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.
Rajasthan Bhawan Trust Vs. Most. Pradlya Devi and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Sep-13-2002
Reported in: [2003(1)JCR486(Jhr)]
M.Y. Eqbal, J.1. This appeal by the defendant appellant under Clause 10 of the Letters' Patent directed against the judgment dated 13.10.1999 passed by the learned Single Judge whereby the appeal filed by the appellant against the judgment and decree passed in Title Suit No. 36/74 has been dismissed.2. The plaintiffs-respondents 1 and 2 filed the aforementioned Title Suit No. 36/74 for a declaration that the sale deed dated 19.4.1981 with respect to 24 and 3/4 decimals of land out of plot No. 21/68 and 21/1769 situated at village Chandwa, P.S. Chandwa, district-Palamau executed by defendant No. 1 in favour of defendant No. 2 is illegal, void, inoperative and without jurisdiction.3. The plaintiffs case, is brief, is that one Balmukund Nath Shahdeo, father of the plaintiffs and defendant No. 1 acquired the aforementioned plot by means of three registered sale deeds and after purchase, the father of the plaintiffs demolished the kacha house and constructed pucca building thereon. The said...
Bisheshwar Singh Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Sep-13-2002
Reported in: [2003(1)JCR418(Jhr)]
ORDERS.J. Mukhopadhaya, J.1. The writ petition was preferred by the petitioner to direct the respondents to pay him the Group Insurance amount and other retrial benefits in the revised scale of Rs. 14,300-400-18,300/- in place of Rs. 12,000-375-16,500/- w.e.f. 3rd April, 2001 till the date of retirement i.e. 31st October, 2001 in terms of Government of Bihar's Order, contained in Memo No. 3/M-2-5 (Ve-Pu)-30/99/5357/VI (2) dated 22nd August, 2001, notified vide Notification No. 01/Accounts, dated 18th/22nd January, 2002 and to pay the difference of salary and other arrears on such revision.2. The case of the petitioner is that he was a Joint Registrar of the Patna High Court when its Ranchi Bench was joint prior to reorganization of the State. He was paid salary in the revised scale of Rs. 12,000-375-16,500/- from the date of promotion. Subsequently, the Patna High Court brought to the notice of the Government of Bihar, the anomaly cropped up in the matter of grant of revised scale of p...
Budhua Oraon and ors. Vs. State of Bihar (Now Jharkhand)
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Sep-11-2002
Reported in: 2002(50)BLJR2051
Lakshman Uraon, J.1. The appellants, named above, have preferred this appeal against the judgment and order of conviction and sentence, passed by the learned 6th Additional Judicial Commissioner, Ranchi, in Sessions Trial No. 200 of 1993, dated 17.12.1993 and 21.12.1993, respectively, convicting all the appellants under Section 302 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing them to undergo imprisonment for life.2. The informant Md. Badrudoja (PW 5) in his fardbeyan (Ext. 3) has alleged that on 24.11.1992 he along with Tahir Ansari(PW 6), Anwar Hussain (PW 1) and Jiyaul Huda (PW 3), all of village-Jari, had gone to village Murchu in search of labourers at about 6 p.m. as they had to get their paddy crops harvested on 25.11.1992. Having not found any labourer, they were returning home at village-Jari and at about 7 p.m. while they were crossing the road in front of the field of Budhram Oraon, they heard the sound of crying of a person. All the three persons flashed torch light ...
Employers in Relation to the Management of Collieries of Tata Iron and ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Sep-11-2002
Reported in: [2003(1)JCR261(Jhr)]
M.Y. Eqbal, J.1. The petitioner who is the management of collieries of M/s. Tata Iron and Steel Company Ltd. has challenged the impugned award dated 3rd March, 1994 passed by the Central Government Industrial Tribunal No. 2, Dhanbad in Reference Case No. 98 of 1991 whereby the Tribunal answered the reference in favour of the concerned workman, namely, Sri Parasnath.2. It appears that the Government of India, Ministry of Labour, in exercise of powers conferred upon them under Section 10(1)(d) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 referred the following dispute to the Tribunal for adjudication :'Whether the action of the management of TISCO Ltd. Jamadoba in not promoting S/Shri Parasnath, S.P. Shukla, Ram Chandra Singh and J.N. Tiwary to the post of Sub-Inspector is; justified? if not, to what relief the workmen are entitled?'3. The concerned workman, Sri Parasnath (hereinafter referred to as the concerned workman) was working as Nayak while three other workmen were working as security gu...
Steel Authority of India Ltd. Vs. Sukant Kumar Roy and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Sep-11-2002
Reported in: [2003(96)FLR1125]; [2003(1)JCR263(Jhr)]
M.Y. Eqbal, J.1. The petitioner M/s. Steel Authority of India Limited has Challenged the Award dated 29.1.1994 passed by the Presiding Officer, Industrial Tribunal, Ranchi in Reference Case No. 9/1990 whereby he answered the reference in favour of the concerned workmen is entitled to be treated as Micro-Film Assistant from the date on which Shri A.K. Roy joined the post of Micro-Film Assistant and further held that the workmen shall be deemed to have been promoted to the higher post on all stages with all consequential benefits.2. It appears that the Government of Bihar in exercise of power conferred by Subsection (2-A) of Section 10 of the said Act referred the following dispute to the tribunal for adjudication.'Whether to show Shri Sukanl Kumar Ray, M.F. Assistant, Staff No. 325792, Junior to directly appointed workmen in the Seniority order in the cadre of promoted and directly appointed M.F. Assistants in the same transaction by the management of Bokaro Steel Plant is justified? if...
Bhola Singh Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Sep-11-2002
Reported in: 2003CriLJ262
ORDERDeoki Nandan Prasad, J. 1. The petitioner has filed this application for quashing the detention order dated 4-6-2002 passed by the District Magistrate, Bokaro, which was confirmed by the State Government dated 14-6-2002 and also the order dated 13-7-2002 confirming the order after rejecting the representation of the petitioner.2. The short facts giving rise to this application is that the petitioner was arrested by the Police of Bihar with the help of the police of Goa from Panjim on 27-7-2000 from Machali Bazar, Goa and thereafter he was brought to Jharkhand. The petitioner made a confessional statement before the police on 29-7-2000 and he confessed that he got certain murder committed at Bokaro which had taken place on 27-5-1999 and he also confessed the incident regarding murder of Ashish Das and on 8-8-1998 of Ajay Agrawal. Those cases were lodged against unknown persons. T.I. Parade was not held and the petitioner was released on bail by the Jharkhand High Court, Ranchi. It ...
Anil Kumar Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Sep-10-2002
Reported in: [2003(1)JCR260(Jhr)]
S.J. Mukhopadhaya, J.1. In this case, the petitioner has prayed for a declaration that he is entitled to hold the post of Typist/Assistant in the Collectorate, having been appointed on compassionate ground on the death of his father, with further prayer to direct the, respondents to give him seniority from the date of his original appointment, made vide letter dated 21st March, 1990. Further declaration has also been sought for that the Officer Order dated 21st September, 1997 is valid and enforceable to the extent in placing the petitioner's service in the Collectorate.2. According to the petitioner, his father was Head Assistant-cum-Accountant in the Collectorate at Lohardagga and died in harness on 3rd March, 1989. The petitioner was appointed on compassionate ground on the post of Typist/Assistant on 21st March, 1990. However, he was deputed in the District Rural Development Agency (D.R.D.A. for short) against a temporary and non-pensionary post. In this background, the petitioner ...
Uranium Corporation of India Limited Vs. Presiding Officer, Central Go ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Sep-10-2002
Reported in: [2003(96)FLR668]
M.Y. Eqbal, J. 1. In this writ application the petitioner Uranium Corporation of India Limited has challenged the Award dated 18.4.1994 passed by Presiding Officer, Central Government Industrial Tribunal No. 2, Dhanbad in Reference Case No. 50 of 1988, whereby, after recording a finding that the management was unable to prove misconduct, set aside the order of dismissal and directed the petitioner-management to reinstate to the workman without any back wages.2. It appears that the Government of India, Ministry of Labour in exercise of the powers conferred under Section 10(1)(d) of the I.D. Act, 1947 referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication : 'Whether the action of the management of M/s. Uranium Corporation of India Limited, Jaduguda Mines, district Singhbhum, Bihar in dismissing Shri Jogeshwar Prasad, Helper-A from service w.e.f. 26.4.1982 is justified? If not, what relief the said workman entitled to?'3. The facts of the case lies in a narrow compass.4. The con...
Lalu Prasad Alias Lalu Prasad Yadav Vs. State Through C.B.i. (A.H.D.)
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Sep-10-2002
Reported in: 2003CriLJ610
ORDERDeoki Nandan Prasad, J.1. All the applications mentioned above have been heard together as the question relating to amalgamation of all the respective cases into one arisen and are being disposed of by this common order.2. It is claimed that RC 20(A)/96, RC 68(A)/96, RC 64(A)/96, RC 38(A)/96 and RC 47(A)/96 should be amalgamated and trial be proceeded as one case. It is alleged that RC 20(A)/96 corresponding to Chaibasa P. Section Case No. 12 of 1996 for the period 1-4-1994 to 31-3-1996. There is an allegation that forged payment of Rs. 97,70,39,743/-was made to different suppliers for the financial year 1994-96 and the said payment was made on the basis of forged allotment letters. Charge-sheet was submitted by the Central Bureau of Investigation (C.B.I.) against 56 accused persons including the petitioner Lalu Prasad alias Lalu Prasad Yadav.3. Likewise in another case RC 64(A)/ 96, it is alleged that the accused persons indulged in criminal conspiracy, withdrew a sum of Rs. 95, ...
Hrishikesh Shukla Vs. State of Jharkhand and anr.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Sep-10-2002
Reported in: 2003CriLJ761
ORDERDeoki Nandan Prasad, J.1. By this application, the petitioner has prayed for quashing the order dated 26-4-2002 passed by the Sessions Judge, Palamau at Daltonganj, in Criminal Revision No. 141 of 2001 whereby and whereunder, the learned Sessions Judge allowed the criminal revision by setting aside the order dated 15-10-2001 passed by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Sadar, Daltonganj, in Misc. Case No. 299 of 1999.2. The short facts giving rise to this application that on the basis of the application filed by the petitioner, a proceeding under Section 147 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (the Code) was initiated and after considering the show cause field on behalf of the parties and also the oral and documentary evidence, the learned Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Sadar, directed the opposite party No. 2 to remove the obstruction from the land in question and the said order was also affirmed in Criminal Revision No. 50 of 2000 by order dated 16-12-2000. It is further claimed that on a...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »