Jharkhand Court January 2003 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.
Bhikhari Singh and ors. Vs. Rup Singh Bhumij and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jan-07-2003
Reported in: [2003(1)JCR547(Jhr)]
ORDERM.Y. Eqbal, J.1. Heard the counsel for the petitioners. 2. The plaintiffs-opposite parties filed a suit for declaration of title and during the pendency of the suit, they filed an amendment petition seeking further relief for recovery of possession on the allegation that during the pendency of the suit they were dispossessed. The said amendment petition was allowed.2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has assailed the impugned order only on the ground that the plaintiff's were neverdispossessed during the pendency of the suit, rather it is the defendants-petitioners who were in continuous possession for the last 40 years and, therefore, the amendment could not have been allowed.3. The question whether the plaintiffs were dispossessed during the pendency of the suit or the defendants have been corning in possession of the property for the last 40 years, is the question which can be decided in the suit and it has got no concern with the relief of amendment sought for. Merely becaus...
Birendra Mandal Vs. the State of Jharkhand Through the Secretary, Depa ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jan-07-2003
Reported in: 2003(51)BLJR655; 2003CriLJ2089; [2003(1)JCR431(Jhr)]
ORDERDeoki Nandan Prasad, J. 1. This application has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for quashing the entire proceedings of CCA Case No. 5 of 2002 including the orders dated 19.8.2000, 3.9.2000 and 20.8.2002 passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Jamtara as well as approval was made by the Government of Jharkhand,Department of Home initiated under Section 12(2) of the Bihar Control of Crimes Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act').2. It is stated that the Sub-Divisional Officer, Jamtara requested the Superintendent of Police, Jamtara to send a proposal to the Deputy Commissioner, Jamtara to detain the petitioner under Section 12 of the Act and thereafter the Superintendent of Police, Jamtara recommended accordingly for detention of the petitioner. Pursuant to the said recommendation, the Deputy Commissioner, Jamtara by order dated 1.8.2002 passed the order of detention of the petitioner under Section 12(2) of the Act and forwarded the said recommendation to the...
Yasoda Sharma Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jan-07-2003
Reported in: [2003(1)JCR569(Jhr)]
ORDERTapen Sen, J.1. Heard Mr. V. Shivnath, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Pradeep Modi, learned G.P.-I and with their consent this writ petition is being disposed off at this stage. At the outset, Mr. V. Shivnath prays that he be allowed to implead the Secretary, Primary Education, Government of Jharkhand as respondent. Let him do so. 2. According to the case of the petitioner, an advertisement was caused to be published in the newspaper in the year 1985 calling for applications from male and female teachers for filling up 514 vacant posts of Assistant Teachers. The petitioner applied. Thereafter, interview etc. were held and a panel was prepared and finally on 28.5.1988, the respondent No. 4 (The Deputy Development Commissioner, Dhanbad) appointed the petitioner as an Assistant Teacher in the Rajkiya Middle School, Digwadih vide Annexure-1 to the writ application. 3. Thereafter, the petitioner joined her service on 30.5.1988. On 3.11.1988, the respondent No. 5 (Deputy Dev...
Yoga Nand Mishra Vs. the State of Bihar (Now Jharkhand) and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jan-07-2003
Reported in: [2003(2)JCR343(Jhr)]
ORDERVikramaditya Prasad, J.1. This writ has been filed for quashing Annexure 8 by which time bound promotion granted to the petitioner with effect from 1.4.1981 was cancelled on the ground that the petitioner was given that promotion without his having passed the accounts examination and further the excess payment was directed to be recovered from him. Secondly by the said order the petitioner was reverted back to the post of Store-clerk.2. The petitioner was appointed as Store-clerk and subsequently by order dated 30.1.1982, Annexure 2. The service of the petitioner was made permanent on the post of Store-keeper.3. It appears that earlier also the petitioner had moved the Patna High Court against the cancellation of his time bound promotion and that order was set aside in CWJC No. 7125 of 1997, Annexure 6 and the Chief Engineer was directed to dispose of the representation of the petitioner keeping in view the observation made by the Court and consequent thereto the impugned order ha...
SarfuddIn Mian Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jan-07-2003
Reported in: 2003(51)BLJR612; I(2003)DMC664; [2003(2)JCR344(Jhr)]
Lakshman Uraon, J. 1. The sole appellant, Sarfuddin Mian, has filed this jail appeal against the conviction and sentence dated 27.9.1994, passed by Shri N.K. Pd. Sessions Judge, Hazaribagh in S.T. No. 513/93 under Section 302, IPC, sentencing him to undergo R.I. for life.2. The prosecution case as per the FIR, Ext. 3, lodged by the informant.Muniza Khatoon, PW 5, of Village Nagri, PS Barkagaon, Dist. Hazaribagh, is that on 6.5.1993 she was returning home at about 11 a.m. alongwith her son, Saddam Hussain, aged about 3 years and when she reached in the gali near the house of Meghan Prajapati and Ramjan Mian, her husband-appellant, Sarfuddin Mian, went near her and asked her to withdraw the criminal case regarding the demand of dowry, instituted by her against him, falling which she and her child would be murdered. When she refused to withdraw the case, her husband, the appellant snatched the child from her and assaulted him with slippers and threw him on the ground as a result of which ...
Puria Rabidas Vs. State of Bihar (Now Jharkhand)
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jan-07-2003
Reported in: [2003(2)JCR351(Jhr)]
Lakshman Oraon, J.1. Sole appellant Puria Rabidas has preferred this appeal against, the order of conviction and sentence passed by Sri Ram Vyas Ram, 4th Additional Sessions Judge, Santhal Parganas, Dumka in Sessions Case No. 292 of 1990 on 30th May, 1992 under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code to go imprisonment for life and under Section 323, IPC to go R.I. for one year directing to run both the sentences concurrently.2. The prosecution case as per written information Ext. 1, given by the informant PW 1 Arun Kumar Das is that the wall of his house situated at village Hathigarh had fallen down. To repair the said wall on 23.1.1990 at about 3.00 p.m.he had erected Pusta of the wall. Thereafter he had gone to village market to run his tea-stall. When he returned his home at about 8.00 p.m. then he was informed by his wife that the Pusta erected by him was cut by Puria Rabidas. When she objected, then Puria Rabidas abused her. The informant went to inquire as to why Puria Rabidas cut ...
Vishwa Nath Singh Vs. Bihar State Electricity Board and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jan-07-2003
Reported in: [2003(4)JCR367(Jhr)]
ORDERVikramaditya Prasad, J.1. Heard both sides.2. This writ has been filed for quashing annexure-3 whereby and whereunder the Inquiry Officer after concluding enquiry submitted his report to the Disciplinary Authority on 8.8.2001 and the disciplinary authority agreeing with the findings of the Inquiry Officer that the some charges had been proved decided to punish the petitioner and issued a second show cause upon the petitioner on 6.11.2001.3. This impugned order has been attacked on two grounds.The first ground of attack is that earlier when the petitioner moved this High Court in C.W.J.C. No. 1815 of 2001 for quashing the departmental proceeding a learned single Judge of this Court has directed as follows:--'Accordingly, without going into the merit of this case, the respondent Bihar State Electricity Board is directed to conclude the departmental proceeding, if already concluded, within three months from the date of receipt/ production of a copy of this order and submit a report t...
Ram Rakshpal Singh Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jan-07-2003
Reported in: [2007(3)JCR113(Jhr)]
ORDERVikramaditya Prasad, J.1. Heard the parties.This writ petition has been filed for twin reliefs:-(i) for quashing Annexure 10 whereby the representation of the petitioner for grant of B.A. Trained Scale as also of the post of Headmaster was refused by the District Superintendent of Education and (ii) for a direction upon the respondents to grant the petitioner the B.A. Trained Scale.2. It appears that earlier the petitioner had filed CWJC No. 1049/2001 for a direction to the respondent-authorities to grant B.A. Trained Scale to him in terms of the recommendations of the Regional Deputy Director of Education. That writ petition was disposed of with a direction to the District Superintendent of Education to dispose of the representation of the petitioner and consequent thereto, the impugned order has been passed, which is under challenge in this writ petition.3. Undisputedly, the DAV School is a minority institution. The question is whether the District Superintendent of Education or...
Kashi Nath Bagaria Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jan-06-2003
Reported in: [2003(1)JCR594(Jhr)]
ORDERS.J. Mukhopadhaya, J.1. The respondent Nos. 4 to 6 preferred to Mutation Case No. 252/97-98 before the Circle Officer, Giridih for mutation of 2.10 acres of land appertaining to khata No. 12, Plot No. 49 of village Dangradih, district-Giridih which was rejected by the Circle Officer, Giridih vide order dated 13th August, 1997. Against the said order, mutation case No. 9/97-98 was preferred by respondent Nos. 4 to 6 before the Additional Collector, Giridih which was also rejected on 11th June, 1998. It appears that mutation appeal No. 2/98-99, thereafter, was preferred by the respondent Nos. 4 to 6 which was also dismissed on 23rd July, 1998 whereinafter mutation revision case No. 11/98- 99 was preferred before Additional Collector, Giridih by those respondents. This revision case was allowed by the Additional Collector, Giridih vide order dated 4th January, 1999 against which mutation revision No. 9/99 was preferred by petitioner before the Commissioner, North Chotanagpur Division...
Rajneesh Mishra Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jan-06-2003
Reported in: [2003(97)FLR1193]; [2003(1)JCR443(Jhr)]
ORDER1. The State of Jharkhand came into existence on 15th November, 2000 and after the creation of State of Jharkhand, cadre of Judicial Officers of theState of Bihar was provisionally bifurcated which led to acute shortage of Judicial Officers in the State of Jharkhand. Since there was dire urgent need of filling up the vacancies of the Jharkhand Judicial Service, the Governor of Jharkhand in consultation with the High Court of Jharkhand framed provisional/temporary rule namely, Jharkhand Judicial Service (Recruitment) Rules, 2001 so as to select/recruit and appoint members of Jharkhand Judicial Services. Under the said rule the process of recruitment of Judicial Officers was undertaken by the High Court. Accordingly selection process was set in motion and list of the selected candidates was sent to the Government for issuing appointment letters. The Government of Jharkhand instead of issuing notification/appointment letters raised certain objections with regard to the reservation an...
- ‹ Prev
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 13
- 14
- 15
- Next ›
- Last »