Jharkhand Court October 2006 Judgments
Santi Prakash Kujur and ors. Vs. Ranchi University,
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Oct-31-2006
Reported in: [2007(1)JCR497(Jhr)]
Amareshwar Sahay, J. 1. In this writ application, the petitioners have prayed for quashing of Annexure-6, the letter of Ranchi University dated 27.01.1982 addressed to the Principal, Simdega College, Simdega whereby, the pay scale of the petitioners which they were getting since April 1990 were reduced and down graded and fixed in the scale of Rs. 1,200 - 1,800.2. The case of the petitioners is that they are non teaching staff of Simdega College, Simdega and they are holding the post of Class - III Assistant against the sanctioned post. According to the petitioners, earlier there were two types of posts of Assistants namely Lower Division Assistants and Upper Division Assistants. Subsequently on 27.01.1982, the Government of Bihar, Department of Education, by issue of Memo No. 91 addressed to all the Vice Chancellor of Universities situated in the State of Bihar, informed that the Government had decided to give the unified scale of pay to the Upper Division and Lower Division Posts. Su...
Tag this Judgment!Raj Kumar Singh @ R.K. Singh, Son of Late Dwarika Prasad Singh Vs. the ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Oct-31-2006
Reported in: 2007(1)BLJR708
Amareshwar Sahay, J.1. The petitioner has filed this Writ Application, challenging the Award dated 26.07.1997, passed by the Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Ranchi, in Reference Case No. 1 of 1993; as contained in Annexure 9 to the Writ Application; whereby the Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Ranchi answered the reference made to him in negative and held that the concerned workman i.e. the petitioner herein, was not entitled to any relief.2. The following reference was made to the Labour Court for adjudication:Whether not giving work after rejecting joining report of Shri R K. Singh, personnel number 50502 - Inspector, Heavy Machine Tools Plant, H.EC., Dhurwa, Ranchi is proper? If not what relief the workman is entitled to?' 3. The facts which are not in dispute are that the petitioner (hereinafter referred to as the concerned 'workman') was an employee under the Management of M/s. Heavy Engineering Corporation (hereinafter referred to as M/s. H.E.C.) and was posted as Inspector in H...
Tag this Judgment!Brij Bihari Ram and Kanayya Prasad Vs. Steel Authority of India Limite ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Oct-31-2006
Reported in: [2007(2)JCR150(Jhr)]
Amareshwar Sahay, J. 1. The petitioners' prayer in this writ application is to quash the orders as contained in Annexure-1 and 1/1 dated 29/09/1999, issued by the Respondents Bokaro Steel Limited (SAIL) by which the petitioners were dismissed from service after a departmental enquiry on the charge that they gave false information regarding their caste category for securing employment.2. According to the petitioners, they joined the services of the respondent No. 1 on 24/06/1974. By issue of the charge sheets as contained in Annexure-2 and 2/1, it was alleged against the petitioners that they committed misconduct under the Standing Orders of the Company, by giving false information regarding their caste category for securing employment in Bokaro Steel Limited. Statements of allegations were also accompanied with the charge sheet, in which it was mentioned that the petitioners mentioned themselves, belonging to Scheduled Caste Community in the caste column in the interview particulars an...
Tag this Judgment!Madhu Das Vs. State of Bihar (Now Jharkhand)
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Oct-31-2006
Reported in: [2007(1)JCR15(Jhr)]
D.G.R. Patnaik, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction dated 9.8.1999 and corresponding sentence, passed by the 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Jamshedpur whereby the appellant was convicted for the offences under Section 376, IPC and Section 3 of the S.C. & S.T. (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for 7 years and 1 year respectively for the said offences.2. Facts of the case which was registered on the basis of the fardbeyan of the prosecutrix on 4.4.1997, is that about five months prior to the lodging of the FIR when the prosecutrix had gone to the river in the afternoon at about 2.00 p.m. for her. bath, present appellant, finding her alone, forcibly took her to a nearby secluded place near a brick kiln where he first made proposal to her for sexual relation, but on her refusal, he felled her down on the ground and committed rape on her. When she wanted to raise alarm, he gagged her mouth and later, under threats as well ...
Tag this Judgment!Professor Pravakar Pradhan Vs. Ranchi University, Through the Vice Cha ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Oct-31-2006
Reported in: 2007(2)BLJR988; [2007(3)JCR510(Jhr)]
Amareshwar Sahay, J.1. In the instant writ application, the prayer of the petitioner is for a direction to the respondents to immediately and forthwith release the payment in favour of the petitioner which are dues in different heads such as pay difference on account of promotion from lecturer to reader for a period of 18 months, pay difference on account of promotion from Reader to Professor for a period of 24 months, arrears on account of Dearness Allowance (D.A.), arrear of salaries due to part payment for the period 1991 - 95, D.D.A., part payment of gratuity, compulsory deposit account (C.D.A.), earned leave, house rent allowance (H.R.A.), ad-hoc D.A. (50% of D.A.) etc.2. The case of the petitioner is that he was appointed as a Lecturer in Oriya on 01.09.1961 by the Cooperative College, Jamshedpur by issue of Annexure-1 to the writ application. His appointment to the post of Lecturer was approved by the Vice Chancellor of Ranchi University which was communicated to the petitioner ...
Tag this Judgment!Dr. Md. KalimuddIn Vs. Birsa Agricultural University and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Oct-31-2006
Reported in: [2007(3)JCR101(Jhr)]
Amareshwar Sahay, J.1. In the present writ application the petitioner has prayed for quashing of the letter dated 09/06/1999 (Annexure-12) and the letter dated 12/11/1999 (Annexure-14), both issued by the orders of the Vice Chancellor, Birsa Agricultural University, Ranchi declaring Dr. Rajendra Yadav respondent No. 5 as senior to the petitioner Dr. Md. Kalimudduin and also rejecting the representation filed by the petitioner against the said declaration of the seniority. Further prayer of the petitioner is for direction to the respondents to restore the seniority of the petitioner over Dr. R. Yadav respondent No. 5.2. The case of the petitioner is that Ranchi Veterinary College is an affiliated college of Birsa Agricultural University and Birsa Agricultural University has two others constituent colleges namely Ranchi Agriculture College, Ranchi and Forestry College, Ranchi. The petitioner was appointed as Associate Professor-cum-Senior Scientist at. Ranchi Veterinary College vide Anne...
Tag this Judgment!Surya Roshni Limited, Vs. Presiding Officer, Labour Court and Atanu Se ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Oct-31-2006
Reported in: 2007(2)BLJR1145; [2007(115)FLR396]; [2007(3)JCR519(Jhr)]
Amareshwar Sahay, J.1. The petitioner M/s. Surya Roshni Limited, by filing this Writ Application, has challenged the order contained in Annexure-10 to the Writ Application dated 21.12.1999 in B.S. Case No. 7/98 by the Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Ranchi, whereby and whereunder, the Labour Court allowed the application under Section 26(2) of the Bihar Shops and Establishment Act, 1953 read with Rule 21 of the Bihar Shops and Establishment Rules, 1955 filed by the respondent No. 2 Atanu Sengupta directing his reinstatement in service with full back wages and consequential benefits.2. A complaint under Section 26(2) of the Bihar Shops and Establishment Act, 1953 (hereinafter referred to as Act) was filed by the respondent No. 2 Atanu Sengupta(hereinafter referred to as the Complainant) before the Labour Court stating therein as follows:(a) He was initially appointed as Deputy Manager (Technical Marketing) on 03.02.1996 by M/s. Surya Roshni Limited on a fixed salary of Rs. 7,230/- per ...
Tag this Judgment!Steel Authority of India Ltd. Vs. the Presiding Officer, Labour Court ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Oct-31-2006
Reported in: [2007(1)JCR267(Jhr)]
Amareshwar Sahay, J.1. In this Writ Application, the petitioner M/s. Steel Authority of India Limited, Unit-Bokaro Steel Plant, Bokaro Steel City. Bokaro has challenged the Order dated 28.8.1999 as contained in Annexure 22 to the Writ Application by which, the Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Bokaro Steel City, Bokaro (Respondent No. 1) allowed the application under Section 33C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 filed by Shri Harihar Prasad Yadav (Respondent No. 2) holding that the applicant (Harihar Prasad Yadav) was entitled to get the present pay scale which was given to Shri D.L. Burnwal and he was entitled to get Rs. 1,86,816.54 paise only and since he was already paid a sum of Rs. 51,913.68 paise and as such, the Management was directed to pay the balance amount of Rs. 1,34,902.86 paise to him.2. The facts in short are that Shri Harihar Prasad Yadav (Respondent No. 2 herein) was appointed as Senior Operative Trainee (S.O.T.) along with several others including one Shri D.L. ...
Tag this Judgment!Firoj Singh Kuntiya and anr. Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Oct-31-2006
Reported in: [2007(1)JCR515(Jhr)]
1. Both the appellants stand convicted for the offences punishable under Sections 376, 302/34 and 2dTof the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to serve rigorous imprisonment for life under Sections 376 and 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code and further sentenced to serve rigorous imprisonment for a period of five years under Section 201 of the Indian Penal Code, by the 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Chaibasa in Sessions Trial No. 234 of 1997. However, both the sentences were ordered to run concurrently.2. The factual matrix leading to their convictions are that deceased Naguri Mai Kandaiburu, daughter of informant used to sell Haria. According to the prosecution version, she had gone to Mangla Hat at Chaibasa in the afternoon of 25.3.1997 from where she returned along with the appellants and two others, namely, Saheb Singh Kuntia and Jhinkpani @ Burhan Singh Kuntia. Further stated that she handed over the sale proceeds to her mother and left the house with the appellants and two others that ...
Tag this Judgment!Md. Rashid Khan Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Oct-31-2006
Reported in: [2007(2)JCR136(Jhr)]
1. Sole appellant Md. Rashid Khan stands convicted for the offence under Sections 376 and 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to serve rigorous imprisonment for life on both counts, by the Vth Additional Sessions Judge, Dhanbad in Sessions Trial No. 350 of 1991.2. Brief facts leading to this appeal are that Kamarjahan, aged 12 years, daughter of informant Abbas Khan (PW 8) went for tending her goats along with the appellant and one Bishnu in the afternoon of 12.3.1991 and did not return. According to the informant, she used to tend the goats in nearby woods regularly. As per this witness, in the afternoon of 12.3.1991, appellant and Bishnu came to his house and asked Kamarjahan to accompany them for tending goats. Further stated that Kamarjahan was not willing, but the appellants insisted and she left along with her goats in company of the Appellant. Thereafter, the informant went to see his wife admitted in hospital and came to learn in the evening that Kamarjahan has not retur...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »