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.
Bharat Coking Coal Ltd. and ors. Vs. Basant Bhuiya
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jan-08-2004
Reported in: [2004(2)JCR112(Jhr)]
ORDER1. Heard counsel on both sides.This appeal is by the respondents in WP (S) No. 4735 of 2002. The respondent herein, the writ petitioner, sought appointment under the dying in harness scheme, His father died on 8.11.1994. He made an application some time in the year 1995. He filed the writ petition in this Court in the year 2002 complaining that no final decision has been taken on his request for appointment. On behalf of the appellants, it is not disputed that no final decision was taken on the request for appointment under the scheme made by the respondent. But what was contended was that the very object of compassionate appointment and the scheme formulated, will be defeated if such a scheme is permitted to be agitated in the year 2002, more than seven years after the death of an employee.2. The learned Single Judge took the view that the appellants cannot take advantage of their own laches in taking the decision and it cannot be allowed to argue that the respondent's claim is b...
Dr. Sanjay Kumar Jha and anr. Vs. Shalini Jha and anr.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jan-08-2004
Reported in: [2004(2)JCR605(Jhr)]
ORDER1. Heard both sides.2. This is an application for condoning the delay in filing the appeal. It is submitted that the delay was really in curing the defects and not in filing the appeal itself.3. In the circumstances, we are satisfied that sufficient cause has been made out for condoning the delay.4. Hence, the petition is allowed.5. The learned Judge, in the writ petition filed by the wife, interfered with the order of the Family Court permitting the father of the husband to act as his agent in the proceedings before the Family Court. It appears that earlier, the husband had sought permission to have himself represented by a counsel but that was declined. That order became final. The Family Court took the view in the subsequent application that in the circumstances and in view of the earlier order not permitting the husband to engage a counsel, it would be proper to permit the father of the first appellant to act as the agent of the appellant/husband before the Family Court. The l...
Surjit Singh Malik Vs. Asiatic Oxygen Ltd. and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jan-08-2004
Reported in: [2005(1)JCR255(Jhr)]
ORDERGuru Sharan Sharma, J.1. Heard. This application has been filed to review the order dated 20.9.2001 passed by this Court in M.A. No. 208 of 2000, whereby the said appeal was disposed of with certain observation.2. The said appeal was filed under Order XLIII Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure, challenging the order dated 23.9.2000, whereby prayer for interim injunction made in Title Suit No. 63 of 2000 was rejected with following observation : If at all any wrong will be found, the party or parties having grievances will be redressed at the time of final adjudication of the suit and this order passed on the point of injunction will not affect final adjudication after full trial. All the defendants have as yet not filed their written statements.'3. At the stage of hearing under Order XLI, Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure the counsel for the appellant as well as the respondents 1 and 9 were present and the appeal was disposed of on 20.9.2001.4. This Court did not interfere w...
Rajesh Kumar Jha @ Raju Jha and anr. Etc. Vs. State of Bihar (Now Jhar ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jan-08-2004
Reported in: [2005(2)JCR500(Jhr)]
Vishnudeo Narayan, J.1. The appeals aforesaid have been directed at the instance of the appellants against the impugned judgment and order dated 23.4.1998, and 25.4.1998, respectively passed in Sessions Trial No. 31 of 1997/3 of 1997 by Shri Prabodh Ranjan Dash, 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Deoghar whereby and where-under the appellants aforesaid were found guilty for the offence punishable under Section 412 of the Indian Penal Code and they were convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years each and further to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/- each and in default thereof to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two months. However, they are not found guilty for the offence under Section 395 of the Indian Penal Code and they were accordingly acquitted. Co-accused Sanjay Kumar Mandal was also found guilty for the offence punishable under Section 411 of the Indian Penal Code and he was convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years and to pay a fin...
Workman, Bachu Singh Vs. Presiding Officer, Labour Court and anr.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jan-07-2004
Reported in: [2004(1)JCR415(Jhr)]
Amareshwar Sattay, J.1. The present writ application is directed against the award dated 6.4.1996, passed by the Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Dhanbad in Ref. Case No. 18 of 1994, whereby in reference to dispute referred by the Government of Bihar to decide as to whether the termination of the service of the concerned workman namely Bachu Singh, Mechanized Operator was proper or not? The learned Labour Court has held that the concerned workman Bachu Singh has been found guilty of serious misconduct of instigating the workers to adopt go slow and thereby caused loss to the management and thereby he was rightly dismissed from service.2. The management of M/S Hindustan Malleables and Forginsgs Limited i.e., respondent No. 2 issued charge sheet to concerned workman under the Certified Standing Order of the Company, alleging therein that the petitioner instigated Shri Kali Singh to depose falsely as defence witness in domestic enquiry against one Mangru Mahto and accordingly the said Kal...
SamsuddIn Ansari Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jan-07-2004
Reported in: [2004(1)JCR650(Jhr)]
ORDERAmareshwar Sahay, J.1. The prayer of the petitioner in this writ petition is for regularization the service of the petitioner since he is working as driver on daily wage basis for more than 13 years in the office of the District Leprosy Eradication Officer, West Singhbhum, Chaibasa against a sanctioned post of driver.2. The case of the petitioner is that vide Annexure-1 he was appointed as Jeep Driver on daily wage of Rs. 25/- by the District Leprosy Officer, Singhbhum, Chaibasa dated 7.9.1988 and since he is continuing in service on daily wage. It is stated that inspite of several request made by the petitioner, his service could not be regularized on the ground that post of the Jeep Driver is under the Health Department and said service comes under Class III post and therefore, at the Collectorate level it was not possible to regularize his service which can be done only at the Director level. It is also stated that though the post of driver is vacant but he has not been regular...
Karnal Ranjit Kumar Sinha and ors. Vs. State of Jharkhand and anr.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jan-07-2004
Reported in: 2004(1)BLJR571; 2004CriLJ2145; II(2004)DMC16
Tapen Sen, J. 1. Heard the parties.2. The petitioners, in the instant case, are the matrimonial relatives of the opposite party No. 2 who was married to the petitioner No. 1. It appears that on account of matrimonial discord, a complaint case under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code was set in motion by the opposite party No. 2/wife. The facts which have been narrated in the instant case may not be relevant in view of the fact that a joint application for divorce by mutual consent was later on filed on 28.8.2002 being Title (Matrimonial) No. 88 of 2002 before the learned District Judge, Bokaro and after hearing the parties, the marriage was dissolved by the judgment and decree dated 2.12.2002 decreeing the suit and dissolving the marriage.3. Mr. Sumir Prasad, learned counsel appearing for the opposite party No. 2 supports the contention of the petitioner and also states that the marriage has finally been dissolved and his client i.e. the opposite party No. 2 is no longer interested ...
Deepak Nag and ors. and Sheo Kumar and ors. Vs. State of Jharkhand and ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jan-07-2004
Reported in: [2004(1)JCR647(Jhr)]
ORDERAmareshwar Sahay, J. 1. Since both the cases arises out of the common impugned order passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Ranchi and therefore, both the cases were taken up together and are being decided by this common order.2. These twelve petitioners have challenged the order dated 17.7.2001 (Annexure-9) passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Ranchi disposing of 18 Misc. Cases by a common order, whereby the learned Deputy Commissioner, Ranchi, held that the settlement of the lands of Khata No. 246 and plot No. 464 of Mauja Kanke made in favour of the 18 persons including the petitioners by the Sub-Divisional Officer, Ranchi was without jurisdiction and Sub-Divisional Officer, Sadar, Ranchi had no jurisdiction to settle the Kaisare Hind land and thereby directed to cancel the settlement made in their favour.3. The case of the petitioners is that the lands in question i.e. portion of R.S. plot No. 465, Khata No. 246 of Village Kanke, District, Ranchi were settled with them by the Sub-Di...
Mahabir Sao Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jan-07-2004
Reported in: [2004(1)JCR651(Jhr)]
ORDERAmareshwar Sahay, J.1. In this writ petition the petitioner has challenged the orders as contained in Annexure-3 to the writ petition whereby the Authorised Officer-cum-Divisional Forest Officer, Chatra confiscated the seized seventeen bundles Sal Wood, three bags Charcoal, two Iron Axes, one Jack, eleven pieces of tools together with Matador bearing registration No. BR-13P-1135 in exercise of power under Section 52 of the Indian Forest Act (Bihar Amendment) Act, 1989, the order dated 16.7.1996 as contained in Annexure-4 passed by the District Magistrate, Chatra in appeal against the order of the D.F.O and also the order dated 20.8.2001 as contained in Annexure-5 passed by the Revisional Authority-cum-Secretary Ministry of Forest and Environment Govt. of Jharkhand, Ranchi.2. The sole ground for challenge of the aforesaid orders as has been argued by the learned counsel for the petitioner is that Beat Officer, who seized the vehicle i.e. Matador and other articles had no power to s...
Nand Kishore Prasad Vs. Central Coalfields Ltd. and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jan-07-2004
Reported in: [2004(1)JCR648(Jhr)]
ORDERAmareshwar Sahay, J.1. The petitioner had earlier moved this Court by filing writ application being CWJC No. 1264 of 1996 (R) for quashing the order dated 24.7.1995, by which the promotion of the petitioner from the post of Assistant Store Keeper to the post of Store Keeper was denied by the respondents on the ground that the departmental proceeding was pending against the petitioner. This Court vide order dated 8.9.1997 dismissed the said writ application filed by the petitioner, after taking into consideration the fact that the stand of the respondents was that after completion of the departmental proceeding the case for promotion of the petitioner will be considered and it was also directed in the said order to the respondents to conclude the departmental proceedings as quickly as possible and then to consider the case of the petitioner for promotion on the basis of the sealed cover policy.2. It is stated that subsequently the petitioner was exonerated from the charges levelled...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »