Jharkhand Court May 2002 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Md. Ashique HussaIn Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: May-02-2002
Reported in: 2002(50)BLJR1003
ORDER1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 13.2.1997 by which the writ petition filed by the petitioner being CWJC No, 1080/96 (R) was dismissed, The order elated 13.2.1997 passed by learned Single Judge is quoted herein below:--'Heard learned counsel for the parties. This application is dismissed.'2. From perusal of the writ petition, it appears that petitioner/appellant had challenged the order dated 1.2.1995 issued by the Desk Officer of the Ministry of Labour, Government of India refusing to refer the disputes for adjudication by the Tribunal. In the writ petition, the petitioner made out a case that during conciliation proceeding, although petitioner workmen was agreeable for an arbitration both under the Act as well as under the Code of discipline but the Management declined to accept it. Inspite of that without the consent of the petitioner, the matter was sent to the Arbitration. The Desk Officer faking into consideration the code of arbitration refuse...
Dukhia Mardi Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: May-02-2002
Reported in: 2002(50)BLJR1004; [2002(93)FLR1196]; (2002)IIILLJ110Jhar
ORDER1. This appeal is directed against the order dated 24.2.1997 whereby the learned single judge dismissed the writ petition being CWJC No. 2632 of 1996 (R).2. The petitioner's case is that he was appointed as Peon on 4.1.1982 by the Managing Committee of Sosomali High School in Rajnagar Block. In March, 1982 the said High School was taken over by the Government of Bihar and was named as Project High School. Sosomali, It was contended by the petitioner that he worked continuously from 4.1.1982 to 5.4.1996 though he did not receive any salary from the respondents. The petitioner submitted a number of application to the District Education Officer, Singhbhum for considering his case for payment of salary and for regularisation of the salary sheet. In 1996, the District Education Officer, Singhbhum issued an office order dated 5.4.1996 informing the petitioner that his appointment was not approved as at the time of his appointment ie. on 4.1.1982, he was only of 16 years 2 month 25 days ...
Bidesh Singh Vs. Madhu Singh and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: May-02-2002
Reported in: 2002(50)BLJR1712
ORDERD.N. Prasad, J.1. This application (I.A. No. 595 of 2001) has been filed on behalf of respondent No. 1 under Sections 81, 83 and 86(1) of the Representation of People Act, 1951 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') and Rule 94-A of the Conduct of Election Rules. 1961 (hereinafter to be referred to as 'the Rules') read with Order VII Rule 11 and Order XIV, Rule 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure for dismissal of the election petition on preliminary issue on the ground that the election petition is not maintainable. 2. It is stated that from the Election Petition, it would not be evident as to what were the number of those ballot papers, what were the reasons shown by the Returning Officer for rejection of those ballot papers whereas the agents of all candidates used to be present at the Counting Counters and used to certify every round of counting, thereafter only the result of those rounds used tobe declared. These are the material facts which constitute cause of action which are l...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next ›