Jharkhand Court May 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.
The Management of the Food Corporation of India and the Employer in Re ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: May-19-2005
Reported in: 2005(53)BLJR2145; [2005(106)FLR1171]; [2005(3)JCR236(Jhr)]
M.Y. Eqbal, J. 1. In these two writ petitions, since common questions of law and facts are involved, they have been heard together and are being disposed of by this common order.C.W.J.C. No. 4497 of 19972. In C.W.J.C. No. 4497 of 1997 the petitioner-Management of Food Corporation of India has challenged the award dated 12.12.1996 passed by the Central Industrial Tribunal No. 1, Dhanbad in Reference No. 108 of 1992 whereby he has answered the reference in favour of the concerned workman.3. It appears that by order dated 1.10.1992 the Central Government in the Ministry of Labour has referred the following dispute for adjudication :'Whether the action of the management of Food Corporation of India, in retrenching Shri Hari Nandan Prasad, Ex-Casual Workman, in contravention of Section 25-F of the I.D. Act, 1947 and denying reinstatement with full back wages and regularization of his service is legal and justified? If not to what relief the concerned workman is entitled to ?'4. The case of ...
Employers in Relation to the Management of North Eastern Railway, Now ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: May-18-2005
Reported in: [2005(3)JCR443(Jhr)]
ORDER1. In keeping with the direction given on the last occasion, the records of Central Government Industrial Tribunal No. 1 at Dhanbad in Reference No. 91 of 1993 have been made available. From the said records it appears that some evidence was led on behalf of the workmen-respondents. It also appears that apart from taking a point of limitation, the appellant did not choose to press the other points, said to have been taken in their written statement before the learned Tribunal. Be that as it may, as will appear from the award of the learned Tribunal which was under challenge before the learned Single Judge, eight other similarly situated employees were given the benefit of reinstatement with full back wages by the Central Administrative Tribunal at Patna upon holding that the termination of their services was made without giving any reason. The learned Tribunal, in the instant case, upon taking note of the said decision of the Central Administrative Tribunal at Patna, and upon hold...
Ram Prasann Singh Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: May-18-2005
Reported in: [2005(4)JCR48(Jhr)]
Narendra Nath Tiwari, J.1. In this writ application, the petitioner has prayed for quashing : (i) the notification No. 5265, dated 1.10.2003 (Annexure-2) issued by the Department of Forest & Environment, Government of Jharkhand, whereby the promotion given to the petitioner to the post of Forest Range Officer with effect from 9.11.1993 has been sought to be shifted and made effective from 23.10.1999 (ii) the Office Order No. 66, dated 6.11.2003 (Annexure-1) issued by the respondent No. 3 pursuant to the said order (Annexure-2) shifting the date of promotion from 9.11.1993 to 22.10.1999 and for quashing the letter No. 30, dated 21.1.2004 (Annexure-3) issued by the respondent No. 3 whereby the difference of amount given to the petitioner as promotional benefits since the date of promotion with effect from 9.11.1993 has been sought to be recovered out of the amount of the leave encashment payable to the petitioner, after his retirement. The petitioner has also prayed for a direction to th...
Jharkhand High Court on Its Own Motion Through Tuku Banerjee Vs. State ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: May-17-2005
Reported in: II(2005)DMC545; [2005(3)JCR41(Jhr)]
ORDERAmareshwar Sahay, J.1. By the Court.-The Vigilance Cell of this Court received a letter written by Smt. Tuku Banerjee, wherein it was prayed to probe as to how her accused-husband was granted bail by the S.D.J.M. Dhanbad. She stated that she had lodged a complaint before the Court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dhanbad against her husband Sandeep Banerjee, father-in-law Magaram Banerjee and Mother-in-law Malati Banerjee for commission of the offence under Sections 498-A IPC and 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. In the said case cognizance has also been taken under the aforesaid sections of the Indian Penal Code. After the cognizance the accused Sandeep Banerjee appeared and he was released on bail by the SDJM.2. Pursuant to the said letter, a report was called for from the District Judge, Dhanbad by the Vigilance Cell. After perusal of the report of the District Judge, the matter was referred to the judicial side to determine whether the bail granted to the accused Sandeep Bane...
S.S. HussaIn @ Sheen Akhtar Vs. State of Bihar and anr.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: May-17-2005
Reported in: [2005(3)JCR216(Jhr)]
Hari Shankar Prasad, J.1. This application under Section 482, Cr PC has been filed for quashing the entire criminal proceedings including order dated 19.7.1999 passed in Complaint Case No. 169/1999, whereby and whereunder the learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Ranchi took cognizance against the petitioner under Sections 153-A, 504 and 506, IPC.2. Facts leading to the filing of the application are that the complainant-opposite party No. 2 lodged a complaint alleging, inter alia, therein that he was the Principal of Ranchi College, Ranchi and he was transferred from Ranchi College to J.N. College, Dhurwa, Ranchi by the petitioner, who, at the relevant point of time, was acting as Vice Chancellor. It is alleged that the said transfer has been done in an illegal manner. Further allegations are that at the instance of petitioner, a letter was issued by the Registrar of Ranchi University asking the complainant-opposite party No. 2 to show his 10th class certificate to establish his date...
Ram Prasad Singh and anr. and ors. Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: May-16-2005
Reported in: [2005(3)JCR9(Jhr)]
ORDERS.J. Mukhopadhaya, J.1. All these cases relate to condition of services of work-charged employees of the State. Common questions of law being involved in all the writ petitions, they have been heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.2. In 1st set of the cases i.e. W.P. (S) Nos. 2166 of 2003, 2210 of 2003, 1750 of 2004, 3254 of 2004, 3588 of 2004 and 6826 of 2002 the petitioners have prayed for a direction on the respondents to regularize their services by taking over their services along with posts in the permanent (regular) establishment of the State.3. In 2nd set of the cases i.e. W.P. (S) Nos. 3854 of 2004, 6471 of 2004, 4360 of 2004 and 4744 of 2004, the petitioners have prayed for a direction on the respondents to consider their cases for compassionate appointments. In some of the cases, their claim have been rejected by the respondents.4. In the 3rd set of the cases i.e. W.P. (S) Nos. 3963 of 2004, 4264 of 2004, 6437 of 2004 the petitioners have pray...
Satya Narayan Agiwal and Bishwanath Agiwal Vs. State Bank of India and ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: May-16-2005
Reported in: 2005(2)BLJR1580; [2005(3)JCR1(Jhr)]
Altamas Kabir, C.J.1. The State Bank of India, the respondent No. 1 in the present appeal, filed Money Suit No. 12 of 1983 against the appellant and proforma respondents for recovery of its dues amounting to Rs. 6,43,663/84-P. The defendants appeared and contested the suit by filing their written statement and taking the plea that there was no cause of action for the suit, which was, therefore, not maintainable. As many as 11 issues were framed. While issues Nos. 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8 were decided against the plaintiff and in favour of the contesting defendants No. 1 to 6, issues No. 9 and 8 were partly allowed. Issue No. 3 was decided in favour of the plaintiff and so were the issues No. 1, 2 and 11. In the result, the suit was decreed in part. Aggrieved by the judgment and decree passed in the suit, the State Bank of India, filed an appeal in this Court, being FA No. 766 of 1992 R. The said appeal ultimately succeeded and by judgment dated 20th August 2004, the findings of the trial Court...
Md. Mustaque Ahmad and anr. Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: May-16-2005
Reported in: [2005(3)JCR31(Jhr)]
ORDERS.J. Mukhopadhaya, J.1. This case relates to appointment against Class IV posts in the Sate of Jharkhand. The respondent Deputy Commissioner, Hazaribagh, vide notice, published in the daily newspaper 'Hindustan' dated 12th December, 2004 fixed 26th December, 2004 as the date to hold written test for appointment against Class IV posts. According to the petitioners, written test for appointment against Class IV post not being permissible, they have challenged the aforesaid notice.2. The case of the petitioners is that they are Ummidbar peon, empanelled since 1991 and are eligible for appointment against Class IV posts on preferential basis over the outsiders, in terms with the judgment, rendered by this Court and the policy of the State Government. But with a view to exclude them, the Deputy Commissioner, Hazaribagh, has issued the impugnednotice to hold written competitive test for appointment against Class IV posts.3. In this case, the only question arises is whether the responden...
Gopal Prasad and ors. Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: May-16-2005
Reported in: 2005(53)BLJR2149; [2005(3)JCR219(Jhr)]
ORDERS.J. Mukhopadhaya, J.1. This writ petition has been preferred by the petitioners for a direction on the respondents to consider their cases for appointments as Primary Teachers under the State of Jharkhand.2. According to the petitioners, they are eligible for appointment to the posts of Primary Teacher and though they have competed in the written test for appointment to the posts of Primary Teacher, held by Jharkhand Public Service Commission. Ranchi (hereinafter to be referred as 'JPSC'), they have not been provided with the letters of appointment whereas the persons, below them in the merit list, have been appointed.3. The case of the petitioners is that they, having passed B. Ed. Examination from Ranchi University, are eligible for appointment to the posts of Primary Teacher. In pursuance of an advertisement, published by the J.P.S.C. in the month of August, 2002, the petitioners applied for appointment as Primary Teachers in Nationalized Primary Schools. They were allowed to ...
Rajiv Kumar Mishra Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: May-16-2005
Reported in: 2005(3)BLJR1873; [2005(3)JCR28(Jhr)]
ORDERS.J. Mukhopadhaya, J.1. This writ petition has been preferred by the petitioner for a direction on the respondents to consider his case for appointment as Primary Teacher under the State of Jharkhand.2. According to the petitioner, he is eligible for appointment to the posts of Primary Teacher and though he has competed in the written test for appointment to the post of Primary Teacher, held by Jharkhand Public Service Commission, Ranchi (hereinafter to be referred as JPSC) he has not been proved with the letter of appointment whereas the person, below him in the merit list, have been appointed.3. The case of the petitioner is that he, having passed B.Ed. Examination from S.N. Zaheer Alam Teaches Training College, examination of which was conducted by Lalit Narayan Mithila University, Darbhanga (1997 session), Is eligible for appointment to the posts of Primary Teacher. Provisional certificate, granted by the University has been enclosed as Annexure 7 to the writ petition. In purs...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »