Jharkhand Court December 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.
Anirudha Mandal Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Dec-19-2003
Reported in: [2004(2)JCR482(Jhr)]
ORDERAmareshwar Sahay, J.1. The learned counsellor the petitioner is permitted to add the Director, Primary Education, Government of Jharkhand as party respondent in this case.2. Heard Mr. V. Shivnath, learned counsel for the petitioner and nobody appeared on behalf of respondent to oppose this application. The prayer of the petitioner is for direction to the respondents to grant for approval to the service of the petitioner with effect from 1.5.1997 and also for direction to release all the arrears and current salary which are not been paid to him.3. It is stated by Mr. V. Shivnath the petitioner was appointed on 25.4.1997 as Assistant Teacher in St. Teress's Girls Middle School, Dudhani, Dumka vide Annexure-3 to the writ application and he joined the post of Assistant Teacher on 1.5.1997 and he is working continuously since then. It is further submitted that vide Annexure-4 the District Superintendent of Education, Dumka issued an office order dated 5.7.1997 that the payment of salar...
Ram Chandra Singh and ors. Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Dec-19-2003
Reported in: [2004(3)JCR147(Jhr)]
1. Admittedly, the appellants were working on the post of un-trained Draftsman in the pay scale of Rs. 1320-2040/- under the Directorate of Land Records arid Survey. They were given first time bound promotion on 1.7.1989 in the pay scale of Rs. 1400-2300/-.2. In the Fifty Pay Revision Committee's Report, which came into force with effect from 1.1.1996, the pay scale of Rs. 1320-2040/- was revised to Rs. 4000-6000/- and the pay scale of Rs. 1400-2300/- was revised to Rs. 4500-7000/-.3. It appears that the revised scale of pay of the appellants was fixed on the basis of the Fifth Pay Revision Committee's Report at Rs. 4500-7000/- from 1.1.1996. When the said mistake was detected, the Settlement Officer, Dhanbad, the respondent No. 5 passed orders on 28.6.2001 rectifying the said mistake and fixing the pay scale of the appellants and also directing for refund of the excess amount paid to them on account of wrong fixation of pay in the scale of Rs. 4500-7000/-.4. The appellants challenged ...
Narad Bauri Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Dec-19-2003
Reported in: [2005(2)JCR160(Jhr)]
ORDERM.Y. Eqbal, J.1. Heard Mr. M.K. Roy, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. K.K. Jhunjhunwala, learned counsel for the respondents State.2. Petitioner has prayed for quashing the order as contained in Memo No. 1191, dated 17.5.2003 issued under the signature of respondent No. 3 District Fisheries Officer-cum-Chief Executive Officer, Bokaro whereby settlement of pond made in his favour has been cancelled.3. The facts of the case lie in a narrow compass.4. Petitioner's case is that Darkonia Bandh situated in Bokaro was settled with him by order dated 4.10.1997. In terms of settlement petitioner was directed to deposit annual rent of Rs. 1670/- for the year 1997-98 and was further directed to get the agreement signed. Petitioner deposited the said amount but agreement was not signed. Petitioner's further case is that he continuously deposited the current rent for the years 1998-99 to 2000-01 and was issued rent receipts. Petitioner said to have peacefully carrying fishing activit...
Ram Prasad Sah Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Dec-18-2003
Reported in: [2004(1)JCR406(Jhr)]
ORDERAmareshwar Sahay, J.1. Heard the learned counsels for the parties.2. The truck of the petitioner bearing Registration No. BRM 9495 was apprehended from the side plot No. 248 of Dhobidihi Protected Forest while transporting coal illegally. The Divisional Forest Officer, Giridih, Forest Division, Giridih. By his order dated 29.4.1994 as contained in Annexure 4 to the writ application specifically held that the truck was carrying coal and forest produce defined under Section 2(4)(a) and 2(4)(b)(iv) of the Indian Forest Act, 1927. As the truck was found carrying coal from Dhobidih notified and demarcated forest area, therefore, the order for confiscation under Section 53(3) of Indian Forest (Bihar Amendment) Act, 1989 was passed.3. The petitioner, thereafter, filed an appeal before the Appellate Authority-cum-District Magistrate, Giridih who by his order dated 30.7.1996 dismissed the appeal on merit after considering the respective cases of the parties.4. Against the order of the Appe...
Smt. Karishma Barla and ors. Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Dec-18-2003
Reported in: [2004(1)JCR405(Jhr)]
ORDERAmareshwar Sahay, J. 1. When the case was taken up Mr. R. Krishna learned counsel for the respondents raised preliminary objection with regard to the maintainability of the writ application in view of the Annexures A and B to the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondent Nos. 2 and 5, i.e. the order passed by the Patna High Court in CWJC No. 5945 of 1999 and CWJC No. 7978 of 1999.2. Heard Mr. V. Shivnath learned counsel for the petitioners on the point of maintainability of the writ application.3. From the orders dated 3.2.2000 and 19.4.2000 passed in CWJC No. 5945 of 1999 and CWJC No. 7978 of 1999 as contained in Annexures A and B wherein it has been held as follows :'The petitioners seek direction for payment of salary from the Bihar State Electronics Development Corporation Limited, Patna. They appear to be employees of the Beltron Video System Limited, Hajipur, which is a subsidiary company of the Bihar State Electronics Development Corporation. Their grievance is ag...
Hari Nath Ram Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Dec-18-2003
Reported in: [2004(2)JCR483(Jhr)]
ORDERAmareshwar Sahay, J.1. Heard Mr. G.K. Sinha learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. D.K. Maliyar J.C. to AAG.2. In this writ application the petitioner has challenged the order dated 17.9.2001 as contained in Annexure-5 to the writ petition whereby the Deputy Commissioner, Garhwa has rejected the appeal filed by the petitioner against the order dated 1.7.1999 passed by the S.D.O. Garhwa cancelling the agreement for running fair price shop.3. Against the order dated 8.11.1999 passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Garhwa by which the appeal filed by the petitioner was dismissed, the petitioner had earlier moved before this Court by filing CWJC No. 3642 of 1999(R) and by order dated 15.6.2001 while disposing of the said writ application, this Court set aside the order of the Deputy Commissioner, Garhwa on the ground that the impugned order was non-speaking order and it was passed without application of his mind and the matter was remitted back to the Deputy Commissioner to determine ...
Central Coalfields Ltd. Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Dec-17-2003
Reported in: [2004(1)JCR368(Jhr)]
M.Y. Eqbal, J.1. In this writ application the petitioner Central Coalfields Limited has challenged the order/direction dated 15.6.2003 issued by respondent No. 5 namely. Jharkhand State Pollution Control Board directing the petitioner to help private respondent No. 6 to remove the slurry from plot No. 836P, 837, 839P, 840 and 841P and further quashing the memo issued by Deputy Collector Incharge, Bokaro to Officer-in-Charge, Gumla Police Station directing him to give all possible assistance to respondent No. 6 in removing slurry from the land.2. Petitioner's case is that on the application filed by respondent No. 6 before Govt. of India Ministry of Forest and Environment stating therein that in his raiyati land since 15 years shiny has been deposited and he may be allowed to remove the same, the Minister vide letter dated 8.3.2002 allowed respondent No. 6 to lift the slurry from his land. Thereafter, vide letter dated 27.3.2002 the Central Government wrote to the petitioner to implemen...
Mandu Prakhand Sahakari Grih Nirman Sahyog Samiti Ltd. and anr. Vs. St ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Dec-17-2003
Reported in: 2004(52)BLJR380; [2004(1)JCR402(Jhr)]
R.K. Merathia, J.1. Heard the parties.2. The Interpretation of Section 46(1)(c) of the Chotanagpur Tenancy Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act), is the main issue in this case.3. The petitioner has prayed for quashing the order dated 18.10.1996, passed by the Commissioner, North Chotanagpur Division, Hazaribagh in Misc. Appeal No.93 of 1993 (Annexure 11). The Commissioner set aside the order dated 18.3.1991, passed by the Deputy Commissioner, granting permission under Section 46(1)(c) of the CNT Act, while allowing the appeal.4. Petitioner's case is as follows :The petitioner No. 2 by three registered sale deeds dated 9.2.1967 and the fourth dated 14.12.1966 purchased lands from the recorded raiyats or their heirs in plot No. 999, under Khata No. 44 and plot No. 1012, under Khata No. 27 and plot No. 1014, under Khata No. 16 of village Sewta. The said vendors were members of the Scheduled Castes and not Scheduled Tribes. The petitioner No. 2 is a member of Scheduled Tribe. For abund...
Heavy Engineering Corporation Limited Vs. Lidha Oraon and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Dec-16-2003
Reported in: 2004(1)BLJR20; [2004(4)JCR622(Jhr)]; (2004)IILLJ506Jhar
ORDER1. Admittedly in the year 1970, Lidha Oraon, the respondent No. 1 was employed as fitter in the Heavy Engineering Corporation (hereinafter to be referred to as 'the Corporation'), the appellant. He attended his duty in the year 1984 to 1988 respectively for 201,192, 229, 183 and 154 days only. On 26.11.1988 he filed an application for leave on medical grounds. On 23.12.1988 he was asked to submit medical certificate in support of his illness of a registered medical practitioner or to join his duty immediately, failing which action would be taken under Clause 15 (x) of the Certified Standing Orders for Industrial Establishment of the Corporation. He received the communication, but neither replied nor produced any medical certificate, nor furnished explanation about his continued absence, nor turned up to join his duty.2. On 11.2.1989 the respondent No. 1 was given notice regarding his unauthorised absence from 26.11.1988 and he was directed to join his duty along with explanation o...
Baijun Oraon and ors. Vs. Ashok Kumar Minz
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Dec-16-2003
Reported in: [2004(2)JCR489(Jhr)]
Gurusharan Sharma, J.1. Title Suit No. 5 of 1981 was filed for declaration of the plaintiffs' title over the suit land, detailed in Schedule 'B' to the plaint, measuring 1.44 acres and for further declaration that the sale deed dated 23.6.1953 said to have been executed by their respective father and mother along with the heirs of the recorded tenant Budhan Uraon in favour of the defendant No. 1 was void and not binding on them.2. According to the plaintiffs, it was detected on 25.11.1980 that the defendant No. 1 fraudulently obtained a sale deed in his favour on 23.6.1953 and the defendants 2 and 4 orally told them that they had never executed any sale deed in favour of the defendant No. 1.3. On the other hand, case of the defendant No. 1 was that Somar Uraon died before 1939, leaving behind his minor son, Bijan Uraon, and widow Mosstt. Bandhani. Similarly on the death of Ganesh Uraon, his entire interest in the suit land devolved upon his sons, Lalo, Fagu, Chauthl, Jhari and Ramlal. ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »