Court : Allahabad
Ashok Bhushan, J. Large scale acquisition of agricultural and Abadi land of farmers of different villages of Greater Noida and Noida of District Gautam Buddha Nagar in the name of planned industrial development is the subject matter of challenge in these 471 writ petitions. These writ petitions have been placed before this Full Bench under orders of Hon'ble the Chief Justice dated 6.8.2011 on a reference made by a Division Bench in writ petition No. 37443 of 2011 and other connected matters. Writ petition No. 37443 of 2011 challenges the notifications dated 12.3.2008 issued under section 4 read with Sections 17(1) and 17(4) of Land Acquisition Act and notification dated 30.6.2008 by which declaration was made for acquisition of 589.188 hectares land of village Patwari. Similar notifications under section 4 read with Sections 17(1), 17(4) and Section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act were issued with regard to different villages. Several writ petitions were filed challenging the land ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Allahabad
Reported in : (2004)88ITD585(All.)
1. All these three appeals filed by the assessees involve common question of law and facts and, therefore, all the three appeals are disposed of by common order. All the three appeals have been filed by the assessees against the order of CIT, Allahabad under Section 263 of the Income-tax Act. No date on the order of the CIT is however, mentioned.2. The following grounds of appeal have been raised against the order of the CIT under Section 263 in the case of Sri Girdhar Gopal Gulati.Similar grounds of appeal have been raised by Sri J.K. Gulati and Sri Satpal Gulati in their appeals: "(i) Because the order passed Under Section 263 setting aside the assessment order dated 9.3.2001 for the assessment year 1998-99 is absolutely illegal, arbitrary and bad in law, read with the facts stated in the statement of fact which forms a part of this appeal. (ii) Because, it is wrong to say that the proper enquiry has not been made by the Assessing Authority with regard to property income and investm...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : AIR1993All143
1. A very ugly situation faces the Court, the High Court, in its original jurisdiction in these cases. Many questions have been flung at the Court. The Court must answer them as they are all questions which this Court or any other Court will have to face some time or the other in the conduct of original proceedings.2. There are two matters before the Court. Both arise out of and relate to the estate of one Mahendra Pratap Singh. By testamentary case No. 13 of 1986 (subsequently converted into testamentary suit No. 2 of 1988) Wing Commander Narendra Pratap Singh, the brother of the deceased, applied to the High Court for letters of administration on September 18, 1986. Notices were issued on the petition and an order for citation was also made. A year anda quarter later a petition was filed by Padma Kumari seeking letters of administration on the same estate of the deceased. Wing Commander Narendra Pratap Singh has sought letters of administration upon a will dated November 25, 1985. Pa...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : [1989(59)FLR153]; (1990)ILLJ273All
S.H.A. Raza, J.1. This writ petition is directed against the impugned order dated 5th December, 1988 by means of which the petitioner who is employed as Clerk in Allahabad Bank, Lucknow was transferred to Allahabad Bank, Branch Gonda in a newly established branch of the said bank. The new grounds upon which the transfer has been passed are in contravention of Para 534 of the Shastri Award dealing with the transfer policy of transferring an employee working in the said bank as well as the guideline, dated June 11, 1988 on transfer job rotation of Award Staff adopted by the said bank.2. There is no dispute that banks are entitled to transfer its staff on the exigencies of the service from one particular branch to another and the Management is in the best position to judge how to transfer its staff between different branches, but it has to be seen whether the impugned order of transfer is in conformity with the policy regarding transfer which has been agreed upon by the parties and which ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
1. This first appeal has been directed against the judgment and award dated 14.3.2002 passed by learned M.A.C.T./Special Judge (E.C. Act), Allahabad in Motor Accident Claim Petition No.67 of 1993 (Kashi Ratneshwar Dayal Tiwari and others v. Sudama Lal Sonkar and others), wherein the claim petition has been allowed and the appellant Rameshwar Bux Singh, respondents Sudama Lal Sonkar owner and Dinesh Sonkar driver of the vehicle have been held liable jointly and severally to pay Rs.2,98,000/- as compensation, however, respondent/opposite parties City Bank and Oriental Insurance Company have been absolved of their liabilities. 2. A perusal of the record goes to show that a petition under section 166 of Motor Vehicles Act was moved by respondents/petitioners Kashi Ratneshwar Dayal Tiwari and four others claiming themselves to be dependents and legal heirs of deceased Praksh Chandra Tiwari aged about 20 years, for compensation with regard to his death in the accident in question, with this ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : [2003]47SCL126(All)
ORDERSunil Ambwani, J.1. Pradeshia Industrial & Investment Corporation of U.P. Ltd. (hereinafter called as PICUP) has filed these Criminal Revision Nos. 41 of 2000 and 49 of 2000 against the Judgment and Order dated 20-12-1999 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ghaziabad in State of U.P. v. M.L. Gupta [Case No. 153 of 1999] by which an application under Section 451, Cr. P.C. has been allowed with a direction that M/s. Keshav Enterprises, Mohali through its authorised representative Amrik Singh be given Supurdagi of the machinery detailed in the list dated 3-5-1999 and 30-8-1999 on furnishing surety bonds of two reliable persons with a personal bond, and the order dated 6-1 -2000 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ghaziabad in Case No. 153 of 1999, State of U.P. v. M.L. Gupta and others by which he has directed Official Liquidator, 33 Tashkand Marg, Allahabad to comply with the Order dated 20-12-1999 and handover the Supurdagi of the case properties in his presence on 10-1-2...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : 2009(2)AWC1777
Sudhir Agarwal, J.1. Aggrieved by the judgment dated 2.11.2000 of Hon'ble single Judge dismissing petitioner-appellant's (hereinafter referred to as the 'petitioner') Writ Petition No. 24972 of 1991 this intra Court appeal under the rules of the Court has been preferred by the petitioner. The writ petition was filed challenging the order dated 5.8.1991 whereby the Director, North Central Zone, Cultural Centre, Nyay Marg, Allahabad (hereinafter referred to the 'N.C.Z.C.C.') has terminated petitioner's services giving him one month's salary in lieu of notice.2. The facts in brief giving rise to the present dispute are that the petitioner was appointed vide order dated 11/16.9.1987 as Stenographer (Hindi) attached to Deputy Director (Admin.) on consolidated pay of Rs. 1,581 per month including all allowances. The aforesaid appointment was purely temporary and terminable at any time without prior notice. On 30.7.1991 the Director, N.C.Z.C.C. published an advertisement in daily Hindi newspa...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Allahabad
Reported in : (2005)93TTJ(All.)470
1. This appeal by the Revenue is directed against the order of the CIT(A), Varanasi, dt. 11th Feb., 1995, for the asst. yr. 1991-92.2. This appeal is filed on five effective grounds of appeal which raise two issues, therefore, we take them separately for the purpose of disposal of this appeal. We have heard the learned Departmental Representative and the learned counsel or the assessee and gone through the material available on record. "1. That, the learned CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in deleting the disallowance of expenses amounting to Rs. 1,47,150 made by the AO under the head 'Raffu'; designing; polishing and 'Rangai' without properly appreciating the fact discussed in the assessment order justifying the disallowances and only on the ground that no such disallowance was made in earlier years, as such, assessment year is independent and the principles of res judicata do not apply to income-tax proceedings. 2. That, the learned CIT(A) while deleting the above disallowances ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Devi Prasad Singh, J. 1. WITH the change of Government, the creation of new districts has become a routine feature in the State of Uttar Pradesh that too, without adverting to financial viability and necessity. Ordinarily, decisions are political to perpetuate legacy of political parties. 2. SIMILAR is the case in hand referred by the Division Bench of this Court relating to constitution of Chhatrapati Shahu Ji Maharaj Nagar (in short CSM Nagar). 3. On account of conflicting judgment with regard to right of State Government to create districts, a Division Bench of this Court (Hon'ble Pradeep Kant, J. and Hon'ble Ritu Raj Awasthi, J.), has framed three (3) questions and referred the same to the Larger Bench. In terms thereof, Hon'ble the Chief Justice has constituted the present Bench. The questions referred by the Division Bench vide order dated 25.3.2011 passed in Writ Petition No.10159 (M/B) of 2010 and three other connected writ petitions, are as under: (i) Whether the issuance of n...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : AIR1933All417
Mukerji, Ag. C.J.1. These two revisions have arisen out of a Small Cause Court Suit No. 5247 of 1930 instituted by Mr. Nihal Chand Shastri against two defendants, Masood Ahmad Khan and Dilawar Khan alias Dilawar for recovery of Rs. 340. The plaintiff's case was_ that defendant 2, Dilawar had a criminal case against him in a Magistrate's Court at Muzaffarnagar, where the plaintiff was then practising as an advocate of the High Court. Masood Ahmad Khan was the plaintiff's clerk. Dilawar Khan wanted the plaintiff to go to Allahabad and to file an application for transfer of the criminal case from Muzaffarnagar and agreed to pay Rs. 50 a day for the period during which the plaintiff would be away from Muzaffarnagar. As Dilawar Khan had no money to pay down, Masood Ahmad Khan, the plaintiff's clerk stood surety for him. The plaintiff carried out his part of the contract, but was not paid. The plaintiff accordingly brought the suit. The learned Judge of the Small Cause Court decreed the suit...
Tag this Judgment!