Jharkhand Court April 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.
Safayatullaha Khan and ors. Etc. Vs. State of Bihar (Now Jharkhand) an ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Apr-09-2003
Reported in: [2003(3)JCR813(Jhr)]
Vishnudeo Narayan, J.1. Both the writ petitions have been heard together and are being disposed of by this judgment. 2. The petitioners in both the writ petitions have prayed for a declaration that the processes issued under Sections 82 and 83 Cr PC is bad, illegal, arbitrary and without jurisdiction and also claimed compensation regarding the damages caused to their residential premises by the respondents in execution of the process aforesaid. 3. Original petitioner No. 1, Enayatul-lah Khan (since dead) in CrWJC No. 264/ 94 (R) (hereinafter referred as petitioner No. 1) claimed himself to be the absolute owner in possession of holding No. 144, holding No. 315, and holding No. 164 on plot Nos. 524, 628 and 534 respectively situate at Naya Basti and Gouri Shanker Road, P.S. Jugsalai, District East Singhbhum and holding No. 144 has been acquired by virtue of the sale deed dated 24.5.1961 executed by Basi Ban Bibi in favour of his wife Shirin Khatoon, who has died on 7.2.1982 and petition...
Smt. Punam Kumari Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Apr-09-2003
Reported in: [2004(1)JCR447(Jhr)]
1. The Central Government in the Ministry of Labour in exercise of the powers conferred under Sections 1(i)(d) and 2A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 referred the following dispute for adjudication to the Central Government, Industrial Tribunal at Dhanbad'Whether the action of the management of Balihari Colliery, P.O. Kusunda, Distt. Dhanbad in denying regulariza-tion of the services of S/Shri Gaya Ram Mahto and 70 others (as per the list annexed) by the management of M/s. BCCL is justified? If not, to what relief are the concerned workmen entitled?'2. Bihar Colliery Kamgar Union sponsored the dispute of Gaya Ram Mahto and 70 others alleging that they were working at Balihari Colliery in underground mine since 1989 to March 1996 continuously in permanent, perennial and prohibited category of job under the direct control and supervision of the management. They were supplied all the implements for execution of job by the management and they rendered services in producing goods for t...
Anupam Food Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Bihar State Electricity Board and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Apr-08-2003
Reported in: [2003(2)JCR696(Jhr)]
Vikramaditya Prasad, J.1. The petitioner has filed this writ petition for a direction for setting aside the order dated 3.2.2000, Annexure-2, passed by the respondent General Manager, whereby and whereunder in exercise of the power under Clause 13 of the H.T. Agreement who disposed of the claims of the petitioner for the year 1992-93 to 1997-98 by a composite order rejecting the total claim of the petitioner for remission in Maximum Demand Charges (MD for short) in all those years and curtailing the remission to which the petitioner was entitled in Annual Maximum Guarantee Charges (AMG for short) for the same years.2. The petitioner is a consumer having a contract demand of 200 KVA. The petitioner claimed proportionate remission in A.M.G charges for the duration of non-supply of power and also for the inability of the petitioner to consume power for twenty minutes after each resumption of supply due to machine downtime. The petitioner had filed its claim for remission right from the ye...
Shyam Sunder Gupta Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Apr-08-2003
Reported in: II(2003)DMC82; [2003(2)JCR707(Jhr)]
ORDERDeokinandan Prasad, J.1. This revision application has been filed against the order dated 16.11.2002, whereby and whereunder the learned S.D.J.M. Dhanbad passed the order for framing of charge against the accused including the petitioner for the offences under Section 498A, IPC and Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act in C.P, Case No. 233 of 1996.2. One Baby Gupta filed a complaint case alleging therein that she was married with the petitioner on 29.4.1992. At the time of marriage, the parents and relatives of the complainant presented the complainant a sum of Rs. 60,000/- as cash and also the other article such as furnitures, utensils, cloths and other house hold articles. After solemnization of marriage, the complainant went to her sasural. It is further alleged that all the accused persons started torturing the complainant and also started demanding a sum of Rs. 50,000/-in the shape of dowry and due to non fulfillment of the said amount, the complainant was subjected to tor...
Deobrat Sahay Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Apr-08-2003
Reported in: 2003(2)BLJR1059; [2003(2)JCR610(Jhr)]
M.Y. Eqbal, J.1. In this writ application the petitioner has challenged the office order dated 19-2-2003 issued under the signature of Chief General Manager (Personnel) Coal India Ltd. whereby the petitioner was intimated that the tenure of the petitioner as Director (Personel) Central Coalfield Ltd. has been terminated and he has been relieved from his duties as Director (Personnel) w.e.f. 10-2-2003. 2. The facts of the case lies in a narrow compass. The petitioner joined M/s. Central Mines Planning & Design Institute (in short-C.M.P.D.I.) as Deputy Chief Engineer (E & M) in the year 1990 and thereafter he was promoted to the post of Additional Chief Engineer in the year 1991. Thereafter he was promoted to the post of Chief General Manager CMPDL In the year 1996 the petitioner being one of the eligible candidates for appointment as Director was called for interview along with other eligible candidates. By office order dated 27.5.97 and 21.12.97 petitioner was appointed as Director (Pe...
Rama Kant Tiwari Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Apr-08-2003
Reported in: [2003(2)JCR662(Jhr)]
M.Y. Eqbal, J. 1. Heard Mr. P.P.N. Roy, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. A.R. Sarangi, learned counsel for the Examination Board. 2. This is second time when petitioner moved this Court for correction of name of his father in the matriculation certificate issued by the respondent Bihar School Examination Board. Petitioner appeared in the Board's examination in 1998. Due to inadvertence, father's name of the petitioner was wrongly written as Rabindra Tiwari instead of Rabindra Nath Tiwari. Petitioner sent several letters requesting the Board to correct the name of his father, but nothing was done. Having no alternative, petitioner moved this Court by filing CWJC No. 334 of 2001. This Court taking into consideration the fact that even in the provisional certificate issued by the Bihar Intermediate Education Council, father's name of the petitioner was correctly mentioned as Rabindra Nath Tiwari and also considering that the Deputy Development Commissioner, Garhwa enquired the m...
Lal Madhusudan Nath Shadeo Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Apr-08-2003
Reported in: [2003(2)JCR593(Jhr)]
ORDERVikramaditya Prasad, J.1. The question to be answered in this writ is whether lease holder petitioner, who sought approval for transfer of the lease to another person but did not execute the deed of transfer, is liable to pay the mining dues including the dead rent etc. against the mining lease?2. The petitioner was a mining lease holder under the Bihar Minor Mineral Concession Rules. The petitioner's case is that the approval of the Collector was sought for transfer of the mining lease and that approval was granted by the Collector and before obtaining that approval, the respondent No. 4 had sworn an affidavit, by which he undertook to fulfill all formalities concerning mining lease. By Annexure-6 respondent State raised demand for dues against the petitioner and the petitioner seeks quashing of Annexure-6 on the ground that the lease stood transferred to respondent No. 4.3. Approval for transfer and transfer are two different things. A question arises when the transfer becomes c...
National Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Gopal Prasad and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Apr-08-2003
Reported in: I(2004)ACC159; [2003(2)JCR708(Jhr)]
ORDERM.Y. Eqbal, J.1. This revision application is directed against the order dated 23.11.2002 passed by the Motor Vehicles Accident Claims Tribunal, Ranchi in Execution Case No. 1 of 1998, whereby he has directed the petitioner Insurance Company to pay the award calculating interest from the date of application till 16.11.99.2. The facts of the case in brief is that, the claimant/opposite parties filed Compensation Case No. 99/90 for the grant of compensation on account of death of Sheo Govmd Ram. The Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs. 1,49,850/- and it was directed that out of the aforesaid amount, a sum of Rs. 25,000/- is granted as ad interim compensation and Rs. 20,000/- being one time payment shall be deducted and the Insurance Company shall pay the amount with interest at the rate of 12% per annum from the date of petition 60 days from the date of the judgment. The operative portion of the judgment is quoted herein below :--'Therefore, Rs. 2700/- x 55 1/2 months comes to Rs. 1,49,850...
Sarwan Kumar Sao Vs. the State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Apr-08-2003
Reported in: 2003(2)BLJR1107; I(2004)DMC32
D.N. Prasad, J.1. This Revision application is directed against the order dated 4-9-2001, whereby and whereunder the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Dhanbad passed the order allowing the maintaiance of Rs. 500/- per month to the opposite party No. 2 in connection with M. P. Case No. 21, 1998.2. Short facts giving rise to this revision is that Manju Devi, the Opposite Party No. 2 filed an application under Section 125 Cr. P.C. for maintaince claiming therein that she was married with the petitioner, Sarwan Kumar Sao, according to Hindu rites and customs about 20 years ago. One daughter and four sons were also born out of their wedlock. The relationship between the husband and wife-were cordially peaceful for about 12 years but later on the petitioner started ill treating and neglecting the wife Opposite Party No. 2 and also his children and thereafter the petitioner driven away the Opposite Party No. 2 and her children from the house, whereafter, the Opposite Party No. 2 filed th...
Ramavtar Prasad Gupta Vs. the Jharkhand State Electricity Board and or ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Apr-08-2003
Reported in: 2003(2)BLJR1140; [2003(3)JCR343(Jhr)]
Vikramaditya Prasad, J.1. Heard both sides.2. This is a case in which the petitioner, who retired on 31-1-2000 as an employee of erstwhile Bihar State Electricity Board, has claimed retiral dues. Admittedly, on that date neither the State of Jharkhand nor the Jharkhand State Electricity Board was in existence.3. The question is who will pay the retiral dues to the employees who retired prior to the creation of State of Jharkhand or J.S.E.B.4. Section 53 of the Bihar Re-organization Act reads with schedule 8 of the said Act require consideration for answering this question. Section 53 of the Act reads as follows :'The liability of the existing State of Bihar in respect of pension and other retirement benefits shall pass to, or be apportioned between, the successor State of Bihar and Jharkhand in accordance with he provisions contained in the Eighth Schedule to this Act'.Schedule 8 reads as follows :'Apportionment of liability in Respect of Pensions and other Retirement benefits: (1) Sub...
- ‹ Prev
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- Next ›
- Last »