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.
Sujata Agarwal Vs. Jharkhand State Electricity Board Through Its Chair ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Apr-15-2004
Reported in: AIR2004Jhar131; [2004(3)JCR162(Jhr)]
ORDERAmareshwar Sahay, J.1. Heard.2. The grievance of the petitioner is that without any prior notice to the petitioner, the respondents have illegally converted the electric connection of the petitioner at his residential premises from domestic category to commercial category and thereby have raised the bills as contained in Annexure-6 to the writ application on the basis of an inspection report which was not supplied to the petitioner.3. In the case of Bihar State Electricity Board and Ors. v. Sri Bir Ispat, reported in 1999 (1) PLJR 466, it has been held that the rules of natural justice are applicable to the administrative decision also unless expressly or by necessary implication they are excluded. It has been further held in the aforesaid decision that prior to raising of the bills, in respect of the report, it is encumbent upon the Board to supply a copy of the same as well as the fresh bill to the petitioner and then the notice should have been issued prior to raising of such a...
Dilip Kumar Pandey Vs. State of Jharkhand Through Secretary, H.R.D.D. ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Apr-15-2004
Reported in: [2004(3)JCR188(Jhr)]
ORDERTapen Sen, J.1. Heard the parties. 2. The petitioner has prayed for quashing the order dated 27.2.2003 as contained in Annexure-34 by which the respondent No. 5 terminated the services of the petitioner. The petitioner has further prayed that after quashing of the aforementioned order, he be reinstated in service with full back wages.3. One of the most important points argued by the learned counsel for the petitioner is that after having spent 14 years in a regular and in a confirmed position in the Department of Education, the respondents could not have terminated his service without following the elaborate procedure laid down for that purpose. The other points which have been argued with equal emphasis are that the petitioner was in fact appointed in a regular manner and in accordance with the rules and/or Circulars that were prevalent at that time and that there was no occasion for the respondents to come to a conclusion that his initial appointment was bad. It has further been...
Avinash Kr. Singh and ors. Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Apr-15-2004
Reported in: 2004(2)BLJR1352; 2004CriLJ2635; II(2004)DMC548
ORDERS.J. Mukhopadhaya, J. 1. This revision application has been preferred by petitioners against the order dated 9th March, 2004 passed by learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge, East Singhbhum, Jamshedpur in Sessions Trial No. 377 of 2001, whereby and whereunder while the Court-below while discharged the petitioners from the offence under Section 307 of the I.P.C. rejected their petition for discharge so far as charge under Sections 341, 323, 504 and 498A of the I.P.C. is concerned.2. Counsel for the petitioners relied on a Judgment dated 23rd Dec. 2002 passed by learned. Principle Judge, Family Court, Singhbhum East, Jamshedpur in Matrimonial Suit No. 40/358 of 2001. It was submitted that the family Court after consideration of entire evidence on record, passed a decree for dissolution of marriage of petitioner No. 1, Smt. Manju Singh. It was also submitted that the aforesaid judgment which is based on evidence was produced before the Court below to suggest that no case was made out ...
No. 7517759 Cook, Ayodhya Pandey Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Apr-13-2004
Reported in: 2004(2)BLJR1080; [2004(2)JCR405(Jhr)]
Tapen Sen, J.1. The petitioner, a cook under the Central Industrial Security Force is aggrieved by the following Orders :--(a) order dated 17/18.9.1997 (Annexure 7) passed by the respondent No. 3 dismissing the petitioner from service,(b) order dated 31.9.1998 (Annexure 8) passed by the respondent No. 2 rejecting the appeal of the petitioner, and(c) order dated 16.10.2001 (Annexure 11) passed by the respondent No. 6 rejecting the revision filed by the petitioner.The petitioner, in addition to the aforementioned prayers also prays for a direction upon the respondents for his salary and other admissible benefits.2. From the facts pleaded, it is evident that on 1.10.1975 the petitioner was appointed as a cook in the C.I.S.F. and was assigned Code No. 7517759 whereafter he was posted under the C.I.S.F. at Ghanudih Colliery, Jhaira, Area No. IX under the Bharat Coking Coal Limited. On 12.7.1990, the petitioner was transferred to the Bokaro Steel City where he was posted in 'F' Company where...
Pradeep Kumar Jha Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Apr-13-2004
Reported in: [2004(2)JCR637(Jhr)]
ORDERAmareshwar Sahay, J.1. Heard the parties.2. The order as contained in Annexure-9 dated 09.02.2002 passed by the Deputy Inspector General of Police, Bihar, Patna by which the representation of the petitioner for his promotion to the post of Sub-Inspector of Police was rejected is impugned in this writ application.3. The petitioner had earlier moved this Court by filing CWJC No. 502 of 2001 for direction to the respondents to consider his case for promotion on the ground that the juniors have already been promoted to the post of Sub-Inspector of Police but his case was not considered. The said writ petition was disposed of, by order dated 06.02.2001, with a direction to the respondents to consider the representation filed by the petitioner and to pass an appropriate order in accordance with law.4. Pursuant thereto Annexure-9 has been passed by the DIG of Police, Bihar.5. It is submitted that there is no dispute that the petitioner is posted in the State of Jharkhand and therefore in...
Prem Kumar @ Prem Kishore Prasad Vs. State of Bihar (Now Jharkhand)
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Apr-13-2004
Reported in: [2004(3)JCR335(Jhr)]
Lakshman Uraon, J.1. Petitioner has challenged the order of conviction and sentence dated 16.5.2000 and sentence dated 17.5.2000 passed by Shri Jai Nandan Sharma, learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Chatra in Sessions Trial No. 263 of 1998 convicting him Under Section 302, IPC and Section 27 of the Arms Act and sentencing him to undergo imprisonment for life and RI for two years respectively.2. Informant Bhola Prasad Jaiswal, a friend of deceased Rakesh @ Anjani Prasad, on 1.1.1998 at 8.30 p.m. proceeded for their respective homes. On their way, Rakesh @ Anjani Prasad informed that his younger daughter and son liked to take sweets, hence on his request they went to a nearby chowk. On their way, he saw appellant Prem along with one unknown boy at Kishori Chowk. Thereafter, as it was New-Year Day hence Rakesh requested to take wine. They went to the wine shop of Chando Ram (PW 9). They purchased two pouches countrymade wine and took it. Thereafter they proceeded ahead and reached Pirp...
Ashit Kumar Singh Vs. Bokaro Steel Plant, Unit of Steel Authority of I ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Apr-13-2004
Reported in: [2005(1)JCR313(Jhr)]
ORDERAmareshwar Sahay, J.1. Heard Mr. A.K. Sahani learned counsel for the petitioner.2. Nobody appeared on behalf of the respondents, though on 12.3.2004 an undertaking was given by the learned counsel for the respondents to file vakalatnama and also the counter affidavit, within a period of four weeks. But neither counter affidavit has been filed nor anybody has appeared today on behalf of the respondents. In that view of the matter, this writ petition is being disposed of on the basis of the averments made in the writ petition.3. The grievance of the petitioner is that though the land of the petitioner was acquired for Bokaro Steel Limited but as per the scheme framed by the concerned respondents the petitioner has not been provided employment in Bokaro Steel' Plant.4. In similar matter, which came before this Court in CWJC No. 2329 of 2001, Ranjit Malik v. Bokaro Steel Plant and others and CWJC No. 1571 of 2001, Gitu v. Bokaro Steel Plant and others, this Court directed the responde...
Sona Ram Soren and anr. Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Apr-09-2004
Reported in: [2004(2)JCR413(Jhr)]
ORDERAmareshwar Sahay, J.1. The petitioners have prayed for direction to the respondents to issue the appointment letters to the petitioners in view of the recommendation made by the Bihar Public Service Commission prior to coming into force of Bihar Re-organization Act, 2000, which according to the petitioners could not be issued in their favour because of mistake on the part of the respondents themselves.2. The facts, which are not in dispute, are that on the basis of the advertisement published by the Bihar Public Service Commission for appearing in Second Primary Teacher Examination, the petitioners appeared in the Preliminary Test examination and successfully passed the same. Therefore, the petitioners also appeared and passed the main examination conducted by the Bihar Public Service Commission on 18.7.1999. The result of the said main examination was published on 20.11.1999 and a merit list of 311 candidates were prepare in which name of the petitioners appeared at Serial No. 23...
Kedar Nath Rai and ors. Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Apr-09-2004
Reported in: [2004(2)JCR639(Jhr)]
ORDERTapen Sen, J.1.Heard Mr. R. Krishna, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr. Sohail Anwar, learned Senior Advocate, for the University and Dr. M.K. Laik, learned Senior S.C.-I for the State respondents and with their consent, this writ petition is being disposed off at this stage.2. The six petitioners are said to be working continuously and without any break as Laboratory Assistant in the S.R.T. College, Dhamri at Godda. This fact has not been disputed by any of the respondents. The only stand is that these petitioners have been working on daily wages without regular pay scale in as much as the Government has not yet sanctioned these posts. However, a letter dated 06.05.1990 (Annexure 8) issued by the Bhagalpur University goes to show that the University had written a letter to various authorities including the Heads of the P.G. Department etc. and also to members of all constituent colleges of the Bhagalpur University informing them that cases for regularization of ...
Prafulla NaraIn Dwary and ors. Vs. Nil NaraIn Dwary and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Apr-09-2004
Reported in: [2004(3)JCR15(Jhr)]
Vishnudeo Narayan, J.1. This appeal at the instance of the defendants appellant has been preferred against the impugned judgment and preliminary decree dated 28.07.2001 and 13.08.2001 respectively passed in title partition suit No. 683 of 1997 by Shri Anirudh Prasad Sharma, 3rd Subordinate Judge, Doeghar whereby and whereunder the said suit was decreed for carving out a separate takhta of half share in favour of the plaintiff-respondent 1st set in the suit property by appointment of a Pleader Commissioner.2. The plaintiffs (who are respondent 1st set in this appeal) had filed the said suit for metes and bounds partition of the suit property detailed in Schedules I, II and III at the foot of the plaint in which they have claimed half share and further a relief has been sought that any portion of the suit property if found alienated by defendant-appellant Nos. 1 and 2 or their father be allotted to their share.3. The case of the plaintiffs-respondent 1st get is that Harihar Dutt Dwari is...
- ‹ Prev
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- Next ›
- Last »