Jharkhand Court September 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.
Employers in Relation to the Management of N.E. Railway Vs. Presiding ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Sep-25-2003
Reported in: [2004(102)FLR361]; [2004(2)JCR262(Jhr)]
ORDERTapen Sen, J.1. The petitioner (Management of North Eastern Railways) have filed the instant writ application challenging the award passed on 29.03.2001 by the learned Central Government Industrial Tribunal No. 1 at Dhanbad in reference Case No. 91 of 1993. Heard Mr. Pradip Modi, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. M.M. Prasad, learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 2 to 6.2. Mr. Pradeep Modi, learned counsel for the petitioner has confined the writ application only insofar as it relates to the second part thereof and which relates to the question as to whether the action of the Management of Sonepur Railway Division in terminating the services of S/Shri Ram Pukar, Dular Chandra Sharma, Jairam Sharma, Md. Yunus and Jang Bahadur, all casual workers with effect from 16.02.1989 was justified or not and if not, to what relief they were entitled to.3. By reason of the award dated 29.03.2001, the learned Tribunal answered the aforementioned reference in favour of the casual Mazd...
Dwarika Mistry and ors. Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Sep-25-2003
Reported in: II(2004)DMC375; [2004(2)JCR322(Jhr)]
Vishnudeo Narayan, J.1. This appeal at the instance of the appellants named above is directed against the impugned Judgment and order dated 13.6.1998 and 18.6.1998 respectively passed in S.T. No. 448 of 1998 by Sri Mishri Lal Choudhury, 5th Additional Sessions Judge, Hazaribagh whereby and whereunder they were found guilty for the offence punishable under Section 304B/34 of the Indian Penal Code for causing the dowry death of Kalamati Devi, the lawfully wedded wife of appellant Ajit Rana and they were convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years each. However, co-accused Gita Devi was found not guilty and she was accordingly acquitted.2. The prosecution case has arisen on the basis of the fardbeyan (Ext. 2) of informant PW 7 Deoki Rana, the father of Kalamati Devi, the deceased of this case recorded on 29.5.1998 at 18.15 hours at Bari of the house of the appellants situate in village Chutiaro by PW 8 SI S.N. Prasad of Muffasil P.S. Hazaribagh about the occurre...
Sitaram Chaudhary and Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Sep-24-2003
Reported in: [2003(4)JCR487(Jhr)]
Vikramaditya Prasad, J.1. Both the appeals have been heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment, as both arise out of the same judgment.2. Both the appellants were convicted for an offence under Section 376(2)(g) and 452, IPC and were sentenced to undergo RI for 10 years and a fine of Rs. 25,000/- and in default, to undergo RI for 3 years and 3 years RI was awarded for the offence under Section 452, IPC, besides a fine of Rs. 5,000/- and in default, to undergo RI for 1 year and the fine so realized be given to the victim. However, both the sentences were to run concurrently.3. According, to the fardbeyan, Ext. 4, of the prosecutrix, PW 2, Sushila Devi, recorded at 4,00 p.m. on 6.11.1998 at Chainpur P.S. in the District of Palamau, she, along with her husband, Anuj Ram, PW 8, lived in a rented house in the village-Sonartand. On 5.11.1998 (prosecutrix does not know the date and says yesterday), which was a Thursday at about 4.00 p.m. the neighbour (Bagalgir) of her ...
Magdali Purty Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Sep-24-2003
Reported in: [2003(4)JCR711(Jhr)]
M.Y. Eqbal, J.1. Heard Mr. Jai Prakash Sahu, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned counsel appearing for the respondents and with their consent this writ application is disposed of at the admission stage.2. The only question that falls for consideration is as to whether the petitioner is entitled to family pension after the death of her, husband who retired as an Assistant Teacher in 1982.3. The petitioner's husband was an Assistant Teacher in Middle School, Tamar, Ranchi and was superannuated w.e.f. 28,9.1982. The petitioner's case is that the provisional pension of her deceased husband was sanctioned but it was never finalized in his life time and he ultimately died on 22.12.2002. It is stated by the petitioner that her husband has not even received the provisional pension. The petitioner was told that she will not be entitled to family pension. Mr. Jai Prakash learned counsel appearing for the petitioner drawn my attention to Annexure-1 to the writ application...
Smt. Rajpati Devi Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Sep-24-2003
Reported in: [2004(1)JCR117(Jhr)]
Amareshwar Sahay, J.1. In this writ application the petitioner has prayed for quashing of the order dated 12.12.1994/ 19.12.1994 passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Palamau as contained in Annexure 3 where by he has cancelled the Basgit Parcha issued in favour of the petitioner by the order of Circle Officer, Bishrampur vide his order dated 5.2.1991 with regard to the land measuring an area 0.15 decimals of Khata No. 10, Plot No. 132 of village, Jhar-hakala.2. According to the petitioner, on application made by the petitioner the Circle Officer, Bishrampur vide order dated 5.2,1991 passed an order for issuance of Basgit Parcha in favour of the petitioner with regard to the land measuring an area 0.15 decimals of Khata No. 10, Plot No. 132 of village Jharhakala vide Annexure 1 to the writ application. The learned Deputy Commissioner by his impugned order dated 19.12.1994 (Annexure 3) cancelled the issuance of Basgit Parcha in favour of the petitioner on the ground that Circle Officer has...
Golak Modak Vs. Mihir Kumar Chakraborty and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Sep-24-2003
Reported in: [2004(1)JCR249(Jhr)]
Vishnudeo Narayan, J.1. This appeal at the instance of the appellant is directed against the impugned judgment and decree dated 17.06.1991 and 27.06.1991 respectively passed in Land Acquisition Reference Case No. 52 of 1989 by Shri Banke Bihari Rai, Land Acquisition Judge, Dhanbad whereby and whereunder the reference under Section 30 of the Land Acquisition Act (hereinafter referred to as the said Act) made by the Land Acquisition Authorities, Dhanbad for deciding the right, title and interest of the applicants-respondent in respect of the acquired land for getting compensation was allowed.2. The State of Bihar (now Jharkhand) had acquired plot No. 581 of Khata No. 95 having an area of 74 decimals and plot Nos. 585 and 587 of Khata No. 2 having an area of 55 decimals and 11 decimals respectively, i.e. 1.40 acres of land situate in village Alkadiha P.S. Jharia, District Dhanbad for BCCL vide Land Acquisition Case No. 8 of 1979-80/16 of 1981-82 and award No. 65 in respect thereof was pre...
Sandeep Kumar @ Bobby Vs. the State of Jharkhand and anr.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Sep-24-2003
Reported in: AIR2004Jhar22; 2003(3)BLJR2285; I(2004)DMC465; [2004(1)JCR603(Jhr)]
ORDERS.J. Mukhopadhaya, J.1. This application has been preferred by the petitioner (husband) against the order dated 20th May, 2003 passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Ranchi in Matrimonial Title Suit No. 44 of 2002 under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act whereby and whereunder, the Court below allowed a sum of Rs. 2,500/- as litigation cost and a sum of Rs. 1000/- per month as maintenance in favour of the 2nd respondent (the wife).2. The case of the petitioner is that the manner in which staff and officers of the Lalpur Police Station, Ranchi and family members of the 2nd respondent solemnized the marriage of 2nd respondent with the petitioner, he filed the Matrimonial Title Suit No. 44 of 2002 under Section 12 of the Hindu Marriage Act for declaring their marriage as null and void. The second respondent filed a petition under Section 24 of the said Act for grant of alimony on the ground that she has no independent income and the petitioner, a man of means and is a...
Ramanand Sah Vs. State of Jharkhand and anr.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Sep-24-2003
Reported in: [2004(1)JCR682(Jhr)]
ORDERVIKRAMADITYA PRASAD, J.1. This is a petition for quashing the order dated 15.7.2002 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dumka in PCR Case No. 272/0.1, GR No. 362/02, whereby and whereunder the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate has taken cognizance of the offence under Section 147/500/503/ 504, IPC.2. It transpires that one Balram Bhagat had filed a complaint against the petitioner alleging, inter alia, that though there was no order restraining the complainant, but the accused of that case (petitioner here) misled the police that there was an order of the Court and consequently got the work stopped and because of the stoppage of the work, there was loss caused to the complainant, besides he also intermediated him and threatened the masons working there.3. Since the offence disclosed was non-conginzable, it appears that the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate referred it to the police for investigation. It further transpires that after investigation, the police submitted charge-...
Basant Kumar Vs. Bihar State Electricity Board and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Sep-24-2003
Reported in: [2004(2)JCR617(Jhr)]
ORDERM.Y. Eqbal, J.1. Heard Mr. M.M. Banerjee, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Ajit Kumar, learned counsel for the respondent-Bihar State Electricity Board, Patna.2. Petitioner has approached this Court for a direction upon the respondents to release leave encashment amount and the commutation of pension amount forthwith, as the same has not been paid to him.3. Petitioner superannuated from the service with effect from 31.3.2001 while working as Electrical Executive Engineer at Ranchi. After retirement, he was paid other retiral dues but leave encashment and commutation of pension was not released.4. A counter-affidavit has been filed by the respondent BSEB wherein it is stated that because of some audit objection, the leave encashment and commutation of pension was not sanctioned. Petitioner was asked to submit reply to the show cause on the charges of audit objection under Rule 139 of the Bihar Service Code. A copy of the notice has been annexed as Annexure-B to the counte...
Kamta Singh Vs. Central Coal Field Ltd. and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Sep-24-2003
Reported in: [2004(2)JCR310(Jhr)]
Amareshwar Sahay, J.1. In the Instant writ application, the petitioner has prayed for quashing of Annexure-5 to the writ application issued under the signature of Respondent No. .2 dated 9.3.1996 whereby the petitioner was informed that he would stand retired from the service of Bachra Project of Central Coal fields Ltd. with effect from 17.12.1996 (P.M.) and for a direction to the respondents to allow the petitioner to continue in service till June, 2010 on the basis of his actual date of birth i.e. 20.6.1950 after accepting his date of birth as recorded in his Service Book and C.M.P.F. record.2. The case of the petitioner is that he was initially appointed as Loader on 20.6.1975 and was posted at Bachra Project of Central Coal fields Ltd. Subsequently, he was promoted to the post of Tyndal CAT-1V and is still continuing on the said post. According to the petitioner, at the time of his initial appointment, he declared his date of birth to be 20.6.1950 which was also recorded in his Se...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »