Jharkhand Court April 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.
Dr. Deovrat Verma Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Apr-06-2004
Reported in: [2004(2)JCR528(Jhr)]
ORDERAmareshwar Sahay, J. 1. The prayer of the petitioner in this writ petition are two folds, Firstly, a departmental proceeding pending against him be quashed pursuant to the order dated 11.8.2000 passed in CWJC No. 7375 of 2000 contained in Annexure-5 to the writ petition. Secondly, for a direction to the respondents to pay dues like Gratuity leave encashment amount and half salary during the suspension period and to give other service benefits which the petitioner is entitled to.2. It appears that the petitioner was an accused in Fodder Scam case instituted by the CBI i.e., in R.C. Case No. 59(A)/96. Thereafter, the petitioner was put under suspension and a departmental proceeding was initiated against him. Since the departmental proceeding was continuing for about one year, the petitioner along with Dr. Binod Kumar and others filed CWJC No. 7375 of 2000 before the Patna High Court which was withdrawn by the petitioners with a liberty to challenge the proceeding if it is not decide...
Rajendra Pandey Vs. the State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Apr-06-2004
Reported in: 2004CriLJ2730
1. Appellant Rajendra Pandey has preferred this appeal against the Order of Acquittal dated 16-12-2002, passed by learned Judicial Magistrate, Chatra in Compliant Case No. 324 of 1999 (T. R. No. 102 of 2002) whereby and whereunder, the learned Court below has acquitted respondent Nos. 2, 3 and 4 for the charges Under Section 430 and 447, I. P. C.2. The case of the complainant-petitioner is that the respondents trespassed the land situated in Khata No. 91 and Plot No. 979 having an area of 0.01 decimal in which Well was excavated by his ancestors. It (well) was in use for drinking water and irrigation purpose but the respondents demolished the well and construct wall of the tank of latrine on it.3. The respondents in course of trial took plea that the land was purchased by them from Shiv Prasad Pandey under registered sale deed in which, there was an old Well. Since last ten years it was not in use and was damaged as is evident from the order passed Under Section 147 Cr. P. C. by Execut...
Banchha Ram Chakrawarti Vs. Jharkhand State Electricity Board and anr.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Apr-06-2004
Reported in: 2005CriLJ1556; [2004(2)JCR646(Jhr)]
ORDERVikramaditya Prasad, J.1. The question is what is meant by disposal of a representation by a reasoned order and in what circumstances, such a disposal will give rise to contempt of Court?2. The question arose out of the fact that in W.P. (S) No. 2035/02, a direction was given to the opposite parties by order dated 4.2.2003 (out of which this contempt application arises) that they should dispose of the representation by a reasoned order. The petitioner accordingly filed a representation, which was disposed of having been decided against him. According to the petitioner, this rejection is not based on proper reasonings and consequently, it has been passed only to circumvent the order of the Court and to get rid of any contempt proceeding.3. In many a cases, such orders for disposing a representation by a speaking/reasoned order is given by the Courts. What is meant by speaking/reasoned order requires some deliberation. (1) When a representation is rejected on some grounds which were...
Surendra Prasad Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Apr-06-2004
Reported in: [2004(3)JCR597(Jhr)]
ORDERAmareshwar Sahay, J. 1. Heard the parties.2. The petitioner moved this Court earlier in C.W.J.C. No. 1386 of 1993 (R) with a simple prayer that the respondent be directed to pay the salary to him for the period he has actually worked. This Court by order dated 21.4.1993 disposed of the said writ application with a direction to the petitioner to make a representation before the Civil Surgeon-cum-Chief Medical Officer, Giridih in respect of his claim and the Civil Surgeon was directed to see that if the petitioner was found that he actually worked for any period as claimed by him then he should be paid the wages for the said period.3. The claim of the petitioner in this writ application is that by order dated 3.4.1984 (Annexure-I) the Regional Deputy Director, Health Services, South Chotanagpur Division, Hazaribagh, on the recommendation of the Incharge Medical Officer dated 21.1.1984, he was allowed to work as 'Dainik Mazdoor' on Daily Wages w.e.f. 1.2.1983. Thereafter, by issue of...
Bihar Colliery Mazdoor Sabha Vs. Presiding Officer, Industrial Tribuna ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Apr-05-2004
Reported in: [2004(2)JCR457(Jhr)]
Amareshwar Sahay, J.1. In answer to reference made to it the Central Government Industrial Tribunal No. 2, Dhanbad in Reference Case No. 13 of 1989 held that the concerned workmen were entitled for their reinstatement in service. Accordingly the management of the B.C.C.L. was directed to reinstate all the concerned workmen. However, in the circumstances of the case, no order for back wages was passed by the Tribunal.2. The said award of the Industrial Tribunal was challenged by the Management of B.C.C.L., particularly challenging the order of reinstatement by the tribunal by filing C.W.J.C No. 1419 of 1994 (R). The said very award of the tribunal has also been challenged by the concerned workman against the finding of the tribunal that the workmen were not entitled to back wages after reinstatement by filing the present writ application.3. The writ application filed by the Management of B.C.C.L. i.e. C.W.J.C. No. 1419 of 1994 (R) has been allowed vide judgment dated 16.9.2002, by setti...
Employees in Relation to the Management of the Central Horticultural E ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Apr-05-2004
Reported in: [2004(102)FLR357]; [2004(1)JCR409(Jhr)]
Amareshwar Sahay, J.1. The award passed by the Central Government Industrial Tribunal No. II, at Dhanbad in Ref. Case No. 20 of 1990, is under challenge in this writ application by the Management of Central Horticultural Experiment Station, Ranchi, whereby, in answer to the reference, the Presiding Officer, held that the Central Horticulture Experiment Station is an 'Industry' and the concerned workmen are the workman within the meaning of the Industrial Disputes Act and they deserved their regularization and payment of Group-D pay scales and accordingly the management was directed to regularize the services of all the concerned workmen and to pay them Group-D pay scale which was the lowest pay scale of the institute.2. According to the case of the petitioner, the Central Horticultural Experiment Station (Hereinafter referred to as 'CHES' in short) is one of several Regional Research Stations of the Indian Institute of Horticultural Research (IIHR), Bangalore, which itself is one of ab...
Rabindra Kumar Singh Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Apr-05-2004
Reported in: [2004(2)JCR526(Jhr)]
ORDERAmareshwar Sahay, J.1. By issuance of order dated 8.8.1998 the petitioner was put under suspension by the Government of Bihar and the departmental proceeding was ordered to be initiated against him. During the suspension period the Head Quarter of the petitioner was fixed at Patna. Thereafter, by issue of order dated 27.12.1999 contained in Annexure-2 the Government of Bihar changed the headquarter of the petitioner from Patna to Chaibasa now falling in the State of Jharkhand.2. It appears that again notification dated 23.6.2000 (Annexure-4) issued by the Government of Bihar, the Head Quarter of the petitioner was changed from Chaibasa to Nawada falling in the State of Bihar.3. The petitioner states that since he was in jail custody from 12.6.2000 at Patna in connection with CBI case against him in which he was released on bail on 20.1.2001 and therefore, he could not join at Nawada pursuant to the order contained in notification dated 23.6.2000. The petitioner further states that...
Gajendra Prasad Singh and ors. Vs. Heavy Engineering Corporation Ltd. ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Apr-05-2004
Reported in: [2004(2)JCR439(Jhr)]
Vikramaditya Prasad, J.1. The writ petitioners have filed this writ for (I) quashing a portion of the office order No. 1/1991 (Annexure-6) subsequently amended by Circular No. 4/1991, dated 28.9.1991 (Annexure-5) -whereby and whereunder the petitioners' pay scale has been reduced, (ii) also for issuance of an order to the respondents to consider the case of the petitioners for providing them the pay scale with effect from 31.12.1987 with revisional benefit of Rs. 350/- as the petitioners were in non-supervisory scale and (iii) for a direction that the petitioners' seniority as against their other colleagues who were working as Assistant Personnel Officer be protected.2. Undisputedly, the petitioners were appointed in the year 1972 as L.D. Assistants. In the year 1977, the promotion was given to the petitioners as Input/Output Clerks and Progress Chaser. According to the respondents, the basic cadre was of L.D. Assistant and from that, three cadres namely (i) U.D. Clerk known as Assista...
Ranchi Kshetriya GramIn Bank Officer's Association Vs. National Bank f ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Apr-05-2004
Reported in: [2004(2)JCR568(Jhr)]
Amareshwar Sahay, J.1. The Officer's Association of Ranchi Kshetriya Gramin Bank (hereinafter referred to as the 'RKGB' in short) has prayed for quashing of the letter dated 5.6.1995 of the Chairman of RKGB (Annexure-10), whereby the representation filed by the petitioner was rejected after holding that the management of RKGB had neither denied nor withdrawn the benefit of actual re-imbursement of expenses on conveyance but only the mode and basis of re-imbursement have been changed and that the change in mode and basis of payment was within the authority of the management of RKGB.2. The case of the petitioner is that the Regional Rural Bank Act, 1976 was enacted by the Central Government with an object for providing incorporation, regulation and winding up of Regional Rural Banks with a view of developing the rural economy by providing for the purpose of development of Agricultural Trade Commerce Industry and other productive activities in the rural areas, RKGB was created by a notifi...
B.N. Singh and ors. Vs. Bharat Coking Coal Ltd. and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Apr-02-2004
Reported in: [2004(2)JCR416(Jhr)]
M.Y. Eqbal, J.1. Heard Mrs. M.M. Pal, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. A.K. Mehta and A.K. Das learned counsel for the respondents.2. Petitioners have prayed for quashing the seniority list dated 26.7.1995 issued by Deputy Chief Personnel Manager, Sudamdih Mines of BCCL, Dhanbad and further for a direction to the respondents to prepare two separate seniority list, one for the Cadre post namely for the petitioners and other seniority list for Ex-Cadre post namely for the respondents.3. Petitioners' case is that they are matriculate and have obtained the III training from recognized Training Institution in different trades namely. Fitter, Welder, Turner, Operator etc. They were initially appointed in between 1967 to 1975 in the mines cadre. The petitioners performed their duties as Fitter-cum-Operator, Fitter-cum-Welder and Fitter-cum-Turner respectively. In 1978 an internal advertisement was published by the BCCL inviting application for different posts including the post of F...
- ‹ Prev
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 12
- 13
- Next ›
- Last »