REGENT COMPUTRONICS PVT. LTD.

HARI OM YADAV Appellant

V/S

STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH Respondents

Referred Judgements :-

STATE OF U. P. AND OTHERS V. PRADHAN KSHETTRA SAMITI AND OTHERS [REFERRED TO]
ORISSA STATE WARE HOUSING CORPORATION V. C.I.T. [REFERRED TO]
ABDUL QUAYYUM V. STATE OF U. P. [REFERRED TO]
ANUKJUL CHANDRA PRADHAN V. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
A K GOPALAN VS. STATE OF MADRAS OPPOSITE PARTY; UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF BOMBAY VS. F N BALSARA [REFERRED TO]
N P PONNUSWAMI THE UNION OF INDIA AND STATE OF MADHYA BHARAT VS. RETURNING OFFICER NAMAKKAL CONSTITUENCY NAMAKKAL SALEM DIST :RETURNING OFFICER NAMAKKAL CONSTITUENCY NAMAKKAL SALEM DIST [REFERRED TO]
JAGAN NATH VS. JASWANT SINGH [REFERRED TO]
V M SYED MOHAMMAD AND COMPANY VS. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH [REFERRED TO]
JAMUNA PRASAD MUKHARIYA VS. LACHHI RAM [REFERRED TO]
BUDHAN CHOUDHRY VS. STATE OF BIHAR [REFERRED TO]
MADHUBHAI AMATHALAL GANDHI VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
BAR COUNCIL OF UTTAR PRADESH VS. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH [REFERRED TO]
INDIRA NEHRU GANDHI SHRI RAJ NARAIN VS. RAJ NARAIN INDIRA NEHRU GANDHI [REFERRED TO]
JYOTI BASU VS. DEBI GHOSAL [REFERRED TO]
MAHENDRA KUMAR SHASTRI VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
GWALIOR RATON SILK MANUFACTURING WEAVING CO LIMITED VS. CUSTODIAN OF VESTED FORESTS PALGHAT [REFERRED TO]
KIHOTO HOLLOHAN VS. ZACHILLHU [REFERRED TO]
SAIJ GRAM PANCHAYAT VS. STATE OF GUJARAT [REFERRED TO]
ORISSA STATE WAREHOUSING CORPORATION VS. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX [REFERRED TO]
OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS VS. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF PUNJAB VS. BHAJAN SINGH [REFERRED TO]
VIJAYALAKSHMAMMA VS. B T SHANKAR [REFERRED TO]
UNION OF INDIA VS. SHIV DAYAL SOIN PRIVATE LIMITED [REFERRED TO]
BIPINCHANDRA PARSHOTTAMDAS PATEL VAKIL VS. STATE OF GUJARAT [REFERRED TO]
JAVED VS. STATE OF HARYANA [REFERRED TO]
KRISHI UTPADAN MANDI SAMITI VS. PILIBHIT PANTNAGAR BEEJ LIMITED [REFERRED TO]

JUDGEMENT

(1.) -In the instant petition sole petitioner has challenged the constitutional validity of Section 27A of the U. P. Kshetra Panchayats and Zila Panchayats Adhiniyam, 1961 U. P. Act No. 53 of 1961 (hereinafter referred to as '1961 Act'), which imposes bar on Legislators and holders of certain offices becoming and continuing as Pramukh, Up-Pramukh, Adhyaksha and Upadhyaksha.

(2.) HEARD Shri S. P. Gupta, senior advocate, assisted by Mr. Yashwant Verma, learned counsel for the petitioner, Shri Chandra Shekhar Singh, learned standing counsel appearing for the State. Shri P. K. Mishra, learned counsel appearing for the State Election Commission, Shri B. D. Madhyan, learned senior advocate assisted by Shri Satish Madhyan, learned senior counsel appearing for Shri Brijendra Singh son of Ram Bharosey Lal, newly impleaded respondent, who has filed impleadment application as he is elected member from Ward No. 22 of Zila Panchayat, Firozabad. He has staked his claim to the office of Adhyaksh, which has become vacant on account of previous Adhyaksh namely, Hari Om Yadav, petitioner having been elected as Member of Legislative Assembly (hereinafter referred to as 'M.LA.').

(3.) A Division Bench of this Court had passed an interim order on 30th April, 2000, directing that the casual vacancy in the office of Adhyaksh that may have occurred due to election of the petitioner to the Legislative Assembly shall not be filled up.

Click here to view full judgment.

HARI OM YADAV Vs. STATE OF U P

Referred Judgements :-

JUDGEMENT

QUick Links

Get in Touch

Email

Contact Numbers

Address