Jharkhand Court August 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.
Ashok Kumar Kejriwal Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Aug-27-2002
Reported in: 2003CriLJ1349
ORDERDeoki Nandan Prasad, J.1. The petitioner has filed this application for quashing the order dated 9-2-2000 passed by Shri P. Kumar, Judicial Magistrate, Ranchi in Protest Petition No. 584 of 1999 whereby and whereunder the learned Magistrate took cognizance of the offence under Sections 406 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code in connection with Kotwali P.S. Case No. 67 of 1999 arising out of Complaint Case No. 114 of 1999.2. The prosecution case in brief as alleged that the opposite party No. 2 filed a complaint in the Court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ranchi on 18-2-1999 which was sent to the police for registration and investigation under Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (the Code) and it was alleged that the petitioner and opposite party No. 2 are both traders. The petitioner approached opposite party No. 2 on 27-4-1998 for supply of good quality of wheat for his Unit, namely, M/s. Ambika Wheat Product Private Limited and promised to pay commission at the rate...
Dr. Amar Kumar Singh and anr. Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Aug-26-2002
Reported in: [2003(4)JCR375(Jhr)]
Gurusharan Sharma, J. 1. Rasamay Ganguly, son of late Heramba Chandra Ganguly of New Alipur, Calcutta owned and possessed one storeyed residential house No. 67/A in P Block situated on an area of 299 sq. meter land. There was no vacant land except the set back area. The said area consisted of narrow strip of land 4 ft. wide on three sides of the building and 10 ft. wide back courtyard covered partly by service latrine and bathroom for servant.2. His wife Anima Ganguly possessed 1513 sq. meter vacant land, bearing plot No. 718-A3/C at Hazaribagh road of Ranchi town.3. Petitioners purchased the said land by registered sale-deed dated 27.4.1979 for a valuable consideration of Rs. 20,000/- from her. Before transferring their vendor had filed application under Section 26 of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') before the competent authority for permission, vide Case No. 207 of 1979, which was granted on 17.4.1979.4. A proceeding under the ...
Raj Ceramic Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Bihar State Electricity Board and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Aug-23-2002
Reported in: [2003(1)JCR248(Jhr)]
Lakshman Uraon, J. 1. M/s. RajCeramics Pvt. Ltd., Hardag, Ranchi, petitioner-appellant, has preferred this appeal, being aggrieved by the order dated 16.3.2000 passed by the learned single Judge in CWJC No. 2945/1998 (R) whereby and whereunder, the learned single Judge dismissed the writ application of the petitioner-appellant on the ground that it is squarely covered by the judgment passed in CWJC No. 1559/1999 (R).2. The petitioner-appellant filed a writ petition bearing CWJC No. 2945/1998 (R) praying therein for issuance of an appropriate writ or a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent. Electricity Board, to exempt the petitioner from payment of annual minimum guarantee charges for the period of five years from the date of its coming into commercial production after expansion of its unit from 15.3.1994 in pursuance to 1993 industrial policy and also by the resolution taken by Energy Department, State of Bihar on 2.9.1996 (P) for issuance of appropriate writ directi...
Central Coalfields Ltd. Vs. Allahabad Bank Ltd. and anr.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Aug-23-2002
Reported in: [2004(2)JCR151(Jhr)]
Gurusharan Sharma, J.1. The plaintiff is appellant. The suit for realization of Rs. 67,990.00 from the defendant No. 1, for price of coal-tar lifted by the defendant No. 2, as detailed in Schedule A to the plaint, plus Rs. 1,98,724.50 paise from the defendant No. 2, being the amount of loss suffered as detailed in Schedule B to the plaint or in alternative for realization of total amount of Rs. 2,66,714.50 paise from the defendant No. 2, in case it was found that the defendant No. 1 was not liable to pay Rs. 67,990.00 was dismissed, holding that the plaintiff was not entitled to claim the aforesaid sum from either of the defendants.2. According to the contract in question, the defendant No. 2, a registered partnership firm, during the period commencing from 1.1.1967 to 31.12.1967 was to lift 17.40 tones of coal-tar from the plaintiffs Coke Oven Plant at Giridih @ Rs. 390.75 paise per tone.3. As per Clause 10 of the General Conditions of tender contract, the defendant No. 2 was asked to...
Rajneesh Mishra, Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Aug-22-2002
Reported in: 2002(50)BLJR1867
ORDER1. When this matter came up for hearing today, learned counsel appearing for the parties pointed out to us that in an identical matter arising from Tamil Nadu, the Supreme Court is seized of the issues involved in this case, viz whether it is constitutionally permissible to exceed the limit of 50% in so far as reservations are concerned. It has been pointed out to us that the identical matter pending consideration of their Lordships of the Supreme Court is in an 'Appeal arising out of SLP No. 13526 of 1993; Voice (Consumer Care Council) v. State of Tamil Nadu. In view of the fact that the issues involved herein are pending adjudication before the Apex Court, it was suggested by the learned counsel appearing for all the parties that we should defer the hearing in this case and await the judgment of the Supreme Court. We found ourselves in agreement with the aforesaid proposal as made by the learned counsel for all the parties. 2. In so far as the question relating to evolving an in...
Sri Sanjay Kumar Singh and ors. and Sri Rabindra Kumar Singh and ors. ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Aug-22-2002
Reported in: [2003(1)JCR359(Jhr)]
M.Y. Eqbal, J.1. In these two writ applications the petitioners seek appropriate, direction for regularisation of their services on the ground, inter alia, that they have been working in the Bokaro Steel Plant for the last so many years.2. Petitioners' case is that Bokaro Steel Plant amongst others, there are two Mills, namely, Hot Strip Mill and Hot Rolled Coil Finishing Mill. In these two Mills types of machines have been installed. The petitioners claim that they have been discharging their duties as operators in those Mills and the work the petitioners perform and perennial in nature. It is further contended that the petitioners like other permanent employees of Bokaro Steel Plant have been enrolled as members of the scheme of provident fund under Bokaro Steel Plant. The petitioners allege that their services are governed by the service conditions applicable to the regular employees. The petitioners have relied upon the report of the Deputy Labour Commissioner, Bokaro Steel Plant w...
Coal Mines Provident Fund Commissioner Vs. Commissioner of Payment and ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Aug-20-2002
Reported in: [2003(2)JCR331(Jhr)]
Tapen Sen, J.1. When the case was called out, Mr. M.M. Prasad stated that he is appearing on behalf of the petitioner and that his name has wrongly been printed showing him to be appearing for the respondents. Nobody, however, appears on behalf of either the respondent No. 1 or the respondent No. 2.2. The instant writ petition is directed against the order dated 13.9.1994 passed by IVth Additional District Judge, Dhanbad (respondent No. 2) by which he dismissed the Misc. Appeal No. 136 of 1981. The above mentioned appeal was filed against the Judgment dated 10.6.1981 by which the claim in relation to undercharges for the period of March 1968 to March 1971 amounting to Rs. 60,384.49 (Rupees sixty thousand three hundred eighty four and forty nine paise) was disallowed. Against this part of the order, the petitioners filed the appeal being Misc. Appeal No. 136 of 1981. The claim of Rs. 60,384.49 wasrejected on the ground that the Inspector's Report dated 20.08.1971 which was the basis of ...
Dr. Supriya Dhaboo Vs. Dr. Basant Kumar Agarwal and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Aug-18-2002
Reported in: [2004(1)JCR335(Jhr)]
1. The subject-matter of the present appeal is the question of seniority between the appellant in one hand and the respondent No. 1 on the other.2. The appellant did her M.B.B.S. from Nagpur University in the year 1971 and obtained M.S. degree in the year 1978. She was appointed as lecturer in Anatomy Department of the Government Medical College, Nagpur and served there from 1.11.1973 to 7.7.1980 on the said post. On 16.3.1988 she was appointed as Assistant Professor, Non-Clinical, in the Anatomy Department of M.G.M. Medical College, Jamshedpur. However, on account of nonavailability of the vacant sanctioned post at the relevant time, she was allowed to join on the post of Tutor, from where on 2.5.1994 she was transferred to Anugrah Narayan Medical College, Gaya, on the post of Assistant. Professor, but she expressed her unwillingness to go to Gaya and continued at Jamshedpur as Tutor.3. Respondent No. 1, on the other hand, was appointed as Tutor on 26.6.1986 and thereafter on 30.5.199...
Sk. Najeeb and ors. Vs. Sk. Kurban and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Aug-16-2002
Reported in: [2003(1)JCR413(Jhr)]
Gurusharan Sharma, J.1. Sk. Neyamat, son of Sk. Lodhi of village-Chandwe, District Ranchi, left behind two widows, Faizan Khatoon arid Saro Khatoon and three sons, Sk. Aklu, Sk. Heyat and Sk. Amin from his first wife and two sons, Sk. Habbu and Sk. Musa, the plaintiff, from his second wife, Sk. Aklu left behind two sons, Sk. Kurban and Sk. Yunus, defendants 1 and 2. Sk. Heyat left behind three sons and a daughter, namely, Sk. Ahad Ali, Sk. Hanif alias Sk. Habib Sk. Dukh alias Sk. Mahabali and Mostt. Uttiman Khatoon alias Tima Khatoon, defendants 3 to 6. Sk. Amin left behind two daughters, Rejhani Khatoon and Rajidan Khatoon, defendants 7 and 8.2. According to plaintiff, after death of Sk. Neyamat his mother was driven out from the house and was forced to take shelter in her parents, house at village Sukurhutu. She along with her son had to depend upon whatever paddy or other food qrains were given by defendants, which was also stopped later on in September (sic).3. Plaintiff, therefore...
Om Fuels and ors. Vs. Bharat Coking Coal Ltd. and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Aug-16-2002
Reported in: 2002(50)BLJR1869; [2003(1)JCR228(Jhr)]
ORDERS.J. Mukhopadhaya, J. 1. All these writ petitions have been preferred by the petitioners for direction on the respondents to release full quota of coal in terms of linkage.Their grievance is that the total quantity of coal, as shown in the linkage, is not being supplied rather lesser quantity than the quantity shown in the linkage.2. The stand taken by the, respondents is that the petitioners are entitled for coal as per the maximum permissible quantity (MPQ) recently fixed, on the basis of the policy decision taken by all subsidiary coal companies for all linked non-core units.3. Similar dispute fell for consideration before a Bench of this Court in the case of Maya Fuel Private Limited v. Bharat Coking Coal Limited and Ors., WP (C) No. 4790 of 2001 [reported in 2002 (3) JCR 196 (Jhr)]. In the said case, the Court vide its judgment dated 14th August, 2002 held :'In view of discussions and reasons,as made and given above, I come to theconclusion and hold : (i) The 'Linkage Quantit...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »