Jharkhand Court November 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.
Radha Kant Choudhary Vs. Presiding Officer, Labour Court and anr.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Nov-14-2003
Reported in: [2004(1)JCR54(Jhr)]
R.K. Merathia, J.1. In this writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the award dated 28th February, 1994 passed by Shri Bijay Kumar Rai, Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Ranchi in Reference Case No. 4 of 1993 upholding the dismissal of the petitioner.2. On 1.8.1979, the petitioner alongwith one other workman was transferred from 06-shop to 02-shop as there was no work in the 06-shop. The petitioner without obeying the said order, made a representation on 4.8.1979, on the ground that only the junior most workmen were to be transferred but the petitioner was not the junior most. After about a month, on 3.9.1979 he entered into the office of Shri G.V.V. Giri, Assistant Manager of 06-shop and assaulted him by slapping on his face. Petitioner was suspended on 3.9.1979 and after holding a departmental proceeding he was dismissed oh 31.10.1980. He preferred a departmental appeal which was also ultimately dismissed. He raised an Industrial Dispute which was registered as Reference Case No....
Munna Alias Manoj Barnwal Vs. the State of Bihar (Now Jharkhand)
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Nov-14-2003
Reported in: 2003(3)BLJR2266; I(2004)DMC554; [2004(1)JCR130(Jhr)]
Lakshman Uraon, J. 1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 27th September, 1999 and 28th September, 1999 respectively, passed by Sri Hari Deo Prasad, learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Dumka, in Sessions Case No. 200 of 1995, whereby and whereunder the appellant has been convicted under Section 304B of the Indian Penal Code as also under Sections 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act and has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years for the offence under Section 304B of the Indian Penal Code whereas no separate sentence was passed under Sections 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.2. The prosecution case is based on the written information, submitted by the informant Sumitra Devi (PW-6), alleging therein, that his daughter Smt. Indra Devi was married with this appellant Munna Lal Modi in the year, 1989. It is further alleged that her father-in-law Kati Modi, mother-in-law, Nand Sunita Devi and Bhaisur Dilip Lal always...
Dr. Devendra Nath Sinhku Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Nov-14-2003
Reported in: [2004(3)JCR183(Jhr)]
Lakshman Uraon, J.1 .In this writ application, the petitioner has prayed for issuance of an appropriate writ/order/direction for quashing the entire criminal proceeding against him in Vigilance PS Case No. 28 of 1990 arising out of an occurrence dated 16.10.1988 in which sanction has not been granted to prosecute this petitioner till date.2. Petitioner has stated that he joined services in the Commercial Taxes Department in the State of Bihar on 14.6.1972 and thereafter was posted at different posts in different places. The FIR was lodged by the Officer-in-Charge, Vigilance Police Station, Bihar, Patna on 2.7.1990 bearing Vigilance PS Case No. 28 of 1990, regarding certain irregularities have been committed by the Purchase Committee of Operation Black Board Scheme of 16.10.1988, 22.10.1988 and 28.11.1988. Petitioner was posted as Director of Cultural Affairs, Art, Culture and Youth Affairs Department, Ministry of Human Resources Development, Govt. of Bihar, Patna on 7.10.1987 and conti...
Ursuline Women's Health and Physical Education College Vs. State of Jh ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Nov-13-2003
Reported in: [2004(1)JCR62(Jhr)]
ORDERR.K. Merathia, J.1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsels for the respondents.2. The grievance of the petitioner is that in spite of judgment dated 7.3.2002 passed by this Court in W.P. (C) No. 4227 of 2001 and subsequent order passed in Cont. Case (Civil) No. 490 of 2002 dated 2.9.2003, the students of the petitioner have not been allowed to take part in the examination as per the said orders.3. Petitioner has prayed for a direction upon the concerned respondents to implement the said orders of this Court fully and immediately hold examinations for the students of the petitioner- Institute who successfully completed their courses in the Sessions 1995-96, 1996-97, 1997-98 and 1998-99 in so far as the Diploma in Physical Education (D.P.Ed.) and for the Sessions 1995-96, 1996-97 in so far as the students of Certificate of Physical Education C.P.Ed.) are concerned.4. It is further submitted that the examinations are going to be held from 10th December, 2003. I...
Virendra Kumar Sinha and ors. Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Nov-13-2003
Reported in: III(2004)BC129; [2004(1)JCR195(Jhr)]
M.Y. Eqbal, J.1. Heard Mr. Binod Poddar, learned counsel for the petitioners, Mr. Kameshwar Prasad, learned Sr. counsel appearing for the respondent-State Bank of India and Mr. P.K. Shahi, learned counsel appearing for the Bihar State Financial Corporation and Mr. Sunil Kumar Sinha for respondent No. 6.2. The petitioner have filed this writ petition praying, inter alia, for quashing the entire certificate proceeding being Certificate Case No. 3/85-86 pending before the District Certificate Officer, Palamau and further for a direction to the respondent-State Bank of India, Chandwa Branch to release and debit the amount involved in the certificate case from respondent No. 6.3. Brief fact of the petitioners' case is that they constituted a partnership firm in the name and style of Chandwa Wood Products in the year 1979 for manufacturing of katha and other allied products. The said firm was sanctioned loan by the Bihar State Financial Corporation (in short the 'Corporation'). The firm was ...
Smt. Urmila Prasad Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Nov-12-2003
Reported in: [2003(4)JCR665(Jhr)]
ORDERM.Y. Eqbal, J.1. Heard Mr. Biren Poddar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Mr. Manjul Prasad, learned counsel appearing for the State and Mr. V. P. Singh, learned counsel appearing for the RRDA.2. The short question that falls for consideration is whether the impugned order passed by the Circle Officer rejecting the application of the petitioner for mutation of her name is justified in the facts of the present case. It appears that the petitioner purchased the land measuring 10 Kattas comprised within Khata 34 and 54 Plot No. 853 and 854 at Mauza Bariatu P.S. Ranchi by virtue of registered deed of sale No. 8283 dated 8.10. 1993 and came in possession of the same. After purchase, she filed an application for mutation in respect of the said land before the Circle Officer, Ranchi which was registered as Mutation Case No. 3785-R 27/2002-03. The Circle Officer on receipt of the application issued notices and called for report from the Halka Karamchari and Circle In-spector....
State of Jharkhand Vs. Basant Kumar Poddar (Mines Owner) and anr.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Nov-12-2003
Reported in: [2004(1)JCR615(Jhr)]
ORDER1. The case of the prosecution is that there was a lease in favour of the Bihar State Mineral Development Corporation given on 27th April, 1976 with respect to 134 acres of land of Hotai forest area to carry on business operation after the enactment of F.C. Act, 1980 and the accused persons were entitled to win the mines only in respect to land which was cleared and broken on 25th October 1980.2, Further case of the prosecution is that on 25th October, 1980, the broken land in forest area was marked and identifted by pillars, but the accused persons won the mines and removed minerals from the mines which was beyond the forest area marked and identified on 25th October, 1980 and for that no permission was taken from the Central Government.3. The prosecution produced arid examined three witnesses, namely, Parikchit Pathak (PW 1); Bhola Manjhi (PW 2); and Hari Nandan Shukla (PW 3) to establish its case. Out of those three prosecution witnesses, two witnesses, PWs 2 and 3 were formal ...
Renuka Sinha Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Nov-12-2003
Reported in: [2004(1)JCR395(Jhr)]
ORDERM.Y. Eqbal, J.1. Heard Mr. Binod Poddar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Mr. Manjul Prasad, learned counsel appearing for the State and Mr. V.P. Singh, learned counsel appearing for the R.R.D.A.2. The short question that falls for consideration is whether the impugned order passed by the Circle Officer rejecting the application of the petitioner for mutation of her name is justified in the facts of the present case. It appears that the petitioner purchased the land measuring 10 kattas comprised within Khata 34 and 54 Plot Nos. 853 and 854 at Mauza Bariatu, P.S. Ranchi by virtue of registered deed of sale No. 8246 dated 8.10.1993 and came in possession of the same. After purchase of the land she filed an application for mutation in respect of the said land before the Circle Officer, Ranchi which was registered as Mutation Case No. 3784R 27/2002-03. The Circle Officer on receipt of the application Issued notices and called for report from the Halka Karamchari and Circl...
Ram Vichar Yadav and ors. Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Nov-12-2003
Reported in: [2004(2)JCR145(Jhr)]
ORDERM.Y. Eqbal, J.1. Heard the parties.2. The facts of the case are that petitioners were appointed sometime in 1999 by the order of Chairman-cum-Executive Officer, Madhupur Municipality on the post of Ward Jamadar, Road Collie and Sweeper (class IV posts) and they were getting salary regularly till February, 2002. In paragraph 26 of the writ application, it is stated that the Executive Officer, Madhupur Municipality verbally ordered to the Sanitary Inspector, Madhupur Municipality not to allow the petitioners to put their attendance on attendance register and stop payment of salary to them. Hence this writ application.3. A counter affidavit has been filed by the respondent/Municipality but the statement made in para 26 of the writ petition has not been denied. In that view of the matter, I have no doubt in mind to hold that such verbal direction stopping payment of salary is wholly illegal, mala fide and unjustified.4. This writ application is therefore allowed and the respondents ar...
Dr. Harey Shyam Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Nov-11-2003
Reported in: [2003(4)JCR666(Jhr)]
M.Y. Eqbal, J.1. Heard the parties.2. The petitioner has prayed for quashing the bill dated 11.9.1995 issued by the respondent Telecom Department for the period of 1.7.1995 to 31.8.1995. The case of the petitioner is that during the aforesaid period the telephone connection remained dead and the connection was not restored despite various oral and written reminders send by the petitioner to the respondents.3. From perusal of the orders time to time passed by this Court. It appears that on 13.2.97 the respondents were directed to furnish the details of the calls availed by the petitioner from 1.7.1995 to 31.8.1995; For the non-compliance of the aforesaid order the Telecom District Manager was directed to appear in person before this Court. In the supplementary affidavit filed by the District Telecom Manager it was stated that it was not possible to furnish the details of the calls allegedly made by the petitioner during the said period. In the counter affidavit filed by the respondents ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »