Court : Allahabad
Reported in : [1990(60)FLR608]; (1991)IILLJ154All
S.K. Dhaon, J.1. In this and the companion Writ Petition Nos. 8214 of 1986,3294 of 1985,13015 of 1984 and 9948 of 1983 the employers feel aggrieved by the refusal of the State of Uttar Pradesh to accord them permission to close down either undertakings or units.2. In this petition the material averments of Jay Shree Tea and Industries Ltd., a public limited company, are these. Amongst other businesses, the company has an establishment of Jay Shree Tyres and Rubber Products at Allahabad (hereinafter referred to as the Allahabad Unit). Each business run by the company is a separate establishment having a separate finance, management and control. The Allahabad unit has been suffering huge losses year after year. It has suffered losses from its very inception. In 1976-77 its loss was of Rs. 1.68 lacs, in 1977-78 the loss was of Rs. 49.98 lacs, in 1978-79 the loss was of Rs. 44.37 lacs, in 1979-80 the loss was Rs. 92.08 lacs, in 1980-81 the loss was of Rs 114.5 lacs, in 1981-82 the loss was...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : AIR1990All205; (1990)3UPLBEC1643
ORDERRavi S. Dhavan, J.1. This writ petition, amongst many others, before the Court, raises a question whether the Court may have the power of absolution in making a new contract or in the alternative whether it could spell out new conditions of a contract. The facts which raise these questions arise out of a situation when a State agency invited tenders for the purchase of tendu leaves.2. Trading in tendu leaves was curtailed and settled on a state corporation, in effect, to create a State monopoly in the purchase and distribution of tendu leaves. This was done when the State of Uttar Pradesh enacted a legislation known as Uttar Pradesh Tendu Patta (Vyapar Viniyaman) Adhiniyam, 1972, hence forth referred to as the Act. In pursuance of the Act were framed the Uttar Pradesh Tendu Patta (Vyapar Viniyaman) Niyamawali, 1972, henceforth referred to as the Rules.3. Tendu leaves are used in the manufacture of Bidis, in Uttar Pradesh amongst many other states. Bidi manufacturing, right from th...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : [1990]33ITD308(NULL)
ORDERPer Anand Prakash, Accountant Member - This appeal is directed against the order under section 263 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax, Allahabad in respect of assessment year 1983-84.2. The setting of the facts, which led to the action under section 263 and the subsequent order passed therein may be noted :-(i) The assessee is a contractor. In respect of assessment year 1983-84, he filed his return of income on 31-12-1983 showing an income of Rs. 1,12,800. The hearing of the aforesaid case was fixed by the ITO on 30th of January, 1984 after issuing notice under section 143(2). The assessee attended on the said date and the assessment was finalised by the ITO on the aforesaid date itself.The order sheet entry reads as below :-'30-1-84 Sri Y. N. Sharma present. T. D. S. Certificate filed. Discussed.Assessed. Issue D.N & R.V.'The assessment order itself was short and reads, inter alia, as below :-'Return filed showing income of Rs. 1,12,800. In response to notice under sect...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : 1991CriLJ2499
Palok Basu, J.1. In short, the controversy in all these matters is as to whether if and when a licence to live in a quarter is revoked by a liceneesor, can the licensee be prosecuted for an offence Under Section 448, IPC.2. Criminal Appeal Nos. 207 of 1981, 208 of 1981, No. 209 of 1981 and No. 210 of 1981 related to matters which, according to the learned counsel for the appellants have become infructuous and on the strength of his statement these are being dismissed as not pressed. These four matters related to acquittals of Ram Lakhan, Jogendra Singh, Sarabjeet Singh and Bhullau. Since they are not being pressed no further discussions on the details of these appeals are necessary.3. The respondents Ram Lakhan, Ram Bharosey, Sarabjeet, Pati Ram, Ram Dayal, Phool Chand and Chhabi Lal in all these seven appeals were prosecuted on different complaints filed by Somnath Pal alleging himself to be the Vice-Chairman of Radha Swami Sat Singh Sabha, Agra, Under Section 448, IPC but the magistr...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : [1990(60)FLR557]; (1995)IIILLJ619All
B.N. Misra, J.1. The union and the concerned workman Baksha Singh have filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution praying for setting aside the Award, dated 30.5.1977, passed by the Labour Court, Meerut whereby it has been held that petitioner No. 2 is not a 'workman' under the U.P. Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, and that he was not entitled to the designation and wage-scale of Assistant Engineer (Electrical) (Supervisory A-II).2. Facts of the case may be briefly stated. Petitioner No. 2 was an employee under M/s. U.P. State Sugar Corporation Ltd., Unit Mohiuddinpur, district Meerut, respondent No. 2. His wage structure and wage fixation were governed by the State Government Notification No. 2309 (ST.)/XXXVI-A-273 (S.T.)-1960, dated 27.4.1961. His designation was Electric In-charge and although under 1961 Order he belonged to the category of 'highly skilled A' workman entitled to the pay scale of Rs. 180-8- 220-E.B.-1O-270, by virtue of a settlement (Ext. E/3), date...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : 1990CriLJ1724
G. Malaviya, J.1. Petitioner Mohd. Salim challenges his detention in pursuance of an order dated 12-4-1989 passed by the District Magistrate, Allahabad Under Section 3(2) of the National Security Act. The ground in support of the order of detention alleged that on the night of 10-3-1989 at about 3 a.m. the petitioner along with his associates went to the Octroi check post at Reewa Road within the limits of Nagar Mahapalika, Allahabad where Chhedilal Yadav, Octroi Clerk, Bhagwati Prasad Dubey, Assistant Octroi Clerk, Ramanand Clerk, Anoop Kumar and Ishtiyaq Ahmed peons were on duty. Three miscreants were armed with country made pistols and one was empty handed, after entering the octroi room they threatened the persons on duty not to move lest they shall be shot dead. Thereafter one of the associates of the petitioner viz. Asharaf alias Pappu took away about Rs. 3,000/- which was placed near the desk on the carpet as also the revenue stamps and the receipts which he kept in his pocket. ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : (1989)79CTR(All)87; [1989]180ITR651(All); [1989]47TAXMAN215(All)
R.K. Gulati, J. 1. This is a cross reference under Section 66(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922. The dispute relates to the assessment year 1961-62. During that year, the assessee, Swadeshi Cotton Mills Co. Ltd., carried on the business of manufacture and sale of yarn and cloth with its head office at Kanpur and branches at Pondicherry, Naini, etc. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Allahabad Bench, Allahabad, has referred the following six questions for the opinion of this court:'(1) Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the sum of Rs. 4,72,742 received by the assessee for surrender of import entitlements was rightly taxed as its income for the assessment year 1961-62 (2) Whether the finding of the Appellate Tribunal of the addition of Rs. 43,000 to the book results of the Pondicherry Unit stands vitiated because it does not take into account some relevant material and takes into account some irrelevant material and considerations ? (3) Whether, on the facts and in...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : AIR1990All108
ORDER1. Writ Petition No. 357 of 1902. (hereinafter referred to as the first petition) and writ petition No. 359 of 1982 (hereinafter referred to as the second petition, involve common question of law and facts, hence it is convenient to dispose them of by a common judgment.2. The first petition filed by the State of U.P. was directed against the appellate judgment dated 22-9-81 passed under S. 33 of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulations) Act, 1976 for short the Act. The Second Petition is directed against the order dated 23-9-81 passed by the District Judge, Meerut. In the first petition the point was as to whether the area measuring Sq. metre (sic) was built up and was not to be treated as vacant land within the meaning of S. 4(9) of the. Act. Whereas in the second petition similar point was involved about the interpretation of S. 2(q)(i) of the Act, In that petition it has been held that over an area of 1480 sq. mtrs. no construction was permissible on the land which was within th...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : [1989(59)FLR582]; (1990)ILLJ548All
B.L. Yadav, J.1. The present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is directed against the order dated 2nd March, 1988 (Annexure 11 to the petition), directing that the employer can put such questions in cross-examination which are germane to the controversy and which have already been taken in the pleadings and not beyond that.2. The factual matrics are these. A complaint was filed by the workman concerned under Section 6(f) of the U.P. Industrial Disputes Act, 1967, (for short 'the Act'), alleging that he has been dismissed on the charges framed, and on that, notices were issued to the petitioner Corporation, which has filed objection. On behalf of the petitioner 5 witnesses were examined, whereas on behalf of complainant M.P. Singh, respondent No. 2, appeared and made his statement in the examination-in-chief. He was called for cross-examination by the petitioner on 2nd March, 1988 on the points averred by him in his affidavit. The questions in the cross-examinatio...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : [1990]78STC417(All)
Anshuman Singh, J.1. These two revisions under Section 11(1) of the U.P. Sales Tax Act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to 'the Act'), are directed against the judgment and order dated 29th January, 1987, passed by the Sales Tax Tribunal, Ghaziabad, allowing the appeal of the assessee in part relating to the assessment year, 1985-86. The assessee is a Corporation of the State Government known as U.P. Avas Evam Vikas Parishad which has been established under the provisions of the U.P. Avas Evam Vikas Parishad Adhiniyam. It is controlled and supervised by the State Government. It was carrying on the work of the construction of residential houses and is also acquiring, holding and disposing of the immovable property. That the assessee with a view to discharge its duties regarding acquisition of the land and construction of the buildings, entered into contracts with various contractors who have constructed the buildings/houses in accordance with the specifications and the directions of the asse...
Tag this Judgment!