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.
Pramod Kumar Sinha Vs. Power Engineer Service Association, Jharkhand S ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Aug-23-2003
Reported in: [2003(3)JCR804(Jhr)]
P.K. Balasubramanyan, C.J.1. The appellant was an employee of the Mineral Area Development Authority, Dhanbad. He went to work as Estate Officer in the Jharkhand State Electricity Board on deputation. There were certain other retired employees re-employed in the Jharkhand State Electricity Board. There were also some deputations. The Power Engineer Service Association, Jharkhand State Electricity Board, filed a writ petition, WP (S) No. 3746 of 2001 complaining that the employment opportunities of officers of the Board are affected by re-employment of retired Board employee and by taking officers on deputation and hence, a direction should be issued to the State Electricity Board not to employ retired personnel and not to take engineers from other organizations on deputation and for other incidental reliefs. In the writ petition, one officer on deputation was impleaded as respondent No. 4. The learned Single Judge on hearing the writ petition and on scrutiny of the file produced before...
Usha MartIn Industries Ltd. Vs. Jharkhand State Electricity Board and ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Aug-23-2003
Reported in: [2003(3)JCR809(Jhr)]
P.K. Balasubramanyan, C.J.1. The appellant is the petitioner in CWJC No. 3127 of 1994 on the file of this Court. The appellant is a consumer of electrical energy under the present Jharkhand State Electricity Board. For the period October 1991 to January 1992, the petitioner was billed a surcharge at 1% for fall of power factor as contemplated by Paragraph 16.6 of the 1991 tariff. The petitioner made a representation contending that he was not liable to be billed such an amount, though the petitioner paid the amount under protest. Since the representation made by the petitioner was not considered or disposed of by the then Bihar State Electricity Board, the petitioner filed CWJC No. 396 of 1994 before the High Court of Patna, at Ranchi. This Court directed that the representation be considered and disposed of by a speaking order and on merits within the time fixed by that judgment. Thereafter, the Electrical Superintending Engineer, Jamshedpur considered the representation of the petiti...
N.K. Srivastava Vs. Chairman, Coal India Ltd. and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Aug-23-2003
Reported in: [2003(4)JCR556(Jhr)]
ORDER1. This application has been preferred by petitioner against the memorandum, reference No. WCL/CMD/ VIG/777 dated 17th July, 2003 issued by the Chairman-cum-Managing Director, Western Coal-fields Ltd., Nagpur whereby and whereunder the petitioner has been asked to show cause as to why the proposed penalty of reduction to the lower stage at Rs. 19,500/- in the time scale of pay of Rs. 19,500/- 25,000/- be not imposed on him.2. According to petitioner, the disciplinary authority cannot record the final finding on the charges at the time of issuing show-cause notice. The disciplinary authority having already decided to reduce the petitioner to the lower stage, having made up the mind to punish the petitioner, the second show-cause notice should be quashed.3. Counsel for the petitioner placed reliance on Supreme Court decision in Yoginath D. Bagde v. State of Maharashtra and Ors., reported in 1999 (7) SCC 739; Punjab National Bank and Ors. v. Kunj Bihari Mishra, reported in 1998 (7) S...
Jaipal Karmali Vs. Bishun Sundi and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Aug-23-2003
Reported in: [2004(2)JCR174(Jhr)]
ORDERGurusharan Sharma, J.1. The plaintiff filed the suit for declaration of title, confirmation of possession or in alternative for recovery of possession over 69 decimals land bearing Plot Nos. 1332 and 1875 appertaining to Khata No. 6 situated in village Kuju P.S. Mandu, District Hazaribagh and for further declaration that the order dated 8.8.1978 passed by the Additional Collector, Hazaribagh, in Appeal No. 82 of 1976, under Section 46(4) of the Chotanagpur Tenancy Act, 1908 (hereinafter to be referred to as 'the Act') was illegal and without jurisdiction.2. The suit was decreed in part, holding that the order passed under Section 46(4) of the Act was illegal and without jurisdiction and the plaintiff acquired right, title and interest over the suit land on the basis of raiyati settlement made by the then landlord in the year 1926 and was also in possession thereof.3. Defendant No. 1 preferred appeal against the said judgment and decree, wherein by impugned judgment and decree date...
Shahnaj Bano Vs. Mubarak Ali and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Aug-23-2003
Reported in: I(2004)DMC721; [2004(3)JCR254(Jhr)]
ORDER1. The defendant wife, in a Matrimonial Suit filed by her Mahomendan husband, is the appellant in the present first appeal.2. There was a marriage between the defendant and the plaintiff, the husband. The plaintiff filed the present matrimonial suit and pleaded that the defendant had unreasonably refused company to him and he was entitled to a decree for restitution of conjugal rights. Though, the defendant, the wife, filed a written statement, she did not further participate in the trial. The plaintiff, the husband, examined himself as AW 1 and gave evidence to the effect that his wife was residing in her parents' house, that he had gone there thrice and invited her to come with him to share the matrimonial home and that she had unreasonably refused to accompany him. He also deposed that the parents of the wife refused to persuade her to come and live with him inspite of repeated requests. This evidence of the husband was corroborated by the evidence of two other witnesses. None ...
Jagdish Ganjhu Vs. Jharkhand State Electricity Board and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Aug-22-2003
Reported in: 2003(3)BLJR2173; [2003(4)JCR192(Jhr)]
ORDERS.J. Mukhopadhaya, J1. This application has been preferred by the petitioner against the order dated 10th June, 2002, whereby and whereunder, the respondents rejected the petitioner's claim for compassionate appointment. Further prayer has been made to direct the respondents to reconsider his case for appointment on compassionate ground and to pay the balance amount of Group Saving Scheme.2. The brief fact of the case is that the father of the petitioner Late Tulsi Ganju who was in the services of the Bihar State Electricity Board (for short B.S.E.B.) in its Patratu Thermal Power Station, Patratu, district Hazaribagh (for short P.T.P.S.) now under the control of the Jharkhand State Electricity Board (J.S.E.B. for short), died in harness of 12th May, 1989, The petitioner was about five years old at that time (See Annexure 1).The mother of petitioner, Kabilasha Devi, who was a Class IV employee in P.T.P.S. also died in harness on 6th September, 1991. Much after such death, the B.S.E...
State of Jharkhand and ors. Vs. Bhawneet Singh
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Aug-22-2003
Reported in: 2003(51)BLJR2028; [2003(4)JCR431(Jhr)]
ORDER1. This application is for a review of the judgment of this Court dated 1.10.2002 allowing the Letter Patent Appeal, filed by the appellant against the judgment dated 16.7.2002 rendered in WP (C) No. 3072 of 2002. 2. The main ground for review sought to be put forward is that the Member, Board of Revenue is having wide powers under Section 6 of Bihar and Orissa and Revenue Act, 1913 to review his own orders and this provision was not referred to or dealt with by this Court in the judgment dated 1.10.2002. Of course, it does not appear that the said section was brought to the notice of the Court by counsel appearing in the case, when the case was argued. This Court had proceeded in the judgment as if there was no power of review in the Board of Revenue under the Bihar Excise Act, 1915. But since it is seen that under Section 6 of the Bihar and Orissa Board of Revenue Act, 1913 there is a power of review, it can be said that there is an error apparent on the face of the record of th...
Management of Heavy Engineering Corporation Ltd. Vs. Sarita Narayan an ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Aug-22-2003
Reported in: [2003(4)JCR602(Jhr)]
ORDER1. Heard the parties. After death of the her husband, P.K. Narayan in harness, the respondent No. 1 herein was given compassionate appointment in the year 1977, by the Management of the Heavy Engineering Corporation Limited, Ranchi. During his service period, her husband on 1.2.1969, in a declaration had given the age of his wife, namely, the respondent No. 1 to be approximately 24 years.2. Although it appears that the respondent No. 1 was already a graduated at the time of her compassionate appointment, but she failed to produce any document in proof of here date of birth and, therefore, on her oral declaration, in Coloumn-8 of the Personal Data Form (Annexure 4), her age was mentioned as 32 years. The said form was duly signed by her. Subsequently, it appear that on 1.12.1979 she got issued a school leaving certificate from J.K. High School, Begusarai, wherein her date of birth was mentioned as 15.9.1948, whereas according to her age mentioned in Personal Date Form, her date of ...
Uday Prasad Singh Vs. Labour Enforcement Officer (Central) and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Aug-22-2003
Reported in: [2003(4)JCR668(Jhr)]
ORDERTapen Sen, J.1. When this case was called out Mrs. J. Mazumdar, learned counsel for the petitioner sought permission to make correction of some inadvertent clerical error which have appeared at pages 2 and 3 of the writ application.2. Let her do so during the course of the day.3. Heard Mrs. J. Mazumdar, learned counsel for the Petitioner and Mrs. Sheela Prasad learned counsel for the respondents and with their consent this Writ Application is being disposed off at this stage.4. The petitioner is aggrieved by the Order dated 12.7.2002 passed by the Regional Labour Commissioner (Central) in Minimum Wages Case No. 65 of 2000 whereby and whereunder he held that the payment made by the -petitioner was less than the minimum wages and accordingly awarded a sum of Rs. 21,350.00 (Rupees Twenty One Thousand Three Hundred Fifty only) to be paid to the concerned twenty workmen within a period of thirty days.5. Mrs. J. Mazumdar, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner ha...
Brij Bhushan Prasad Vs. State of Bihar
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Aug-22-2003
Reported in: 2004CriLJ1513
Amareshwar Sahay, J. 1. The present appeal has been filed by the appellant against the judgment of conviction and sentence dated 6-10-1997 passed by the Special Judge (C.B.I.), Dhanbad in R. C. Case No. 5/86; whereby the appellant has been convicted under Section 161 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 5(2) read with Section 5(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act., 1947 and has been sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for one year under each count and has further been sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 500/- and in default of such payment of fine to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for two months. However, sentences were ordered to run concurrently.2. The prosecution case in brief is that Shankar Bhuian, a Miner Loader, Ena Colliery, B.C.C.L. Area VIII, Dhanbad lodged a complaint before the C.B.I. Dhanbad alleging therein that on 25-1-1986 he was to join his duty but as his wife was ill, he went to join on 28-1-1986 but he was not allowed to join and was asked by the Person...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »