Jharkhand Court March 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.
Raj Refractories Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Jharkhand State Electricity Board and a ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-05-2004
Reported in: [2004(2)JCR476(Jhr)]
ORDERTapen Sen, J.1. Heard Mr. M.S. Mittal, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Delip Jerath learned counsel for the respondents.2. The prayer made in the Writ Petition is for quashing the order communicated by letter dated 27.7.2001 as contained in An-nexure-6 whereby and whereunder the General Manager-cum-Chief Engineer has rejected the prayer in relation to relief regarding maximum demand and has observed that if any surcharge is paid by the petitioner, the same will be adjusted against future period.3. According to the petitioner, the Bill in question (Annexure-1) was for the period 1999-2000 for a sum of Rs. 91,946 approximately. Upon receipt of the aforementioned bill, the petitioner deposited 50% thereof and receipt to that effect was issued by the Board on 9.8.2000 (Annexure-2). The petitioner thereafter filed an application for relief under the provisions of Clause 13 of the HT agreement wherein he stated that supply was not given as per agreement and that the petitione...
Udai Pratap Singh and ors. Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-05-2004
Reported in: [2006(1)JCR201(Jhr)]
ORDERLakshman Uraon, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.2. In paragraph No. 3 of the supplementary affidavit, filed on behalf of the petitioner, it has been mentioned that writ petitioner No. 3 Jitan Mallik son of late Fakirchand Mallik died on 9.11.2003 during pendency of this writ petition. In that view of the matter, the name of the petitioner No. 3 is deleted.3. Petitioners have filed this writ petition for issuance of an appropriate writ, order or direction, quashing the order dated 12.7.2002, passed by the learned Additional District & Sessions Judge-Ill, Dhanbad, in Criminal Revision No. 4 of 1994, arising out of G.R. No. 3369 of 1988, whereby and whereunder, the learned Additional Sessions Judge has been pleased to dismiss the Criminal Revision.4. Learned Counsel for the petitioner has drawn my attention towards two charge-sheets (Annexures 2 and 5), submitted in this case, by the Investigating Officer. At Serial No. 5 of Annexure-2 the name of Dr. A.P. Sinha has been m...
Anil Kumar Jha Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-04-2004
Reported in: [2004(2)JCR14(Jhr)]
Tapen Sen, J.1. The petitioner in the instant case prays for quashing the order dated 18.12.1999 issued under Memo No. 2369 by the Director. Social Welfare. Government of Bihar, Patna (Annexure-1), whereby and whereunder the appointment of the petitioner as an Assistant Teacher of the Government Deaf & Dumb School. Dumka was ordered to be cancelled with immediate effect. The petitioner also makes a prayer that upon setting aside of the aforementioned order, appropriate direction be passed reinstating him together with all consequential benefits, including arrears of pay as well as current, salary and other benefits.2. According to the petitioner, he was appointed on the post of an Assistant Teacher of the Government Deaf & Dumb School. Dumka by order dated 16.6.1987. Upon his joining, the District Welfare Officer, Dumka duly accepted the same by Memo dated 11.7.1987 (see Annexures-2 and 3).On 26.2.1986, the Director. Social Welfare issued a direction to the Deputy Director. Social Welf...
Singh Saw Mill Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-04-2004
Reported in: [2004(2)JCR32(Jhr)]
ORDERTapen Sen, J. 1. This contempt application has been filed making a grievance that the order dated 10.12.2002 passed in WP (C) No. 3672 of 2001 as contained in Annexure 2 hereof has been disobeyed.2. It is stated that after obtaining the certified copy of the judgment, the petitioner filed an application on 27.12.2002 which was followed by a reminder on 29.3.2003 vide Annexures 4 and 4/1. According to the petitioner, on 7.5.2003 by Annexure-5, the Divisional Forest Officer Deoghar, asked the petitioner to appear in a hearing which was scheduled to be held on 12.5.2003. It appears that the petitioner received that letter belatedly and therefore, as has been stated in paragraph 28, it filed an application (Annexure 6) wherein it stated that it had received the letter dated 7.5.2003 only on 16.5.2003 and therefore could not attend. The petitioner accordingly, made a prayer for appropriate orders on that letter. The petitioner has stated that in the first week of June, it received an o...
Jai Govind Singh Vs. Bihar State Electricity Board and 5 ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-04-2004
Reported in: 2004(1)BLJR657; [2004(2)JCR34(Jhr)]
ORDERTapen Sen, J.1. In this writ application, the petitioner prays for quashing the resolution dated 4.4.2000 (Annexure-7) being resolution No. 785, a copy whereof was forwarded to the petitioner vide Memo No. 786 whereby and where under the petitioner was imposed with the punishment of 'stoppage of 5% of pension'. The petitioner has also prayed that after quashing of, the aforesaid resolution, a direction be made upon the respondents (respondent No. 3 in particular) to release 5% of the withheld pension.2. The short facts which are necessary to be taken note of are that after having been appointed as an Assistant Electrical Engineer, he was promoted to the post of an Executive Engineer in April 1976. Thereafter, in January, 1992, the petitioner was promoted to the post of a Superintendent Engineer.3. On 28.2.1997, the petitioner superannuated from service. It appears from the pleadings that on 5.5.1997, the respondent-Board withheld 10% of pension plus Gratuity and Leave Encashment o...
Ayodhya Mahto and ors. Vs. Ram Dutt Mahto
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-04-2004
Reported in: [2004(2)JCR18(Jhr)]
Vishnudeo Narayan, J.1. This appeal at the instance of defendants-appellant has been preferred against the impugned judgment and decree dated 9.9.1988 and 20.9.1988 respectively passed in Title Appeal No. 69 of 1984 by Shri Jugal Kishore Prasad. 6th Additional District Judge, Palamau whereby and whereunder the said appeal was allowed and the judgment and decree dated 27.6.1984 and 11.7.1984 respectively in Title Suit No. 45 of 1982 passed by the Munsif, Palamau were set aside.2. The plaintiff-respondent had filed-the said Title Suit for a declaration regarding the sale deed dated 27.8.1981 (Ext. 1/1) executed by original defendant No. 1 Machu Mahto in favour of defendants-appellant Saraswatia Devi and Manmatia Devi is void, illegal, inoperative and not binding upon the plaintiff-respondent in view of the fact that the property covered under the said deed is a joint family acquisition.3. The case of the plaintiff-respondent is that one Shiv Balak Mahto was the common ancestor of the par...
Chandra Bhushan Sood Vs. Coal India Ltd. and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-04-2004
Reported in: [2004(2)JCR28(Jhr)]
Amareshwar Sahay, J. 1. In this application, the petitioner has prayed for a direction to the respondents to consider his case for promotion afresh to the post of Executive Grade-M-1 and to give an appropriate marking on the basis of ACR as awarded by the Project Officer and General Manager who were the immediate Controlling Authority of the petitioner after ignoring the action of the Directors in reducing the ratings of ACR of the petitioner and to quash the order dated 27.12.1995 as contained in An-nexure-1 to the writ application whereby, the ratings of the ACR of the petitioner was reduced.2. The case of the petitioner is that he was appointed as Junior Executive Trainee on 4.11.1978 and then he was promoted on 22.2.1980 as Under Manager (Executive Grade E-2) thereafter he got promotion of E-3 Grade on 10.1.1985, and then to E-4 and E-5 Grade on 31.8.1988 and 30.7.1992 respectively.3. It Is stated by the petitioner that he was qualified for the post of M-1 Grade and in the year 199...
Taraknath Upadhyay Vs. Bharat Coking Coal Ltd. and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-04-2004
Reported in: 2004(1)BLJR680; [2004(2)JCR41(Jhr)]
ORDERTapen Sen, J.1. In this writ application, the petitioner prays for quashing the letter dated 16/20.10.2003 being letter No. 3169 as contained in Annexure 16 by which the petitioner was informed that in view of the fact that he had attained the age of 60 years, he would therefore superannuate with effect from 31.3.2004 (forenoon). The petitioner also makes a prayer for quashing letter No. 3201 dated 24/ 27.10.2003 (Annexure 18) by which the respondents apparently rejected the representation filed by the petitioner and once again put him on notice that he would be superannuating with effect from 31.3.2004. As a consequence of quashing the aforementioned letters, the petitioner prays for issuance of an order commanding the respondents to correct his date of birth as assessed by the Medical Board.2. The case of the petitioner is that he joined as a Literate Prop Coolie in the Gopalichak Colliery on 1.1.1969. On 7.5.1969, he passed the Mining Sirdar's Examination and accordingly was pr...
Chandra Shekhar Mishra Vs. Presiding Officer, Labour Court and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-04-2004
Reported in: [2004(102)FLR120]; [2004(2)JCR222(Jhr)]
Amareshwar Sahay, J.1. The petitioner filed an application under Section 28(1) of the Bihar Shops and Establishment Act, 1953 read with Rule 22 of the Bihar Shops and Establishment Rules, 1955 before the Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Ranchi, which was registered as B.S. Case No. 14 of 1992 stating inter alia that he was initially employed in the High Tension Insulator Factory as clerk-cum-typist. He also worked as Chaser in the despatch section and thereafter he was posted in the Accounts Department where he used to maintain the store ledger and then since January, 1980 he was posted in the despatch section. Subsequently, on 28.1.1981 the petitioner was put under suspension due to the alleged involvement in a criminal case. The order of suspension was followed by the charge-sheet and then he was proceeded departmentally and ultimately the order of dismissal from service was passed on 25.10.1993.2. The petitioner filed an application under Section 26(2) of the Bihar Shops and Establi...
Subtakim Ansari Vs. State of Bihar (Now Jharkhand)
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-04-2004
Reported in: 2004(1)BLJR780; 2004CriLJ2137; [2005(2)JCR399(Jhr)]
Vishnudeo Narayan, J.1. This appeal at the instance of the appellant has been directed against the impugned judgment and order dated 19.4.1999 and 21.4.1999 passed in Sessions Case No. 178 of 1998/ 165 of 1998 by Sri Mungeshwar Sahoo, 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Godda whereby and whereunder the appellant was found guilty for the offence punishable under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code and he was convicted and sentenced to undergo R.I. for seven years.2. The prosecution case has arisen on the basis of the fardbeyan (Ext. 3) of Informant PW 4 Zahida Khatoon, a married woman, said to be aged about 15 or 16 years as per medical evidence and alleged to be the victim of ravishment, recorded by PW 8 S.I. Nand Kishore Sharma, the I.O. on 20.1.1998 at 13.00 hours in Godda Muffasil PS regarding the occurrence which is said to have taken place on that very day at 6.00 hours on the pinda of the pond in village Zamni Paharpur P.S. Godda Town District Godda and a case was instituted by drawi...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »