Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: insecticides act 1968 section 6 other committees Court: allahabad Page 14 of about 11,842 results (0.167 seconds)

Jul 19 1977 (HC)

Committee of Management, ColvIn Taluqdars' College and Ors. Vs. Chandr ...

Court : Allahabad

Reported in : AIR1978All93

..... supplanted on the approval of scheme of administration. it would merely be modified. 14. the third question referred to hereinabove is answered by sub-section (3) of section 16-c of the act which says that if the scheme of administration is not submitted within time, the director of education shall take action in accordance with clause ( ..... period allowed is found deficient, the director may get the defects removed. a right to make representation is given to the institution vide sub-section (5) of section 16-a of the act. obviously, it takes some time before the scheme of administration is finally approved. again, if a scheme of administration is not submitted within ..... that the college was functioning without a scheme of administration for the last 15 years or so. hence the managing committee was functioning in contravention of section 16-a of the act and, therefore, it was illegally constituted. 4. in short, the grouse of the respondent no. 1 was that the managing committee managing the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 27 1992 (HC)

Mahabir Prasad Dwivedi Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and Others

Court : Allahabad

Reported in : AIR1992All351; (1992)2UPLBEC1074

..... the legislature did not intend that an opportunity of hearing should be given before passing an order of confirmation.8. however, a deeper analysis of sec. 7-a and the scheme of the act has persuaded me to reach to the conclusion that an opportunity of hearing must be given by the state government before passing an order of confirmation, ..... thepresent petition the petitioner has challenged the impugned order of the district magistrate, banda dated 10-1-1992 (annexure-9 to the writ petition) under section 7-a of the u.p. town area act removing the petitioner from the post of chairman, as well as the order of the state government dated 21-1-1992 (annexure-10) to the ..... , learned counsel for the petitioner and shri yatindra singh and standing counsel for the respondents, and i am disposing of this writ petition finally.3. section 7-a(l) of the u. p. town areas act states as follows :--'7-a. removal of a chairman or a member of a committere.-- (1) the prescribed authority, or, where an authority .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 28 1998 (HC)

Smt. Jinat Rahman Vs. District Inspector of Schools, Azamgarh and Othe ...

Court : Allahabad

Reported in : 1998(4)AWC248; (1998)3UPLBEC2077

..... of the institution, a teacher or a non-teaching member of the staff, however, subject to the supervisory power of the d.i.o.s. conferred under section 16g of the act. the submission on behalf of the respondents appears to be that even though the d.i.o.s. has not approved the order of suspension as passed by ..... the present case as all the aforesaid facts and circumstances are foreign to the facts of the present case. the committee of management has acted in flagrant violation of the provisions of sub-section (6) of section 16g as it has failed to report the matter to the d.i.o.s. the committee of management perhaps had in its mind ..... learned counsel for the petitioner urged that in the absence of the approval accorded by the d.i.o.s., as contemplated under section 16g of the u. p. intermediate education act. 1921 (hereinafter referred to as 'the act'), the petitioner cannot be allowed to remain under suspension and she cannot be prevented from performing her duties of the said post. this .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 06 1998 (HC)

Arun Kumar Singh Vs. State of U.P. and Others

Court : Allahabad

Reported in : 1998(3)AWC2378

..... shall vest in the registrar and such selection may be held otherwise than in any meeting, notwithstanding anything contained in clause (b) of section 32.'sub-section (4) of section 29 of the act was substituted by u. p. act no. 5 of 1983. with effect from 23.12.1981. which reads thus :'(4) (a) where, for any reason whatsoever, ..... to our judgment in dot singh vadau (supra), he contended that 'the petitioner of that case had failed to demonstrate the vires of the act whereas 'under sub-section (4) section 29 of the act. it is the duty of the secretary of the co-operative society to send requisition to the registrar for the purposes of holding election 4 ..... the state, on the other hand, contended as follows :(i) the petitioner is a notified co-operative society. by virtue of the proviso attached to sub-section (3) of section 29 of the act. this provision is not applicable to the petitioner. accordingly, the entire arguments of mr. singh falls like a house of cards. (ii) apart from the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 05 1994 (HC)

Smt. Swaroopwati and Others Vs. the Collector, Dehradun

Court : Allahabad

Reported in : AIR1995All31

..... . 52,047.06 paise awarded by arbitrator.13. next important question is whether appellant shall be entitled to solatium on the price of the land determined under the act. section 8(3) of the act provides that compensation shall be the price of the land . it docs not include solatium. thus, appellant would have been entitled solatium on the marketvalue of land if ..... is to be struck down. this principle was laid down by supreme court in various decisions following which it was held in the decision of supreme court reported in air 1968 sc 1425 (balammal v. state of madras) that deprivation of statutory right to solatium at the rate of 15% on the market value is discriminatory violative of art. 14 ..... exemplers, are relevant for being considered. they are exts. 10, 11 and 12. land under these documents are under the acquired land. transaction under ext. 10 is dated 4-6-1968. though it is a transaction made three years before, it indicates price prevailing in open market for small strip of land in .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 11 1991 (HC)

Gorakhpur Development Authority Gorakhpur Vs. District Judge, Gorakhpu ...

Court : Allahabad

Reported in : AIR1991All241

..... but the said application is a qualified one, namely, to the extent its application is not excluded by the context of the land acquisition act. subsection (2) of section 50 read with sections 18 and 30 of the act excludes the application of order 1, rule 10, c.p.c. by necessary implication. the decision of the supreme court in himalaya ..... does not come into the picture. it was submitted that order i, rule 10, c.p.c. does not apply in view of sub-section (2) of section 50 of the land acquisition act. the application for impleadment has been dismissed by the learned district judge, against which the present writ petitions have been filed.3. the learned ..... undoubtedly appear and adduce evidence on the question of the quantum compensation.'the court then referred to an earlier decision of its own in sunder lal v. paramsukhdas : [1968]1scr362 and to the decisions of the punjab and haryana, calcutta and madras high courts in hindustan sanitary ware and industries ltd. v. state of haryana , comilla .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 10 2000 (HC)

Swatantra Kumar Singh Vs. Gorakhpur Kshetriya GramIn Bank and Others

Court : Allahabad

Reported in : 2000(3)AWC2354; (2000)3UPLBEC2024

..... made thereunder, to provide for all matters for which provision is necessary or expedient for the purpose of giving effect to the provisions of this act, in sub-section (2) of the said act, it provides that every regulation so made be forwarded to the central government which shall lay the same before each of the house of the ..... with.11. admittedly, the plaintiff is an employee governed by the gorakhpur kshetrlya gramin bank staff service regulations, 1980, framed under section 30 of the regional rural banks act. 1976. section 30 in the said act prescribes that the board of directors of a regional rural bank may, after consultation with the sponsor bank and the national bank and ..... was held that in such situation, the employees shall be confirmed by implication. reliance was placed by the apex court in the case of punjab v. dharam singh, air 1968 sc 1210 and om prakash v. u. p. co-operative sugar federation, air 1986 sc 1844. on the basis thereof. it had proceeded to hold that regulation 10 .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 22 1996 (HC)

M/S. Orai Oil Chemicals Pvt.Ltd. and Another Vs. State of Uttar Prades ...

Court : Allahabad

Reported in : AIR1997All92

..... an empty formality and unnecessary exercise to determine as to whether the plants and machineries are immovable properties or not. inasmuch as though section 17 of the registration act does not include a deed transferring moveable properties within the documents which are registerable. but as soon a document is sought to be ..... right or liability is, or purports to be, created, transferred, limited, extended, extinguished, or recorded.'10. 'document' has been defined in section 3(18) of the general clauses act, 1897 in the following expression:'document' shall include any matter written, expressed or described upon in substance by means of letters, figures, or marks ..... registered though not compulsorily registerable, it was required to be validly stamped. since in view of section 48 of the indian registration act, a reg-istered document shall override all other oral agreements. admittedly in the present case, plants and machineries have been transferred. now .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 05 2006 (HC)

The Aligarh Muslim University Through Its Vice-chancellor Vs. Malay Sh ...

Court : Allahabad

Reported in : 2006(1)AWC992

..... which shall also be shortly noticed while noticing the judgment in some detail. it is, however, relevant to refer to some of the provisions of the 1920 act. section 3 of the act provided that first chancellor, pro-chancellor and vice chancellor shall be the persons appointed by notification of the governor general in council. the university was enacted as a ..... the basis of the apex court judgment in s. azeez basha and anr. v. union of india etc. a.i.r. 1968 s.c. 662 (hereinafter referred to as azeez basha's case). the amendment act, 1981 is in consonance with the history of the establishment of the aligarh muslim university. relying on the apex court judgment in ..... of the supreme court and the report of the case will be found at : [1968]1scr833 it ruled that the university is not a minority institution.6. the 1981 act is an act of our parliament, no. 62 of 1981 being aligarh muslim university (amendment act 1981), which received assent of the president of india on the 31st december, 1981 .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 25 1965 (HC)

Rashtriya Chini Mill Mazdoor Union and ors. Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh ...

Court : Allahabad

Reported in : AIR1967All36; (1968)IILLJ26All

..... services essential to the life of the community and for maintaining employment.'these are the facts which constitute the condition precedent to the exercise of power under section 3 of the act. under section 3 the requisite order can be passed if in the opinion of the state government it is necessary so to do to achieve the various purposes ..... fields in which the two powers operate are different after 1957 it is no longer necessary that an acute emergency should exist before the state government can act under section 3 (b) of the act.11. learned counsel next urged that the impugned order is bad as it violates the principles of natural justice. it is urged that before passing ..... 2. the impugned notification dated 1-5-62 purports to have been passed by the state government in exercise of the powers conferred by section 3 of the u. p. industrial disputes act, 1947 (u. p. act no. xxviii of 1947) it directs 69 named vacuum pan sugar factories to pay to their employees amounts, by way of bonus for .....

Tag this Judgment!


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organize Client Files //