Allahabad Court March 2011 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.
Jagran Prakashan Ltd. Vs. State of U.P. and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-03-2011
1. In spite of sufficient service no one appeared on behalf workman respondent No.3, Ram Raj, hence only the arguments of learned counsel for employer petitioner were heard. 2. This writ petition is directed against award dated 29.04.1997 given by Presiding Officer, Labour Court (III), Kaptur in Adjudication Case No.124 of 1995. The matter which was referred to the labour court was as to whether the action of petitioner employer terminating the services of its workman respondent No.3, who was peon/salesman w.e.f. 02.04.1994, was just and valid or not? 3. The workman contended that he was employed in 1976, and that his services were orally terminated w.e.f. 29.04.1994 on the false allegation that he had not deposited the amount received by him from the hawkers. The further case of the workman was that when he protested that the complaint was false, he was forced to resign on the threat that otherwise police would be called and he would be sent to jail on the allegation of theft, hence w...
SaeeduddIn Vs. State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-03-2011
1. This criminal jail appeal arises from a judgement and order dated 10.12.2003 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge/Fast Track Court No.1, Hamirpur convicting and sentencing the appellant Saeeduddin to imprisonment for life and a fine of Rs. 10,000/- under section 302 IPC, in case of default, the appellant was directed to further undergo two years simple imprisonment; ten years rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 5000/- under section 376 IPC and in default the appellant will have to further undergo one year simple imprisonment and five years rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 3000/- under section 201 IPC and in default, one year simple imprisonment. However, all the sentences were directed to run concurrently. 2. Initially there were two accused persons, namely the appellant Saeeduddin and one Deepak alias Deepu, who were nominated in the FIR dated 20.1.2003 lodged at 12.30 PM at police station Kurara, district Hamirpur by Ram Khilawan, P.W. 1. However, the other accused D...
Kanpur Development Authority, Kanpur Vs. Ms. U.P. Builders, Kanpur and ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-03-2011
1. This is an application by the petitioner for referring the dispute under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') and to appoint, preferably the Chief Engineer, Kanpur Development Authority as the Arbitrator. 2. There is an agreement between the petitioner and opposite party no.1 in which there is a clause, which reads as under:- "Clause 24. Except where otherwise specified in the contract the decision of the Chief Engineer for the time being shall be final, conclusive and binding on all parties to the contract upon all question relating to the meaning of the specifications designs, drawings and instructions hereinbefore mentioned and as to the quality of workmanship or materials used on the work or as to any other question, claim, right, matter or thing whatsoever in any way arising out or relating to the contract, designs, drawings specifications, estimates instructions, order or these conditions or otherwise concerning the wo...
Cm Visheshwar Uchchatar Madhyamik Vidyalaya and Another Vs. State of U ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-03-2011
1. Heard Sri Anil Bhushan learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned standing counsel for the respondent nos. 1,2 and 3. 2. In view of the nature of the order that is proposed to be ,passed it is not necessary to issue any notice to the respondent no.4 at this stage. 3. Needless to mention that the petitioner had earlier filed Writ Petition No. 10093 of 2011 which was dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to file a fresh writ petition keeping in view the order dated 8.7.2008 and this writ petition has been filed assailing the said order dated 8.7.2008. 4. The present writ petition assails the order dated 28.1.2011 whereby Committee of Management has been superseded in exercise of powers under Section 6(3) of the Payment of Salary Act under U.P.Act No.24 of 1971 on the ground that the Committee which had been validly elected in Jan.,2006 had not been recognised and an order has been passed on 8.7.2008 refusing to grant recognition. Accordingly the said Committee has no right to co...
Prem Pal Vs. State of U.P. and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-01-2011
1. The petitioner is the owner of the land having an area of 0.122 hectare of Gata No. 788, situated in village Shahzadpur Kanaini, Pargana & Tehsil Khurja, District Bulandshahr. His name is recorded as Bhumidhar with non-transferable rights over the said land. The petitioner does agricultural work over the said land, as the agriculture is the only source of his livelihood. According to the petitioner, the Power Grid Corporation of India is establishing a high tension electric line and for that purpose they have entered upon the petitioner's land and have constructed structures, as a result of which the said land cannot be used optimumly for agricultural work in future.2. The case of the petitioner is that when he made enquiries and lodged complaints against encroachment in his land, some persons approached him and forcibly gave him a cheque of Rs. 26,800/-. The petitioner was also informed that it was the compensation for use of his land. The petitioner filed an application dated 19.0...
Rakesh Kumar Srivastava and Others Vs. State of U.P. and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-01-2011
1. Petitioners have filed the aforesaid batch of writ petitions assailing either the orders of their termination from service or disengagement or claiming regularization of service on different posts in the Mandi Parishad. According to the petitioners' Counsel, petitioners were engaged as Work charge/Muster Roll/on consolidated pay under the contingency limit in various construction divisions of the Rajya Krishi Utpadan Mandi Parishad. 2. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioners that in Mandi Parishad there are three categories of employees, namely, (1) those appointed on regular basis against duly sanctioned posts in accordance with the service regulations in the establishment of the Mandi Parishad (2) persons engaged on daily wages, fixed pay, contract against sanctioned posts in the establishment of Mandi Parishad and (3) the third category, consists work charge, Muster Roll and fixed pay employees engaged within 2% contingency limit as per the policy/practice of the Board...
Naushad Ali Rana Vs. Aligarh Muslim University and ors
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-01-2011
1. The petitioner is a student of Post Graduation Speciality Course Hifz-e-Sehat in Unani Medicine in the Aligarh Muslim University. The petitioner was admitted in the Session 2009-10 in the said course which is of three years. After having obtained 19th Rank in the Entrance Test, the petitioner was granted admission and has undergone the first year of his course. He again attempted a second time in the Entrance Examination for a fresh admission in the session 2010-11. This time the petitioner succeeded in getting 6th rank in the Entrance Test and has thereafter made a request to the University to cancel his earlier admission of 2009-10 and to allow him to pursue his post graduation course against the seat to which he is entitled under the fresh Entrance Test of 2010-11. 2. The University has resisted the claim of the petitioner on the ground that the petitioner had already given an undertaking at the time of the admission in the previous session which is to the following effect: 1."I ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- Next ›