Jharkhand Court February 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.
Doncon Trade Centre Patratu Vs. Central Coalfield Ltd. and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Feb-09-2005
Reported in: 2005(2)ARBLR616(Jhar); 2005(1)BLJR558; [2005(2)JCR118(Jhr)]
ORDERM.Y. Eqbal, J.1. In the instant application filed under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (shortly 'the said Act') the petitioner has prayed for appointment of Arbitrator and for reference of the dispute between the parties for adjudication by the appointed Arbitrator.2. Petitioner's case is that pursuant to a tender notice floated by the respondents for transportation of earth for filing up of subsidence area, Bhurkunda Colliery. Pursuant to the tender notice dated 14.8.1996 the petitioner, being a registered contractor, participated in the said tender and its tender having been found to be lowest, was accepted vide concurrence letter dated 27.3.1997. Consequent thereupon, work order was issued under the signature of respondent No. 4, the Assistant General Manager, Central Coalfield Ltd. Bhurkunda, Hazaribagh accepting the offer of the petitioner for the work of transportation of 39,000 H-3 earth for filing SAM-B of Bhurkunda colliery. In terms of the te...
Bijay Kumar Mandal Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Feb-09-2005
Reported in: [2005(3)JCR428(Jhr)]
M.Y. Eqbal, J.1. Heard Mr. Mahesh Tiwari, learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.P.P. for the State.2. This revision application is directed against the order dated 21-4-2004 passed by the District & Sessions Judge, Giridih in Cr. Appeal No. 19 of 2004 whereby he has rejected the prayer for bail of the petitioner, and further prayed that the petitioner may be enlarged on bail.3. Mr. Mahesh Tiwari, learned counsel, submitted that the petitioner has been declared juvenile and, therefore, in view of the provision of Section 2 of the Juvenile Justice (Care & Protection of Children) Act, 2000, he is entitled to be released on bail.4. On the basis of FIR lodged against the petitioner, after due investigation, charge-sheet was submitted against the petitioner for committing offence punishable under Sections 302, 307, 323 and 341, IPC and accordingly cognizance of the offences has been taken by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Giridih and the case was committed to the Court of Sess...
Sri Krishna Bihari Singh Vs. the State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Feb-09-2005
Reported in: [2005(4)JCR145a(Jhr)]
ORDERS.J. Mukhopadhaya, A.C.J.1. According to the petitioner, he was in the services of the State and retired on 31st January, 2003 from the post of Headmaster, Sanyukt Sewa Sahyog Samiti Rajkiyakrit Madhya Vidyalaya, Baridih, Jamshedpur. While in service, he was put under suspension on 1st August, 1996, which was revoked on 27th July, 2001.2. Grievance of the petitioner is that the respondents have not paid him the retiral benefits after finalization of pension, gratuity, leave encashment etc. nor have paid him the salary for the intervening period, while he was under suspension.3. It appears that a departmental proceeding was initiated wherein charge-sheet was served on the petitioner. Though the enquiry officer already submitted his report on 19th December, 2002, no final order has been passed by the competent authority.4. A show cause notice has been issued on the 5th respondent i.e., District Superintendent of Education, East Singhbhum, Jamshedpur, as to why he has to passed final...
Automobile Ancilliary Industries Vs. Jharkhand State Electricity Board ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Feb-08-2005
Reported in: [2005(2)JCR218(Jhr)]
ORDERM.Y. Eqbal, J.1. Heard Mr. M.S. Mittal, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. A.K. Mehta, learned counsel for the respondent-Board.2. In this writ application the petitioner has mainly prayed for issuance of appropriate directions upon the respondents to delete the entire delayed payment surcharge being levied upon the petitioner every month to the extent of Rs. 18,000/-to Rs. 19,000/- on the arrears carried forward every month and also for quashing current monthly bill from the month of January 2004 to April 2004 both for its LT connection for the factory and CS connection for the office on the ground that those bills have been raised on the basis of 1993 tariff instead of 2004 tariff of the Jharkhand State Electricity Board and further for a direction upon the respondents to revise entire bills from January 2004 to April 2004.3. Petitioner's case is that since 1993 respondent-Board issued inflated bills and the same were challenged by filing various writ petitions. In CWJC ...
Sunil Kumar Yadav Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Feb-08-2005
Reported in: [2005(2)JCR333(Jhr)]
ORDERAmareshwar Sahay, J.1. Heard the parties.2. The petitioner is named in the FIR as one of the accused in Sonari P.S. Case No. 69 of 2003 registered under Sections 302 and 34, IPC.3. From the FIR, it appears that there is direct allegation against the petitioner that he after dragging out Nawal Kishore Singh, a practicing Advocate of Jamshedpur from his house, fired two shots resulting into the death of the said lawyer.4. It is submitted that the petitioner has been declared as juvenile and, therefore, he is entitled to be released on bail.5. From the impugned order, dated 29.01.2004, passed by the Sessions Judge, it appears that the prayer for bail of the petitioner has been rejected on the ground that the release of the petitioner would defeat the ends of Justice.6. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, relying on a decision of the Rajasthan High Court in the case of Satish and Ors. v. The State of Rajasthan, reported in 2003 (11) AIC Raj HC 860, (Annexure-3) has submitted...
Chandeshwar Lal Das @ C.L. Das No. Ii Vs. Harihar Narayan Singh and or ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Feb-08-2005
Reported in: [2005(2)JCR84(Jhr)]
ORDERNarendra Nath Tiwari, J. 1. This civil revision application is against the order dated 11.10.2004 passed by Subordinate Judge, VIIth, Dhanbad in Title Suit No. 33 of 2002 whereby the opposite party Nos. 1 to 15, who were plaintiffs, have been allowed to withdraw the suit. The grievance of the petitioner is that the Court below has erroneously and illegally allowed the plaintiffs to withdraw the suit without taking into consideration that the suit was filed through the petitioner who is the constituted attorney of all the plaintiffs and the withdrawal has been allowed against the consent of the said attorney. The Court below has passed a detailed order and recorded reasons. It has been noticed that the suit was filed for declaration of the plaintiffs right in the suit land and for injunction. The petition had been filed on behalf of all the plaintiffs along with Vakalatnama, which has been signed by all of them. In the application, all the plaintiffs have stated that they have aban...
Chandreshwar Lal Das @ C.L. Das No. I Vs. Harihar Naryan Singh and ors ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Feb-08-2005
Reported in: [2005(2)JCR89(Jhr)]
ORDERNarendra Nath Tiwari, J. 1. This civil revision application is against the order dated 11.10.2004 passed by Subordinate Judge, VIIth, Dhanbad in Title Suit No. 142 of 2002 whereby the opposite party Nos. 1 to 15, who were plaintiffs, have been allowed to withdraw the suit. The grievance of the petitioner is that the Court below has erroneously and illegally allowed the plaintiffs to withdraw the suit without taking into consideration that the suit was filed through the petitioner who is the constituted attorney of all the plaintiffs and the withdrawal has been allowed against the consent of the said attorney. The Court below has passed a detailed order and recorded reasons. It has been noticed that the suit was filed for declaration of the plaintiffs right in the suit land and for injunction. The petition had been filed on behalf of all the plaintiffs along with Vakalatnama, which has been signed by all of them. In the application, all the plaintiffs have stated that they have aba...
Raj Kumar Thakur and Staff Association, B.V. Parikh Janta College and ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Feb-08-2005
Reported in: [2005(2)JCR161(Jhr)]
ORDERM.Y. Eqbal, J.1. The petitioner of WPC No. 6726/2004 is the father of two girl students, namely Preety Kumari and Miss Rashmi Kumari and the petitioners of WPC 6442/2004 are the Association of teaching and non-teaching staff of B.V. Parikh Janta College, Jamshedpur. The petitioner of WPC 6726/2004 has filed the writ petition for quashing the letter No. 672, dated 11.6.2004 issued by the Deputy Secretary, Human Resources Development Department, (Higher Education), Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi whereby a decision has been taken to close down the said college and transfer all the teaching and non-teaching employees and also for quashing the resolution of the Ranchi University Syndicate dated 1.4.2004 and 15.4.2004 whereby they have decided to transfer all the teaching and non-teaching employees to other colleges. The petitioners of WPS 6442/2004 have prayed for a direction upon the respondents to make payment of their salary which has not been paid to them since April, 2004 onwards...
Automobile Ancillary Industries Vs. the Jharkhand State Electricity Bo ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Feb-08-2005
Reported in: 2005(1)BLJR753
ORDERM.Y. Eqbal, J.1. Heard Mr. M.S. Mittal learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. A.K. Mehta, learned counsel for the respondent/Board.2. In this writ application the petitioner has mainly prayed for issuance of appropriate directions upon the respondents to delete the entire delayed payment surcharge being levied upon the petitioner every month to the extend of Rs. 18,000/- to Rs. 19,000/- on the arrears carried forward every month and also for quashing current monthly bill from the month of January, 2004 to April, 2004 both for its L.T. connection for the factory and C.S. connection for the office on the ground that those bills have been raised on the basis of 1993 tariff instead of 2004 tariff of the Jharkhand State Electricity Board and further for a direction upon the respondents to revise entire bills from January, 2004 to April, 2004.3. Petitioner's case is that since 1993 respondent/Board issued inflated bills and the same were challenged by filing various writ petitions. ...
Ashok Kumar Singh @ Ashok Singh Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Feb-08-2005
Reported in: [2005(2)JCR332(Jhr)]
ORDERAmareshwar Sahay, J.1. Heard the parties.2. The order dated 04.10.2004, passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate Dhanbad is under challenge in this application by the petitioner, whereby the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate rejected the petition of the petitioner for release of the cash amounting to Rs. 84,955/- and the Iron-scraps materials seized in connection with Jharia P.S. Case No. 306 of 2004 registered under Sections 413, 414 and 34, IPC.3. It is not disputed that Police after completion of investigation submitted chargesheet in the said case. It is also not disputed that the seizure was made from the premises of M/s. Ashok Enterprises, of which the petitioner is the owner. It was submitted on behalf of the petitioner that in view of the fact that he is the owner of the aforesaid seized articles and since the papers regarding the Iron-scrap have been found by the Police to be genuine and, therefore, the Court below has wrongly rejected the prayer for release.4. Fro...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »