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.
Ram Pravesh Pandit and ors. and Satya Narayan Singh and ors. Vs. State ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Aug-29-2005
Reported in: [2005(4)JCR447(Jhr)]
S.J. Mukhopadhaya, J.1. In both the cases, the petitioners have challenged similar orders of dismissal all dated 2nd January, 1992, passed by the Commandant, BMP-3, Govindpur, Dhanbad, in different departmental proceedings, similar appellate orders dated 11th. January/17th March, 1993 as also the similar revisional orders, passed on different dates, and common question of law, being involved, they have been heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.2. The case of the petitioners is that they were deputed as Constables along with others, including Sub-Inspectors of Police, at Khajuri Police Post under Konch Police Station, District-Gaya (Bihar), in the month of January, 1989 to maintain law and order, the area being effected by the Maobadi Communist Center (hereinafter to be referred as 'MCC', as extremist group). On 12th March, 1989 at 5.00 p.m. one Sidheshwar Singh along with Madan Upadhayay and Sitaram Dubey came there for duty. On the same day (12th March, 198...
Gadadhar Roy Vs. Chhedi Ram Parsurmka
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Aug-25-2005
Reported in: [2005(4)JCR382(Jhr)]
ORDERM.Y. Eqbal, J.1. Heard the parties.2. This revision application under Section 14(8) of the Bihar Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1982 has been filed by the petitioner-tenant challenging the order dated 10.5.2005 passed by the Subordinate Judge-I, Godda in Title Eviction Suit No. 2 of 2001, whereby he has directed the petitioner-tenant to vacate the premises within 30 days from the date of the order.3. Plaintiff-respondent filed the aforementioned suit for eviction of the defendant-petitioner on the ground of bona fide personal necessity. Even after service of summons, the petitioner did not make out a case for obtaining leave to contest the suit Consequently the suit was decreed under Section 14(4) of the said Act by order dated 24.2.2003. The petitioner challenged the said order by filing Civil Revision No. 292 of 2003. This Court in terms of order dated 20.8.2003 allowed the revision application and set aside the order dated 24.2.2003. The matter was remitted b...
Rajendra Prasad Agrawal Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Aug-25-2005
Reported in: I(2006)ACC135; [2005(4)JCR325(Jhr)]
M.Y. Eqbal, J.1. In this writ application the petitioner has prayed for issuance of appropriate writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing the order dated 27.06.2005 issued by the Principal Secretary, Department of Transport, Government of Jharkhand, Ranch! whereby he has cancelled the letter of Authority granted by the Joint Transport Commissioner being the Registering Authority to the petitioner in terms of Rule 63 of the Motor Vehicles Rules.2. Petitioner's case is that he applied for letter of Authority under the provisions of Section 56 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 read with Rule 63 of the M.V. Rules, 1989 for the purpose of Authorized Testing Station. It is stated by the petitioner that he possessed all the qualifications and eligibility criteria for the purposes of operating Authorized Testing Station. The Registering Authority, being the Joint Transport Commissioner, after having been satisfied with the requirements complied with by the petitioner, granted Letter of Autho...
Radhey Shyam Pandey Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Aug-25-2005
Reported in: [2005(4)JCR160(Jhr)]
ORDERN.N. Tiwari, J.1. In both the writ applications a common question arises for consideration as to whether the State of Bihar has got jurisdiction to pass the impugned order(s) of dismissal of the petitioner.2. Both the writ applications are grounded on Identical facts barring the development which gave rise to the cause for filing WP(S) No. 6309 of 2004 after filing the earlier writ application being WP(S) No. 2138 of 2003,3. The petitioner was an Assistant Engineer In the Water Resources Department and he was put under suspension by order No. 127. dated 5.5.2000 (Annexure-1) fixing his Headquarters in the Office of the Chief Engineer. Water Resources Department. Kanchi. Alter the reorganization of the State of Jharkhand under the provisions of Bihar Re-organisation Act, 2000, a tentative list of cadre allocation was made by the Cadre Allocation Committee. The petitioner's name appeared at Sl. No. 78 in the tentative list of Assistant Engineers of Water Resources Department for the...
R.L. Kochar Vs. Jharkhand State Electricity Board and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Aug-25-2005
Reported in: [2005(4)JCR378a(Jhr)]
ORDERS.J. Mukhopadhaya, J.1. Today when the above cases were taken up, Mr. Sanjeev Kr. Mishra, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the Company has deposited a further sum of Rs. 5 lacs with the JSEB on 14th May, 2005. After depositing the amount, the matter has been taken up by the Chairman, JSEB to resolve the dispute. It is informed that the matter is pending with the Chairman of JSEB, wherein, prayer has been made to reduce the bill on the grounds, mentioned in the representation.2. Counsel for the petitioners further submitted that the petitioners intend to pursue the Chairman of JSEB to take a decision on their representation, on merit and the Company is expecting that a favourable decision may be taken by the JSEB. It is further informed that the petitioners also intend to file objection under Section 9 of the Public Demand Recovery Act before the Certificate Officer.3. Prayer has, accordingly, been made to allow the petitioners to withdraw the writ petit...
Pradeep Cement Private Limited Vs. Jharkhand State Electricity Board a ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Aug-25-2005
Reported in: [2005(4)JCR388(Jhr)]
ORDER1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 14th June, 2005 passed by the learned Single Judge dismissing the writ petition, being WP (C) No. 2248 of 2005, filed by the appellant herein, in which the appellant had claimed exemption from payment of Annual Minimum Guarantee (hereinafter to be referred to as 'A.M.G.') charges under the Industrial Policy of 1995.2. The appellant set up a Cement Manufacturing Unit and applied to the Department of Industries for grant of Industrial License under the Small Scale Sector. The appellant also applied for an electric connection of 100 KVA which was sanctioned by the Electrical Executive Engineer, Giridih, by letter dated 14th January, 2000. After completion of all requirements and formalities, including execution of an agreement, the electric connection to the petitioner's manufacturing Unit was energised on 6th December, 2000. Admittedly, the appellant started commercial production with effect from 18th January, 2001. Sub...
Md. Alam Ansari Vs. Bharat Coking Coal Ltd. and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Aug-25-2005
Reported in: [2006(2)JCR67(Jhr)]
ORDERS.J. Mukhopadhaya, J.1. This writ petition related to compassionate appointment of the petitioner, whose claim has been rejected on the ground that a disabled person cannot be appointed on compassionate ground. The petitioner has challenged the order contained in letter No. 723, dated 12/13th July, 2004, issued by the Area Personnel Manager, Katras Area, Bharat Coking Coal Limited (hereinafter to be referred as 'BCCL' in short). The said decision having been communicated to the petitioner vide letter No. 739, dated 24/26th July, 2004 issued by Project Officer, Ram Kanali Colliery, Katrsagarh, Dist.-Dhanbad, he has also challenged in the same.2. Father of the petitioner, late Gayasuddin Mian who was in the services of BCCL, died in harness on 16th December, 2003, while posted as foreman in Ram Kanali Colliery, Dhanbad. The petitioner, thereafter, applied for compassionate appointment, but his claim was rejected on the ground that he is a disabled person.3. Petitioner has not disput...
Mansoor Mian @ Mansorminch Vs. the State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Aug-25-2005
Reported in: 2006CriLJ3558
ORDERNarendra Nath Tiwari, J.1. In this writ application the petitioner has prayed for quashing the order dated 18-2-2005 passed by Shri. P.G. Prasad, the J.M. Jamtara in T.R. No. 1182/ 95 whereby, upon receipt of the judgment of the Appellate Court, the Court below has issued non-bailable warrant of arrest against the petitioner for serving the sentence and has also issued notice to the bailers.2. The grievance of the petitioner is that in course of trail and before the his conviction he was in custody from 12-3-05 to 11-6-05 i.e. for a period of three months and his sentence being R.I. for three months, he is entitled for set off against the term of the imprisonment and as such the order Issuing the warrant of his arrest is illegal and without jurisdiction. Notice was issued to the O.P. No. 2 who has appeared and filed a counter affidavit stating, inter alia, that the petitioner was convicted under Section 379 I.P.C. and was sentenced to undergo R.I. for a period of three months. The...
Bihar State Scheduled Caste Co-operative Development Corporation Ltd. ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Aug-22-2005
Reported in: [2005(107)FLR582]; [2005(4)JCR31(Jhr)]; (2006)IILLJ374Jhar
ORDER1. This appeal the instance of the Bihar State Scheduled Caste Co-Operative Corporation Limited and its Managing Director has been filed against the judgment and order dated 18th June 2003, passed by the learned Single Judge on the writ application filed by the respondent Nos. 7 to 15 herein, being W.P. (S) No. 2734/2002. In the writ application, the writ petitioners had questioned the manner in which their services had been terminated without due compliance with the provisions of Section 25-F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.2. Admittedly, the petitioners had been appointed in 'AJAVINI' at different points of time in different capacities. An Engineering Cell was opened in 'AJAVINI' but ultimately, a decision was taken to abolish the said Cell. Accordingly, pursuant to a decision dated 25th July, 2000, the Administrator 'AJAVINI' abolished the Engineering Cell on the ground that no fund for the work was being allotted to the said Cell. An order was passed to take steps for adj...
Nakul Tiwary Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Aug-22-2005
Reported in: [2005(4)JCR387(Jhr)]
S.J. Mukhopadhaya, J.1. After departmental enquiry petitioner was punished by an order No. 3109, dated 19th August, 1999 issued by DIG of Police, South Chhotanagpur Range, Ranchi. He was compulsorily retired from service, the charge of taking bribe of Rs. 2000/- (Two thousand) from one Pramod Kumar Sinha, cook, at the time of opening of his service book having been proved. The appellate authority having rejected the memorandum of appeal by order No. 63, dated 9th February, 2002, the petitioner has challenged both the aforesaid orders in this case.2. Though the writ petition was preferred on 1st July, 2002, but details relating to departmental proceeding was not pleaded nor any specific plea was taken on assail the orders. A vague plea was taken that he has been denied natural justice.3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that no second show cause notice was served on the petitioner not the copy of the complaint made by the complainant was handed over to the petitioner. Th...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- Next ›
- Last »