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.
Gunjardeo Ram and ors. Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Apr-23-2004
Reported in: [2004(3)JCR227(Jhr)]
ORDERTapen Sen, J.1. Heard Mr. Saurav Arun, learned counsel appearing for the Petitioners and Mr. Shamim Akhtar, learned S.C. II for the State-Respondents.2. The Petitioners, who are presently all work-charged employees working under the authorities since 1983/1988, have prayed for a command upon the respondents for regularization of their services and for payment of salary following the principles of equal pay for equal work. During the course of arguments, both the learned counsels produced for perusal of this Court a Scheme which has now been formulated by the Government of Jharkhand in relations the work-charged employees and also in relation to daily wage earners. It is evident from reading the contents of the said Scheme that it has been issued on the basis of judicial orders. The Scheme was circulated vide Memo No. 9334 dated 16.12.2003. It is therefore not necessary for this Court to go into the other facts of this case as this Court considers it appropriate to direct the respo...
State of Bihar Vs. Anil Baran Ghosh
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Apr-23-2004
Reported in: [2004(4)JCR461(Jhr)]
Hari Shankar Prasad, J.1. This appeal under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, arises out of judgment dated 12.3,93 and award dated 23.3.93 passed by Sub-Judge Ist-cum-Land Acquisition Judge, Seraikella allowing the reference and enhancing the quantum of compensation.2. It appears that pursuant to the Notification published in the Zila Gazette dated I.I.I 987 under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, lands of the applicant including residential house and other buildings situated in Mauja Dayapur, P.S. Nimdih were acquired for construction of Dam under the Subarnarekha Multi Purpose Project and after issuance of declaration compensation was assessed and award was prepared. The claimant disputed the valuation of the lands including residential buildings etc. fixed by the Collector and sought reference to the dispute under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act.3. The case of the applicant is that the lands, which are admittedly the residential houses consist of three blocks, One ...
In Re: Tata Yodogawa Limited, a Company Incorporated Under the Compani ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Apr-23-2004
Reported in: [2005(2)JCR93(Jhr)]
ORDERS.J. Mukhopadhaya, J.1. Upon the above petition of Tata Yodogawa Limited (hereinafter referred to as the Company), above named, presented to this Court on 22nd August, 2004 (sic--2003?) for adjustment of miscellaneous expenditure (to the extent not written off or adjusted) of Tata Yodogawa Limited in terms of the special resolution passed at their Extra-ordinary General Meeting held on 18th August, 2003 and Upon going through the petition and hearing on 2nd September, 2003, it was ordered to publish the notice in two leading National newspapers; one in English and another in Hindi, informing the concerned persons the decision of the share-holders of the Company taken in its Extra-ordinary General Meeting held on 18th August, 2003. The Notice of hearing of petition was published in the newspapers 'Hindustan Times' (English), Ranchi and Patna Editions on 5th September, 2003 and another in 'Hindustan' (Hindi), Ranchi, Dhanbad and Jamshedpur Editions on 5th September, 2003, calling fo...
Vishnudeo Choudhary Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Apr-22-2004
Reported in: [2004(3)JCR38(Jhr)]
Tapen Sen, J.1. Both the aforementioned two writ petitions have been taken up together in C.W.J.C, No. 3180 the petitioner (Vishnudeo Choudhary) has prayed for a direction upon the respondents to evict the respondent No. 6 (namely Smt. Sushila Sharma who is the petitioner of the other writ petition) from Quarter No. 55/2-4 situated on Road No. 6, Adityapur at Jamshedpur. It has further been prayed that the petitioner should be allowed to reenter the Quarter and the Housing Board be directed to execute deed of final transfer in the name of the petitioner. A further prayer has been made to the effect that the authorities should be directed to initiate action for glaring illegal action taken by one or other officer of the Board in allowing the respondent No. 6 to continue to be in occupation of the Quarter referred to above from 1991 till date which, according to the petitioner, was in fact, allotted to him.2. In C.W.J.C. No. 752 of 1995 (R) the petitioner Smt. Sushila Sharma) has prayed ...
M.P. Bansal and anr. Vs. State Jharkhand and anr.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Apr-22-2004
Reported in: [2004(102)FLR356]; [2004(2)JCR590(Jhr)]; (2004)IIILLJ441Jhar
M.Y. Eqbal, J. 1. In this application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure the petitioners have prayed for quashing the order dated 24.2.2001, passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dhanbad in F.A. case No. 251/2001 whereby the Court has taken cognizance of the offence under Section 96(A) of the Factories Act and also the entire criminal proceeding against them.2. The petitioners were persecuted for violation of the provisions of the Factories Act and the rules made thereunder. The aforesaid case was registered on the basis of a complaint filed by the Inspector of Factories alleging violation of the provisions of the Factories Act and the rules made thereunder.3. Learned counsel for the petitioners assailed the impugned order mainly on the ground that in the license issued by the Opposite Parties, the name of Sri S.C. Roy has been shown as occupier and not the petitioners and, therefore, the instant criminal prosecution against the petitioners other than the occupiers ...
Raj Kishore Singh Vs. the Bihar State Road Transport Corporation Throu ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Apr-21-2004
Reported in: [2004(3)JCR145(Jhr)]
Amareshwar Sahay, J.1. The petitioner has prayed for quashing of Annexure 8, i.e. the Enquiry Report as well as Annexure 7, dated 31.7.2001, by which the Disciplinary authority agreeing with the findings of the Enquiry Officer, issued notice to show cause to the petitioner as to why he should not be awarded major punishment and also the order as contained in Annexure-11 dated 29.8.2002, whereby the Disciplinary authority passed the order imposing punishment of dismissal from service against the petitioner.2. The petitioner, an employee of the Bihar State Road Transport Corporation, was proceeded departmentally for certain charges. The gist of the charges is that the petitioner was Conductor of Bus No. BHT 8060 on 16,4.1984. On that day, the said Bus was checked by a Traffic Inspector under the supervision of a Magistrate near Mariam Toli, while it was returning from Chainpur to Ranchi. On checking it was found that altogether 92 passengers were there in the Bus but only 13 passengers w...
State of Jharkhand Vs. Sanjay Mahto and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Apr-21-2004
Reported in: [2004(2)JCR580(Jhr)]
Lakshman Uraon, J.1. Death Reference No. 6 of 2003, and both the Appeals i.e. Cr. Appeal No 995 of 2003 and Cr. Appeal No. 1047 of 2003, having arisen out of the same judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 17th June, 2003 and 26th June. 2003, passed by the learned 4th Additional Sessions Judge, Garhwa, in Sessions Trial No. 66 of 2000, arising out of Meral P.S. Case No. 97 of 1999, have been heard together and are being disposed of by this single judgment of this Court.2. Appellants in both the Cr. Appeals have been convicted under Section 364/149 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and also to pay a fine of Rs. 12,000/- each and in default of payment of fine, to undergo simple imprisonment for one year each. All the appellants have further been convicted under Section 302/149, of the Indian Penal Code, and have been awarded capital punishment for which the learned 4th Additional Sessions Judge. Fast Track Court, Garhwa, has ref...
Radha Mohan Singh Vs. Bharat Coking Coal Ltd. and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Apr-21-2004
Reported in: [2004(3)JCR161(Jhr)]
ORDERM.Y. Eqbal, J.1. Heard the parties.2. Petitioner passed matriculation examination in the year 1962. In the matriculation certificate his date of birth has been recorded as 5.11.1944. He joined service in 1966 when he was medically examined on 15.6.1966 his age was assessed as 22 years. His age was mentioned in the service book as 22 years without mentioning date and month of his birth. When petitioner came to know about the aforesaid fact, he filed representation before the respondents who enquired into the matter from the Bihar School Examination Board and the Matriculation Certificate was found genuine and the date of birth recorded in the matriculation certificate was found genuine. Inspite of that petitioner was served with a notice of superannuation on 31.1.2004 taking his date of birth as 15.6.1944 instead of 5.11.1944. It is rather absurd to presume that when the petitioner was examined by the Medical Board, that assessment will become the date of birth showing the date, mo...
Sharat Chandra Singh Deo and anr. and Dr. Kalyani Prasad Mishra Vs. St ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Apr-21-2004
Reported in: 2004(2)BLJR1357; [2004(3)JCR204(Jhr)]
Amareshwar Sahay, J.1. The two writ applications arise out of similar fact and involve identical question, accordingly, both the writ applications were heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.2. The facts of C.W.J.C. No. 2182 of 1996 (R) are that the petitioners, Graduates in Ayurvedic Medicine and Surgery applied for the post of Vaidya (Ayurvedic Doctors) pursuant to the advertisement published by Zila Parishad, Singhbhum, Chaibasa for filling up the five posts of Vaidyas (Ayurvedic Doctors) in the pay-scale of Rs. 730-880/-. They appeared in Interview on 01.12.1982 and thereafter they were appointed as Vaidyas on probation for two years by issue of appointment letter dated 25.03.1986 (Annexure-5). The petitioners joined the service on 31.03.1986 which was duly accepted by the Secretary, Zila Parishad. The petitioner No. 1 was posted as Vaidya (Ayurvedic Doctor) in Talbhanga Ayurvedic Hospital, whereas, the petitioner No. 2 was posted at Kuida Ayurvedic Hospit...
Md. Zubair Vs. Jharkhand State Electricity Board and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Apr-21-2004
Reported in: [2004(3)JCR175b(Jhr)]
ORDERAmareshwar Sahay, J.1. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the respondents.2. Prayer in this writ petition is to quash the order as contained in Annexure-4 dated 19.6.1999 by the Dy. Director of Personnel, Dhanbad Area Electricity Board, Dhanbad, whereby the claim of the petitioner to treat his date of birth as 23.1.1938 has been rejected.3. The petitioner had moved this Court earlier in CWJC No. 1517 of 1997 (R), which was disposed of by order dated 20.5.1998. The relevant portion of the said order reads as follows :--'The date of birth mentioned in the service book was being doubted by the authorities as some sort of marks were there, but the same has not been investigated as to how those marks were there. If there were any confusion in the mind of the authorities of the BSEB, they should have made an enquiry after an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, but without basing on the service book or without hinging the date of birth in the service book, on the basi...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »