Jharkhand Court January 2004 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.
Yakub Jojowar and ors. Vs. Steel Authority of India and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jan-27-2004
Reported in: [2004(1)JCR649(Jhr)]
ORDERAmareshwar Sahay, J.1. All the sixty six petitioners, who are either Ex-Army Personnel or Ex-personnel in Central Industrial Security Force and are deployed under respondent Nos. 1 to 3 as Security personnel on contract by M/s National Investigation and Security Contractor, have prayed for issuance of writ of mandamus for a direction to the respondents No. 1 to 2 to absorb the service of the petitioners as regular employees and they further pray that respondents be directed to provide equal pay for equal work to the petitioners at par with the permanent employees of the respondent No. 1 as they are discharging the same function similar to that of the petitioners working under respondent No. 2.2. Mr. Ananda Sen learned counsel for the respondents No. 1 to 3 at the very outset submits that in the view of the recent decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Steel Authority of India Ltd. and Ors. v. National Union Water Front Workers and Ors. reported in (2001) 7 SCC 1 and also the...
Pawan Biscuit Co. Pvt. Ltd., Kwality Refractories, Bhagwani Paper Prod ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jan-23-2004
Reported in: [2004(1)JCR499(Jhr)]
M.Y. Eqbal, J.1. In all these writ applications, common question of law and facts are involved and, therefore, heard and disposed of by this common judgment. In all these cases, the petitioners, besides other reliefs, prayed for quashing the order passed by the General Manager-cum-Chief Engineer, whereby he has disposed of the claim of the petitioners under Clause 13 of the High Tension Agreement.2. In CWJC No. 3280 of 1994 (R), the petitioner, namely, M/s. Pawan Biscuit Co. Pvt. Ltd. is a H.T. Consumer, having a contract demand of 190 KVA. Initially it has filed a claim for proportionate remission under Clause 13 of the High Tension Agreement for the year 1992-1993. The petitioner claimed remission for interruption of 4968 hours, including the interruption for Sundays and holidays. The petitioner also claimed remission in KVA charges as per details of interruption submitted by the Electrical Executive Engineer, Chakradharpur. The General Manager-cum-Chief Engineer allowed proportionat...
Murari Pandey Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jan-23-2004
Reported in: III(2004)BC84; 2005(1)CTLJ79(Jhar); [2004(1)JCR574(Jhr)]
ORDERM.Y. Eqbal, J.1. Heard Mr. Rajiv Ranjan learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. R.N. Sahay, learned counsel for the State.2. In this writ application the petitioner has prayed for quashing the tender published by the respondents for construction of Sub-Divisional Office and other allied buildings for Hussainabad Sub-Division in the district of Palamau on the ground that the petitioner was awarded same contract pursuant to a tender notice published earlier.3. Petitioner's case is that on 31.12.1999 a tender notice was published by the respondents for construction of Sub-Divisional Office and other allied buildings for a total contract value of Rs. 46,418,000/-. Petitioner submitted his tender for the said work and after negotiation the work was allotted to the petitioner and agreement was executed on 21.6.2000. It is alleged that after the agreement was executed the site for construction of building was not made available and construction work could not be started however, the s...
Chetna Mazdoor Sangh and ors. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jan-23-2004
Reported in: [2004(101)FLR786]; [2004(1)JCR498(Jhr)]; (2004)IILLJ1137Jhar
M.Y. Eqbal, J.1. In this writ application filed by the petitioners, a writ of mandamus has been sought commanding upon the respondents to issue a notification abolishing contract labour in respect of all categories of employment that are perennial in nature and which have been specifically identified by the Deputy Labour Commissioner and further for a direction declaring that the settlement dated 30.7.1975, 19.6.1979 and 18.5.1995 are binding upon the respondents.2. The petitioners' case is that the members of the petitioners' Union have been engaged by the respondents through contractors as contract labour for the work of sweeping, cleaning and dusting of the building owned and occupied by the respondents 3 to 6, namely, Bokaro Steel Plant of the Steel Authority of India Limited. Their further case is that the Central Government exercising its power under Section 10 of the Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act, 1970 (hereinafter to be referred to as 'the Act') and on the reco...
Awar Abhiyanta Sangh Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jan-23-2004
Reported in: [2004(1)JCR541(Jhr)]
M.Y. Eqbal, J.1. Heard Mr. Chandrashekhar, Senior Advocate on behalf of the petitioner and Mr. B.S. Lal Additional Advocate General.2. In this writ application the petitioner has prayed for quashing all the appointments/postings of Assistant Mining Officers from different cadres of Geologists including the private respondents No. 5 to 9.3. The petitioner's case is that the respondents by notification dated 27.11.1996 fixed the minimum qualification for appointment in the post of Assistant Mining Officer. As per the notification a degree in Mining Engineering from any Indian University or B.Sc. (Mining Degree) is the minimum qualification for the said appointment which qualification has also been prescribed by the Bihar Public Service Commission. Respondent Nos. 5 to 9 do not possess requisite qualification and, therefore, they cannot be appointed/posted as Assistant Mining Officer. Further case of the petitioner is that the Commission used to fill up the post of Assistant Mining Office...
Amit Raut Vs. Kanhai Rout and 30 ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jan-23-2004
Reported in: [2004(2)JCR603(Jhr)]
ORDERP.K. Balasubramanyan, C.J. 1. This Second Appeal by the plaintiff challenges the final decree for partition. The plaintiff in terms of preliminary decree was entitled to one out of six shares. In the final decree certain properties were proposed to be allotted to him by Amin Commissioner. The plaintiff objected to the proposal made by the Amin Commissioner by contending that there has been no proper valuation of the shares and the allotments were inequitable, that the whole of the prime lands available for partition having commercial importance, were allotted to defendant Nos. 4 to 7 alone and that the division proposed was unjust and against the fundamental principle, that the properties should be valued and each sharer should be allotted properties of equal value. The Trial Court did not accept this contention and proceeded on the basis that the lands were non-transferable and therefore, their potential value was irrelevant and allotment was just. Thus, a final decree was passed...
Bharat Coking Coal Ltd. and ors. Vs. Ram Prakash Singh and ors.,
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jan-21-2004
Reported in: [2005(1)JCR529(Jhr)]
Tapen Sen, J.1. All the three appeals relate to a common Judgment delivered on 10th September, 2002 by a learned Single Judge of this Court whereby and whereunder he was pleased to hold that the pay scale which was given to the clerks of the appellants should also be given to the respondents herein (i.e., the petitioners of the Writ Applications) and other teachers of the concerned schools with effect from the date of the judgment together with all consequential benefits such as Provident Fund etc, A further direction was made to the effect that the Appellants herein must implement the said Judgment within two months from the date of production thereof. However, in so far as the prayer made to the effect that the State of Jharkhand should take over the Ram Kanali School is concerned, the learned single Judge did not pass any order.2. In CWJC No. 226 of 2000 (R) [subject matter of L.P.A. No. 548 of 2002], the petitioners therein, namely Ram Prakash Singh and others, prayed for an order/...
Kauleshwar Prasad Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jan-20-2004
Reported in: [2004(2)JCR124(Jhr)]
ORDERAmreshwar Sahay, J.1. Heard the learned counsel for the parties.2. The prayer of the petitioner in this writ petition is for direction to the respondents to fix his pension after counting his service period as extra clerk from 17.12.1958 to 10.2.1981 rendered in the establishment of the District Sub-Registrar Office at Chas and to pay retiral benefits and further prayer of the petitioner is for direction to the respondents to pay his salary from 2.2.1991 to 16.2.1992.3. It is stated that the petitioner was appointed as extra clerk on 17.12.1958 under the District Sub-Registrar, Registry Office at Chas, Respondent No. 3 and worked till 10.2.1981 and as such he was absorbed as temporary clerk in the same department under the respondent No. 3. Thereafter he was superannuated on 31.12.1994.4. While the petitioner was in service, a criminal case was instituted against him being Giridih PS case No. 22 of 1991 for committing of an offence under Section 304B of the Indian Penal Code. In t...
Employers in Relation to the Management of Kusunda Colliery of Bharat ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jan-20-2004
Reported in: [2004(2)JCR497(Jhr)]
Amareshwar Sahay, J.1. The Management of Kusunda Colliery of BCCL has challenged the award of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal No. 2 at Dhanbad, dated 26.7.1996, in Reference No. 306 of 1986, whereby the learned Tribunal has answered the reference in favour of the workmen, holding that the demand of the Union for regularising the concerned workmen, namely, Ulfat Mian and 9 others is justified and gave a direction to the Management to prepare a 1st as per annexure of the reference to regularise them within a period of six months from the date of implementation of the award and during the intervening period, they should be given job of casual nature of same category having equal pay of permanent employees.2. The facts of the matter in short is that in exercise of the power under Section 10(1)(d) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, the Central Government referred the following dispute for adjudication :--'Whether the demand of Rashtriya Colliery Mazdoor Sangh that the Manageme...
Indian Drugs and Pharmaceuticals Ltd. Vs. State of Jharkhand and anr.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jan-20-2004
Reported in: [2004(3)JCR231(Jhr)]
M.Y. Eqbal, J.1. The petitioner, M/s Indian Drugs & Pharmaceuticals Ltd. has prayed for quashing the award passed by the Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Ranchi in Reference Case No. 1/94 whereby and whereunder the Labour Court held that termination of the services of the concerned employee was neither legal nor proper and, as such, held that the concerned employee, namely, Mr. M.K. Bandopadhaya, Medical Representative of the petitioner company is entitled to be reinstated with full back wages consequential benefits and continuity in service.2. The above reference was made to the Labour Court vide notification dated 1.12.1993 of Labour, Employment & Training Department, Government of Bihar to give an adjudication to the following dispute :Whether transfer of M.K. Bandopadhaya Medical Representative, Indian Drugs and Pharmaceuticals Ltd. from Ranchi to some other places was made to harass Sri Bandopadhaya and whether to terminate him from services during pendency of industrial dispute c...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »