Jharkhand Court November 2003 Judgments
Central Coalfields Ltd. Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Nov-29-2003
Reported in: 2004(1)BLJR94
ORDER1. Two writ applications, namely, CWJC Nos. 391 and 392 of 1999(R) involving the common question were taken up together by the learned Single Judge and were disposed of by impugned order dated 27.2.2001. Hence, the appellant has filed two separate appeals. Both the appeals are, therefore, disposed of by common order.2. The appellant M/s. Central Coalfields Limited filed common objection under Section 9 of the Bihar and Orissa Public Demand Recovery Act, 1914 (hereinafter to be referred to as 'the Act') in certificate case No. 1 and 22 of 1998-99 pending before the Certificate Officer (Mines), concerned. Those certificate cases related to the demand and recovery of the amount of royalty as assessed on the shortage of coal and were registered at the instance of the District Mining Officer concerned.3. In its objection, the appellant inter alia claimed that it being the Government Company has already paid the royalty on the despatch and/or extraction of coal and was not liable to pay...
Tag this Judgment!Satyadeo Singh Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Nov-25-2003
Reported in: [2004(1)JCR152(Jhr)]
ORDERM.Y. Eqbal, J.1. The petitioner has prayed for quashing the impugned letter No. 5095, dated 24.7.2003 issued under the signature of the Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar, Patna whereby decision has been taken not to issue Integrity Certificate in favour of the petitioner. It appears that the petitioner earlier moved Patna High Court in CWJG No. 12587 of 2001 for the grant of Integrity Certificate as required by the Government of India and Union Public Service Commission for considering his ease for promotion to Indian Administrative Service. The writ petition was dismissed on 28.11.2001 holding that grant of Integrity Certificate depends upon the subjective satisfaction of the authority concerned and thereafter no interference can be made with the decision of the Government in the matter of grant of Integrity Certificate. Aggrieved by the said order the petitioner filed Letters Patent Appeal being LPA No. 75/02. The Division Bench disagreeing with the view taken by the learned ...
Tag this Judgment!Geeta Devi and anr. Vs. Allahabad Bank and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Nov-25-2003
Reported in: [2004(1)JCR170(Jhr)]
ORDERM.Y. Eqbal, J.1. The petitioners have challenged the order passed by the respondents which was communicated to them vide letters dated 9.5.2002 and 20.5.2002 whereby the competent authority has expressed its inability to appoint petitioner No. 2 on compassionate ground for the reasons stated in the said letters.2. Petitioners' case is that the deceased husband of petitioner No. 1 and father of petitioner No. 2 was serving in the respondent-Bank as Armed Guard. He worked from 1996 to 1998 and, thereafter died in harness in 1998. The petitioners, thereafter, made an application for appointment of petitioner No. 2 on compassionate ground. The said application was rejected on the ground that the income shown by the bereaved family was sufficient to maintain the petitioners.3. The respondents, in their counter affidavit, have stated that as per the policy and rules of the Bank compassionate appointment is given in cases where it is found that the family of the deceased employee is not ...
Tag this Judgment!Colliery Karamchari Sangh Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and anr.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Nov-25-2003
Reported in: [2004(2)JCR98(Jhr)]
ORDER1. On hearing counsel in detail and on scrutinizing the decision referred to by him, we are not satisfied that there is any justification in interfering with the decision of the learned Single Judge. The learned Single Judge has referred to the relevant aspects and has taken note of the fact that the entry regarding the date of birth was entered in Form B register in the year 1971, that the said entry was communicated to the appellant in the year 1987 inviting objections if any and that the appellant did not raise any objection and has held that no such dispute regarding age could be raised at the fag end of his career or after such a long lapse of time. The appropriate Government has referred to the salient aspects and has came to the conclusion that there was no dispute which required to be referred to the Industrial Tribunal. The argument that it is not the appropriate Government that can decide the question and it is the Industrial Tribunal that alone can decide the question, ...
Tag this Judgment!Sona Ram Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Nov-25-2003
Reported in: 2004CriLJ1925
1. This jail appeal has been preferred by appellant, Sona Ram after about six years and four months against the judgment dated 16/17th October, 1996 passed by the learned 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Jamshedpur. The appellant is in custody since 28th October, 1992 i.e. about 11 years.;The appeal was placed under the heading 'FOR ORDERS' for condonation of delay but no sufficient cause has been shown for not preferring the appeal in time.2. One of the questions arises in this case is :'Whether a party instituting an appeal in the Court after the prescribed period of limitatin should file an application/or explain sufficient cause for not preferring the appeal within the period of limitation to condone the delay or not.'Apart from Mr. Ravi Prakash (AC), other counsel, namely, Mr. G. C. Sahu, Mr. Rajen Raj and others also assisted the Court. It was submitted that the Court has inherent jurisdiction to condone the delay. Even if no application is preferred, the Court should condone the d...
Tag this Judgment!Indian Iron and Steel Company Ltd. Vs. Eqbal Singh and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Nov-24-2003
Reported in: 2004(1)BLJR229; [2004(1)JCR167(Jhr)]; (2004)IILLJ512Jhar
ORDER1. Heard both sides indetail.2. The Letters Patent Appeal was filed by the management of M/s. Indian Iron and Steel Company Limited challenging the order of the learned Single Judge dated 12.5.2003 passed in C.W.J.C. No. 2464 of 1993(R) holding that non-payment of certain amounts claimed by way of overtime of the workmen should be treated as contempt of Court and directing the management of see to it that it was paid. The Letters Patent Appeal way admitted and in the circumstances as we felt that it would be appropriate to call up the writ petition, C.W.J.C. No. 2464 of 1993(R) also for being finally heard and disposed of along with the appeal, the writ petition was also called up and it has also come up for hearing along with the appeal. The management resisted the prayers in the writ petition C.W.J.C. No. 2464 of 1993(R).3. It is seen that an application was filed by the workmen under Section 33(c)(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') before t...
Tag this Judgment!GodwIn Ekka Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Nov-24-2003
Reported in: [2004(1)JCR363(Jhr)]
Amareshwar Sahay, J.1. Respondent No. 4 had filed an application before the Additional Collector under Section 71-A of the Chhotanagpur Tenancy Act (hereinafter to be referred as the 'Act' for the sake of convenience) for restoration of altogether 23 plots under Khata No. 257 situated in village Gotra PS Simdega, District Ranchi (now Gumla) on the ground that the transfer of the land was in violation of Section 46 of the Act. The said application for restoration was registered as SAR case No. 283 of 1979-80. The Deputy Collector by his order dated 20.10.1981 dismissed the application filed by the respondent No. 4 on the ground that as it was filed beyond 30 years, therefore, it was barred by limitation.2. Being aggrieved by the said order of Deputy Collector, respondent No. 4 filed an appeal before the Additional Collector, Gumla who by his order dated 27.4.1984 allowed the appeal, set aside the order of the Deputy Collector and ordered for restoration of the lands in question in favou...
Tag this Judgment!Barnipal Fisherman Co-operative Society Ltd. and ors. Vs. State of Bih ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Nov-24-2003
Reported in: [2004(1)JCR480(Jhr)]
ORDERR.K. Merathia, J.1. Heard.This writ petition was filed for quashing the order dated 24.9.1996 passed by the deputy Commissioner, East Singhbhum and District Fishery Officer, Jamshedpur by the which Pandu Tank, Chhotasirsl, thana No. 728, Khata No. 81, Plot No. 79, are one acre, was settled in favour of Ran-jeet Kumar Shit, respondent No. 5 on the ground that the case of the petitioner was not considered and settlement was made in violation of the Government order and Guidelines regarding settlement of Tank.2. While referring to paragraph 7 of the counter affidavit Mr. Modi submitted that there is nothing to show that the petitioner society has actually filed this case. There is no authorization of a competent body in the name of the executive member namely Hart Ram Singh for pursuing this case.He however pointed out to the order dated 4.11.1990 passed in this writ petition whereby the petitioner and the respondents were restrained from fishing from the tank in question. He submitt...
Tag this Judgment!A.N. Mishra Vs. Hindustan Steelworks Construction Ltd. and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Nov-24-2003
Reported in: [2004(2)JCR243(Jhr)]
M.Y. Eqbal, J.1. Initially the petitioner filed this writ petition for issuance of appropriate writ directing the respondents to change the venue of the departmental proceeding from Hyderabad to Bokaro Steel City and also for change of the Enquiry Officer as also the Presenting Officer but since during the pendency of the writ petition final order of dismissal of the petitioner from service in the said ex parte departmental proceeding has been passed, the petitioner has also challenged the order of dismissal by filing amendment petition which has been allowed by order dated 22.3.99.2. Facts of the case in briefs is that the petitioner joined the service of the respondents in 1968 and he was to superannuate on 31.12.2000. In the year, 1994 he became the member of a Committee under a scheme known as 'Employees Voluntary Welfare Fund.' There were four members in the said Committee including Sri B.L. Roy, a senior officer of the respondents of the status of General Manager. Out of four per...
Tag this Judgment!Rajnish Mishra Vs. State of Jharkhand Through Its Chief Secretary and ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Nov-21-2003
Reported in: AIR2004Jhar115; [2004(1)JCR162(Jhr)]
P.K. Balasubramanyan, C.J.1. The basic prayer in this writ petition, is to restrain the State of Jharkhand from frittering away public funds by forming unnecessarily, corporations and companies for taking up welfare projects when the same could be got done by the existing arrangements through the concerned departments and Ministries. The petitioner, a practising lawyer, submits that corporations are created and companies are incorporated just to accommodate some persons or by way of distribution of patronage and such exercise is not warranted as it is against public interest and common good. The prayer is couched as one for the issue of 54, writ of mandamus directing the State Government to justify before this Court the constitution of boards, authorities and the like bodies with reference to the need for their constitution and the expenditure that was involved in maintaining such bodies. According to the petitioner, these hoards, corporations and companies tend to become white elephan...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »