Allahabad High Court Weekly Round-Up: June 26 To July 02

NOMINAL INDEX Kul Bhushan Mishra And Another vs. State Of U.P. And 4 Others 2023 LiveLaw (AB) 197 Vinod Kumar Gupta And Another vs. Sri Veer Bahadur Yadav, S.D.M. And Another 2023 LiveLaw (AB) 198 Shyam Bahadur Singh vs. State of U.P. and Another 2023 LiveLaw (AB) 199 Raj Kumar @ Rajenda Srivas And 3 Others vs. Mohd. Kaukab Azim Rizvi And Another 2023 LiveLaw (AB) 200 Kiran Rawat And Another vs. State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko. And Others 2023 LiveLaw (AB) 201 Raj Narain @ Ram vs. State of U.P 2023 LiveLaw (AB) 202 Rajkumari vs. State Of U.P. And 3 Others 2023 LiveLaw (AB) 203 ORDERS/JUDGMENTS OF THE WEEK ‘Transfer Not Matter Of Right’: Allahabad HC Upholds Validity Of UP Govt’s Transfer Policy For Basic Education Assistant Teachers Case title - Kul Bhushan Mishra And Another vs. State Of U.P. And 4 Others [WRIT - A No. - 10209 of 2023] Case Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (AB) 197 While holding that transfer cannot be sought as a matter of right, the Allahabad High Court upheld the validity of the Uttar Pradesh Government’s transfer policy for assistant teachers teaching in Basic Education Institutions run by the Basic Education Board. The bench of Justice Ashwani Kumar Mishra and Justice Ashutosh Srivastava did not find any illegality in the policy of the State to restrict the entertainment of application for transfer in normal circumstances unless a particular teacher has completed a specified length of service (five years’ service for male teachers and two years’ service for female teachers) in the cadre. Intra-Court Appeal Not Maintainable Against Single Judge's Order Declining To Initiate Contempt Proceedings: Allahabad High Court Case title - Vinod Kumar Gupta And Another vs. Sri Veer Bahadur Yadav, S.D.M. And Another [SPECIAL APPEAL No. - 234 of 2023] Case Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (AB) 198 The Allahabad High Court observed that an intra-court appeal is not maintainable against the order of the Single Judge declining to initiate contempt proceedings against the alleged contemnor. The bench of Justice Sunita Agarwal and Justice Vikas Budhwar further held that no appeal is maintainable against dropping contempt proceedings against the contemnor under Section 19 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, as the remedy lies under Article 136 of the Constitution of India before the Supreme Court. Second Plea U/S 125 CrPC For Maintenance Is Maintainable After Rejection Of First In Changed Circumstances; 'Res Judicata' Principle Not Applicable: Allahabad HC Case title - Shyam Bahadur Singh vs. State of U.P. and Another [CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 22529 of 2008] Case Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (AB) 199 The Allahabad High Court has observed that a second application seeking maintenance under Section 125 of CrPC can sustain, after the rejection of the first application, if there are changes in the circumstances, entitling a person to be a claimant under the said provision. Stressing that the liability to maintain under section 125 CrPC is a continuing one, the bench of Justice Jyotsna Sharma was of the view that if the right to file an application for maintenance is foreclosed, it shall frustrate the very purpose of section 125 CrPC. Photocopy Of Sale Deed Can't Be Accepted As Surety For Purposes of S. 17 Of 'Small Cause Courts Act' R/w S. 145 CPC: Allahabad HC Case title - Raj Kumar @ Rajenda Srivas And 3 Others vs. Mohd. Kaukab Azim Rizvi And Another 2023 LiveLaw (AB) 200 [MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 5480 of 2023] Case Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (AB) 200 The Allahabad High Court has observed that the photocopy of the sale deed cannot be accepted as surety for the purposes of Section 17 of the Provincial Small Causes Court Act, 1887 read with Section 145 of the Code of Civil Procedure 1908. The bench of Justice Neeraj Tiwari noted that for the purposes of both the provisions, a surety should have been of the nature, which may be sold out as and when required and since, on the basis of the photocopy of the sale deed, no sale of the property can be made, therefore, such surety cannot be accepted. 'SC's Views On 'Live-In' Matters Can't Be Considered To Promote Such Relations': Allahabad HC Rejects Interfaith Live-In Couple's Protection Plea Case title - Kiran Rawat And Another vs. State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko. And Others [CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 3310 of 2023] Case Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (AB) 201 While dismissing a plea filed by an interfaith live-in couple seeking protection against alleged harassment at the hands of the police, the Allahabad High Court observed that the views expressed by the Supreme Court pertaining to 'live-in' relationships "cannot be considered to promote such relationships" Observing that traditionally, Law has been biased in favour of marriage, the Bench of Justice Sangeeta Chandra and Justice Narendra Kumar Johari also...

Allahabad High Court Weekly Round-Up: June 26 To July 02

Sparsh Upadhyay

Tags