.....for permitting the movement of imported coal from vizag port to the petitioner’s plant via tilda station of sec railway.2. briefly stated the fact of the case leading to the filing of the present writ petition are that the petitioner had proposed to set up coal based thermal power plant of 1370 mw (2 x 685 mw) at village raikheda, tilda block, raipur, chattisgarh. the feasibility report was submitted to the south eastern central railway (hereinafter referred to in short as ‘secr’) which was approved in principle. however, the plant could not be made operational on account of the fact that the domestic coal linkage was not provided. since there was a prolonged delay in obtaining the immediate domestic long term coal linkage, the petitioner proposed to use the imported coal from south africa till the time of obtaining the domestic coal linkage. the petitioner accordingly signed a memorandum of understanding with south african coal mines for supplying the requisite coal to the plant site till the domestic coal linkage was obtained. the imported coal was proposed to be moved from vizag port via titlagarh-raipur railway station to the plant site which was at a distance of.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT.....petitioner in the year 2015. 3(i) besides the writ petition being barred by gross delay and laches, the petitioner is also guilty of concealment of facts besides lacking in bonafides. (ii) the first concealment, as stated above, is that the petitioner has not stated in the writ petition as to what is the amount he received pursuant to the acceptance of his voluntary retirement and which answer is given only at the time of oral arguments that petitioner has received and taken benefit of around rs.15 lacs of rupees. (iii) the second concealment of fact is that counsel for the respondent no.1 has drawn the attention of this court to a writ petition filed by this very petitioner being w.p.(c) no.185/2012, and in which petition the petitioner had claimed the relief of quashing of the selfsame order dated 30.12.2003 viz the petitioner in that writ petition also claimed the relief that he should not have been held to be voluntarily retired from the respondent no.1 in terms of the order dated 31.12.2003. this writ petition, after arguments, was withdrawn and the following order was passed by a learned single judge of this court on 10.01.2012 :“after some arguments counsel appearing on.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT.....committing offence under section 376 (2) (g) ipc. by an order dated 11.05.2011, he was sentenced to undergo ri for ten years with fine `10,000/-.2. facts and circumstances giving rise to the case, as stated in the charge-sheet were that on 24.11.2009, the appellant and his associate chhotu administered poisonous substance to ‘x’ (assumed name), aged 14 years and thereafter sexually assaulted her for two days. police machinery swung into action when ‘x’ lodged complaint at 11:45 a.m. on 26.11.2009 against the appellant and his associate for committing rape on her person. both the accused persons were arrested and at their instance, clothes of the prosecutrix which she was wearing at the time of incident were recovered. ‘x’ was medically examined. statements of witnesses conversant with the facts were recorded and after completion of investigation, a charge-sheet was filed against both of them for committing offence under sections 328/376 (2) (g) ipc. the prosecution examined 13 witnesses to bring home the appellant’s guilt. in the statement recorded under section 313 cr.p.c. to afford him opportunity to explain the incriminating circumstances, the appellant denied.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT.....thus, it is clear that procedure of assessment has already been prescribed under section 126 of the electricity act, 2003, and electricity supply code, thus it is not open for the secretary, jharkhand state electricity board to issue another circular in that connection.7. in view of the aforesaid finding that the secretary, jharkhand state electricity board has no power to issue circular prescribing the method and mode of assessment, i am of the view that circular no. 531, dated 29.01.2009 is wholly without jurisdiction, therefore, the same is non est in the eye of law. thus, any act done on the basis of aforesaid circular is also without jurisdiction, hence, not sustainable. 5 accordingly, i allow these writ applications and quash all the assessment orders and bills issued on that basis. however, i give liberty to the electricity board or successor company to make final assessment on the basis of procedure prescribed under section 126 of the electricity act, 2003 as well as the electricity supply code, 2005 as amended in the year 2010 and raise bills to all the petitioners.8. it appears that in compliance of interim order passed in these writ applications, petitioners already.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT.....thus, it is clear that procedure of assessment has already been prescribed under section 126 of the electricity act, 2003, and electricity supply code, thus it is not open for the secretary, jharkhand state electricity board to issue another circular in that connection.7. in view of the aforesaid finding that the secretary, jharkhand state electricity board has no power to issue circular prescribing the method and mode of assessment, i am of the view that circular no. 531, dated 29.01.2009 is wholly without jurisdiction, therefore, the same is non est in the eye of law. thus, any act done on the basis of aforesaid circular is also without jurisdiction, hence, not sustainable. 5 accordingly, i allow these writ applications and quash all the assessment orders and bills issued on that basis. however, i give liberty to the electricity board or successor company to make final assessment on the basis of procedure prescribed under section 126 of the electricity act, 2003 as well as the electricity supply code, 2005 as amended in the year 2010 and raise bills to all the petitioners.8. it appears that in compliance of interim order passed in these writ applications, petitioners already.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT..... for the period of 201214 in formb register, the present writ petition has been filed. 2. briefly stated, the facts leading to filing of the present writ petition are summarised thus; the petitionertelco workers union is a trade union 3 registered under the trade unions act, 1926 which represents the cause of employees in tata engineering and locomotive company limited (now tata motors limited). the petitionerunion has a registered constitution for election of the executive committee of the petitionerunion. for the 200810 election, one a.k. pandey filed a writ petition being w.p.(l) no. 556 of 2008 which was disposed of vide order dated 10.03.2008 by this court granting liberty to the said a.k. pandey to file a representation with respect to his grievance regarding proposed election. in the meantime, the said a.k. pandey was discharged from service with effect from 26.08.2008. the said a.k. pandey also filed a title suit bearing title.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT.....thus, it is clear that procedure of assessment has already been prescribed under section 126 of the electricity act, 2003, and electricity supply code, thus it is not open for the secretary, jharkhand state electricity board to issue another circular in that connection.7. in view of the aforesaid finding that the secretary, jharkhand state electricity board has no power to issue circular prescribing the method and mode of assessment, i am of the view that circular no. 531, dated 29.01.2009 is wholly without jurisdiction, therefore, the same is non est in the eye of law. thus, any act done on the basis of aforesaid circular is also without jurisdiction, hence, not sustainable. 5 accordingly, i allow these writ applications and quash all the assessment orders and bills issued on that basis. however, i give liberty to the electricity board or successor company to make final assessment on the basis of procedure prescribed under section 126 of the electricity act, 2003 as well as the electricity supply code, 2005 as amended in the year 2010 and raise bills to all the petitioners.8. it appears that in compliance of interim order passed in these writ applications, petitioners already.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT.....1st class, porahat at chaibasa in t.r. no. 16 of 1994 was confirmed and the petitioner was sentenced to undergo r.i. for one year.2. the brief facts of the prosecution case is that the petitioner was alloted the work for digging of 14 wells under the jaldhara schemes no. 1/88-89 to 14/88-89. he executed and entered into the agreement with the b.d.o bandgaon vide (ext. 4 to 4/13) for completing digging of the wells by 30.06.1988. the petitioner received advance of rs. 1,24,000/- for completion of work with respect to the aforesaid schemes. that the petitioner did part work with respect to scheme no.1,2 and 5 and 13 amounting to rs. 3, 272.03/- only. despite service of notice he did not complete the work for digging of the wells as per the agreement. he dishonestly mis-appropriated an amount of rs. 1,20,000/-. on the written report filed by the b.d.o. keraikella, bandgaon the police instituted and registered the case under section 406 of the i.p.c. the petitioner faced the trial for charge under section 406 and has been found guilty for the offence and on appeal the 1st additional sessions judge, chaibasa affirmed the conviction and sentence by the impugned order.3. learned.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT.....thus, it is clear that procedure of assessment has already been prescribed under section 126 of the electricity act, 2003, and electricity supply code, thus it is not open for the secretary, jharkhand state electricity board to issue another circular in that connection.7. in view of the aforesaid finding that the secretary, jharkhand state electricity board has no power to issue circular prescribing the method and mode of assessment, i am of the view that circular no. 531, dated 29.01.2009 is wholly without jurisdiction, therefore, the same is non est in the eye of law. thus, any act done on the basis of aforesaid circular is also without jurisdiction, hence, not sustainable. 5 accordingly, i allow these writ applications and quash all the assessment orders and bills issued on that basis. however, i give liberty to the electricity board or successor company to make final assessment on the basis of procedure prescribed under section 126 of the electricity act, 2003 as well as the electricity supply code, 2005 as amended in the year 2010 and raise bills to all the petitioners.8. it appears that in compliance of interim order passed in these writ applications, petitioners already.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT.....2011, arising out of c.p. case no. 666 of 2011, which was instituted for the offence under sections 147, 341, 323, 394 and 307 of the indian penal code and section 25 of the arms act.3. from perusal of the record, it appears that the complaint, being c.p. case no. 666 of 2011, was filed by the complainant respondent no. 4 in the court of learned chief judicial magistrate, giridih, against these petitioners. there is allegation against the petitioners of assaulting the complainant and taking away his cash and ornament. the said case was sent for institution of the police case under section 156 (3) of the cr.p.c., on the basis of which, giridih (m) p.s. case no. 143 of 2011 was instituted and investigation was taken up. the petitioners thereafter filed this application for quashing the entire criminal proceeding against them in the said case. it is apparent from the record that there was previous enmity between the parties and there are criminal cases between both the parties, filed against each other.4. this court, by order dated 23.12.2011 had directed for taking no coercive step against these petitioners in the said criminal case, and again by order dated 21.3.2014, it was.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT