Parmanand vs State Of U.P.Thru Prin.Secy. ...
Judges: Ritu Raj Awasthi, Dinesh Kumar Singh
16 August, 2021·Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the records. The instant writ petition has been filed challenging the judgment and order dated 4.5.2016, passed by U.P. State Public Services Tribunal in Claim Petition No.1850 of 2011; Parmanand Vs. State of U.P. and others, whereby the claim petiti...
High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
Pinkal Singh @ Raghvendra Singh ... vs State Of U.P. And Another
Judges: Yogendra Kumar Srivastava
16 August, 2021·5. Learned counsel for the applicants has not been able to point out any inconsistency between the allegations made in the complaint and the statement of the complainant recorded under Section 200 of the Code. The statements of the witnesses recorded under Section 202 of the Code during the course o...
High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
Rabi Kant Singh vs State Of U.P. Thru. Addl.Chief ...
Judges: Rajesh Singh Chauhan
16 August, 2021·5. As per Sri Manjive Shukla, since the order impugned has been passed after due approval from the Governor, therefore, the petitioner may very well file either revision under Rule 13 or review under Rule 14 of UP Government Servant (Discipline & Appeal) Rules, 1999. Secondly, the alternative remedy...
High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
Shobha Ram vs State Of U.P.Thru Prin.Secy. ...
Judges: Rajesh Singh Chauhan
16 August, 2021·"36. In view of reading down Rule 3(8) of the U.P. Retirement Benefits Rules, 1961, we hold that services rendered in the work-charged establishment shall be treated as qualifying service under the aforesaid rule for grant of pension. The arrears of pension shall be confined to three years only befo...
High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
Pooja vs State Of U.P. Through Its ...
Judges: Vivek Kumar Birla
16 August, 2021·In support of their age, petitioner no. 1 brought on record her AADHAR Card wherein the date of birth is shown to be 1.7.2003 and that of petitioner No.2 brought on record his AADHAR Card, wherein date of birth is shown as 5.2.2000. Thus, it appears from the record that both the petitioners are majo...
High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
Ram Prasad @ Minder vs State Of Uttar Pradesh Through ...
Judges: Pankaj Naqvi, Naveen Srivastava
16 August, 2021·It is submitted that petitioner is an informant in the above case and despite approaching the authority concerned for fair investigation, no action whatsoever has been taken, an appropriate direction be issued for fair and expeditious investigation. It is well settled in view of the decision of the ...
High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
Jahir Khan vs Sub-Divisional Magistrate, ...
Judges: Mohd Faiz Khan
16 August, 2021·It has been admitted by learned A.G.A. that a copy of the petition along with its enclosure has already been provided to him. By filing this application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. a prayer has been made by the applicant to direct the opposite party no.1 i.e. Sub Divisional Magistrate, Mohammadi, Dist...
High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
Rajni Goyal vs Pratap Singh Baghel Secy. Board Of ...
Judges: Sangeeta Chandra
16 August, 2021·4. This Court found that the reason assigned for not transferring the petitioner to Lucknow was non existent and therefore, directed the Secretary Basic Siksha Parishad in consultation with the Secretary Basic Education to consider afresh the petitioner's case for transfer and finalize the transfer ...
High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
Jitendra Kumar @ Neelu vs State Of U.P.
Judges: Chandra Dhari Singh
16 August, 2021·It is submitted that there is no apprehension of the applicant influencing the witness, tampering the evidence or fleeing from judicial process. In case he is released on bail, he undertakes to abide by all the conditions and not to misuse the liberty of bail. Learned Additional Government Advocate ...
High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
Smt Sushmita vs State Of Uttar Pradesh
Judges: Suneet Kumar
16 August, 2021·It is settled by the Apex Court in Lata Singh vs. State of U.P., AIR 2006 SC 2522, that it is the right of major individuals to live together or to solemnize marriage and no interference with such right is permissible. Para 17 of the said judgment is reproduced:- "17. The caste system is a curse on ...
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.