Jharkhand Court December 2002 Judgments
Employers in Relation to the Management, Kusunda Area of B.C.C.L. Vs. ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Dec-20-2002
Reported in: [2003(97)FLR262]; [2003(1)JCR530(Jhr)]
Vikramaditya Prasad, J.1. The petitioner-Management of Kusunda Area of M/s. B.C.C.L. has challenged the award on the grounds of the reference being stale and the award being perverse.2. The case of the management in short is that in the year 1973 to 75 there were several ugly incidents like Chasnala disaster and indiscriminate firing etc. the workmen became very panicking and several workmen of different collieries under Kusunda Area left their employment. Some submitted resignation and withdrew their C.M.RF. and others dues whereas others abandoned their employment voluntarily. As the worker who had abandoned their job had not returned for a long time the Management had employed other workers on their place, then after a long period of 12 years i.e. in the year 1989 reference was made by the Central Government and then award has been passed. Hence this writ has been filed challenging the award on the aforesaid grounds.3. The respondents workmen appeared through Bihar Colliery Kamgar U...
Tag this Judgment!Ram Dayal Rai Vs. Jharkhand State Electricity Board and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Dec-19-2002
Reported in: [2003(1)JCR525(Jhr)]
ORDERS.J. Mukhopadhaya, J.1. The petitioner has challenged the order No. 2970 dated 15th June, 2001 issued by the Joint Secretary, Bihar State Electricity Board (B.S.E.B. for short), Patna communicated vide letter No. 365 dated 22nd June, 2001 by the Electrical Executive Engineer Transmission, Division Ranchi, whereby and whereunder, the respondents have issued penal order, withholding 5% of the pension permanently.2. It appears that even after petitioner's retirement on 28th February, 1998, he having not vacated the Board's quarters, the impugned order dated 15th June, 2001 was issued after notice and hearing the petitioner, on the basis of evidence.3. The main plea taken by petitioner is that as Rule 43(b) of the Bihar Pension Rules, 1950 relates to misconduct if committed during the service period so, the respondents have no jurisdiction to pass any order under Rule 43(b) for retention of quarters after his retirement.4. It is not in dispute that the B.S.E.B. adopted Bihar Pension R...
Tag this Judgment!Vijay Kumar Mallik Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Dec-18-2002
Reported in: [2003(2)JCR362(Jhr)]
ORDERDeoki Nandan Prasad, J.1. This application under Article 226 of Constitution of India has been filed for quashing the entire criminal prosecution initiated as against the petitioner including the order dated 31st May, 2002, whereby and whereunder the. learned Special Judge took cognizance for the offences under Section 56 of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 r/w Sections 49(3) and (4) of the Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999 in connection With Case No. FEMA 2 of 2002.2. One Complaint case has been filed against the accused persons including the petitioner for defrauding a huge amount of Government money to the extent of Rs.7,09,92,000/- during the period 1980-90 on the basis of fake allotment letters and the petitioner took active part in getting money by way of certain foreign exchange remittance in total of US $ 3,15,000/- and Pounds 1000 as detailed in Annexure-1 during the year 1991-92. It was found that it was not actually the genuine gift but were suspected to be...
Tag this Judgment!Ashiya Khatoon and ors. Vs. Sadashib Prasad
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Dec-18-2002
Reported in: [2003(2)JCR321(Jhr)]
ORDERM.Y. Eqbal, J.1. This revision application is directed against the Judgment and decree dated 20.4.2000 passed by Sub-Judge-IV, Dumka in title (eviction) suit No. 22/63 of 1997/98 whereby he has decreed the suit in favour of the plaintiff-opposite party on the ground of personal necessity.2. The facts of the case lie in a narrow compass :The plaintiff-opposite party filed the aforementioned suit against the defendants-petitioners for a decree of eviction in respect of the suit property comprising of holding No. 228, Ward No. 6 situated in the town of Dumka. The defendant Was inducted as monthly tenant in respect of three rooms where the petitioners used to run a studio in the name and style of M/s. Rellex Studio. The plaintiffs case is that he has a large family consisting of his married son and grand children whom he was unable to maintain after his retirement in 1991 from government service as his sons are unemployed and sitting idle at home. The plaintiff therefore wants to open...
Tag this Judgment!Chhotanagpur Agro Agencies and Atma Ram Agencies Ltd. Vs. State of Jha ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Dec-18-2002
Reported in: [2003(2)JCR300(Jhr)]
ORDERS.J. Mukhopadhaya, J.1. Petitioner Atma Ram Agencies Ltd. of W.P.(C) No. 4310 of 2002 (1st writ petition for short) assailed the question of the Respondents State authorities to accept the price quotation for supply of units of Tractor with Trailer of 4th Respondent-Chhotanagpur Agro Agencies, Ranchi-petitioner in W.P.(C) No. 5981 of 2002 (2nd Writ petition for short). The order for supply of units of tractor with Trailer given in favour of the said 4th Respondent was alleged to be illegal, arbitrary, unfair, mala fide, discriminatory and suffers from lack of transparency, fairness, openess etc.2. During the pendency of the first writ petition, the respondents published a notice on 14th August, 2002 in newspaper 'PRABHAT KHABAR', whereby it cancelled the earlier tender notice published in the newspaper dated 12th May, 2002 and the corrigendum published on 19th may, 2002 in respect of tender inviting supply of Tractors with Trailers. It having affected, the 4th Respondent-Chhotanag...
Tag this Judgment!Churaman Rai and ors. Vs. State of Bihar (Now Jharkhand)
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Dec-17-2002
Reported in: [2003(2)JCR97(Jhr)]
Vishnudeo Narayan, J.1. This appeal has been preferred by the appellants named above against the impugned judgment dated 30.8.1994 and the order dated 1.9.1994 passed in Sessions Case No. 209 of 1993/11 of 1993 by Sri Sita Ram Pandey, 3rd Addl. Session Judge, Dumka whereby and whereunder the appellants aforesaid were found guilty for the offence punishable under Section 302/34, IPC and they were convicted and sentenced to undergo RI for life. However, co-accused Mishar Rai and Lillu Rai were not found guilty and they were acquitted. 2. The prosecution case has arisen on the basis of the fardbeyan (Ext. 3) of PW 7, Sabitri Devi, widow of Mathur Rai, the deceased of this case recorded by SI, K.D. Prasad of Jarmundi P.S. on 16.10.1992 at 10.45 hours at the house of the informant in Village Tharipathar, P.S. Jarmundi, District Dumka regarding the occurrence which is said to have taken place on 15.10.1992 at about 5.00 p.m. In the house of the appellants situate in Village Tharipathar afore...
Tag this Judgment!Tata Iron and Steel Company Ltd. Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Dec-17-2002
Reported in: [2003(1)JCR595(Jhr)]
S.J. Mukhopadhaya, J.1. The petitioner-Tata Iron & Steel Company Limited (Company for short) being not satisfied with the judgment and order dated 15th April, 2000 passed by the learned Single Judge in C.W.J.C. No. 891 of 2000 (R), preferred this letters patent appeal.In a certificate case, the certificate officer rejected the objection preferred by petitioner under Section 9 of the Bihar & Orissa Public Demand Recovery Act, 1914 (P.D.R Act for short) regarding demand for realisation of Rs. 12,22,78,729.89 paise (Twelve crore 'twentytwo lacs seventyeight thousand seven hundred twentynine and eightynine paise) which was affirmed by the learned single Judge.2. The brief history of this case is that the company was established in the township of Jamshedpur and its estate vested in the State of Bihar in the year 1956, under the Bihar Land Reforms Act, 1950 (Bihar Act 30 of 1950). Disputes and differences arose between the then Government of Bihar and the company regarding the operation and...
Tag this Judgment!All India Conference (Golmuri Constituent Branch) Mahila Sharan Vs. St ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Dec-17-2002
Reported in: [2003(2)JCR122(Jhr)]
S.J. Mukhopadhaya, J. 1. The petitioner, All India Conference (Golmuri Constituent Branch), Mahila Sharan, Teclo Colony while challenged the order dated 11th June, 1991 passed in reference Case Nos. 5/86 to 8/86, have also challenged the award dated 28th June, 1993 passed in Reference Case Nos. 5/86 to 8/86/27/88 to 30/88.2. By order dated 11th June, 1991, the learned Presiding Officer decided the preliminary issue against the petitioner and held it an 'Industry', as defined under Section 2(j) of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (I.D. Act for short). 'By the impugned award dated 28th June, 1993, while the dismissal orders of respondents 3 to 7 have been set aside by the learned Presiding Officer and minor punishment of stoppage of three increments have been imposed, they havebeen reinstated with full back wages and other benefits. 3. The petitioner which claim to be a Philanthropic Organisation mainly raised two questions for determination, namely, (a) whether the Philanthropic Institutio...
Tag this Judgment!Damu Purty and ors. Vs. State of Bihar (Now Jharkhand)
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Dec-17-2002
Reported in: [2003(2)JCR316(Jhr)]
Lakshman Uraon, J.1. All the three appellants have preferred this appeal against the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 28th November, 1989, passed by Smt. Shakuntala Sinha, 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Singhbhum at Chaibasa, in Sessions Trial No. 401 of 1987. whereby and whereunder, each of them have been convicted under Section 302/34 and Section 201 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life under Section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code and further to pay fine of Rs. 1000/- each, in default whereof to undergo simple imprisonment of six months. They have further been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years for the offence punishable under Section 201 of the Indian Penal Code. However, both the sentences have been directed to run concurrently.2. The prosecution case, as per the information given by the informant Govind Chandra Purty, is that on 29.8.1987 in the evening at about 7.00 p.m. he was returning to hi...
Tag this Judgment!Sushil Choudhary Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Dec-17-2002
Reported in: [2003(2)JCR327(Jhr)]
ORDERVikramaditya Prasad, J. 1. No counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the State.2. The writ has been filed for quashing the order (Annexure 14 and 15). By Annexure-14 the services of the petitioner was terminated by the Director, Land Acquisition and Rehabilitation- cum-Deputy Secretary on the ground that Rehabilitation Officer had no power to make appointment and by Annexure-15 the effective order of termination was issued.3. The case of the petitioner in short is that the petitioner was appointed as Amin along with others on the vacant post on 9.8.1988. He joined his service at Deoghar and from there he was transferred to Khunti. While he was posted at Khunti, some employees were retrenched but the name of petitioner did not appear in the retrenchment order, Annexure-4. Vide Annexure-5, on 26.11.1988 the petitioner made his representation for release of salary which was accordingly released to him. Thereafter, he was transferred from Khunti to Chaibasa in the year 1990. In...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »