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.
Binod Vikash Manch and anr. Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Nov-06-2003
Reported in: [2003(4)JCR710(Jhr)]
ORDER1. Heard both sides.2. In this writ petition, learned counsel for the petitioners essentially challenged the examination already held for selection of primary school teachers in the State. The challenge made to that examination has been rejected by this Court in WP (PIL) No. 2769 of 2003 and connected cases, Mr. M.S. Anwar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner argued that the State has introduced CBSE Syllabus for education in the State and that Syllabus provides that English language be taught from the first standard. The learned counsel pointed out that under Article 21A of the Constitution of India, fundamental right to elementary education has been conferred upon children up to the age of 14 years and that right under Article 21A of the Constitution would include the right to quality education. He submitted that we cannot impart quality education in English by asking the teaching to be done by a teacher who has not even studied that subject. In support of the submissio...
Sambhu Kumar Singh and anr. Vs. State of Bihar (Now Jharkhand)
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Nov-06-2003
Reported in: [2004(1)JCR691(Jhr)]
Vishnudeo Narayan, J.1. This appeal at the instance of the appellants is directed against the impugned judgment and order dated 25.7.1995 and 31.7.1995 respectively passed in Sessions Trial No. 272 of 1992 by Shri Dilip Kumar Sinha, 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Hazaribagh whereby and whereunder the appellants were found guilty for the offence punishable under Sections 25(1)(c) and 26(2) of the Arms Act, 1959 and they were convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for five years for the offence punishable under Section 25(1)(c) and they were further sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of five years for the offence under Section 26(2) of the said Act and the sentences were ordered to run concurrently. However, both the appellants were not found guilty of the offence under Section 5 of the Explosive Substance Act and they were accordingly acquitted in respect thereof.2. The prosecution case has arisen on the basis of self report of PW 1 Shambhunath Sin...
Aman Sinku and ors. Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Nov-05-2003
Reported in: [2004(2)JCR147(Jhr)]
ORDER1. Heard counsel at length.2. We are not satisfied that any interference is necessary with the decision of the learned Single Judge. First of all, we find that no effective relief can be granted to the appellants in the absence of the particular training Institute being impleaded in the writ petition. Secondly, we find that the stand adopted by the respondents was fully justified, since admittedly, the appellants did not have the requisite qualification for becoming commercial pilots, namely, 10+2 with Physics, Chemistry and Mathematics. Here admittedly the appellants did not study mathematics. The programme was to train tribal youths of the State as commercial pilots. It clearly shows that for becoming a commercial pilot one has to have 10+2 qualification with physics and mathematics. In other words physics and mathematics are compulsory. Since the appellants, admittedly, did not have the requisite qualification for becoming commercial pilots, it appears that the Tribal Welfare C...
Santosh Narayan @ Santosh Kumar and anr. Vs. Steel Authority of India ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Nov-04-2003
Reported in: [2003(4)JCR663(Jhr)]
M.Y. Eqbal, J.1. Heard Mr. S. Srivastva, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. P.K. Sinha, learned Sr. counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents.2. The petitioner have prayed for quashing the letters dated 17.7.2003 and 16.7.2003 as contained in Annexures-8 and 8/A to the writ application whereby the respondents he demanded development cost of the land failing which the agreement for lease shall be terminated.3. The petitioner, in pursuant of an advertisement made by the respondents in. 1986 applied for allotment of plots in the City Centre of Bokaro Steel City. The petitioners having fulfilled the terms and conditions for allotment, were allotted the plots and lease deeds were duly executed and registered in 1902 for a period of 33 years petitioner's case is that after investing huge amount, they constructed houses as per plan approved by the respondents and they were residing and carrying on their business. It is sated that in 1993 when the petitioners asked for basic faci...
Suraj Prasad Vs. Steel Authority of India Ltd. and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Nov-04-2003
Reported in: AIR2004Jhar52; 2003(51)BLJR2279; [2004(1)JCR127(Jhr)]
ORDERM.Y. Eqbal, J. 1. Heard Mr. S. Srivastava, learned counsel appealing for the petitioner and Mr. P.K. Sinha, learned senior counsel appearing for the respondent.2. In this writ application the petitioner has prayed for quashing the letter dated 29.11.2002 and 20.3.2003 whereby the respondents have directed the petitioner to furnish an undertaking to the effect that he will pay the development cost of the leased hold plot pursuant to advertisement issued by the respondents in 1980. The petitioner applied for plot in the City Centre of the Bokaro Steel City. The respondents allotted a plot to the petitioner and a lease agreement was executed and registered on 29.3.1993 for a period of 33 years. After the allotment of the plot the petitioner constructed a house as per the plan approved by the respondents and is presently residing and carrying on his business. The petitioners case is that when he asked for completion certificate the respondents insisted for an undertaking to the effect...
Asgar Alam Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Nov-04-2003
Reported in: [2003(4)JCR714(Jhr)]
ORDERTapen Sen, J.1. Since counsel for the respondents is not ready for a detailed hearing, the matter could not be disposed of today itself.2. Admit.3. On hearing counsel for the appellant, we are satisfied that the appellant has made out a prima facie case for an interim protection permitting him to collect the vehicle parking and entry fees in the Rock Garden at Ranchi. Counsel for the appellant submits that the balance amount due, namely, Rs. 3,87,000/- will be deposited by the appellant straight-way without availing of the facility for payment of the amount in instalments when it was pointed out by counsel for the Ranchi Regional Development Authority that the Instalment falling due on 31.7.2002 was not paid by the appellant. In that situation, we direct that if the appellant deposits the balance amount of Rs. 3,87,000/- with the Ranchi Regional Development Authority towards the contract in question and also files a statement giving up all claims for -compensation for the period h...
Pramuk Traders and ors. Vs. Bharat Coking Coal Ltd. and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Nov-04-2003
Reported in: [2003(4)JCR659(Jhr)]
M.Y. Eqbal, J.1. The short question that falls for consideration is as to whether petitioner being Hard Coke manufacturer is entitled to the 'handling charges' in respect of sale of the hard coke manufactured by it.2. Petitioner is carrying on business of manufacturing hard coke and for that purpose owns a beehive hard coke over plant at Nichitpur Collery, Bansjora in the district of Dhanbad. In 1974 an agreement was entered into by and between the petitioner and the respondent-BCCL whereby and whereunder it was agreed that the respondents BCCL (in short Company) will supply coal suitable for manufacture of hard coke to the, extent of 1500 tonnes per month on market price to the petitioner at plant site. The petitioner will pay market price in advance to the company in accordance with the usual terms of sale. The petitioner after manufacturing hard coke will hand over to the Company at 12-1/2% less than the company's selling price. Petitioner at his own cost load the hard coke in truck...
Rasika Champia Vs. State of Bihar (Now Jharkhand)
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Nov-04-2003
Reported in: [2005(3)JCR56(Jhr)]
Hari Shankar Prasad, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 30.8.1996 and order of sentence dated 31.8.1996 passed in Sessions Trial No. 389 of 1993 whereby and whereunder the learned Sessions Judge, Singhbhum (West) at Chaibasa held the appellant guilty under Sections 302/120B of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and convicted and sentenced him to undergo RI. for life.2. The prosecution case in brief is that Udai Champia, the informant, gave fardbeyan on 4.8.1993 at 4.30 p.m. at village Nuiya stating therein that he is an employee of Gua Mines Plant and from 3.8.1993 his shift of work was from 2.00 p.m. not 10.00 p.m. and on 4.8.1993 he and his co-worker Bahadulla Kerai got down from the company bus on a Kucchi road near his house situated village Nuiya and from there they started for their respective houses and on the way near Bair tree, daughter of informant Gurubari aged about ten years and son Sadhu Champia, aged about eight years were seen crying and they disclosed to ...
Budhu Munda and ors. Vs. State of Bihar
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Nov-04-2003
Reported in: 2004CriLJ549; [2005(3)JCR74(Jhr)]
1. This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 24-2-1997 and order of sentence dated 25-2-1997 passed in Sessions trial No. 328/95/T.R. No. 12/ 95, whereby and whereunder the learned First Additional Judicial Commissioner. Khunti held the appellants guilty under Sections 302/34 IPC and convicted and sentenced them to undergo RI for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/- and in default to undergo RI for six months. They were further convicted and sentenced to undergo RI for one month under Section 323 IPC but sentences were directed to run concurrently.2. Prosecution case in brief is that Dulari Oraon (Kachchap) gave a fard beyan on 6-11-1994 at about 2.15 P.M. in Argori village before B Kullu. Officer Incharge of Khunti P.S. stating therein that on 5-11-1994 at about 6 P.M. she was lying on the bed as she was suffering from fever and her husband and her eldest daughter and younger daughter were in the house. Her son Mansa Oraon who was studying in Ranchi, had come to house on the ...
Arunoday Rabidas Vs. Smt. Satyabala Dasi
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Nov-03-2003
Reported in: I(2004)DMC254; [2004(1)JCR235(Jhr)]
ORDER1. Admittedly, Arunoday Rabidas was married with Satyabala Dasi on 8.3.1980 according to the Hindu religion and rites at Gandhinagar, Dhanbad.2. At the time of marriage, the husband was a student of Intermediate class. After marriage the couple lived together at village Barketni, P.S. Tundi, District Dhanbad and led conjugal live. Unfortunately, some time in March, 1981, the first pregnancy of the wife was destroyed on abortion and thereafter in respect of the second pregnancy, some time in the month of December, 1984, she had to undergo surgery and thereby she delivered a dead child. Her ovary was said to have been removed and thereafter she became incapable to bear a child in future.3. Some time in the year 1987, the husband was employed as a teacher in the Government Primary School and thereafter from village Barketni she came to Nirsa and lived with her husband in a rented house.4. On 11.1.1991, the husband filed Title Matrimonial Suit No. 5 of 1991, under Section 13(1)(a) of ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »