Jharkhand Court October 2005 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.
Vivek Kumar and ors. and Shiv Shankar Chatterjee Vs. State of Jharkhan ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Oct-28-2005
Reported in: [2006(1)JCR249(Jhr)]
S.J. Mukhopadhaya, A.C.J.1. In both the writ petitions, as similar prayer has been made they were heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.2. Petitioner Vivek Kumar and two others of W.P. (S) No. 2653 of 2005 have challenged the order contained in letter No. 813. dated 12th April. 2004 issued by the Secretary, Agriculture and Cane Development Department. Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi, whereby and whereunder. the process of recruitment for appointment of Marketing Supervisors in the Jharkhand Stale Agricultural Marketing Board, (hereinafter referred to as the Marketing Board) has been cancelled. Further prayer has been made to set aside the order dated 15th April, 2005 Issued by the Managing Director, Marketing Board, Jharkhand. Ranchi, whereby and whereundcr the process of appointment to the post of Marketing Supervisors has been cancelled.Petitioner Shiv Shankar Chatterjee of W.P. (S) No. 2974 of 2005 while challenged the decision taken by the State of Jharkh...
Shiv Karmpal Sahu, Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Oct-28-2005
Reported in: [2006(108)FLR984]; [2006(1)JCR245(Jhr)]
ORDERS.J. Mukhopadhaya, A.C.J.1. In all these cases, the petitioners, who claim to be the dependent (s) of the person (s), killed by the extremists, have prayed for direction (s) to pay compensation and/or to provide appointment on compassionate ground, as per the Government's scheme. The grounds/ cause being common, all the writ applications have been heard together and are being disposed of by this common order.2. Before deciding the claim of individual petitioner, it is necessary to notice relevant guidelines, issued by the State Government from time to time for payment of compensation and/or appointment on compassionate ground to the dependent (s) of those, killed by the extremists, which are discussed hereunder :The then State of Bihar from its Home (Special) Department initially circulated a scheme vide Letter No. 1701, dated 21st September, 1987, whereby and whereunder, it was decided to give compensation to the dependent (s)/injured, who are killed/injured by the terrorist/extr...
Kapildeo Ram Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Oct-28-2005
Reported in: [2006(1)JCR254(Jhr)]
ORDERS.J. Mukhopadhaya, A.C.J.1. As both the writ petitions have been preferred by same petitioner, and are based on common facts, they were heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.2. The petitioner who was in the services of the State was proceeded and by an order No. 1670-73, dated 16th April, 1997 he was asked to refund the excess amount which he had drawn on account of wrong promotion. In spite of such order he having not refunded the amount for more than three years he was suspended vide an order No. 5158-60, dated 25th May, 1997.In the first writ petition, W.P. (S) No. 2976 of 2003, the petitioner has challenged the order of suspension No. 5158-60, dated 25th May, 1997.During the pendency of the said writ petition, the order of suspension was revoked and an Order No. 219, dated 20th March, 2002, followed by Memo No. 287, dated 26th March, 2003 were issued by which, giving reference to the earlier Order No. 1670-73, dated 26th April, 1994, the respondents ...
Arun Kumar Chakravarty Vs. Asit Baran Chakravarty and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Oct-28-2005
Reported in: [2006(1)JCR256(Jhr)]
ORDERS.J. Mukhopadhaya, A.C.J.1. This petition under Article 227 of the Constitution has been preferred by 3rd defendant/ petitioner against the order dated 13th October, 2004 passed by Sub-Judge V, Hazaribagh in Title (Partition) Suit No. 93 of 1977, whereby and whereunder, the Court below allowed the amendment petition dated 21st September, 2004, as preferred by the plaintiff/1st respondent.2. The case of the petitioner is that one Suropati Chakravarty, father of plaintiff/1st respondent filed the aforesaid suit for partition being Title Suit No. 93 of 1977, claiming partition of 1/4th share in the Schedule 'B' properties and half share in the Schedule 'C' properties. Schedule 'C' properties which is the subject matter of the present writ petition, comprised of 20 decimals of Plot No. 2904 under Khata No. 225. The original plaintiff, father of present plaintiff/1st respondent claimed that the Schedule 'C' property was acquired jointly by one Suropati Chakravarty and another Shreepati...
Mukesh Kumar and ors., Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Oct-28-2005
Reported in: [2006(1)JCR225(Jhr)]
S.J. Mukhopadhaya, A.C.J. 1. In all these cases, as the petitioners have challenged the common orders, they have been heard together and are being disposed of by this common order.2. Petitioners have challenged the orders, contained in Memo No. 2, dated 20th May, 2003 and Memo No. 251, dated 28th June, 2003. The first Memo was published in the daily newspaper 'Prabhat Khabar' on 2nd June, 2003, whereby, giving reference to Letter No. 5530, dated 23rd October, 1988, and other letters, services of the petitioners and others have been terminated, on the ground of illegal appointments. Formal order has been issued by the Regional Director, Santhal Parganas Division, Dumka, vide Memo No. 251, dated 28th June, 2003.3. As the issue can be decided on short points, similar cases having already been disposed of by this Court and Supreme Court, it is not necessary to discuss all the facts, except the relevant one, as mentioned hereinafter :All the petitioners claim to have been appointed as Techn...
Bhola Thakur, Secretary, Non-gazetted Workers Union, Bokaro Branch Vs. ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Oct-28-2005
Reported in: [2006(1)JCR227(Jhr)]
S.J. Mukhopadhaya, A.C.J.1. This writ petition has been preferred by the petitioner Bhola Thakur, Secretary, Jharkhand Non-Gazetted Workers Union, Ranchi, Bokaro Branch, Bokaro Steel City, Bokaro (hereinafter to be referred as the 'Workers Union') against the order, contained in Memo No. 3 M-2-6-2000-4737/Bihar, Patna dated 8th July, 2000, as circulated vide Memo No. 772, dated 25th August, 2000, whereby and whereunder, the Finance Department of Government of Bihar informed all the departmental heads that the Government employees, who have been allotted quarters of TISCO at Jamshedpur; Bokaro Steel City, Bokaro and H.E.C., Ranchi, will not get the House Rent Allowance in the light of Finance Department's Memo No. 5011, dated 5th May, 1981, as the quarters allotted to them shall be deemed to be Government quarters.2. The petitioner claims to be the Secretary of the Union of Non-Gazetted Government of Jharkhand Employees, who are posted at Bokaro and occupying quarters of Bokaro Steel Pl...
Shyam Kishore Prasad Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Oct-28-2005
Reported in: [2006(1)JCR237(Jhr)]
ORDERS.J. Mukhopadhaya, A.C.J.1. This writ petition has been preferred by the petitioner for a direction on the respondents to consider his case for appointment to the post of Peon in the District Court, Godda. Further prayer has been made to set aside the order of appointment, issued in favour of 3rd respondent Rajesh Kumar Hansda on the ground of illegal appointment.2. Admitted facts of the case are that the respondents issued advertisement for appointment against class IV posts of Peon and equivalent posts in different Judgeships, including the Judgeship of Godda. Petitioner alongwith others applied for appointment against Class IV post and by letter dated 5th April, 2002 he was asked to appear at viva-voce test/interview on 30th April, 2002 in which he appeared.3. Grievance of the petitioner is that though his name is appearing at serial No. 17 of the waiting list and the persons, including those, whose names are appearing in the waiting list, have been appointed in January, 2003, ...
Sitwanto Devi Mahila Kalyan Sansthan Through Its Secretary Madan Mohan ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Oct-27-2005
Reported in: AIR2006Jhar39; [2006(1)JCR301(Jhr)]
ORDERNarendra Nath Tiwari, J.1. In this writ application, the petitioner has prayed for quashing the letter No. GE/355 dated 1.3.2005 (Annexure 10) issued by the respondent No. 3 whereby the petitioner has been directed to deposit inspection fee for grant of 'No Objection Certificate' to start Under Graduate Level Course in the Management purportedly, in response to the application of the petitioner for grant of affiliation by the University for establishment of M.B.A. Course. The petitioner has further prayed for a direction commanding upon the respondents 2 and 3 to proceed for granting affiliation to the petitioner-Institute for M.B.A. Course.2. The petitioner is a Society registered under the Societies Registration Act, having its registration No. 209/96-97. The petitioner intending to establish an institute for M.B.A. Course in the name of Netaji Institute of Business Management at Jamshedpur, made an application for grant of approval dated 24th November, 2002 before the All India...
Jamshed Mian Vs. Halima Khatoon
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Oct-27-2005
Reported in: 2006(1)BLJR116; 2006CriLJ923
ORDERAmareshwar Sahay, J.1. In this application the petitioner has challenged the legality of the order dated 14.72004 passed by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Dumka awarding maintenance in favour of the applicant/wife, directing the petitioner/husband to pay Rs. 500/- P.M. from the date of filing of the application under Section 125, Cr PC.2. The facts in short are that an application under Section 125, Cr PC was filed by Halima Khatoon, i.e. the opposite party herein, for grant of maintenance allowance of Rs. 500/- P.M. It was stated by her that she was legally married wife of the petitioner herein and the marriage between them was solemnized on 3.5.1993 according to Muslim rites and rituals. At the time of marriage, huge amount of dowry was demanded by the husband but the father of the applicant paid only Rs. 25,000/- cash and gave one motorcycle and a wrist watch to her husband but since, he was not satisfied and, therefore, he started pressurizing her to bring more dowry. He u...
Smt. Leela Yadav and ors. Vs. State of Bihar
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Oct-26-2005
Reported in: I(2006)DMC444; [2006(1)JCR103(Jhr)]
Amareshwar Sahay, J.1. This application is directed against Order dated 24.01.2000 passed by the Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Jamshedpur in Misc. Case No. 92 of 1998 whereby the learned Judicial Magistrate dismissed the petition for maintenance filed under Section 125, Cr PC by the petitioners on the ground that the same was not maintainable.2. The brief facts are that an application under Section 125, Cr PC was filed before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jamshedpur by the petitioners against the opposite party No. 2 herein namely Pradeep Kumar Chaudhary for grant of maintenance in favour of petitioner Nos. 2 and 3 namely Manisha Choudhary and Payal Chaudhary respectively who were the minor daughters of the opposite party No. 2 (Pradeep Kumar Choudhary) born out of the wedlock of the opposite party No. 2 (Pradeep Kumar Choudhary) and Sarika Choudhary (since deceased), the mother of the petitioner Nos. 2 and 3 and the daughter of the petitioner No. 1 namely Smt. Leela Yadav. The peti...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »