Court : Allahabad
Reported in : (1990)ILLJ250All
B.L. Yadava, J.1. By present stay application, petitioner, Zila Sahkari Bank Limited, has prayed that the implementation of the impugned award dated 22nd July, 1987, published in the notice board of the Labour Court, Gorakhpur, on 22nd July, 1987, in Adjudication Case No. 280 of 1985 between Zila Sahkari Bank Limited, Basti, and Mohan Lal Kesharwani be stayed during pendency of the writ petition in this Court.2. A short portrayal of essential facts appears imperative. The petitioner was an employer and the respondent No. 3, Mohan Lal Kesharwani, wasa workman working as a clerk/cashier under the petitioner-Bank. His services were governed by the U.P. Co-operative Employees' Service Regulations, 1975. He was appointed on different dates for fixed period of 3 months. His services, however, were terminated or retrenched on 10th January, 1980. He raised an industrial dispute and the same was referred by the State of U.P. for adjudication, under Section 4(k) of U.P. Industrial Disputes Act, ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : 2009(4)AWC3269
Sabhajeet Yadav, J.1. By this petition, the petitioner has challenged the letter/communication of Executive Engineer, Irrigation Department, Obra Dam Khand, Obra, Sonbhadra dated 23.2.2008 wherein it is stated that the compassionate appointment of petitioner would be considered after the decision in Original Suit No. 631 of 2004 instituted by Sri Mohan Prasad son of Jaipati in the court of Civil Judge (Junior Division), Deoria. The aforesaid. letter was communicated to the petitioner in pursuance of direction given by this Court in Writ Petition No. 58491 of 2007 decided on 28.1.2007, earlier filed by petitioner.2. The brief facts of the case are that one Sri Triveni Prasad, who was a permanent Class IV employee in the office of Executive Engineer, Irrigation Department, Obra Dam, Obra, district Sonebhadra/respondent No, 2, died while in service on 4.10.2003. The petitioner claims to be adopted son and dependent of said Triveni Prasad thus moved an application in the office of responde...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : (2009)222CTR(All)153; [2009]179TAXMAN73(All)
Pradeep Kant, J.1. This is a bunch of writ petitions, which challenge the notice under Section 158BC of the IT Act, 1961, issued to all the petitioners separately and thus challenge the proceedings for block assessment initiated under Chapter XIV-B of the IT Act, for the block period commencing from 1st April, 1996, to 16th Dec, 2002. Since all the writ petitions arise out of almost similar facts and involve the same questions of law, we have proceeded to decide them by a common order but in doing so, keeping in mind the distinct circumstances, which require separate adjudication, we divide the aforesaid petitions in two sets. Writ Petn. Nos. 5731 (MB) of 2004, 5730 (MB) of 2004 and 5729 (MB) of 2004, Writ Petn. No. 5931 (MB) of 2004 and Writ Petn. No. 5932 (MB) of 2004, which have been filed, respectively, by (i) Raghuraj Pratap Singh, son of Udai Pratap Singh, (ii) Smt. Bhavni. Kumari, wife of Raghuraj Pratap Singh, (iii) Smt. Manjul Raje, wife of Udai Pratap Singh, (iv) Trilochan Pr...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : 2009(1)AWC521; [2008(119)FLR935]
ORDERAshok Bhushan and Arun Tandon, JJ.1. Heard Sri Shakti Swarup Nigam for the appellants and Sri K. R. Sirohi, senior advocate, assisted by Sri Rajesh Tiwari for the respondents.2. The appellant No. 1 before this Court is an unaided institution said to be recognised by the Central Board of Secondary Education. The institution had approached this Court by means of Writ Petition No. 53277 of 2008 challenging the notification issued in exercise of powers under Section 1(5) of E.S.I. Act, 1948 dated 30th June, 2008 whereby educational institutions have been brought within the purview of the E.S.I. Act, 1948.3. Learned Counsel for the appellants had contended before the Hon'ble single Judge that word 'establishment' has not been defined under the E.S.I. Act. Educational Institutions cannot be treated to be an establishment within the meaning of Section 1(5) of the E.S.I. Act, 1948 inasmuch as the words 'other establishments' as used in the said Section would necessarily take it's colour f...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : 2002(3)AWC2251; (2002)3UPLBEC2231
S.K. Singh, J.1. Indian Railway Construction Company Limited (in short the respondent company) is a Government of India owned company registered under the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956. All the shares of the company are held by the President and/or officers of the Central Government in the name of the President of India. The respondent company concededly an instrumentality of State within the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution is engaged in the construction and implementation of various projects in the country and abroad pertaining to construction of roads, buildings, bridges, electrification, telecommunication, railway tracking, and construction work pertaining to airports.2. Petitioners in these five writ petitions were appointed at Anpara Project of the respondent company on casual/ad hoc basis on a consolidated monthly emoluments of Rs. 400 subject to the condition that they will have to undergo training for the prescribed period during which they would be entitled t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : [2003]133TAXMAN482(All)
ORDERM. Katju, J. This writ petition and connected writ petitions are being disposed of by a common judgment. The petitioner is challenging the validity of notification dated 25-9-2001 (Annexure-l to the writ petition), by which rule 3 of the Income Tax Rules, 1962 was substituted by the Income Tax (22nd Amendment) Rules, 2001 issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes. The petitioner is also challenging the validity of section 17(2)(vi) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 as inserted by the Finance Act, 2001 on the ground that it has delegated essential legislative powers and that it is violative of Articles 19(1) and 246 of the Constitution.2. We have heard learned counsels for the parties.It is alleged in para 2 of the petition that the petitioner is an Association of Officers of Airport Authority of India.3. Before dealing with the controversy in this case, we may refer to section 17(2)(vi) of the Income Tax Act which states that for the purposes of sections 15 and 16 and of that section ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : I(2003)ACC629; 2003ACJ1274; 2003(1)AWC556
G.P. Mathur, A.C.J.1. This appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act has been preferred against the judgment and award dated 6.1.2002 of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal/Additional Judge, Court No. 19, Meerut, by which the claim petition filed by Brij Pal Singh (respondent No. 1) was allowed and the appellant-insurance company was directed to pay Rs. 1,28,400 as compensation along with interest at the rate of 9 per cent from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of payment.2. The appeal was heard for admission on 15.4.2002 when notice was issued to the respondents and a direction was issued to summon the trial court record. In response to the notice Sri V. P. Singh Charak and Sri D. R. Chowdhary put in appearance on behalf of Pramod Kumar (respondent No. 2). Thereafter with the consent of the parties, the appeal was finally heard at the admission stage.3. Brij Pal Singh, respondent No. 1, filed a claim petition on 18.2.1998 under Sections 140 and 166 of the Mot...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : (2003)185CTR(All)1; [2004]265ITR224(All)
M. KATJU, J.1. This writ petition and connected writ petitions are being disposed of by a common judgment. The petitioner is challenging the validity of Notification dt. 25th Sept., 2001 (Annex.-1 to the writ petition), by which Rule 3 of the IT Rules, 1962, was substituted by the Income-tax (22nd Amendment) Rules, 2001 issued by the CBDT. The petitioner is also challenging the validity of Section 17(2)(vi) of the IT Act, 1961, as inserted by the Finance Act, 2001 on the ground that it has delegated essential legislative powers and that it is violative of Articles 19(1) and 246 of the Constitution. We have heard learned counsel for the parties.2. It is alleged in para. 2 of the petition that the petitioner is an association of officers of Airport Authority of India.3. Before dealing with the controversy in this case, we may refer to Section 17(2)(vi) of the IT Act which states that for the purposes of Sections 15 and 16 and of that section perquisite includes 'value of any other fringe...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : I(1987)ACC46; [1988]63CompCas266(All)
B.D. Agarwal, J. 1. These connected appeals under Section 110D, Motor Vehicles Act, are directed against an award of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (Additional District Judge, Allahabad) dated December 20, 1977.2. The claim petition was filed by Smt. Chandra Kumari alleging that her husband, Jaskaran Singh, deceased, was aged about 28 years. He was employed as a driver in truck No. UTE 1447 belonging to Arun Kumar Rastogi and his brother, the appellants. The salary paid was Rs. 400 per month besides Rs. 10 per day as diet allowance. On October 1, 1976, at about 11 p.m., Jaskaran Singh was driving the truck loaded with bricks from the brick kiln of Iradatganj, District Banda, when it met with an accident having dashed against a tree. Jaskaran Singh died instantaneously on account of the injuries sustained in the accident. The owners of the truck resisted the claim pleading that the accident took place due to rash and negligent driving by the deceased and that they are not liable to...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : AIR1957All384
ORDERMehrotra, J. 1. The present petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution by a member of the Municipal Board, Chandausi, for a writ of quo-warranto against the opposite party Sri Om Prakash to show the authority by which he is holding the office of the member of the Municipal Board. 2. The Municipal Board Chandausi consists of 25 members including the President who is the ex-officio member of the Board. The General Elections took place on the 26th of October 1953 to elect the President and the members of the Board and the petitioner and the opposite party Om Prakash were elected members and one Sri Bhagwati Prasad was elected President of the Board. Formerly the opposite party Om Prakash was an insurance employee and on the commencement of the Life Insurance Corporation Act XXXI of 1956, i.e., on the 1st of September 1956, he became an employee of the Central Government through the Life Insurance Corporation of India. Since the 1st of September 1958 he is working a...
Tag this Judgment!