Jharkhand Court July 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.
Jharkhand State Electricity Board, Through Its Chairman and ors. Vs. M ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-26-2005
Reported in: 2005(3)BLJR1805; [2005(4)JCR96(Jhr)]
ORDER1. This appeal has been filed by the Jharkhand State Electricity Board against the judgment and order dated 15th October, 2003 passed by the learned single Judge on the writ petition filed by respondent No. 1 herein being W.P. (S) No. 5727 of 2002. By the said order, the learned single Judge allowed the writ application, quashed the order impugned in the writ petition and directed that the writ petitioner would be entitled to remain in service till he attains the age of 60 years on the basis of the age recorded in the Service Book.2. As will appear from the materials on record, the writ petitioner was appointed by the appellants and his Service Book was opened on 21st June, 1975 in which his date of birth is recorded as 12th October, 1945. After 25 years of service i.e. on 14th December, 2000, the writ petitioner was made to undergo medical examination by a Medical Board which determined his age as 60-62 years and, thereafter by memo dated 24th January, 2001, the petitioner was ma...
Pradip Kumar Tiwari and ors. Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-26-2005
Reported in: 2005(3)BLJR1835; [2005(4)JCR147(Jhr)]
ORDER1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order of the learned single Judge dated 14.06.2005 dismissing the writ application filed by the appellants herein on the ground that the writ petitioners had no legal right to conduct the proceedings as public Prosecutors.2. As will appear from, the materials on record the appellants herein were appointed as Special Public Prosecutors to conduct Sessions Trial No. 117/2002 which was initially pending in the Court of Sessions Judge, Siwan and was transferred by the Hon'ble Supreme Court to Ranchi for trial.3. It appears that an application had been filed by the son of the informant in the Supreme Court for appointment of different Special Public Prosecutors, but the said application was dismissed on 20th December, 2002 on the ground that it had been made in a disposed of transfer application. The son of the informant, thereafter, filed another petition in this Court being WP (Cri) No. 34/2003 which was dismissed on the concession ...
Shyamal Kumar Sinha Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-26-2005
Reported in: AIR2006Jhar36; [2005(4)JCR188(Jhr)]
ORDERM.Y. Eqbal, J.1. In this writ petition, the petitioner seeks a direction upon the respondents to accept his application for renewal of registration as Pharmacist for the year 2005.2. The petitioner's case is that he was registered as Pharmacist in the erstwhile State of Bihar being Registration No. B-12083. The registration was renewed upto 31.12.2004 and a certificate of renewal was issued by Jharkhand State Registration Tribunal, Pharmacy, Ranchi. In 2005 the petitioner made an application before respondent No. 3. The Registrar Jharkhand State Registration Tribunal Pharmacy, Pharmacy Institute, Ranchi along with a bank draft of Rs. 125/-. The petitioner learnt that the concerned respondent is not accepting the renewal application of the Pharmacists who were practicing in the State of Jharkhand. It is stated by the petitioner that he was registered as Pharmacist long back in the year 1992 and his name was included in the First Register prepared by the erstwhile State of Bihar. In...
Hirdeo Prasad (No. 8017761) Ex-constable of C.i.S.F. Unit B.T.P.S. (D. ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-25-2005
Reported in: [2005(3)JCR381(Jhr)]
ORDERM.Y. Eqbal, J. 1. Petitioner has challenged the order passed by the Inspector General, Central Industrial Security Force, Eastern Sector, Patna, whereby he has rejected the revision petition and held that punishment of dismissal from service is the appropriate punishment imposed upon the petitioner.2. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner at the relevant time was a constable in C.I.S.F. In 1992 he was served with a memorandum of charges for holding an enquiry under Rule 34 of the CISF Rules, 1969. There were two charges levelled against the petitioner. First charge was that on 11/12.2.1992 the petitioner was assigned to 'C' shift duty from 21.00 hrs. to 05.00 hrs. at Watch Tower No. III of 'B' Plant and he was sitting and dozing in front of small fire which amounts to negligence of duty within the meaning of Section 18 of CISF Act, 1968. The second charge was that at about 00.20 hrs. he assaulted Inspector/Exe T. Chakraborty who has found him sitting and dozing while...
Lenga Manjhi and anr. Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-25-2005
Reported in: 2006CriLJ1882; [2005(4)JCR444(Jhr)]
ORDERAmareshwar Sahay, J.1. This revision application has been filed against the order dated 15.12.03 whereby learned Court below rejected the prayer of the petitioners to release the cash amounting to Rs. 5.15.750/- and also two fixed deposits seized by the police, bearing No. S.D. A/68-734772 and S.D. A-72-443861 in connection with Mandu (Kuju) P.S. Case No. 233 of 2003 which was registered against the Lodha Manjhi for offence under Section 25(1-B), A, 26, 35 Arms Act.2. From perusal of the impugned order it appears that the learned Magistrate, after hearing the parties has come to the conclusion that the seized money and fixed deposit certificates are not perishable items and there was no justification for the petitioner to keep such a huge amount in his house and thereby the learned Magistrate rejected the prayer for release of the aforesaid cash amount as well as the fixed certificates.3. Learned counsel for the State who was directed to seek instruction and file counter affidavit...
Dudheshwar Mahto Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-25-2005
Reported in: [2005(4)JCR251(Jhr)]
M.Y. Eqbal, J.1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.Petitioner was appointed as Malaria Inspector on 10.9.1961 and later on he was appointed on the post of Lab-Technician on 1.2.1972 at Primary Health Centre, Baliapur in the district of Dhanbad. His pay scale was fixed at Rs. 4500-7000/-. Petitioner continuously withdrew salary at the aforesaid pay scale for about 30 years and thereafter, retired on 31.1.2001. It was only after retirement, an objection was raised that his pay scale should have been fixed at Rs. 4000-6000/- instead of Rs. 4500-7000/-. The scale mentioned herein above are the revised scale which came into effective from 1.1.1996. Consequently, instead of releasing entire pensionary benefits an order has been passed for recovery of the excess amount to the petitioner.2. In the counter affidavit filed by the State, it is stated that petitioner was wrongly given pay scale of Rs. 4500-7000/-. According to the respondents, pay scale of Rs. 4500-7000/- is admissible to the ...
Harendra Prasad Gond Vs. State of Jharkhand and anr.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-25-2005
Reported in: [2005(4)JCR421(Jhr)]
ORDERAmareshwar Sahay, J.1. Heard.2. The petitioner has challenged the order dated 24.1.2004 passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Saraikela, whereby he has rejected the petition under Section 239 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, filed by the petitioner for his discharge.3. The facts, in short, are that on the basis of the written report of the Block Development Officer, Saraikela, a First Information Report was registered under Sections 420 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code against the petitioner, alleging therein that the petitioner by committing fraud got a caste certificate issued in his favour declaring himself to be a member of scheduled tribe. The police after investigation submitted charge-sheet and thereafter, cognizance was taken under the aforesaid sections.4 The petitioner has challenged the impugned order on the ground that he belongs to a caste (Gond), which has already been declared as scheduled tribe in the State of Bihar and he originally belongs...
Subernrekha Enterprises Vs. Jharkhand State Electricity Board and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-22-2005
Reported in: AIR2006Jhar60; [2005(4)JCR73(Jhr)]
ORDER1. Having heard the learned Advocates of the respective parties, we are of the view that no useful purpose will be served in keeping the matter pending in view of the order which we propose to pass.2. As will appear from the order of the learned single Judge dated 20th May, 2005 which has been impugned in the appeal, the appellant, M/s. Subernrekha Enterprises through its proprietor, Alok Khaitan, had filed the writ petition for a direction upon the respondents-Jharkhand State Electricity Board and its authorities to 'activate the new electrical connection of the petitioner which the Board has sanctioned and which the Board was withholding on the ground that there were certain outstanding dues payable by M/s. Bharat Agrico, a partnership firm which had been closed down in 1997 in which Alok Khaitan was also a partner.3. According to petitioner, an Induction Furnace Unit has been set up which required electrical connection to the extent of 310 KVA. After deposit of a part of the se...
Bhartendu Singh @ Murari and anr. Vs. State of Jharkhand and anr.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-22-2005
Reported in: 2005(3)BLJR1731; 2006CriLJ772; [2005(4)JCR115(Jhr)]
ORDERAmareshwar Sahay, J.1. Heard Mr. Sen, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and Mr. Kashyap, learned counsel appearing for the opposite parties.2. This revision is against the order dated 3/4/2003 passed by the Ist Additional District and Sessions Judge, Jamshedpur in Sessions Trial No. 346/2001 whereby the petition for discharged, filed under Section 227, Cr PC by the petitioners, has been rejected.3. Mr. Sen, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner mainly challenged the impugned order on the ground that even according to the FIR and the materials collected during investigation admittedly the petitioners were not present on the date and time of alleged occurrence and, therefore, no case whatsoever for the commission of the offence under Section 307 Indian Penal Code is made out against them.4. In order to test the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioners it is necessary to examine the allegation in the FIR and the materials collected during investigatio...
Smt. Kunti Kui Purty Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-21-2005
Reported in: [2005(107)FLR179]; [2005(3)JCR506(Jhr)]
ORDERN.N. Tiwari, J.1. In this writ application, the petitioner has prayed for quashing the decision of the District Level Compassionate Committee dated 22.12.2003 insofar as Item No. 22 is concerned, whereby the Committee has resolved to reject the application of the petitioner for her appointment on compassionate ground on the ground that she does not fulfill the condition of requisite qualification and for a further direction to the respondents to appoint her on compassionate ground immediately so that she may be able to mitigate the hardships caused on account of sudden death of her husband.2. The petitioner's case is that her husband, later Darshan Purti, who was in Government service and was posted as peon under the respondent No. 4, died in harness on 25.9.2002 leaving behind the petitioner and two minor children aged about 5 years and 3 years respectively. It has been stated that her husband was the sole bread earner and after his death, there is no body to look after them. The...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »