Jharkhand Court August 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.
Phul Kumari Devi Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Aug-26-2003
Reported in: [2003(4)JCR500(Jhr)]
S.J. Mukhopadhaya, J. 1. This writ petition has been preferred by petitioner for direction on the respondents to pay her the death-cum-retiral benefits including family pension to which she is entitled on the basis of last pay drawn by her husband.Further prayer has been made to quash the order passed by the Senior Accounts Officer of Accountant General (for short A.G.) (A & E) II. Bihar and Jharkhand contained in letter No. PEN 13-PR-J-453 (01-02) Sa-Patna 3077 dated 4th April, 2002 whereby the said authority while returned the service book of the husband of the petitioner, informed the State Authorities that her husband was wrongly promoted to the higher scale and thereby wrongly given higher revised scale of Rs. 4000-6000/-w.e.f. 1st January, 1996. The pay fixation has been shown in the lower scale of pay and requested the State Authorities to adjust the payment already made.2. The case of petitioner is that her husband late Harendra Nath Das was in the services of the State and ret...
Arjun Prasad Yadav Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Aug-26-2003
Reported in: [2003(4)JCR682(Jhr)]
ORDERS.J. Mukhopadhaya, J. 1. This application has been preferred by petitioner against the order issued by the Accountant General (A and E) II, Bihar, Patna as contained in letter No. Pen 811-4502 dated 17th May, 2001, whereby and where under the pension of petitioner has been fixed at a lower stage of Rs. 8,650/- instead of Rs. 9,000/- which was the last pay drawn by him; the consequential order issued by the commandant, Home Guard, Bihar, Patna is also under challenge. The authority rejected the claim of petitioner and held that the pension fixed by the Accountant General, at Rs. 8,650/-is correct and the pension and gratuity has been correctly fixed by the Accountant General, Bihar, Patna.2. It appears that the petitioner moved before this Court for proper fixation of pension and gratuity in WP (S) No. 5206/2001. In the said case a counter-affidavit was filed on behalf of the Accountant General, Bihar and Jharkhand with the stand that last pay of the petitioner was shown as Rs. 8,6...
Smt. Chota Bhagiya Bhuini Vs. Bharat Cocking Coal Ltd. and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Aug-26-2003
Reported in: [2003(4)JCR705(Jhr)]
ORDERTapen Sen, J. 1. Heard Mr. Sanjay Kumar Sinha, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. A.K. Mehta assisted by Mr. Rupesh Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the respondents.2. The petitioner in the instant case prays for compassionate appointment on the ground that her husband died on 30.10.1990. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner the rejection of that application was communicated only by letter dated 13.8.2001.3. It is well know that compassionate appointment cannot be granted after a long lapse of reasonable period and the very purpose of compassionate appointment, as an exception to the general rule of open recruitment, is intended to meet the immediate financial problem being suffered by the members of the family of the deceased employee. The very object of appointment of dependent of deceased employee who died in harness is to relieve immediate hardship and distress caused to the family by sudden demise of the earning member of the family and such considerati...
Shiv Sahay Singh Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Aug-26-2003
Reported in: [2003(4)JCR681(Jhr)]
ORDERTapen Sen, J.1. Heard Mr. Jitendra Nath, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Krishna Shankar, JC to learned Advocate General.2. The petitioner in the instant case has prayed for quashing the order of punishment dated 24.9.1999 by which he has been inflicted with the punishment of forfeiture of increments for six months which is equivalent to one black mark passed in Departmental proceeding. This apparently has been passed pursuant to Departmental proceeding No. 11/99 conducted by the Commandant BMP 12 Tatisilve, Ranchi now redesignated as Jharkhand Armed Police-11, Tatisilve, Ranchi.3. According to the police, he was employed as Driver and on 2.5.1999 he was directed by the Officer Incharge of the Motor Transport to carry the dead body of another driver who had died. Inspite of that order, the petitioner disobeyed and left the premises. Thereafter, charges were framed and departmental proceedings initiated in which the petitioner was given adequate opportunity but he was ul...
Sunita Devi Vs. Autar Singh and anr.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Aug-26-2003
Reported in: II(2004)ACC198; 2005ACJ1175; [2004(101)FLR214]; [2004(1)JCR76(Jhr)]
1. The appellant filed Workman Compensation Case NO. 4 of 1993 for grant of Compensation, under the provisions of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 (hereinafter to be referred to as 'the Act) on account of death of her husband. Bijay Ram @ Bijay Kumar on 23.5.1992, in course of his employment as a driver of Autar Singh, the respondent No. 1, who was owner of the Maruti Van (BEN-9670).2. She claimed that her deceased husband was employed as driver by Autar Singh. On 23.5.1992, while he was driving the Maruti Van, it collided with a Truck (UGI-9845) near a pond on the Daltonganj-Ranchi Road at village Hirsa-Pokhraha in Palamu district. In the said accident he sustained head injury and died. At the time of death, he was 25 years' old and was getting a salary of Rs. 900/- per month.3. Autar Singh appeared in the case and filed written statement stating, inter alia, that deceased. Bijay Ram @ Bijay Kumar was employed by him as driver on the said Maruti Van, which was of purely casual nat...
The Employers in Relation to the Management of Mudidih Colliery of Sij ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Aug-25-2003
Reported in: [2003(4)JCR200(Jhr)]
Tapen Sen, J. 1. In this writ application, the petitioner (the Management of Mudidih Colliery of Sijua Area of M/s. Bharat Coking Coal Limited) has challenged the validity of the notification dated 29.1.1999 (Annexure 8) issued by the Desk Officer, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi (respondent No. 2), whereby and whereunder the following dispute has been referred for adjudication under the provision of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') :--'Whether the action of the Management of Mudidih Colliery of M/s. BCCL in dismissing Sri R.K. Prasad, Lamp Cabin Incharge from the services of the Company w.e.f. 31.12.1985 only on the ground of unauthorized absence w.e.f. 28.8.1984 to 19.10.1984 which the Management has failed to establish the same through any documentary evidence is justified? If not, to what relief the concerned workman is entitled.'The petitioner has further prayed for a writ of mandamus commanding upon the concerned respondents to ...
Suresh Kumar Singh and ors. Vs. Central Coal Field Ltd. and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Aug-25-2003
Reported in: [2004(1)JCR279(Jhr)]
M.Y. Eqbal, J. 1. The petitioners have prayed for quashing the office orders dated 24.1.1999 issued by the General Manager, Dhori Area, Central Coalfield Ltd. by which the petitioners have been awarded punishment of demotion to the next lower post and pay scale and also for recovery of the financial loss caused to the respondents from their salary.2. Short facts of the case are that the petitioners were working as clerks in Amlo Project under Dhori Area of the respondents. On 4.7.1994 the petitioners were assigned the work of pay clerks. On the same day in the night after duty hours theft was committed in the strong room and the money and other articles kept therein were taken away. A police case was instituted on the next day against unknown. In course of investigation the petitioners were made accused and they were put under suspension pending issue of formal charge-sheet and initiate on of departmental proceeding. Charge against the petitioners was that on 4.7.1994 after disbursemen...
Dhanai Majhi and anr. Vs. Ranga Majhi and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Aug-25-2003
Reported in: [2004(1)JCR198(Jhr)]
ORDER1. The plaintiffs are the appellants. They filed a suit for declaration of their title over Plaint-B and F Schedule properties, for recovery of possession of plaint-B Schedule and for confirmation of possession over Plaint-F Schedule properties.2. The suit was resisted by the defendants. The suit was dismissed by the trial Court and that dismissal was confirmed in appeal by a learned Single Judge of this Court. Hence, this appeal under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent.3. The plaintiffs are the sons of one Dhuma Majhi. Dhuma Majhi had a brother, Batol Majhi alias Bajol Majhi, who died before 1961, leaving behind his widow and daughter Kandri Majhian. Of course, there is controversy, whether he died in the year 1961 or in the year 1926. Whatever it be, he left a widow and a daughter Kandri Majhian. The defendants in the suit are the husband of Kandri Majhian and her four sons and the daughter. According to the plaintiffs, the suit properties were ancestral and on the death of Batol M...
Bharat Coking Coal Ltd. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Aug-25-2003
Reported in: [2004(2)JCR294(Jhr)]
ORDER1. This appeal has been preferred by M/s. Bharat Coking Coal Limited (hereinafter referred to as the 'BCCL') against the order of the learned Single Judge dated 18.7.2002, passed in CWJC No. 2775 of 2000(R), whereby Reference No. 32 of 1998 dated 30.6.1998, made by the Central Government was not interfered with.2. It is not in dispute that some time in the year 1973 certain lands belonging to private persons were acquired by M/s. BCCL on payment of consideration amount. Subsequently in the year 1978 a circular was issued, whereby those persons, whose 2 acres agricultural land or 3 acres non-agricultural lands were acquired by M/s, BCCL, were entitled to get employment of one person by way of compensation, besides the consideration amount.3. Jharkhand Colliery Sharmik Union, a trade Union registered under the Act, in the year 1996, raised an Industrial dispute on behalf of those land-owners, whose lands were acquired by M/s. BCCL in the year 1973 and the Central Government being th...
Ayodhya Singh Vs. Smt. Meera Devi
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Aug-23-2003
Reported in: AIR2004Jhar88; 2003(3)BLJR1995; I(2004)DMC274; [2003(4)JCR39(Jhr)]
ORDER1. This is an appeal by the husband, who was the petitioner in an application under Section 13 (1-a) and (1-b) of the Hindu Marriage Act. The husband sought divorce from his wife, the respondent, on the ground of cruelty and on the ground of desertion. The Court below dismissed the application finding that the husband had failed to prove the ground of cruelty or the ground of desertion. The dismissal of the application by the trial Court is challenged by the husband.2. The husband alleged that the wife had treated him with cruelty and he was entitled to a decree of divorce on the ground of cruelty in terms of Section 13(1-a) of the Act. But the husband did not even give formal evidence of cruelty when he was examined. There was also no other evidence made available in support of the plea of cruelty. Except possibly suggesting that long desertion amounts to cruelty, there was no material on the basis of which the trial Court could have granted a decree for divorce on the ground of ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »