Court : Allahabad
Reported in : 2007(2)AWC1113
Amitava Lala, J.1. Petitioners made this writ petition in the form of a Public Interest Litigation (sometimes called as PIL) praying inter alia as follows:I. Issue a writ, order, or direction in the nature of mandamus/prohibition thereby prohibiting the construction of the proposed 'Haj House' over the land of Khasra 1399 (area 4.535 acre) at village Arthala, situated at the bank ('doob kshetra') of river Hindon, near the National Highway No. 58 E in pargana Loni, tehsil and district Ghaziabad.II. Issue a writ, order, or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to immediately stop the construction of the proposed 'Haj House' over the land of Khasra 1399 (area 4.535 acre) at village Arthala, situated at the bank ('doob kshetra') of river Hindon, near the National Highway No. 58 E in pargana Loni, tehsil and district Ghaziabad.III. Issue any other writ, order, or direction, which this court may deem fit and proper.IV. Award the cost of the petition to the petitioner...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : 2001(4)AWC3045
G.P. Mathur, J.1. The petitioner, an advocate, practising in Allahabad High Court, has filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, praying that (a) a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus be issued declaring Section 35(2) of the U. P. Reorganisation Act, 2000, as ultra vires of the Constitution, and (b) a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus be issued declaring the power of the Chief Justice under Section 35 (2) of the Act to be judicial in nature and further that the Chief Justice should exercise the power of grant of certificate after hearing the parties who invoke such jurisdiction and after recording reasons and that too only in exceptional cases.2. The Parliament enacted the Uttar Pradesh Reorganisation Act, 2000 (Act No. 29 of 2000) (hereinafter referred to as the Act) to provide for reorganistion of the existing State of Uttar Pradesh and for matters connected therewith. The Act cameinto force on August 25, 2000 and the 'appointed d...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : AIR1973All458
Satish Chandra, J. 1. This appeal has been filed by the State and the officials of its education department, It is directed against the judgment of a learned single Judge, whereby he quashed an order appointing an authorised controller for the Arva Kanva Inter College, Jhansi. 2. On 21st April. 1971, the Director of Education U. P. served upon the Manager of the College a notice purporting to be under Section 16-D (2) of the U, P. Intermediate Education Act. It enumerated 19 irregularities and defects in the working of the institution, and stated that the mentioned irregularities made it clear that the management of the college was not being conducted properly and that the instructions issued by the Department were being repeatedly evaded. It required the institution to remedy the defects and to submit an explanation under Section 16-D (2). The management submitted a detailed explanation on 14th May. 1971. Thereafter, the Director made some further queries by his letter dated May 26. 1...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : AIR1959All643
ORDERJ. Sahai, J. 1. The petitioner was appointed as Assistant Electrical Foreman in 1944 in the erstwhile Bengal and Assam Railway. After the partition of the country the Bengal and Assam Railway was renamed as Assam Railway and the petitioner continued to work in that railway. He was promoted to the post of electrical foreman in the scale of Rs. 360-500 and was confirmed on that post a little after. The Assam Railway was merged in the North Eastern Railway and the petitioner continued to serve as electrical foreman in the railway electrical power house at Pandu under the North Eastern Railway. The petitioner was the General Secretary of the Assam Railway Labour Association, a registered and recognised trade union of the railway workers and after the reorganisation of the railways the petitioner became the General Secretary of the North Eastern Railway Mazdoor Union and in the election held in October 1955 the petitioner was elected as General Secretary of the same Union and continues...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : 2002(3)AWC2605a; (2002)3UPLBEC2336
Ashok Bhushan, J.1. Heard Sri R.G. Padia, senior counsel assisted by Sri Prakash Padia for the petitioner and Sri Ajay Bhanot learned standing counsel appearing for the respondents. Affidavits have been exchanged between the parties. Both the parties have agreed that the writ petition itself be finally decided.2. By this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for quashing of the impugned order dated 23.4.1999 Annexure-14 to the writ petition by which the petitioner has been dismissed from service. Facts of the case as emerge from the pleadings of the parties are :Petitioner was appointed as Labour Investigator vide order dated 26.7.1979 under the U.P. Recruitment of Dependants of Government Servants (Dying-in-Harness) Rules, 1974. Petitioner was promoted as Welfare Superintendent and was working as Housing Inspector in the year 1996. On 27.7.1996, the petitioner was transferred as Housing Inspector from Shastri Nagar to Zajmau, Kanpur Nagar. Petitioner did not hand over charge of Sha...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : 2007(4)AWC3591; [2007(115)FLR150]
Anjani Kumar and Sudhir Agarwal, JJ.1. Aggrieved by the order dated 30th September 2000 passed by respondent No. 1 imposing punishment of deduction of pension by 20% in exercise of power under Article 351-A of Civil Service Regulation (hereinafter referred to as CSR) the petitioner has sought a writ of certiorari for quashing the said order and has also sought a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to release the entire pension, gratuity and other retiral benefits along with interest at the rate of 18%.2. The facts in brief, as stated in the writ petition are that the petitioner was appointed as Naib Tahsildar and promoted to the post of Tahsildar and Deputy Collector where-from he retired on attaining the age of superannuation on 30.6.1997. Just a few months earller to the date of retirement the petitioner received a charge sheet dated 20th December 1996 which contained four charges with respect to alleged irregularities committed by the petitioner while working as Land Acquisi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : 1966CriLJ1106
Gyanendra Kumar, J.1. In this case the opponent, who is a member of the Socialist Party, had addressed a personal letter dated 25.7.1964 in a closed envelope to Sri Mathuresh Narain, Judicial Magistrate, Bijnor. However, it was written on the official letter-head of the Party. It made reference to three cases - two of which had already been decided by the Magistrate, while the third one was still pending. The letter stated that in the complaint case of Alladia v. Mahkar Singh, Sub-Inspector, Police Station, Seohara, the opponent had appeared as a witness for the complainant under Section 202 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The opponent alleged that the Magistrate did not like his appearing as a witness against the Police Sub-Inspector. He further alleged that in spite of the fact that there was prima facie evidence in the case, the Magistrate did not summon the Sub-Inspector as an accused, with the result that notwithstanding that his complaint was true, the said Alladia had to get ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : 1964CriLJ362
ORDERN.U. Beg, J.1. This is an application Under Section 3 of the Contempt of Courts Act. The applicant is Dr. Ganga Baksh Singh and the opposite parties are (1) Dr. J. C. Sharma, Principal, National Homeopathic Medical Collage, Lucknow (2) Dr. Daya Nand, Member U. P. Homeopathic Medicine Board, Lucknow and (3) Dr. A. P. Arora, Member, U. P. Homeopathic Medicine Board, Lucknow.The facts giving rise to this application may be briefly stated as follows:On the 7th of February, 1961 an application signed by a number of persons was made to the Registrar, Homeopathic Medicine Board, U. P. Lucknow alleging that Dr. J. C. Sharma, opposite party No. 1 who was principal of the National Homoeopathic College, Lucknow and a member of the Management Board of the said coJIegei, had obtained scholarship from the U. P. Government for higher studies by making certain false representations regarding his qualifications and had also succeeded in securing his post in National Homeopathic College, Lucknow in...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
1. This writ petition having been restored to its original number vide order of date passed on restoration application, as requested by learned counsel for the parties, it is taken up for hearing and is being decided finally. 2. Heard Sri K.K. Tripathi, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the respondents. 3. The executive authorities are supposed to execute policies of Government employing Rule of Law as laid down by Legislature and interpreted by this court. The incidental work which is also of equal importance is that those responsible for such execution must perform their job diligently, devotedly, honestly with ultimate goal of best public interest. Those who lack, should be made to suffer consequences. The later part, i.e., the consequences, ordinarily comes as a result of disciplinary proceedings conducted in accordance with Rules laying down procedure consistent with Article 311 of the Constitution and on the broad principle of administrative law....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : (1959)ILLJ357All
Jagdish Sahai, J.1. The petitioner was appointed on 11 October 1935 as a rural development organizer. On 30 September 1943 he was appointed as an agriculture supervisor. On 30 July 1948, he was working as incharge supervisor, Central Seed Store, Budaun, when he was suspended. On 23 October 1948, a chargesheet was served on him to which the petitioner submitted an explanation. On 25 November 1948 he was called by the Circle Accounts Officer at Bareilly and some enquiries were made from him on 29 and 30 November and 1 December 1948. The Circle Accounts Officer reported the proceedings to the Deputy Director of Agriculture, Bareilly, who recommended to the Joint Director of Agriculture, Lucknow, that a bad entry be made in the character roll of the petitioner and the proceedings initiated by the chargesheet be withdrawn. The Joint Director of Agriculture ordered that the matter be referred to the District Magistrate, Budaun, for prosecution of the petitioner in a criminal Court. A case wa...
Tag this Judgment!