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.
Mahesh Mandal and anr. Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Apr-28-2004
Reported in: [2006(1)JCR172(Jhr)]
ORDERVikramaditya Prasad, J.1. Heard both the sides.2. Admittedly the petitioners' prayer for bail has been earlier rejected in BA No. 6432 of 2002 by one of the erstwhile Benches of this Court and by that very order one Kesho Mandal was granted bail.3. This bail petition has been renewed on the ground that from the subsequent statement of the informant (Annexure-2) a clear indication has come that Kesho Mandal had also fired on the mouth of the deceased and since there is direct allegation against Kesho Mandal and he has been released on bail therefore the case of the petitioner is on similar footing consequently they deserve bail. Other plea is that the place of occurrence has changed. The learned Counsel for the State has opposed the bail. When the prayer for bail of these petitioners was rejected earlier and Kesho Mandal was granted bail (supra), the FIR appears to be the only material available before the Court for granting bail to Kesho Mandal as there was no specific allegation ...
State Through Superintendent of Police Cbi Vs. Mahendra Prasad and anr ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Apr-28-2004
Reported in: [2006(1)JCR191(Jhr)]
ORDERHari Shankar Prasad, J.1. This application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed for quashing the order dated 27.2.2003 passed in R.C. Case No. 25(A)/94(D) whereby and where under the learned Special Judge, C.B.I. Cases-cum-1st Additional District Judge, Dhanbad refused the prayer of the prosecution for reopening the prosecution evidence.2. Facts giving rise to the filing of this application are that pursuant to the complaint received by the C.B.I., Dhanbad by one S.H. Verma, Fitter Grade-I of Carriage and Wagon Department, Eastern Railway, Barwadih, CBI authorities registered FIR bearing RC Case No. 25(A)/94/(D) on 3,9.1994 against the O.P. No. 1 and 2 that while complainant was working in the office of Carriage and Wagon Department of Eastern Railway, Barwadih O.P. No. 1 demanded illegal gratification of Rs. 200/- from the complainant S.H. Verma for issuing release order. Accordingly a trap was laid and O.Ps. Nos. 1 and 2 were caught red handed on 2....
V.N. Singh Vs. the Central Coalfields Ltd. and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Apr-27-2004
Reported in: [2004(3)JCR306(Jhr)]
Amareshwar Sahay, J.1. The petitioner has prayed for quashing the order as contained in Annexure-18 dated 3.10.1996 passed by the Chairman-cum-Managing Director (Actg.), Central Coal Field Ltd. whereby the petitioner was imposed punishment of stoppage of one increment for one year with cumulative effect from 24.8.1995 and also the order as contained in Annexure-23 dated 3/4.3.1998 passed by the Chairman-cum-Managing Director and Appellate Authority, Coal India Ltd., whereby the Appellate Authority, having found no merit in the appeal filed by the petitioner and thereby affirmed the order passed by the Disciplinary Authority. 2. The petitioner who was posted as Deputy Sales Manager/Areas Sales Officer, Argada Area, during the relevant time was served with a memo dated 21/25.5.1994 under the signature of the Chairman-cum-Managing Director of Central Coalfields Limited whereby he was served with four Articles of Charge containing a statement of imputations of misconduct in support of whic...
G. Ravi Patnaik Vs. Bihar School Examination Board Through Its Secreta ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Apr-27-2004
Reported in: [2005(1)JCR312(Jhr)]
ORDERAmareshwar Sahay, J.1. Heard the parties.2. By order dated 27.2.2003 passed in W.P. (C) No. 344 of 2003 filed by the petitioner, this Court directed the Secretary of Bihar School Examination Board to consider the claim of the petitioner and to pass an appropriate order. By the said order, the petitioner was asked to represent before the Secretary, Bihar School Examination Board, pursuant thereto by Annexure-9, the petitioner sent his application by registered post to the Secretary, Bihar School Examination Board. It appears that on 12.5.2003, the Secretary, Bihar School Examination Board sent a letter to the petitioner asking him to submit certain documents within ten days but in fact the said letter was sent on 20th of May, 2003 which was received by the petitioner on 27.5.2003 but as it appears from Annexure- 10, the order passed by the Secretary, Bihar School Examination Board that without waiting for the reply of the petitioner pursuant to his letter dated 12.5.2003, the Secre...
Santosh Kumar Mahto Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Apr-27-2004
Reported in: [2005(1)JCR388(Jhr)]
ORDERAmreshwar Sahay, J.1. Heard the parties.2. The petitioner retired as Headmaster on 30.11.2003. The grievance of the petitioner in this writ application is that he has not been paid the retiral dues e.g. Pension, Gratuity, Leave Encashment, General Provident Fund, LIC alongwith the statutory interest, though he has submitted all the relevant papers to the concerned respondents on 26.12.2003. It is further stated that by his letter dated 23.02.2004 and 18.03.2004, he has already represented to the District Superintendent of Education, Ranchi as well as the Deputy Commissioner, Ranchi, which was duly received by those authorities but nothing has been done in this matter and no step has been taken by the respondents for the payment of his retiral dues.3. Considering the facts and circumstances of this case, this application is being disposed of with a direction to the respondent No. 2 - District Superintendent of Education, Ranchi, and the respondent No. 5 - Deputy Commissioner, Ranch...
Sangeeta Kumari Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Apr-27-2004
Reported in: [2005(1)JCR387(Jhr)]
ORDERAmreshwar Sahay, J.1. Heard the parties.2. The prayer of the petitioner in this writ application is for direction to the respondents to release and pay the due salary to the petitioner from February, 2003 and May, 2003 onwards with current salary and non-practicing allowances besides other admissible dues. It is stated that against the said demand a letter dated 26.3.2004 has already been issued by the Government of Jharkhand, Department of Health and Family Welfare, Ranchi, whereby all the in-charge Medical Officers are directed to see that the fund which has been allotted for the said purpose should be distributed to the concerned employees, but for the reasons best known to the respondents, the petitioner has not yet been paid their legitimate dues.3. Considering the facts and circumstances of this case, this application is disposed of with a direction to the petitioner to file a fresh representation before the respondent No. 5-The Civil Surgeon-cum- Chief Medical Officer, Dhan...
Pandey Janardan Prasad Sinha Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Apr-27-2004
Reported in: [2005(1)JCR386(Jhr)]
ORDERAmreshwar Sahay, J.1. Heard the parties.2. It appears that the petitioner, earlier moved this Court in WP (S) No. 1531 of 2001 for a direction to the respondents to pay his arrears of pay for six months, difference of new pay scale from 1.4.1997 to 28.2.1998, gratuity and leave encashment etc. The said writ application was disposed of by this Court by order dated 18.3.2004 giving two months time to the respondents to consider the matter and pass an appropriate order.3. In the present application, the grievance of the petitioner is that though he has been paid his provident fund amount i.e. Rs. 5,78,509/- but he has not been paid the statutory interest on the provident fund amount and also he has not been given the benefit of one per cent for not taking any advance during his service period. It appears that after receipt of the same provident fund amount, the petitioner did not point it out to the authority concerned about the aforesaid claim.4. Accordingly, this application is bei...
Hulas Ram, Vs. Central Coal Fields Ltd. Through Its Cmd and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Apr-23-2004
Reported in: [2004(3)JCR1(Jhr)]
M.Y. Eqbal, J.1. In all these writ petitions since common question of law and facts are involved the same have been heard together and are disposed of by this common order.2. IN WPS No. 1721 of 2004 the petitioner's father while in service of the respondent died in harness on 6.11.1999. As per the provision of National Coal Wage Agreement -V (NCWA-V) the petitioner filed application on 17.2.2000 for compassionate appointment. The said application was forwarded by respondent Nos. 6 and 7 namely, the Project Officer and the Chief General Manager of CCL. While recommending the case, the Deputy Chief Personnel Manager informed his higher authority that the petitioner is 17 years old and, therefore, mother should get compensation of Rs. 3000/- per month and the name of the petitioner be kept in live roster. A copy of the said representation has been annexed as Annexure-4 to the writ petition. Curiously enough in 2002 the petitioner was informed by the impugned letter dated 29/30.4.02 that t...
Employer in Relation to the Management of Tata Iron and Steel Company ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Apr-23-2004
Reported in: [2004(3)JCR202(Jhr)]
ORDERTapen Sen, J.1 .Heard Mr. G.M. Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Baban Lal, learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 3 and 4.2. The petitioner in the instant writ petition has challenged the Award dated 16.03.2001 passed in Reference Case No. 83 of 1997 whereby and whereunder he held that the action of the Management in not providing employment to Manoj Kumar (respondent No. 4) was not justified and accordingly directed the Management to provide employment to him within thirty days from the date of publication of the Award.3. Mr. G.M. Mishra, with reference to the order dated 13.07.2001 argued that the only question which arises for determination by this Court is as to whether the order of the Tribunal in directing the employment of the respondent No. 4 out of turn without taking into consideration the fact that persons similarly situated and empanelled prior to the respondent No. 4 (as evident from Annexure-1), was correct or not. He further submits that the Manag...
Pradip Kumar Ghosh Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Apr-23-2004
Reported in: [2004(3)JCR312(Jhr)]
ORDERTapen Sen, J.1. Heard Mr. Ananda Sen, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Pradip Modi, learned G.P. I for the State-respondents.2. The petitioner in the instant case has prayed for issuance of a writ of certiorari for quashing the following Orders :--(1) Order dated 14.09.2001 (Annexure 5) passed by the Authorised Officer-cum-Divisional Forest Officer, Chaibasa, North Division, Chaibasa in Confiscation Case No. 11 of 2001 by reason whereof he confiscated the truck belonging to the petitioner bearing No. WB-33-2547; (2) Order dated 22.03.2002 (Annexure 6) passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Seraikella-Kharswan by which, upon an appeal having been preferred by the petitioner, he confirmed the order of the Confiscating Authority passed on 14.09.2001 and accordingly dismissed the appeal; and (3) the Order dated 26/30.09.2002 (Annexure-7) passed by the Secretary-cum-Revisional Authority, Department of Forest and Environment, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi rejecting the revision ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »