Jharkhand Court August 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.
Suneet Services Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Aug-31-2005
Reported in: [2006(1)JCR82(Jhr)]
M.Y. Eqbal, J.1. In this writ petition, petitioner has challenged the authority of the district administration, namely, Deputy Commissioner, Dhanbad who has granted 'No Objection' to respondent No. 6 for opening a fuel station on the site which is situated at the distance of 150 metres from the petitioner's fuel station which is in contravention of the guidelines, issued by the Government of India, Ministry of Road Transport and Highways.2. Petitioner's case is that he has been running a fuel station at Mouza Saraidhela, Thana No. 8, Khata No. 175, Plot No. 3300 along the National Highway No. 32 in the district of Dhanbad. He as a dealer of M/s. Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited is running the outlet since 1994. Respondent No. 5, M/s. Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited invited the applications for appointment of dealers within the State of Jharkhand. Pursuant to that advertisement, respondent No. 6 applied for dealership and he was appointed as a dealer and proposed to open his...
Akshaya Technologies Private Limited Vs. Damodar Valley Corporation
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Aug-31-2005
Reported in: III(2006)BC326; [2005(4)JCR473(Jhr)]
ORDER1. This appeal is directed against the order passed by the learned Company Judge on 13th July, 2005 in Company Petition No. 5 of 2003, which was a petition under Sections 433 and 434 of the Indian Companies Act, 1956, filed by Damodar Valley Corporation (hereinafter referred to as 'D.V.C.'} for winding up of the appellant Company Akshaya Technologies Private Limited, Jharkhand.2. Admittedly, the appellant Company had obtained supply of electricity from D.V.C. and had defaulted in payment of its dues which was quantified by D.V.C. as Rs. 3,37,004.06 on account of bills and a further sum of Rs. 2,59,65,004/- on account of Delayed Payment Surcharge and additional interest at the rate of two per cent per month.3. In the winding up petition, it was mentioned that although the appellant Company agreed to pay the outstanding dues in twenty instalments, after payment of some of the instalments, it discontinued the payment of the other instalments, as a result whereof, D.V.C. was compelled...
Abhishek Tiwary @ Baba Tiwary and Paramjeet Singh @ T.T. Vs. State of ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Aug-31-2005
Reported in: 2006CriLJ925; [2005(4)JCR431(Jhr)]
R.K. Merathia, J.1. This bail application was filed by Abhishek Tiwary on 7.3.2005. On 30.3.2005, case diary was called for. Bail was granted on 24.6.2005 on the basis of the submissions that Paramjeet Singh is the main accused.2. On the other hand, it was submitted on behalf of Paramjeet Singh, during hearing of this Bail Application (B.A. No. 3102 of 2005) that Abhishek Tiwary who is the main accused, has been granted bail and therefore he should also be granted bail. It was further submitted that by suppressing facts it was submitted on behalf of Abhishek Tiwary that Paramjeet Singh is the main accused.3. In the circumstances, notice was issued to Abhishek Tiwary to show cause as to why bail granted to him be not cancelled as the same was granted on suppression of facts.4. Pursuant to the said notice issued a show cause has been filed in B.A. No. 3102 of 2005, which is tagged with B.A. No. 1135 of 2005. Both the applications are taken up together and are being disposed of by this co...
Massom Pervez Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Aug-31-2005
Reported in: [2006(1)JCR15(Jhr)]
ORDERM.Y. Eqbal, J.1. Heard Mr. Indrajeet Sinha, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, Mr. V.R. Reddy, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf or respondent No. 5 and the learned Counsel appearing for the Union of India and the State of Jharkhand.2. In this writ petition the petitioner has prayed for quashing the 'No Objection Certificate' [In short NOG] issued by the Deputy Commissioner, Hazaribagh on 31.12.2003 in favour of respondent No. 5, M/s. Reliance Industries, Ltd, Ranchi to install retail outlet on National Highway No. 2, G.T. Road, near Barhi in the district of Hazaribagh and also for quashing the order dated 3.6.2005 passed by the Deputy Commissioner. Hazaribagh whereby he has permitted both the petitioner and the private respondent No. 5 to carry on their business of petrol outlet in the said place.3. Petitioner's case is that he was granted NOG by the Deputy Commissioner on 12.9.2003 for staring a petrol pump in G.T. Road near Barhi. It is stated that ...
Tejender Singh Vs. Commandant, the Sikh Regimental Centre and anr.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Aug-30-2005
Reported in: AIR2006Jhar28; [2005(4)JCR471(Jhr)]
ORDER1. This writ application has been filed by one Tejender Singh against the order dated 26th March, 2004 passed by the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Jharkhand, Ranch!, dismissing his appeal, being No. 69 of 2004, and affirming the order passed by the District Consumer Forum, Hazaribagh.2. The respondent No. 1 as the Commandant of the Sikh Regimental Centre in the Ramgarh Cantonment, appears to have entered into an agreement with the writ petitioner herein on 15th February, 2001 for providing Cable T.V. network facilities in the Sikh Regimental Centre for its Officers, J.C.O. and other civilians. In terms of the contract entered into between the writ petitioner and the respondent No. 1, the writ a petitioner was to provide such services and in lieu thereof he would be entitled to collect monthly subscription from the connection holders . It was agreed that the writ petitioner would collect Rs. 250/- by way of security deposit from each connection holder, which would b...
Dadan Ram and anr. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Aug-30-2005
Reported in: [2006(1)JCR373(Jhr)]
ORDER1. This matter relates to a case of mutual transfer between one Babulal Ram and Lalit Kumar Ram whose services have been allocated to the State of Jharkhand from Bihar and the appellants herein whose services have been allocated to the State of Bihar. It appears that the said Babulal Ram and Lalit Kumar Ram have agreed to remain in the State of Bihar and have filed representations to the competent authority of the successor State. Since the matter was kept pending by both the State of Jharkhand and State of Bihar, the appellants filed a writ petition, being WP(S) No. 2265/2005, which was disposed of on 11th May, 2005 by the learned single Judge by directing the competent authority of the successor State to dispose of the representations said to have been made by the appellants on 11th April, 2005 and 20th April, 2005 within a period of thirty days from the date of receipt of a copy of the order.2. The present, appeal has been preferred by the writ petitioners on the ground that th...
Smt. Prabha Verma Vs. Sanjay Singh
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Aug-29-2005
Reported in: [2005(4)JCR169(Jhr)]
S.J. Mukhopadhaya, J.1. This petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been preferred by defendant/petitioner against the order dated 24th April, 2005 passed by the learned Sub-Judge, IVth, Dhanbad in Title Suit No. 51 of 1997, whereby learned Court below allowed the plaintiff/respondent to make necessary amendment in the plaint.2. The main grievance of the petitioner is that the aforesaid amendment of plaint has been allowed at the final stage of argument, which may give fresh cause of action and may change the nature of the suit.3. From the pleadings made by the petitioner and the enclosures attached to the writ petition, it appears that the Title suit No. 51 of 1997 was preferred by plaintiff/respondent for declaration of title, recovery of possession and permanent injunction against the defendant in respect to the suit land, as shown in Schedule. At the stage of argument, a petition was filed by the said plaintiff/respondent for amendment of plaint, including the ...
Ram Nath Ram Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Aug-29-2005
Reported in: [2005(4)JCR173(Jhr)]
S.J. Mukhopadhaya, J.1. This writ petition has been preferred by petitioner for a direction on the respondents to reconsider the case of petitioner for promotion to the post of Deputy Commandant, in view of the fact that the adverse remarks in the annual confidential report of petitioner recorded during the period 1st January, 1997 to 31st December, 1997 and 1st April, 1996 to 7th August, 1996 have been expunged vide orders dated 3rd March, 1999 and 2nd March, 2000 respectively.2. According to the petitioner, he was appointed in the services of Central Industrial Security Force (hereinafter referred to as 'CISF') in the year 1968 and was accorded the Personnel Number 7111003. During his service career, he took every care to keep high spirits, honesty and sincerity in his work for which he was awarded on several occasions and provided with commendation certificate. He was promoted to the post of Assistant Commandant vide Notification dated 18th March, 1991, whereinafter he was posted at...
Foseco India Ltd. Vs. Jharkhand State Electricity Board and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Aug-29-2005
Reported in: [2005(4)JCR167(Jhr)]
S.J. Mukhopadhaya, J.1. This writ petition has been preferred by petitioner against the order dated 21st September, 2004 passed by the Consumer Grievance Redressal Forum (hereinafter referred to the Forum) of Jharkhand State Electricity Board (JSEB for short) Ranchi case No. 98 of 2003, whereby and where under the Forum upheld the order dated 1st August, 2003 passed by 3rd respondent, the General Manager-cum-Chief Engineer, JSEB, East Singhbhum at Jamshedpur and held that the Annual Minimum Guarantee (AMG for short) bills dated 28th October, 1999 and 22nd November, 1999 for Rs. 19,02,574.25 paise and Rs. 82,534/- respectively have been rightly raised.2. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the Company entered into an agreement with JSEB on 12th August, 1995 for High Tension (HT for short) connection to the Company to receive electricity supply. The Company subsequently having become unable to perform well, in November, 1998, introduced a Voluntary Retirement Scheme. Therea...
Birsa Skill Development Centre for Rural Mass Vs. State of Jharkhand a ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Aug-29-2005
Reported in: AIR2006Jhar62; [2005(4)JCR170(Jhr)]
S.J. Mukhopadhaya, J.1. This writ petition has been preferred by petitioner, Birsa Skill Centre for Rural Mass for a direction on the respondents to issue Provisional National Trade Certificates to the students of petitioner Institute, who appeared in the examination for the Session 2001-03 and 2002-04, having been declared successful.2. According to petitioner, it is an Industrial Training Institute (hereinafter referred to as the 'Institute'), affiliated to the Directorate General of Employment and Training, New Delhi, Government of India. It imparts training to students and for the Certificate of Excellence, the examination conducted by Employment and Training Department, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi, which also published the result and issues the Certificate to the successful candidates. Apart from imparting teaching and training, the petitioner-Institute has no role in conducting the examination or in giving certificates to the successful students.3. The case of the petitioner ...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- Next ›
- Last »