Jharkhand Court September 2002 Judgments
Satyendra Kumar and Co. Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Sep-30-2002
Reported in: III(2003)BC249
ORDERS.J. Mukhopadhaya, J. 1. The petitioner has challenged the notice dated 20th May, 2002 published in newspaper, whereby the respondents intimated the works allotted in favour of one or other contractor in pursuance of Tender Notice published in the newspaper on 8th March, 2002.2. The case relates to Package No, JH-0502 for construction of road under 'PRADHAN MANTRI GRAMIN SARAK PARTYOJNA'. 3. According to the petitioner in pursuance of Tender Notice dated 8th March, 2002 published in the newspaper 'HINDUSTAN', it submitted tender papers for Package No. JH-0502, as mentioned at Sl. No. 52' of the Tender Notice. The tender was opened on 27th March, 2002 and the petitioner was found the lowest tenderer (L-1 for short). The 6th respondent, M/s. B.N. Engineering Works, Deoghar was the second lowest tenderer (L-2 for short).Subsequently, notice was published by the Engineer-in-Chief, by which the petitioner was directed to appear for negotiation on 6th May, 2002. All on a sudden, after s...
Tag this Judgment!Sheo Shakti Cement Industries Vs. Jharkhand State Electricity Board an ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Sep-30-2002
Reported in: [2003(1)JCR482(Jhr)]
ORDERS.J. Mukhopadhaya, J.1. The writ petition was preferred by petitioner for issuance of appropriate writ directing the respondents to immediately restore the electricity line of the petitioner disconnected on 14th June, 2002 for non-payment of alleged dues arising out of Arbitral Award dated 30th March, 2002.2. On 28th June, 2002, learned counsel for the Jharkhand State Electricity Board (J.S.E.B. for short) was directed to seek instruction and file counter affidavit. In the meantime, it was ordered to restore the electrical connection for three weeks to enable the petitioner to move for interim relief before the Court where the application to set aside the Award has been preferred and pending. In view of aforesaid interim order of this Court, the electrical connection of petitioner has been restored for the present.3. It appears that in pursuance of inspection made by an anti- power theft team of the State Electricity Board, one FIR was lodged against the petitioner on 25th July, 1...
Tag this Judgment!Shivam Lime Works and Shivam Sodium Silicate Industries Vs. Central Co ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Sep-30-2002
Reported in: [2003(1)JCR484(Jhr)]
ORDERS.J. Mukhopadhaya, J.1. In both the cases, petitioners have challenged the common wireless message dated 30th July, 2002 issued under the signature of the Chief General Manager (Sales & Marketing), Central Coal Field Limited, Dhanbad (CCL for short) whereby and whereunder it has been ordered to keep in abeyance supply of coal/washery products to all linked industrial units of Bihar with immediate effect.2. According to petitioners, it has affected their units situated in the State of Bihar. The wireless message dated 14th July, 2002 has been issued without notice and hearing the petitioners on the direction of the District Industries Centre, Bihar (DIC for short) without application of mind.3. Counsel for the petitioners submitted that in view of the decision of the Court dated 14th July, 2002 in the case of Maya Fuel Private Limited v. B.C.C.L. in WP (C) No. 4790 of 2001; see 2002 (3) JCR 196 (Jhr), the District Industries Centre having no jurisdiction to determine the question o...
Tag this Judgment!Madan Mohan Singh Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Sep-30-2002
Reported in: [2003(1)JCR395(Jhr)]
Tapen Sen, J.1. Heard Mr. A.K. Sahani, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mrs. I Sen. Choudhary, learned SC III for the State. No counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the State in this case.2. The undisputed facts of this case is that the post of Head Master in the concerned school was lying vacant from 15.5.1977 and the petitioner started functioning as Head Master-In-charge in that school from 15.7.1977. However, the grievance of the petitioner is that after having moved the Patna High Court in various writ applications a notification was finally issued on 8.5.1992 (Annexure 2) by which the Government gave approval to the petitioner and recognised him as Head Master from the. date of issuance of the order. The claim of the petitioner is that he should be given the status of Head Master right from the date he started functioning and the period rendered by him in the capacity of Head Master-In-Charge should also be taken into consideration. He, accordingly, moved C.W.J.C. ...
Tag this Judgment!Mahabir Chaudhury Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Sep-27-2002
Reported in: [2003(1)JCR381(Jhr)]
Tapen Sen, J. 1. In this writ application, the petitioner has prayed for an order commanding the respondents to pay him the difference of salary which is said to be due to him for the period 26.9.1987 to 31.1.1992, i.e. from the date of his suspension till the date of his superannuation or retirement and also to pay him his retrial benefits, including pension, gratuity, G.P.F., Group Insurance, leave encashment salary and other admissible allowances to which he may be found entitled together with statutory and penal interest.2. The short facts which are necessary to be looked into are that the petitioner was appointed on the post of Revenue Karmchari and joined as such on 29.10.1953. On 26.9.1987, while he was posted at Satgawan under the Circle Officer, Jainagar, Koderma (respondent No. 9) he has put under suspension for irregularities committed in Settlement Case Nos. 92/85-86 and 93/85-86. Thereafter, a departmental proceeding was initiated. The petitioner has stated that since he h...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Salestina Tuti Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Sep-27-2002
Reported in: [2003(1)JCR378(Jhr)]
Tapen Sen, J. 1. Heard Mr. A.K. Sinha, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Sarvendra Kumar, learned JC to GP-I.2. While on the one hand the petitioner claims to have worked continuously right from 25.2.1957 to 5.12.1984 from 10.00 a.m. to 4.30 p.m., the respondents on the other hand at paragraph 5 of the counter affidavit have stated that during the period 25.2.1957 to 5.12.1984 she merely worked as part time escorting rnaid servant and that she performed her duty from 9.00 a.m. to 10.00 a.m., escorting children from their respective homes to the School and again taking them back from the school from 4.30 p.m. to 5.00 p.m.3. According to the petitioner, however, she worked full time and therefore, she does deserve pension under the provisions of Section 59(3) of the Bihar Pension Rules, 1950 which reads thus :'The State Government after careful consideration have, therefore, been pleased to decide that, if the service of the temporary or officiating Government servant who is not...
Tag this Judgment!Anirudh Flat Owners Association Vs. Jharkhand State Electricity Board ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Sep-27-2002
Reported in: [2003(1)JCR481(Jhr)]
ORDERS.J. Mukhopadhaya, J.1. The writ petition has been preferred by Annirudh Flat Owners Association, an association of 170 flats owners of Annirudh Apartment, 3rd Street, Shukla Colony, Town & District-Ranchi. They have challenged the bills for the month of June, 2002 received by the Association in July, 2002 for Rs. 35,499/- and another bill of July, 2002 for Rs. 42,855/-.2. According to petitioner, the bills in question relates to 'common area' of residential apartment raised on the basis of commercial tariff, treating the petitioner as CS-2 category consumer though its members are Domestic Category consumers. The bills are stated to be illegal, arbitrary being contrary to the provisions of the amended tariff as made on the basis of decision of the Court.3. It was brought to the notice of the Court that vide Circular No. 472 dated 14th August, 1996 the Secretary, Bihar State Electricity Board, Patna, giving reference of a judgment passed by the Supreme Court communicated the amende...
Tag this Judgment!Bhim Dubey Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Sep-25-2002
Reported in: [2003(1)JCR457(Jhr)]
M.Y. Eqbal, J.1. The petitioner has prayed for quashing the Memo No. 3755/86 dated 2.12.1986 by which he has been dismissed from service and also the orders dated 28.7.1987, 22.6.1989 and 30.9.1992 passed by the Inspector General of Police and Director General of Police in appeal and revision confirming the order of dismissal of the petitioner from service and rejecting his appeal and revision.2. The petitioner was in the service of the respondent-Police Department as a Sepoy. After his appointment as such he was posted at Chaibasa. In 1986 because of his unauthorized absence from June, 1986 to November, 1986 he was charge-sheeted and on the same day i.e. on 11.11.1986, he was suspended. A copy of the memo of charge-sheet has been annexed as Annexure-2 to the writ application. When the Superintendent of Police who was the Disciplinary Authority did not receive any reply to the said charge from the petitioner, he passed the impugned order of dismissal of the petitioner from service on 2...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Chinta Devi and anr. Vs. Smt. Saraswati Devi
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Sep-24-2002
Reported in: [2004(1)JCR347(Jhr)]
ORDERGurusharan Sharma, J.1. Defendants are appellants. On 13.12.1995 the plaintiff executed a registered sale deed (Exhibit-B) in favour of the defendant No. 1 in respect of the suit property, for a consideration of Rs. 30,000/- and simultaneously the defendant No. 1 executed a registered deed of agreement (Exhibit-3) in favour of the plaintiff undertaking to reconvey the said property on the same consideration amount within a period of five years, commencing from 1.1.1986 to 31.12.1990.2. On 14.11.1990, the plaintiff sent lawyer's notice (Exhibit- 1) to the defendants to reconvey the property in question as she was ready and willing to pay the amount of consideration before the Sub-Registrar. Hussainabad. On 27.11.1990 defendant No. 2, husband of defendant No. 1 wrote a letter (Exhibit-7) to plaintiff's advocate, who had sent aforesaid notice that he was ready to receive the aforesaid amount of Rs. 30,000/- from Saraswati Devi in Registry office. Hussainbad on any date and time fixed...
Tag this Judgment!Sushma Kumari and ors. Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Sep-23-2002
Reported in: [2003(1)JCR416a(Jhr)]
ORDERS.J. Mukhopadhaya, J.1. The writ petition has been preferred by the petitioners for direction on the respondents to admit them in the Auxiliary Nursing and Midwife School, Dhanbad (A.N.M. for short), they having found successful and selected against their respective category, including Scheduled Caste.2. The case of the petitioners is that in pursuance of advertisement published in newspaper 'Hindustan' dated 27th March, 2002, they applied for admission in ANM course. Initially, the respondents took decision to hold competitive test but later on such decision was modified and intimated vide notice published in newspaper 'Prabhat Khabar' on 6th April, 2002, wherein it was mentioned that the select list will be prepared on the basis of marks obtained in matriculation examination instead of written test. Thereafter, a Selection Committee selected candidates on the basis of matriculation marks and published list of successful candidates on 7th April, 2002. The petitioners being succes...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »