Jharkhand Court September 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.
Deo Nandan Choudhary Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Sep-19-2002
Reported in: [2003(1)JCR478b(Jhr)]
ORDERTapen Sen, J.1. Heard Mr. A.K. Sahani, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Rupesh Singh, learned JC to SC-I.2. In this writ application, the petitioner has made a prayer for issuance of an appropriate writ commanding upon the respondents to pay all his retiral dues together with interest at the rate of 18% per annum. According to the petitioner, he joined his service in the Survey Settlement Department at Bhagalpur on 15.12.1970, whereafter he was transferred to Darbhanga and finally to Dumka in the year 1992. On or about 16.5.2001, by Annexure 1, the Assistant Settlement Officer (Headquarters) informed the petitioner he would be completing 58 years of age on 31.5.2001 and therefore would be superannuated on and from that date.3. On the same day, i.e. 16.5.2001 the same Officer also asked the petitioner to produce the certificate of date of birth. This letter is marked as Annexure 2 to the writ application. Two days, thereafter, i.e., on 18.5.2001, the petitioner was direct...
Devender Singh Vs. State of Jharkhand and anr.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Sep-18-2002
Reported in: I(2003)BC484
ORDERD.N. Prasad, J.1. This application has been filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (the Code) for quashing the order dated 7.2.2002 passed by the Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Jamshedpur, C/1 Case No. 829 of 2001 whereby the learned Magistrate took cognizance of the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (the Act) and also for quashing of all further criminal proceedings in the aforesaid case.2. The case of the prosecution in brief is that opposite party No. 2/complainant filed a complaint case alleging, inter alia, that the petitioner and the complainant were well known and the petitioner had approached the complainant to give a sum of Rs. 40,000/- as he was in urgent need of money. On his request, the petitioner was paid Rs. 40,000/- and, accordingly, a cheque of Rs. 40,000/- bearing Cheque No. '481903' '226015005' of the Canara Bank, Hi-Tech. Agricultural Finance Branch, Lucknow dated 20.4.2001 was issued by the petitioner to ...
Employees in Relation to the Management of Murulidih Colliery Under Mo ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Sep-16-2002
Reported in: [2003(96)FLR292]
S.J. Mukhopadhaya, J.1. The petitioner-Management of Murulidih Colliery of M/s. Bharat Coking Coal Limited (BCCL for short) has challenged the award dated 6th January, 1994 passed by the Presiding Officer, Central Government Industrial Tribunal (No. 2), Dhanbad in Reference Case No. 13/89. 2. The Presiding Officer held that the concerned workmen were transferred fromBhatdih colliery to Murulidih colliery vide office order dated 1st August, 1969 but were not allowed to join their duty and they are entitled for reinstatement and directed the Management, accordingly. 3. At the instance of 2nd respondent, Bihar Colliery Mazdoor Sangh (Union for short), the Government of India, Ministry of Labour in exercise of powers conferred on them under Section 10(1)(d) of the I.D. Act, 1947 referred the following dispute to the Tribunal for adjudication vide their order No. L-20012/38/88-D, 4(A)-I.R. (Coal-I), dated 9th May, 1989 : THE SCHEDULE 'Whether the management of M/s. B.C.C. Ltd in relation t...
Rajendra Behl Vs. Commissioner and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Sep-16-2002
Reported in: 2002(50)BLJR2396
S.J. Mukhopadhaya, J.1. This case arises out of an order of fair rent determined by the Rent Controller. 2. The petitioner is the tenant of the premises. The manner in which he is acting and handling the matter, as discussed hereunder, will reveal that the petitioner-tenant neither intends to enhance rent, nor intends immediate disposal of litigation but to prolong it. The building in question is in the prime locality of Ranchi in its main road bearing Municipal Holding No. 1605, Ward No. 2/B, Old Commissioner's Compound, Ranchi. 3. The building is two storied comprising of about 40 numbers of rooms, hall, Verandah, Courtyard on an area about 10,000 sqf. It was taken by the petitioner on rent from the respondent @ Rs. 2,000/-per month. Admittedly, the petitioner is running a hotel in the premises. 4. It appears that the tenant having defaulted to pay rent for the period from 15th April, 1983 to 14th July, 1983, the landlord filed a Title (Eviction) Suit No. 182, wherein learned Special...
Nagendra Choudhary Vs. State Bank of India and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Sep-16-2002
Reported in: [2003(1)JCR421(Jhr)]; (2003)IIILLJ394Jhar
S.J. Mukhopadhaya, J. 1. The writ petition was preferred By the petitioner against Memorandum No. 448 dated 23rd March, 1998, whereby and whereunder the disciplinary authority inflicted punishment of dismissal from service without notice on petitioner in terms of Para-521 (S) (a) of Sastry award as retained in Desai award.2. In the amendment petition, the petitioner has also challenged the appellate order communicated vide letter No. DUM/DPS/R/Genl/326 dated 8th November, 1999, whereby the appellate authority modified the punishment order as compulsory removal from service with superannuation benefit as would be due otherwise at that stage and without disqualification from future employment.3. The petitioner was suspended in April, 1994 in contemplation of departmental proceeding followed by a charge-sheet dated 27th January, 1995.4. Initially, charge of misappropriation of Bank money amounting to Rs. 800/-by removing 8 (eight) pieces of currency note from the packet of Rupee one hundr...
Lohardaga Charitable Ursuline Society Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Sep-16-2002
Reported in: [2003(97)FLR171]; [2003(1)JCR476(Jhr)]; (2003)IILLJ554Jhar
Tapen Sen, J.1. Heard Mr. S. Choudhary, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. P.P.N. Roy, learned counsel appearing for the respondents.2. The petitioner, in the instant case, has prayed for quashing of Annexure 3, the order dated 19.10.1994 by which the respondent No. 2 (Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner) has levied a sum of Rs. 1,87,019.00 as Provident Fund contribution in respect of employees employed with the Urusuline Hospital at Lohardaga.3. According to the petitioner, the impugned order, apart from being an ex parte assessment, is also illegal inasmuch as it has incorrectly dealt with the main issue namely that the Nuns and Sisters who have taken a vow of poverty are not covered under the provisions of the Employees Provident Fund (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act, 1952 (hereinafter referred for the sake of brevity as the 'said Act'). According to Mr. S. Choudhary, learned counsel for the petitioner, the aforementioned Hospital is a part of the Lohardaga Charitable Ursuli...
General Engineering and Foundary Company and ors. Vs. Bank of Baroda
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Sep-16-2002
Reported in: I(2004)BC370; [2003(4)JCR318(Jhr)]
Gurusharan Sharma, J. 1. Defendants are appellants. On 20.11.1982 the plaintiffs filed Money Suit No. 203 of 1982 against the defendants for realization of Rs. 69,970.49 paise (Rs. 43,288.19 paise being the amount outstanding as per Books of account with interest calculated upto 25.3.1980, plus projected interest of Rs. 26,682.30 paise as shown in the Books of accounts accrued due, on and from 26.3.1980 to 18.11.1982).2. In the year 1974, on the request of defendants 1 to 4, a cash credit limit of Rs. 40,000/- was sanctioned to them by the plaintiff-bank. Subsequently in the year 1975, on the request of defendant-firm limit of cash credit facility was increased from Rs. 40,000/- to Rs. 1,00,000/-, for which a demand promissory note dated 18.2.1975 for Rs. 1,00,000/- payable at Jamshedpur with interest thereon @4-1/2% over bank rate and minimum 13-1/2% per annum was executed by the defendants 1 to 4. A letter of hypothecation of goods was also executed, whereby the defendants 1 to 4 cre...
State of Bihar Through Dy. Commissioner Vs. Mustt. Muluwa and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Sep-16-2002
Reported in: [2004(2)JCR153(Jhr)]
Gurusharan Sharma, J.1. These 38 appeals, filed under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter to be referred to as 'the Act') arose out of a common judgment and therefore, have been heard together and are disposed of by a common judgment.2. On 16.10.1987, Notification No. 366 dated 10.9.1987, under Section 4 of the Act was published in Hazaribagh District Gazette for acquisition of total 14.87 acres land of Khata Nos. 2, 3, 5, 6, 9, 10, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 18, 19, 20, 24, 25, 28, 35 and 97, situated in village Rundai, within Gola Police Station of Hazaribagh District, for the purpose of excavating and laying out canal to be commonly known as 'Bhairwa Jalsai Project.'3. The Collector under the Act prepared the awards, under Section 11 of the Act, which, were pronounced on 14.2.1989 and on the same day possession of the lands under acquisition was also taken by the State Government.4. Nature of lands as recorded in Khatiyan was Tand I, II and III, Dhan I, II and III and...
Binay Kumar Gupta Etc. Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Sep-13-2002
Reported in: [2003(96)FLR1028]; [2003(1)JCR267(Jhr)]; (2003)ILLJ877Jhar
M.Y. Eqbal, J.1. In these writ petitions the petitioners are aggrieved by the orders dated 10.8.1994 and 19.9.1994 passed by respondent No. 3, the Additional Collector, Ranchi, being the appellate authority under the Minimum Wages Act, in Miscellaneous Appeal Nos. 1/93, 4/93, 13/93, 15/93 and 16/93. By these orders the petitioners were directed to deposit 50% of the claimed amount and on their failure to deposit the said amount the appeal shall not be admitted.2. It appear that on the application filed by the Labour Superintendent and Labour Inspector under Section 20(2) of the Minimum Wages Act (in short the said Act) complaining less payment of minimum wages by the petitioners who are the employers, proceedings were initiated by the Sub-Divisional Officer-cum-Authority under the said Act. On being noticed to show-cause the petitioners appeared before the Sub-Divisional Officer and took a defence that they were paying wages to their employees at the rates determined in a tripartite ag...
Binada Nand Jha Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Sep-13-2002
Reported in: [2003(1)JCR519(Jhr)]
Vikramaditya Prasad, J.1. The petitioner was working as Naik in Central Industrial Security Force (hereinafter referred to as C.I.S.F. for short) and on 25.2.1994 he was on duty vide Annexure 1. The petitioner had a brilliant career in service which will be evident from Annexure 2. At the relevant time in the month of July, 1996 the petitioner was deputed on duty at New Delhi for a short period and he was suspended by the Assistant Commandant on I.S. duty vide Annexure 3 and subsequently that order was revoked vide Annexure 3/1. The petitioner was proceeded departmentally for the following charges :--Article of Charge-I'An act of gross misconduct and indiscipline in that No. 944430040 Naik B.N. Jha of CISF Unit FCI Sindary while deployed in election duty/IS duty in coy No. 204 in Delhi, abused and threatened to No. 7014117 ASI/Exe R.C. Sharma using unparliamentarily language in dining hall of CISF Unit BTPS Badarpur at about 21.00 hrs on 19.7.1996 after consuming alcohol.'Article of Ch...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »