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.
Sanjay Kumar Vs. Indian School of Mines and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-11-2005
Reported in: [2005(3)JCR372(Jhr)]
M.Y. Eqbal, J.1. In this writ petition, the petitioner seeks issuance of a writ commanding upon the respondent Nos. 1 to 4 to regularize/absorb the services of the petitioner on permanent basis in pursuance of the order dated 23.3.2000 passed by the Court in C.W.J.C. No. 3249 of 1998(R) and to quash the letter dated 18.10.2001 by which the representation of the petitioner has been rejected by respondent No. 3 - the Registrar, Indian School of Mines, Dhanbad.2. The facts of the case lie in a narrow compass.The petitioner was appointed as Project Assistant under the Department of Applied Geology for a period of two years.The tenure of the appointment was extended upto 23.3.1998. Admittedly, the service of the petitioner was to be governed by the terms and condition of the Special Assistance Programme conducted on the recommendation of the Education Commission and in consultation with the University Grants Commission. The petitioner was again appointed as a Project Assistant with the appr...
Debashree Construction (India) Ltd. Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-11-2005
Reported in: [2005(3)JCR172(Jhr)]
Altamas Kabir, C.J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 13th May, 2005 passed by a learned Single Judge dismissing the writ petition, being WP (C) No. 1785 of 2005, filed by the appellant herein.2. The grievance of the writ petitioner-appellant was in respect of a tender notice dated 18th February, 2005 and in the writ petition a direction was sought upon the respondents not to allot the work in terms of the said tender notice to M/s. Santosh Kumar Singh, respondent No. 5 in the instant appeal.3. As will appear from the materials on record, the respondents issued the aforesaid tender notice for road construction between Km. No. 21 to Km No. 41 of the National Highway No. 75. Pursuant to the said notice, both the writ petitioner-appellant as also the respondent No. 5 submitted their respective tenders. On behalf of the writ petitioner-appellant, it was contended in the writ petition that in spite of non-fulfillment of all the conditions contained in the tender...
K. Steel Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Bihar State Electricity Board and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-11-2005
Reported in: [2005(4)JCR179(Jhr)]
S.J. Mukhopadhaya, J.1. This writ petition was preferred by the petitioner M/s. K. Steel Pvt. Ltd., Jamshedpur, for issuance of an appropriate writ in the nature of mandamus, commanding upon the respondents to restore the electric supply in its factory, which was disconnected on 3rd November, 1999, pursuant to an inspection, made in the factory premises of the petitioner.2. It appears that in the factory premises of the petitioner, a High Tension Consumer ('H.T. Consumer' for short), an -inspection was made by the officials of the Bihar State Electricity Board (now Jharkhand State Electricity Board-hereinafter to be referred as 'the Board') and on the ground of theft of electricity, electrical connection was disconnected on 3rd November, 1999 itself and an FIR was lodged against the Directors and others of the petitioner Company. The petitioner pleaded that the police has closed the case by submitting final report in the Court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Seraikella...
Yogendra Prasad Verma Vs. J.S.E.B. and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-07-2005
Reported in: [2005(4)JCR81(Jhr)]
ORDERS.J. Mukhopadhaya, J.1. The writ petition was preferred by the petitioner for payment of retiral benefits and other dues.2. It appears that the matter was referred to Lok Adalat, therein the respondents came out with cheque for Rs. 5,85,327/-, as admitted dues payable to the petitioner. The petitioner being not present, it was handed over to the Joint Registrar, Incharge High Court Legal Services Committee, Later on, the petitioner received the cheques amount of Rs. 5,85,327/- from the Joint Registrar, Incharge High Court Legal Services Committee on 13th September, 2004.3. Learned counsel for the petitioner while admits that the petitioner has accepted the amount of Rs. 5,85,327/-, submits that the respondents paid the Provident Fund amount after calculation of statutory interest for the period upto 30th June, 2003. The amount having paid in September, 2004, they should have calculated the statutory interest upto August, 2004. It is further stated that there are certain other dues...
Sidheshwar Singh Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-06-2005
Reported in: [2005(4)JCR68(Jhr)]
ORDERS.J. Mukhopadhaya, J.1. This application has been preferred by the petitioner for a direction on the respondents to pay him the arrears of retiral benefits and other dues, such as, arrears of pension on revised pay scale with effect from 1st September, 1999, arrears of salary on revised pay scale with effect from 1st April, 1997 to 31st August, 1999, gratuity on revised pay scale, leave encashment on revised pay scale and commutation of pension on revised pay scale.2. According to the petitioner, he was in the services of the Bihar State Electricity Board and retired on 31st August, 1999 from the post of Accounts Assistant, South Bihar Area Electricity Board, Ranchi. After retirement, he has been paid GPF, GSS and other benefits.3. His grievance is that after revision of pay, as made effective with effect from 1st April, 1997, the respondents have neither revised his pension, gratuity, leave encashment and commutation amount nor have paid his the consequential benefits, including ...
Pranab Kumar Sen Vs. Jharkhand State Electricity Board and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-06-2005
Reported in: [2005(4)JCR404(Jhr)]
ORDERS.J. Mukhopadhaya, J.1. This writ application has been preferred by the petitioner for direction on the respondents to charge electricity bill as per the actual meter reading and to revise the previous bills and, if necessary, to adjust the amount already paid in excess by the petitioner towards the previous bills.2. According to the petitioner, in spite of the fact that the Meter is perfect and running bill has been raised not according to the exact meter reading. With a view to ensure that no electricity is disconnected, the petitioner deposited the energy bill, but requested the authority to raise the bills on the basis of actual meter reading.3. According to the petitioner, he received the first bill in the month of May, 2002 with a charge of Rs. 411/- for 312 units whereas the actual meter reading was only 62.7 units. Similar is the situation with regard to subsequent months.4. It appears that the petitioner has already approached the authority i.e., Consumer Grievance Redres...
Nayeb Singh Vs. Bharat Coking Coal Ltd. and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-05-2005
Reported in: [2005(4)JCR45(Jhr)]
ORDER1. This appeal is, at the instance of the writ petitioner, whose writ petition, being W.P. (S) No. 682 of 2002, was dismissed by the leaned Single Judge by judgment and order dated 18th May, 2004.2. According to the writ petitioner-appellant, he was appointed as Dozer/ Scraper Operator by the respondents in the year 1975, and at the time of his joining, he gave his date of birth, which was recorded in Form 'B' Register as well as in the other Statutory Register maintained in Colliery, as 4th November, 1945. He was also issued Identity Card wherein his date of birth was shown as 4th November, 1945.3. It appears that the respondents floated Voluntary Retirement Scheme for which the writ petitioner-appellant also applied, but by a communication dated 20th October, 2001, the petitioner was informed that his application for Voluntary Retirement Scheme had been referred to the Date of Birth Committee and after examination of his case, it was found that the date of birth of the petitione...
Steel Authority of India Ltd. and ors. Vs. Niranjan Mandal
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-05-2005
Reported in: [2005(4)JCR177(Jhr)]
ORDER1. This appeal has been filed by the Steel Authority of India Ltd and its officers against the judgment and order dated 2nd September, 2003 passed by the learned Single Judge in the writ application filed by the writ petitioner- respondent, Niranjan Mandal, being CWJC No. 2082 of 1995.2. The respondent herein challenged an order by which punishment was inflicted on him by his disciplinary authority by reduction of his pay to an amount equivalent to two increments vide order dated 24th August, 1988 on the ground that two of the charges levelled against him in the disciplinary proceeding had been established.3. As will appear from the judgment under appeal, the respondent No. 1, at the relevant point of time, was the Store Keeper in the Store Department of the Bokaro Steel Plant. In 1985, a theft was committed in the godown in respect of which the respondent was in charge. A criminal case was started which ultimately concluded in the acquittal of the respondent, on the ground that a...
State of Bihar (Now Jharkhand) and anr. Vs. Meera Devi and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-05-2005
Reported in: [2006(1)JCR378a(Jhr)]
ORDER1. Having heard the learned Counsels of the respective parties, we dispose of this appeal by directing the appellants to pay the balance amount of the compensation amount of Rs. 3,98,880/- to the respondents within six weeks from date. The amount is to be paid to the respondent No. 1, Meera Devi, in terms of the directions contained in the award. In the event such payment is made within the time stipulated, the direction regarding payment of interest @ 9% per annum as indicated in the award shall not be given effect to. However, in the event, the payment of the balance amount of the award is not made within six weeks, the said amount will carry interest @ 9% per annum from the date of this order till the date of payment. We make it clear that this order is being made, having particular regard to the fact that besides having paid to the heirs of the deceased the death benefit of the deceased, employment has also been provided to one of the sons of the deceased. There will be no ord...
Praveen Kumar Sukhani and ors. and State of Bihar and anr. Vs. Bishwan ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-01-2005
Reported in: AIR2006Jhar1; [2005(3)JCR178(Jhr)]
M.Y. Eqbal, J.1. Since these two appeals arose out of common Judgment and decrees passed by the Courts below, they have been heard together and are disposed of by this common judgment.2. The appellants have challenged the Judgment and decree dated 8.1.2004 passed by the First Additional District Judge, Koderma in Title Appeal Nos. 24 and 26 of 2000 whereby he has dismissed the appeals filed by the appellants and affirmed the Judgment and decree dated 30.3.2000 passed by the Munsif, Koderma in Title Suit No. 9/96 whereby the so called counterclaim filed by the interveners-respondents has been allowed and decreed. These two appeals were admitted on 6.5.2004 for hearing on the following substantial questions of law :(i) Whether the trial Court acted legally and with jurisdiction in purporting to decide the claim of defendants 3 to 17 as against defendants 1 and 2 and/or against additional defendants 18 to 20 in the suit filed by the plaintiff?(ii) Having found that the suit was liable to ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »