Allahabad Court July 2011 Judgments
Kainash Ram Kochar Vs. State of U.P. and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-29-2011
ASHOK BHUSHAN, J. 1. Heard Sri Uma Nath Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Ramendra Pratap Singh learned counsel for the respondent no. 3 as well as learned Standing Counsel for the respondents No. 1 and 2. 2. By this writ petition the petitioner has prayed for quashing the order dated 11.5.2011, passed by the Additional District Magistrate (Land Acquisition), Gautam Buddha Nagar rejecting the application submitted by the petitioner for making a reference under section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act for enhancement of compensation. A mandamus has also been sought directing the respondent authorities to send the reference before the District Judge, Gautam Buddha Nagar. 3. Brief facts of the case as emerged from the writ petition are; the petitioner's Khata No. 11 Gata 5M area 0.2020 hectare situate in village Khanpur, Pargana Dankaur, Tahsil Sadar was acquired under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act. The compensation for the land was determined in accordance wit...
Tag this Judgment!M/S. Prestige Lights Ltd. and Another Vs. State Bank of India and Othe ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-27-2011
1. Heard Sri Keshri Nath Tripathi, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Sri V.D.Chauhan for the petitioner and Sri Bhanu Prakash Dubey, Sri Deepak Mishra holding brief of Sri A.K.Mishra, Advocates, for respondent No.1. 2. The respondents No. 2 and 3 being Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal and Debt Recovery Tribunal are formal parties, and having no lis in the matter, need not be served. Learned counsel for respondent No.1 states that since the issue raised before this Court in this writ petition is purely legal and therefore he does not propose to file counter and the matter be heard and decided finally at this stage under the Rules of the Court. As agreed and requested by learned counsel for the parties, I proceed accordingly. 3. By means of the impugned order dated 13th July, 2011, Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as "Appellate Tribunal") has rejected the appeal preferred by petitioners against order dated 01.12.2006 of Debt Recovery Tribunal (hereinafter refer...
Tag this Judgment!M/S. Al Faheem Meetex Pvt. Ltd. Vs. State of U.P. and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-26-2011
Vineet Saran, J. In response to an advertisement dated 1.7.2010 for construction of a Slaughter House in Meerut on a public private partnership model (hereinafter after referred to as the 'P.P.P. model'), the bid of the petitioner had been considered along with that of other applicants and was accepted by the Bid Evaluation Committee (B.E.C.) in its meeting held on 8.9.2010. A fresh decision was thereafter taken by the B.E.C. on 22.11.2010 holding that the bid of the petitioner was financially improper. It was thus recommended that fresh bids be invited by giving proper and wide publicity. In response thereto, a fresh advertisement was issued on 1.12.2010 by the Nagar Palika Parishad inviting fresh bids up to 15.12.2010. Challenging the said decision of the B.E.C. dated 22.11.2010 and consequential advertisement issued by the Municipal Commission, Nagar Nigam, Meerut dated 30.11.2010 (published on 01.12.2010), this writ petition has been filed. On 9.12.2010 this Court had passed the fo...
Tag this Judgment!Umesh Chand Sharma Vs. U.P. S.R.T.C., Bulandshahar and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-26-2011
A.P. SAHI, J.This petition arises out of an award of the Labour Court against the petitioner rejecting his claim against the reference of termination of his services on the charge that he had allowed ticket-less passengers to travel on the bus on which he was on duty on the date of the incident i.e. 17.9.1987.Sri Y.K. Sinha, learned counsel for the petitioner has raised the following four submissions:-A. Petitioner could not be charge sheeted or punished for alleged misconduct committed on 17.9.1987 as it was for the earlier period of employment from 4.6.1987 to 18.9.1987 and his re-employment w.e.f. 19.7.1987 condoned the earlier misconduct particularly when from 19.7.1987 to 22.9.1990 there was no misconduct alleged against him.B. In view of the provisions of section 6 (2) (A) of the U.P. I.D. Act, Labour Court has been given appellate power over the findings recorded by the enquiry officer as such Labour Court was duty bound to frame the issue of enquiry and would have appraised the...
Tag this Judgment!Raisa Begam Vs. District Registrar, Saharanpur and Another
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-25-2011
Sudhir Agarwal, J. 1. The writ petition is directed against the order dated 11.2.2010 passed by respondent no. 1, i.e. District Registrar, Saharanpur, in Appeal No. 3/4/2007, allowing the application of respondent no. 2 under Section 72/73 of the Indian Registration Act, 1908 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'), directing Sub Registrar to register the instrument allegedly executed by the petitioner in respect to property in dispute, mentioned in the alleged sale deed dated 28.2.2007. 2. Brief facts giving rise to the dispute are as under: - 3. The petitioner is the owner of Plot No. 334 Hata No. 264 measuring 0.7630 hectares at Mauza Salampur, Village Bhukadi, District Saharanpur. Respondent no. 1 filed an application on 9.5.2007 under Section 73 of the Act, alleging that the petitioner has executed an instrument on 28.2.2007 in respect to the said property, affixing her signature and thumb impression on the sale deed, registration whereof has been denied by the Sub Registrar, hence...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Bala Dhama and Others Vs. Sub Divisional Magistrate, Baraut and O ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-22-2011
VINOD PRASAD, J. Family of Suresh Pal Petitioner no. 3,his wife Smt. Bala Dhama, petitioner no.1 and minor son Vijay Kumar petitioner no.2, have preferred instant writ petition under Article 226 of The Constitution of India praying for issuance of a writ of certiorari quashing the impugned orders dated 23.4.2010 passed by Sub Divisional Magistrate, Baraut, district Baghpat in Case No.81 of 2008, Smt. Saroj Dhama Vs. Suresh Pal and others, under Section 145 Cr.P.C., annexure no.25 and lower revisional court's order dated 20.4.2011 passed in criminal revision no. 54 of 2010, Smt. Bala and others versus State of U.P. And Others recorded by Ist Additional Session's Judge, in respect of immovable properties situated in village and P.S. Binauli district Bagpat. By the impugned orders, S.D.M. Baraut district Bagpat, respondent no.1, had ordered both the contesting sides to get their rights decided by competent civil court and till such determination has kept the disputed properties under atta...
Tag this Judgment!Meerut Development Authority Vs. Labour Court, Saharanpur and Another
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-20-2011
1. Counter affidavit filed by Sri Neeraj Agrawal and rejoinder affidavit filed by Sri B. Dayal for petitioner, are taken on record. Heard counsel for the parties and perused the record. 2. This petition is preferred challenging validity and correctness of the ex parte award dated 5.5.2010 enforced by publication on 1.11.2010 , by which the labour court has held that termination of service of the workman with effect from 28.1.1987 by the employer is illegal and unjustified. The labour court , U.P. Saharanpur thereafter answered the relief part in the order of reference and directed the employer to reinstate the workman with continuity of service without back wages to the workman but he shall be entitled to wages from the date of reinstatement in the same mode or manner in which he was being paid prior to his illegal termination. 3. The petitioner has also challenged the order dated 7.4.2011 by which the restoration application filed by the employer petitioner for setting aside and recal...
Tag this Judgment!Har Karan Singh Vs. State of U.P. and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-19-2011
1. We have heard Sri Pankaj Dubey for the petitioners. Sri M.C. Chaturvedi, learned Chief Standing Counsel assisted by Dr. Y.K. Saxena, standing counsel appears for the State respondents. Sri Ramendra Pratap Singh appears for Greater Noida Industrial Development Authority. Sri Naveen Sinha assisted by Sri Rahul Agarwal appears for M/s Supertech Ltd – impleaded respondent in writ petition No. 27396 of 2010. 2. The petitioners are original tenure holders, purchasers, and a Society recorded as owners in revenue records of the land in village Patwari, Tehsil, Dadari, District Gautam Buddha Nagar. 3. By these eleven writ petitions, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have challenged the notification dated 12.3.2008 under Section 4 (1), applying Section 17 (1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (in short, the Act) proposing to acquire a total area of about 589.188 hectares of land in the village Patwari, Pargana Dadri, District Gautam Budh Nagar, for public p...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Satyawati and Others Vs. State of U.P. and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-19-2011
Proceedings under Section 33/47-A of the Indian Stamp Act were initiated against the petitioners in terms of the a notice issued by the Deputy Registrar-I on 12.03.2010 whereunder the deficiency of the stamp duty on the document in question was shown as Rs. 24,480/-. Before the proceeding in that regard could be concluded, a supplementary report was submitted after spot inspection by the Collector himself stating therein that the deficiency in the stamp duty in the matter was Rs. 59,200/-. A further direction was issued that the case be decided having due regard to the supplementary report so submitted. The Assistant Commissioner Stamp without noticing the subsequent spot inspection report of Collector passed an order dated 31st March, 2010 upholding the earlier notice only because in response thereto the petitioners unconditionally agreed to pay the money mentioned in the notice. On coming to know the aforesaid order dated 31.03.2010, which was passed without considering the subsequen...
Tag this Judgment!Kushagra Mokhriwale Vs. State of U.P. and Another
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-18-2011
VINOD PRASAD, J. This revision U/S 53 of Juvenile Justice ( Care And Protection Of Children) Act, 2000, ( herein after referred to as the Act) has been preferred by Kushagra Mokhariwale son of a bank cashier Diwakar Mokhriwale for being released on bail in crime no. 247 of 2011, under Section 386 I.P.C., P.S. Hariparwat, District Agra. For seeking desired relief revisionist has challenged impugned orders dated 20.4.2011 passed by Juvenile Justice Board, Agra, and order dated 7.5.2011 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 1, Agra in Juvenile Appeal No. 116 of 2011. By the aforesaid orders, Juvenile Justice Board and appellate Court, both have refused to release the revisionist on bail in the aforementioned crime number for aforementioned offence. Before entering into discussions on the contentions raised and opposed in this revision, a quick search light on the back ground facts indicate that informant Ramesh Nagvani lodged a FIR at P.S. Hariparwat on 25.3.2011 at 8.22 p.m. aga...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »