Jharkhand Court November 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.
Jai Narayan Singh, Proprietor of Awadh Cinema Vs. State of Bihar Throu ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Nov-30-2005
Reported in: [2006(1)JCR259(Jhr)]
ORDERR.K. Merathia, J. 1. Heard the parties.Petitioner filed this writ petition for a direction upon the Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (respondent No. 3) to issue 'No Objection Certificate' to the Licensing Authority (respondent No. 2) for renewal of the Cinema Licence; and for quashing the letter dated 18.1.1996 (An-annexure 5), whereby the respondent No communicated his objection to the renewal of Cinema Licence due to non-payment of Entertainment Tax; and for a direction to respondent No. 2 to renew the licence of the petitioner for running 'Awadh Cinema' at Phusro and for quashing Annexure-7 issued by respondent No. 2 refusing renewal of the Cinema Licence on the basis of the said objection of respondent No. 3; and for declaration that petitioner is liable to pay only at the rate of 12% of the compounding tax payable by the Cinema Licence Holder under category 'K; and for other reliefs.2. Sri Devi Prasad, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner, submitted that...
Etwari Devi and ors. Vs. Lakhan Lal and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Nov-30-2005
Reported in: [2006(1)JCR347(Jhr)]
ORDERS.J. Mukhopadhaya, A.C.J.1. This application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been preferred by the petitioners, the judgment debtor/defendants against order dated 4th October, 2005 (Annexure-7) passed by the Addl. Munsif, Ranchi, in Execution Case No. 17 of 2002 whereby and whereunder the objection filed by him under Order XXVI, Rule 10(2) of the Code of Civil Procedure seeking leave to examine the Pleader Commissioner has been rejected.2. From the enclosures attached to this writ petition and having heard the submissions made by the counsel for the parties, it appears that the respondents/ plaintiffs preferred a Title Eviction Suit No. 44 of 1987, which was decreed in their favour on 18th April, 2002. This resulted in the filing of the Title Appeal No. 06/48 of 2002 by the defendant petitioners. Thereafter, the appeal preferred by the judgment debtor petitioners having been dismissed, the petitioners preferred a Second Appeal No. 467 of 2004 before this Court. ...
Kerala Samajam Model School Through Its Trust Incharge Apr Nair Vs. Un ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Nov-30-2005
Reported in: [2006(108)FLR981]; [2006(1)JCR178(Jhr)]
Ramesh Kumar Merathia, J.1. The petitioner has prayed for quashing the order dated 22.8.1995 (Annexure-10) passed by the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, Jamshedpur (respondent No, 2) holding that eight Canteen employees will be treated to be the employees of the petitioner-school and that benefit of Provident Fund be extended to one Grate Keeper, who was re-employed, after retirement.2. The petitioner's contention, inter alia, is that the petitioner-school and the Canteen, both are separate and independent bodies under 'Kerala Samajam', which is a registered society. It has let out space to the contractor for running the Canteen. The School is in no way connected with the affairs of the canteen. The workers in the Canteen are under the direct control of the contractor who appoints and terminates them. The School does not know what records the said contractor is maintaining. There is no master-servant relationship between the Canteen employees and the School. The School is registe...
Femco Promoters and Development and ors. Vs. Shri Sakti Pado Ghosh
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Nov-29-2005
Reported in: [2006(1)JCR371(Jhr)]
ORDER1. This writ petition was preferred by petitioners against the order dated 9th February, 2004 passed by the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, New Delhi in Revision Petition No. 229 of 2004, whereby and whereunder the revision petition preferred by petitioner against the order dated 20th November, 2003 passed by the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Ranchi in Appeal No. 510 of 2003 was dismissed. The appeal aforesaid was preferred against the order dated 30th August, 2003 passed by the District Consumer Redressal Forum, Jamshedpur in Complaint No. 123 of 2002, whereby and whereunder the petitioners were directed to pay an amount of Rs. 4,04,000/- to the respondent with 9% interest from 7th September, 1999 till payment in full and a sum of Rs. 35,000/- towards mental agony and Rs. 5000/- towards litigation cost.2. When the case was taken up on 2nd February, 2005, this Court having noticed the agreement reached between the parties and the statement made bef...
Ranchi University and anr. Vs. Nand Kumar Singh and ors.,
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Nov-29-2005
Reported in: [2006(1)JCR335(Jhr)]
ORDER1. The private respondents were appointed as teaching and non-teaching employees in Mandar College, Mandar and P.P.K. College, Bundu, which were made constituent colleges under the appellant-Ranchi University in the 4th phase. Services of some of them were initially terminated, but they were reinstated in view of the decision and direction of the Patna High Court given in one or other writ petitions including CWJC No. 4021 of 1995. However, they were not paid salary for certain period. By the common impugned order dated 14th August, 2003, learned Single Judge held that the respondent-writ petitioners would be entitled to get arrears of salary from January, 2003 as also the current salary subject to the final decision as may be taken by the Supreme Court. It was brought to the notice of the Court that the question of absorption of teaching and non-teaching staff of converted constituent colleges (4th phase) was pending consideration before the Supreme Court in the case of State of ...
Daro Rout @ Prakash Rout and Laxmi Rout and anr. Vs. State of Bihar (N ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Nov-28-2005
Reported in: 2006CriLJ919; [2006(1)JCR105(Jhr)]
R.K. Merathia, J.1. Since no body appeared on behalf of the appellants in Criminal Appeal No. 140 of 1995, Mr. J.P. Jha, learned Senior Advocate assisted the Court as Amicus Curiae.2. As both the appeals arise out of the same judgment, they have been heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.3. Appellants in both the appeals have been convicted for an offence under Section 395 of the Indian Penal Code and have been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years vide judgment of conviction dated 28.6.1995 and order of sentence dated 29.6.1995 passed by 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Dumka.4. The prosecution case in short is that the informant Naresh Chand Sen (PW 17) gave his Jardbeyan at 4.36 a.m. on 10.11.1993 about the occurrence which took place about five hours earlier in the night between 9/10.11.1993. His version was that at about 11 p.m. in the night, he heard India of chorchor. Sajendra Mandal son of Cheku Mandal (PW 10) was raising hulla that...
Dr. Sushma Verma Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Nov-25-2005
Reported in: [2006(1)JCR93(Jhr)]
ORDERM.Y. Eqbal, J.1. In this writ application the petitioner has prayed for quashing the Office Order No. 498(4), dated 10.12.2004 by which the earlier departmental Notification No. 45(4), dated 3.11.2004 pursuant to which the petitioner was transferred and posted as District Leprosy Officer, Deoghar has been cancelled with a direction to the petitioner to continue on her earlier place of posting i.e. at Jamtara. By the said impugned notification, respondent No. 6 has been transferred and posted as District Leprosy Officer, Deoghar with a direction that Dr. Jha will also hold an additional charge of Medical Officer, Raj Kumari Kushthashram at Deoghar.2. Petitioner's case is that she was posted as District Leprosy Officer, Jamtara. By notification dated 3.11.2004 she was transferred as District Leprosy Officer, Deoghar. In compliance of the said order of transfer petitioner said to have submitted her joining on 6.11.2004 and the Civil Sur-geon-cum-Chief Medical Officer Deoghar acknowle...
Anil Kumar Vs. State of Bihar (Now Jharkhand) and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Nov-24-2005
Reported in: [2006(1)JCR261(Jhr)]
ORDERR.K. Merathia, J.1. Heard the parties.2. Mr. Dubey, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner, Mr. Modi, appearing for the State-respondents and Mr. Mehta, appearing for the University-respondents submitted that this case is now covered by the judgment rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of State of Bihar and Ors. v. Bihar Rajya M.S.E.S.K.K. reported in 2005 (2) JCR 126 (SC) : 2005 (1) JLJR SC 215 and now t the University is to act as per the said judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court.3. Mr. Dubey submitted that petitioner's name appears in Annexure-III and IV a of the report submitted before the Supreme Court relating to Adarsh College at Rajdhanwar (a constituent unit of Binowa Bhave University, Giridih) Mr. Modi appearing for the State respondents and Mr. Mehta, appearing for the University respondents submitted that it is to be seen by the University as to how to deal with the case of the petitioner as per the said report, and it is to take a decision in' acco...
R.K. Steels Vs. Bihar State Electricity Board (Now Jharkhand State Ele ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Nov-24-2005
Reported in: [2006(1)JCR204(Jhr)]
R.K. Merathia, J.1. The petitioner has prayed for quashing the decision of the General Manager-cum-Chief Engineer (respondent No. 2) taken under Clause 13 of the High Tension Agreement with respect to reduction in A.M.G, Charges and maximum Demand Charges relating to the period for the years 1989-90 and 1990-91, dated 21.12.1991 (Annexure 6) and directing him to pass fresh order in accordance with law; and for a direction to respondent No. 2 to forthwith dispose of the Claim Petitions under Clause 13 of the H.T. Agreement, filed by the petitioner on 2.11.1993 (Annexure 8) against A.M.G. Bills and Maximum Demand Charges for the years 1991-92 and 1992-93 and also for quashing the certificate proceeding being Certificate Case No. 5 (Misc.) 1994-95, pending in the Court of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Dhalbhum, Jamshedpur.2. Mr. Biren Poddar, learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the said order dated 21.12.1991 (Annexure 6) is not in accordance with law inasmuch as the interr...
Purnima Sao and ors. Vs. State of Bihar (Now Jharkhand) and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Nov-24-2005
Reported in: [2006(1)JCR214(Jhr)]
ORDERR.K. Merathia, J.1. Heard the parties.2. The predecessors in the interest of the petitioner Dipali Rani Sao @ Dipali Sao, wife of late Gyani Prasad Sao filed this writ petition for quashing the order dated 29th January, 1996 passed by Settlement Officer Incharge, Jamshedpur in Case No. 1 of 1995, under Section 87 of the C.N.T. Act (as contained in Annexure-1).3. The main ground taken in this writ petition is that without affording any reasonable opportunity to the petitioner, the said order was passed against her.4. Mr. C.S. Prasad, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, submitted that records of right were finally published sometime in the year 1983. The case No. 159/8687, under Section 90 of the C.N.T., Act filed by the State was dismissed on 25.8.1995 with liberty to take recourse to Section 87 of the C.N.T. Act. On 30.9.1995 the State filed the suit in question in case No. 1 of 1995, in which petitioner appeared on 15.1.1996 by filing vakalatnama The case was fixed on 2...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »