect from the date...
Tag this Judgment!State of U.P. Through Principal Secretary and Others Vs. Mulayam Singh ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-27-2011
1. We have heard Additional Advocate General, Mr. Jafar Nayar for the State-respondents and Sri Ashok Khare, learned Senior Advocate, assisted by Sri Sahab Tewari and Sri Yogesh Srivastava for the respondents on the Delay Condonation Applications filed along with the appeals. 2. Cause shown for the delay is sufficient Therefore, we condone the delay in filing the aforesaid appeals and, upon the consent of the parties, proceed to hear the same. 3. Since the aforementioned special appeals have arisen from the same judgement and order dated 10.6.2009 passed by the learned Single Judge in CM WP No. 60625 of 2008 (Mulayam Singh v. State of U.P. and others) connected with several other connected writ petitions, involving similar matters, allowing the writ petitions, we are deciding all the appeals by this common judgment and order. 4. The State Government has challenged the aforesaid order of the learned Single Judge in all the appeals before us. 5. The facts, in brief, leading to the filing...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »