Ram Kishore Dubey Son Of Sri ... vs Union Of India (Uoi) Through The ...
Judges: A Bhushan
10 November, 2005·3. Learned Counsel for the petitioner Sri Satish Dwivedi challenging the order contended that there has been violation of Rule 153.8 of the Railway Protection Force Rules, 1987 since the petitioner was not given opportunity to have his defence assistant due to which the entire enquiry proceedings ar...
High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
Sanjeev Sharma S/O Late Sri Tilak ... vs State Of U.P. Through Principal ...
Judges: A Tandon
09 November, 2005·(i) State of Hariyana v. Pyara Singh; (ii) Gujrat Agricultural University v. Rathore Labhu Bechar and Ors.; . (iii) Andhra Pradesh Electricity Board and Ors. v. J. Venkateshwara Rao and Ors.; (b) On the principle of promissory stopples the respondents are debarred from making direct recruitment on t...
High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
Jabar Singh S/O Sri Hari Singh vs Iv Additional District And ...
Judges: D Singh
09 November, 2005·3. Having obtained a money decree in suit No. 58 of 1972 against the predecessor-in-interest of the contesting opposite parties, the petitioner filed an Execution Case No. 12 of 1975. After rejection of the objections, the agricultural land of the judgment debtor was put to auction on 18,4.1980. whe...
High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
Surya Deo Tyagi vs Chandradeo Tyagi And Ors.
Judges: A Kumar
09 November, 2005·1. Heard Sri Manoj Misra, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Sri W. H. Khan, learned Counsel who has accepted notice on behalf of respondent Nos. 2 and 3 as well as Sri Vijay Prakash, learned Counsel for respondent No. 1. 2. The petitioner-defendant aggrieved by an order passe...
High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
Kamta Prasad Tripathi Son Of Sri ... vs State Of U.P. Through Its ...
Judges: R Tiwari
09 November, 2005·6. The learned Counsel for the respondents in rebuttal has submitted that whether the contract is bona fide or sham has to be adjudicated upon. It is further submitted that admittedly the answering respondents had issued no appointment letter to the petitioners and they have been receiving their sal...
High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
Birendra Nath Rai Son Of Kesari ... vs The District Inspector Of ...
Judges: S Yadav
09 November, 2005·12. On behalf of the petitioner it is next pressed that the DIOS had no jurisdiction to review his order dated May 2, 1979. It is true that no powers of review have been vested in the DIOS and that he could only recall his order dated May 2, 1979 if it could be shown that the said order have been ob...
High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
Hamidudin Son Of Salahuddin vs State Of U.P. Through Ministry Of ...
Judges: S R Alam, S Agarwal
09 November, 2005·4. It is further submitted that other teachers, who have been conferred upon the State Teacher's Award after attaining the age of superannuation, have been allowed extension and, therefore, the petitioner is also entitled for similar treatment. 5. This contention of the petitioner is fallacious and ...
High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
Mithlesh Kumar Tripathi S/O Late ... vs The Commissioner Of Income Tax, ...
Judges: A Yog, B Agarwal
08 November, 2005·19. Third contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that 'Reason', do not germane out of material or the facts of the case before the concerned authority and the impugned 'Notice' under Section 148(2) of the Act has been issued in a mechanical manner without application of mind. 20. Th...
High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
Kali Charan, Nek Ram, Shanker Lal ... vs Additional Collector, ...
Judges: V Misra
08 November, 2005·5. Being aggrieved by the said order of the Tehsildar, the petitioners filed a revision before the Additional Collector who too disposed off the same on 19.9.1984 upholding the order of the Tehsildar. Being aggrieved by the order dated 30.6.1984 passed by the Tehsildar and the order dated 19.9.1984 ...
High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
Hiralal (D) Through L.R. vs Vth A.D.J. And Ors.
Judges: S Khan
08 November, 2005·2. Ram Chandra Saxena respondent No. 3 filed release application under Section 21 of U. P. Act No. 13 of 1972 against the petitioner-tenant, which was initially numbered as Case No. 126 of 1975. Later on it was re-numbered as case No. 56 of 1979. The Prescribed Authority/City Munsif, Bareilly, decid...
High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
Don’t wait for legal issues to escalate
By continuing past this page, you agree to our Terms of Service, Cookie Policy, Privacy Policy, Refund Policy and Content Policies. © 2023 - Uber9 Business Process Services Private Limited. All rights reserved.