Jharkhand Court March 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.
BipIn Kumar Sinha and ors., Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-23-2005
Reported in: [2005(3)JCR141(Jhr)]
ORDERS.J. Mukhopadhaya, J.1. In all these three cases the petitioners have challenged common notification contained in Memo Nos. 4891 and 4898 both dated 11.12.2004. By the aforesaid notification the petitioners have been posted as Assistant Engineers.2. The main grievance of the petitioners is that they have been reverted from the higher post of Executive Engineer to the lower post of Assistant Engineer, though they were eligible and fit to hold the post of Executive Engineers.3. Counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners have already been found fit by the Selection Committee for regular posts of Executive Engineers and vigilance clearance has been given. In-spite of that instead of granting them promotion to the post of regular Executive Engineer, they were given charge of Executive Engineer and later on sent back to the lower post of Assistant Engineer.4. Admittedly the petitioners have not been promoted to the higher post of Executive Engineer. They were merely give...
ishwar Lal Patel Vs. Dhrub Nath Singh
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-23-2005
Reported in: [2005(3)JCR363(Jhr)]
ORDERM.Y. Eqbal, J.1. Heard Mr. R.S. Mazumdar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner.2. In the instant application filed under Section 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has prayed for quashing the order dated 7.2.2005 passed by the District Judge, Dhanbad in Misc. Appeal No. 93 of 2004 whereby he has dismissed the appeal at the admission stage on the ground that appeal was not maintainable against the order passed under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure.3. Since the impugned order was passed by the District Judge before admitting the appeal, I do not think it necessary to hear the respondent for deciding the question of law as to whether the District Judge was correct in law in dismissing the appeal as not maintainable.4. The plaintiff-respondent filed Title Suit No. 87 of 2004 praying, inter alia for a decree declaring the suit land as a road in the use of the plaintiff and the performa defendants and also for perpetual injunction restraining the defenda...
Hitesh Verma Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-23-2005
Reported in: II(2005)DMC443; [2005(3)JCR495(Jhr)]
ORDERHari Shankar Prasad, J.1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.2. Facts leading to the filing of this application is that Prem Chandra Verma lodged an FIR with Argora P.S., Ranchi alleging, inter alia, therein that his daughter Sanjana Verma was married with petitioner Hitesh Verma on 4.4.93 according to Hindu rites and customs and after marriage his daughter lived in her sasural together with her husband (petitioner) and in-laws. His son-in-law is posted in CCL as Sales Officer and his elder daughter has two children; first son is aged about 9 years and second daughter is about 5 years.3. Further case of the prosecution is that soon after marriage husband of his daughter and in laws always demanded car and money and always pressurized his daughter for money. In order to save his daughter from assault and torture, he paid Rs. 4.00 lacs in 25 installments in the hands of mother in law of his daughter. Some amount has been paid through bank draft and cheque. His daughter used to in...
Dhirendra Kumar Banerjee and ors. Vs. State of Bihar and anr.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-22-2005
Reported in: 2005CriLJ4791; [2005(3)JCR141a(Jhr)]
Hari Shankar Prasad, J.1. This application under Section 482, Cr PC has been filed for quashing the order dated 18.3.1999 passed in G.R. No. 135/98 corresponding to Doranda (Argora) P.S. Case No. 176/98, whereby and whereunder the learned CJM, Ranchi took cognizance. against the petitioners under Sections 468, 420 and 120-B, IPC.2. Facts leading to the filing of this application are that opposite party No. 2, complainant filed a complaint, which was sent to the Court of CJM, Ranchi under Section 156(3), Cr PC for registration and investigation and on the basis of that Daronda (Argora) P.S. Case No. 176/98 was registered under Sections 468, 420 and 120-B, IPC. As per prosecution case, a demand notice was issued vide Letter No. 1189, dated 17.12.1993 from society and according to which a sum of Rs. 7443/was to be paid by the complainant. The complainant paid Rs. 7381/- in four instalments by cheque but receipt were issued some time in the name of his brother and some time in the name of ...
Urmila Devi and ors. Vs. Smt. Sushila Devi and anr.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-21-2005
Reported in: [2005(2)JCR556(Jhr)]
ORDERN.N. Tiwari, J.1. This Civil Revision application has been directed against the judgment and decree dated 11.12.2003 passed by Munsif-I, Dhanbad in Title (Eviction) Suit No. 9 of 1998.2. The petitioner are the tenants. The plaintiffs-landlord let out the shop premises to the petitioner-ternants wherein they have been running their clothes business in the name and style of Rajesh Clothes Stores. The plaintiffs filed the said Title (Eviction) Suit No. 9 of 1998 for eviction of the petitioners- tenants on the ground of personal necessity. According to the plaintiffs, they require the suit premises for their personal use and occupation to start a business for plaintiff No. 2. The defendants were thus requested but they did not vacate. Hence the suit was filed.3. The case of the defendant-tenants/petitioners is that the plaintiffs are not the real owner of the suit premises and the instant case was filed as a counter action after the petitioner had filed Title Suit No. 85 of 1997 which...
Md. Sadique Vs. Union of India (Uoi) Through Secretary of Home Affairs ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-21-2005
Reported in: [2005(3)JCR122a(Jhr)]
ORDERS.J. Mukhopadhaya, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 19th December, 2003, passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P. (S) No. 32 of 2002, dismissing the writ petition on the ground of lack of jurisdiction.2. Although the appeal was filed after a delay of about 43 days, after hearing the learned counsel, we are satisfied that sufficient grounds has been made out for condonation of such delay. The delay in filing the appeal is accordingly, condoned and the appeal is taken up for admission.3. The writ petitioner/appellant, who is a resident of the district of Koderma within the State of Jharkhand, was a Constable in the Central Industrial Security Force Unit, Shar Centre, Sriharikota, Andhra Pradesh. While posted at Andhra Pradesh, the writ petitioner/appellant was served with a memo of charge and was awarded punishment of fine, equivalent to seven days' wages. An appeal, filed by the writ petitioner/appellant against the said order of punishment, was r...
Arun Refractories and ors. Vs. the Bihar State Electricity Board and o ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-21-2005
Reported in: [2005(4)JCR136(Jhr)]
ORDERM.Y. Eqbal, J.1. Pursuant to order dated 18.3.2005, the Chairman of the Board and the General Manager-cum-Chief Engineer, Dhanbad Area Electricity Board, Dhanbad have appeared in person and filed show-causes and counter-affidavit.2. Instant writ petition was filed by the petitioners for quashing the circular as contained in letter dated 11.7.2000 issued by the Bihar State Electricity Board fixing the rate of fuel surcharge for the years 1996-97, 1997-98 & 1998-99 in compliance of the judgment dated 26.6.2000 passed by a Division Bench of this Court in the case of Pulak Enterprises & Ors. (CWJC No. 5542 of 1999 and other analogous cases) and also for quashing the circular dated 16.8.2000 by which the Board has fixed the provisional rate of fuel surcharge for the period 1999-2000. In the said writ' petition, petitioners also challenged the bills of fuel surcharge on various grounds.3. The writ petition was heard on 23.10.2000 and this Court passed the following order :Heard learned ...
Saheb Ghosh and ors. Vs. State of Bihar (Now Jharkhand)
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-21-2005
Reported in: [2005(3)JCR499(Jhr)]
R.K. Merathia, J.1. This appeal arises out of judgment and order dated 21.4.1992 passed by Shri Om Prakash Sinha, Additional Sessions Judge, Pakur (Sahibganj) in Sessions Case No. 243 of 1990, 18 of 1991. The appellants No. 1 and 2 have been convicted under Section 395/412, IPC and appellant No. 3 has been convicted under Section 395, IPC. The appellants have been sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for seven years under Section 395, IPC. Appellants-Gaffar Seikh and Saheb Ghosh have further been sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for seven years under Section 412, IPC. However, the sentences are ordered to run concurrently.2. The Informant-Tarapada Nag (PW 9) lodged a written report on 29.6.1989 at 10 a.m. about the dacoity in his house in the preceding midnight (28/29.6.1989). It was alleged that he along with his family members was sleeping in his house situated in village Mathara Barmasia. 'Dhibri' (Oil lamp) was burning in the rooms. In the midnight, someone dashed on ...
Ram Pravesh Singh and ors. Vs. J.S.E.B. and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-21-2005
Reported in: 2005(3)BLJR1849; [2005(4)JCR154(Jhr)]
ORDERM.Y. Eqbal, J.1. Heard the counsel for the parties.2. In the writ application the petitioner seeks the following relief :'That the instant writ application is being filed on behalf of the petitioner seeking great indulgence of this Hon'ble Court to issue high prerogative writ(s) of appropriate nature commanding and directing upon the respondents for grant of following reliefs :(i) For direction to the respondents to fix the final pension on the basis of last pay drawn by the petitioner on the date of retirement i.e., on 11.11.1999.(ii) For direction to the respondents to make payment of all the retiral dues such as P.F. gratuity, leave encashment as well as other dues on the basis of last pay drawn by the petitioner on the date of retirement i.e., on 1.11.1999 with up to date statutory interest apart from penal Interest @ 18% per annum from the date of retirement till the date of actual payment with appropriate cost.(iii) For direction to the respondents to pay the arrears of pens...
Anup Kishore Sharan Vs. State of Jharkhand and anr.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-21-2005
Reported in: 2005CriLJ3677
ORDERHari Shankar Prasad, J.1. This application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, has been filed for quashing the entire criminal prosecution including the F.I.R., as contained in Annexure-1, and order dated 21-6-2004, as contained in Annexure-2, passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, I/C, Ranchi in connection with Chutia P.S. Case No. 39 of 2004 corresponding to G.R. No. 1739 of 2004 under Sections 3, 4, 5 and 6 of Immoral Traffic Act.2. Facts giving rise to filing of this case are that the Police C.I., Mohan Ram of Chutia P.S. lodged an F.I.R. on 15-6-2004 alleging therein that a registered letter with one C.D. was received by the Senior Superintendent of Police in which petitioner was seen with deceased Sarita alias Gudia committing intercourse with that girl. On investigation, it came to light from the statement of one Shanti Devi that she is doing business of 'Deh Vyapar' and for that one house was taken on rent at Ketari Bagan by Paritosh Pal alias Bapi an...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »