Uttaranchal Court October 2004 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Krishna Verma and anr. Vs. Director, Uttaranchal Power Corpn. and ors.
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Oct-25-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)AWC206(UHC); [2005(104)FLR189]
P.C. Pant, J.1. In all the above four petitions, common question of law and fact is involved as such these are being disposed of by this common judgment.2. These writ petitions are filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for mandamus directing promotion of petitioners to the post of Junior Engineer. In Writ Petition No. 7195 (S/S) of 2001, Mahabir Prasad Gairola and Ors. v. Uttar Pradesh Power Corporation and Ors., seniority list dated 17.11.2001 has also been sought to be quashed and mandamus has been sought not to interfere in the functioning of petitioners as officiating Junior Engineers.3. Brief facts of the case, as alleged by the petitioners, are that they are Technical Grade-II in various Divisions, of Uttaranchal Power Corporation. Earlier, they were employees of Uttar Pradesh State Electricity Board (for sake of brevity U.P.S.E.B.). In the year 1985, a departmental examination was conducted by U.P.S.E.B. for the purposes of promotion from the post of Technical Gr...
Ram Singh Vs. State of Uttaranchal
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Oct-16-2004
Reported in: II(2005)DMC653
J.C.S. Rawat, J.1. This criminal appeal has been preferred by the appellant Ram Singh against the judgment and order dated 20.3.2002 passed by Shri V.K. Jain, the then Sessions Judge, Almora in Session Trial No. 51 of 2000 convicting and sentencing the appellant for the offence under Section 304B, IPC for 7 years R.I. and under Section 498A, IPC for a period of 3 years R.I. Both the sentences were ordered to run concurrently.2. Brief facts, which rise to this appeal are that a report was lodged by Shri Balwant Singh, the uncle of the deceased Smt. Radha Devi, with the Naib Tehsildar on 31.1.2000 alleging that the marriage of his niece Radha Devi was solemnized with the appellant Ram Singh in village Kankhola about 2 years back. Soon after the marriage the appellant and her mother-in-law Smt. Bhagwati Devi had been torturing her with cruelty in connection with the dowry and he was demanding an amount of Rs. 50,000/- and T.V., etc. She had been telling this fact to her grand-mother Smt. ...
R.D. Bhardwaj Vs. Smt. Saroj Jain
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Oct-15-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)ARC481
Rajesh Tandon, J.1. By the present writ petitions, the petitioners have prayed for quashing the order-dated 29.2.2000 passed by the Prescribed Authority as well as order dated 28.2.2001 passed by the Appellate Authority. Writ Petition No. 514 of 2001 is being treated as a leading case.Facts of the case2. Briefly stated the facts according to the case of the parties are that the application under Section 21 (1) (a) of the U.P. Act No. 13 of 1972 was filed by Smt. Saroj Jain (respondent in writ petition No. 514) praying for the release of the accommodation in possession of the tenants.3. The Prescribed Authority has rejected the application. On appeal by the respondent, the accommodation was partly allowed. Both the parties have come up in the writ petitions. Writ Petition No. 514 of 2001 is made a leading case.Bonafide need4. Respondent in writ petition No. 514 of 2001 has filed her release application for requirement of herself and her family members stating therein that there are eigh...
Mishri Lal Vs. Shiv Kumar Gupta and ors.
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Oct-15-2004
Reported in: 2006ACJ1065
Rajesh Tandon, J.1. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties. The present appeal has been filed against the judgment and order dated 25.4.1988 passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Chamoli.2. Briefly stated the facts giving rise to the present appeal are that the appellant has filed a claim petition before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Chamoli for grant of compensation on account of death of Sukha in a motor accident on 31.7.1986 at 12 noon near Hanuman Chatti, District Chamoli Garhwal, involving bus No. HRX 2791. The petitioner alleged that accident had taken place due to rash and negligent driving by the bus driver.3. The opposite parties contested the claim petition. The opposite party Nos. 1 and 2, i.e., the driver of the bus and the owner of the bus have denied that the accident took place due to rash and negligent driving of the bus. They have contended that it was raining and the road was slippery due to which the bus skidded and fell down into the gorge. New In...
Kishan Chandra Vs. General Manager (Admn. and Personnel), Bharat Heavy ...
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Oct-14-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)AWC74(UHC); [2005(104)FLR31]; (2005)1UPLBEC12
Prafulla C. Pant, J.1. By means of this writ petition, moved under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has sought mandamus for arrears of salary, pensioner benefits including payment of provident fund dues and gratuity etc. Also quashing of notice dated 8.5.2002 issued in pursuance of departmental enquiry against the petitioner has been sought,2. Brief facts of the case, as narrated in the writ petition, are that the petitioner joined his services on 1.4.1977 as a Driver in the Bharat have Electricals Limited, Ranipur. District Haridwar (hereinafter B.H.E.L. tor sake of brevity) which is a corporate body of public sector. A First Information Report was lodged against the petitioner on 28.2.1995 for an offence punishable under Section 381/411 of IPC registered at Police Station Ranipur, District Haridwar on the basis of which a criminal case with crime No. 39 of 1995 was registered against him. Consequently, the petitioner was arrested and was tried for the said all...
Surjeet Singh and anr. Vs. Kishan Singh and anr.
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Oct-14-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)ARC385
Rajesh Tandon, J.1. Heard Sri P.M.N. Singh, Sr. Advocate assisted by Sri Sudhir Singh and Sri Jagdish Prasad, Counsel for the respondents.2. By the present appeal, the appellants have challenged the order dated 22nd January, 2003, by which, their application under Order IX, Rule 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure alongwith application under Section 5 of Limitation Act has been rejected.3. Briefly, stated, the facts leading to the present appeal are that the application was filed for the custody of the female child. The case was decided ex-parte. On 2nd February, 2002.4. The appellants have filed an application of recalling of the said order stating therein that no summons were ever received by the applicants, who are the grand-father and grand-mother and without hearing the applicants the ex-parte order was passed on 2nd February, 2002. The application under Order IX, Rule 13 was filed on 5th August, 2002. The application was rejected by the then District Judge on 2nd February, 2002 on ...
Govind Singh Sijwali Vs. State of Uttaranchal, Through Secretary, Medi ...
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Oct-14-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)AWC77(UHC); (2005)1UPLBEC9
Prafulla C. Pant, J.1. By means of this Writ petition, moved under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has sought quashing of order dated 30.4.2001 passed by the Director General, Medical Health and Family Welfare Services, whereby the representation of the petitioner has been rejected regarding his claim as to seniority vis-a-vis respondent Nos. 4 & 5.2. Brief facts of the case, as narrated in the writ petition, are that the petitioner initially joined has services as a ward boy (Class IV) in the Medical and Health Department on 26.12.79 against a vacant post under orders of the Chief Medical Officer, Almora. The petitioner passed intermediate examination in the year 1980. Apart from this petitioner had knowledge of typing work and consequently he was doing practically clerical work under order dated 5.7.1985 (Copy Annexure-1 of the writ petition) of the Deputy Chief Medical Officer, Almora. On completion of 5 years of service in class IV category, the petitioner ...
Devi Dutt Budhilballab and Sons Vs. Narayan Singh and ors.
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Oct-13-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)ARC74
Rajesh Tandon, J.1. By the present Writ Petition the petitioner has prayed for quashing of the order dated 25th September, 2004 by which the amendment application of the petitioner has been rejected.2. Briefly stated, the Suit was filed by the plaintiff for recovery of a sum of Rs. 23,966/-. In Paragraph 4 of the plaint, it has been mentioned as under:-^^fd izfroknh us oknh ls ;g Hkh bdjkj fd;k Fkkfd vkf[kjh [kkrk Dykst gksus ds fnu ls ns; /kujkf'k ij 22%lkykuk dh nj ls C;kt oknh dks vnk djsxkAgY}kuh esa ;gh C;kt vnk;xh dk fjokt o pyu gSA**3. On the basis of the averments made in Paragraph 4, the petitioner has sought the amendment adding 22% as interest. The relevant amendment to that effect is quoted below:-^^egksn;]mijksDr ekeys esa nkSjkus okn oknh ds vf/koDrkdks i=koyh dk voyksdu ls ;g rF; lKku esa vk;k gS fd Vad.k dh =qfVo'k okn i= dsvuqKks'k v dh izFke iafDr esa 23]966@& : ds i'pkr e; C;kt 22 izfr'krfy[kus ls jg x;k gS ftl rF; dks okn i= esa yk;k tkuk vko';dh; gSA oknh }kjk fd;s...
Trimlesh Bharti Vs. Shravan Kumar
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Oct-12-2004
Reported in: II(2005)DMC550
P.C. Verma, J.1. The appeal has been preferred under Section 19 of the Family Courts Act against the judgment and decree dated 27.9.2003 passed by the Judge, Family Court, Dehradun, in Original Suit No. 34 of 2002, Shravan Kumar v. Smt. Trimlesh, whereby the learned Judge has passed decree for divorce dissolving the marriage solemnized between the parties on 2.12.1988.2. Brief facts, giving rise to the present appeal, are that the respondent-husband had initially filed a suit for divorce against the appellant in the Court of Additional District Judge, Indore (Madhya Pradesh), which was ultimately transferred for hearing at Dehradun Court under the orders of the Hon'ble Supreme Court dated 18.9.2000. The petitioner-respondent has alleged in his petition that the marriage between the parties was solemnized on 2.12.1988 at Dehradun according to the Hindu rites and customs. Out of the wedlock, one son Sushant Bharati was born, who is aged 8 years and has been living with the respondent at ...
Kichha Sugar Company Ltd. Vs. Tara Chand Mahtoliya and anr.
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Oct-11-2004
Reported in: 2004(4)AWC3499
P.C. Pant, J.1. By means of this writ petition, moved under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has sought quashing of the impugned order/award dated 24.9.1992 passed in Adjudication Case No. 97 of 1990 by the Labour Court, Haldwani.2. Brief facts of the case, as narrated in the writ petition, are that the petitioner is a Sugar Company owned and controlled by the U. P. State Sugar Corporation, Lucknow. It employed permanent as well as seasonal employees for running the business of sugar factory. Out of the seasonal workmen, some are engaged on daily wages and others as casual workmen to meet the emergent situation. The respondent No. 1, Tara Dutt Mahtoliya was employed on daily wages during the season 1982-83 till 1985-86. While he was working as a Watchman in the intervening night of 25/26 of October 1987, a theft took place in the residential colony whereafter the services of the respondent No. 1 were terminated on 27.10.1987. The termination was made due to the ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »