Jharkhand Court October 2002 Judgments
Sohan Mahto Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Oct-03-2002
Reported in: 2002(50)BLJR2392
ORDERS.J. Mukhopadhaya, J.1. The petitioner was in the services of the State, retired on 31st January, 1998 from the post of Panchayat Sevak. He having not received the retiral benefits has preferred this writ petition.2. Counsel for the petitioner submitted that no proceeding under Rule 43 (b) of the Bihar Pension Rules, 1950 was initiated against the petitioner, nor any notice under Rule 139 (b) of the Bihar Pension Rules, 1950 was given to him. The respondent-Deputy Commissioner, Dhanbad has no jurisdiction to initiate any departmental proceeding after the retirement of petitioner either for the purpose of punishment or for the purpose of withheldment of retiral benefits as has been made vide Memo No. 146 dated 8th March. 2002.3. It is also submitted that the respondents after the retirement of petitioner cannot raise any dispute relating to legality and propriety of matriculation certificate which was not produced by the petitioner.4. It appears that the petitioner was suspended vi...
Tag this Judgment!Bhavneet Singh Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Oct-01-2002
Reported in: 2002(50)BLJR2408
ORDER1. With the consent of the parties, the appeal is taken up for final disposal today itself. 2. The appellant is aggrieved of the order dated 16th July, 2002, passed by the learned Single Judge in WP (C) No. 3072/2002 whereby the writ application filed by appellant against the order dated 12th April, 2002, passed by the respondent No. 2 was disposed of (in effect and substance dismissed). The learned Single Judge declined to interfere with the pending review proceedings before respondent No. 2 and in fact, directed him to dispose of the review application at his earliest. In this manner, apparently, therefore, the learned Single Judge took the view that exercise of review jurisdiction by respondent No. 2 was proper and also that he rightly was proceeding to record evidence in the Review proceedings. 3. Shorn of unnecessary details, the crux of the matter is that against the cancellation of licenses of the appellant, the appellant had preferred an appeal under Section 8 of the Bihar...
Tag this Judgment!Karman Roy and ors. Vs. State of Bihar (Now Jharkhand)
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Oct-01-2002
Reported in: [2003(1)JCR467(Jhr)]
Lakshman Uraon, J.1. The appellants have preferred this appeal against the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 22.6.1989 passed by the learned 1st Addl. Sessions Judge, Dumka (SP) in Sessions Case No. 206/12 of 1988 sentencing each of them to go RI for life for the offence under Section 302/34, IPC.2. The prosecution case as per the fardbeyan of the informant, Janki Devi, PW 1, is that, on 19.4.1988 at about 3 p.m., she was sitting at the door of her house. She saw some villagers, armed with lathi, bahangi etc. running towards nursery raising hulla. She also went towards nursery and in her way she saw chaukidar, Budhan Rai, PW 4, also going towards nursery. When she reached near nursery then she saw that her brother, Lal Mohan Rai, was being assaulted at random by the villagers, Karman Rai, Bideshi Rai, Gouri Shankar Rai, Mangru Rai and Mahadeo Rai, all the appellants of village Karnpura with lathi, sabal, bahangi etc. The appellant, Gauri Shankar Rai, assaulted with sa...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next ›