Jharkhand Court November 2006 Judgments
Satya Narayan Singh Vs. the State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Nov-30-2006
Reported in: [2007(3)JCR122(Jhr)]
Permod Kohli, J.1. Petitioner was serving as a Constable in the Police Department of the then State of Bihar. He was posted in the Dumka District Force. After earning one promotion, as Hawildar he finally retired from service on 07th March, 2000. According to the petitioner, he was not aware of the date of his retirement due to non-availability of his service book. It is stated that the service record of the petitioner had been destroyed and to support this contention reliance is placed upon a communication dated 20th of October, 2000 of the Superintendent of Police, Dumka. Petitioner was made to retire on 07th March, 2000 after his service book was received in the office of the Superintendent of Police, East Singhbhum, Jamshedpur, wherein, the date of the birth of the petitioner was recorded as year 1941. On the basis of the recorded date of birth, he was to retire on 30th of June, 1999. After retiring the petitioner, the Superintendent of Police, East Singhbhum, Jamshedpur passed an ...
Tag this Judgment!Dr. Gyanendra Kumar Singh Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Nov-30-2006
Reported in: [2007(2)JCR161(Jhr)]
ORDERN.N. Tiwari, J.1. In this writ application the petitioner has prayed for a direction on the respondents to pay the arrears of salary for the period from 1.1.1999 to 31.8.1999 for which the leave has already been sanctioned vide Annexure-2. It has been stated that the petitioner has taken voluntarily retirement on 31.5.2004. but the petitioner has not been paid his arrears of salary for the said period though the leave against the same has already been sanctioned by the competent authority. The petitioner is also entitled to get the A.C.P. benefit which was also sanctioned as far back as on 21.12.2005. but the monetary benefits thereof have not been paid to the petitioner. The petitioner made repeated requests and also filed representation before the Secretary, Health, Medical Education and Family Welfare Department, Government of Jharkhand, but till date no order has been passed on the said representation.2. Learned J.C. to Sr. S.C.-I submitted that the petitioner has belatedly ap...
Tag this Judgment!Most. Taruna Devi Vs. the State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Nov-30-2006
Reported in: [2007(2)JCR158(Jhr)]
ORDERPermod Kohli, J.1. Petitioner is aggrieved of order No. 78 dated 28th July, 2006, whereby her claim for compassionate appointment has been rejected on the ground that the petitioner's husband, namely, Sahdev Prasad Mehta, has died a normal death and there is no provision for providing compassionate appointment to the legal heir of such a person. It is stated that only if the death is caused in extremists' encounter, compassionate appointment can be granted.2. Petitioner is the widow of late Sahdev Prasad Mehta, who was enrolled as a Volunteer with the Home-Guard. It is admitted case of the parties that the deceased husband of the petitioner met with an accident while on patrolling duty along with his co-members and died on 28th January, 2006. The deceased has left the petitioner as his widow, two minor sons and two minor daughters. After the death of her husband, the petitioner applied for compassionate appointment, stating therein, that the deceased was the sole bread-earner of h...
Tag this Judgment!Deonandan Mandal Vs. the State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Nov-30-2006
Reported in: [2007(3)JCR130(Jhr)]
ORDERPermod Kohli, J.1. Vide order dated 24th June, 2004 petitioner has been ordered to retire from service with effect from 30th June, 2004, on completing 40 years of service. It is this order which is under challenge in the present writ petition. It is stated that the petitioner's date of birth is 05.02.1947, which is recorded in the service records. He was appointed on 10th June, 1964 and is due to retire on 5th February, 2007 on completion of sixty years of age. However, he has been prematurely retired vide the impugned order without any valid reasons. Accordingly, a further direction is sought for payment of salary with effect from 1st July, 2004 till he attains the age of superannuation at the age of 60 years.2. In the counter affidavit, filed by respondent No. 2, it is stated that the petitioner has been retired on 30th June, 2004 as per the direction, given by the Energy Secretary, Government of Bihar, Patna vide letter No. 3980 dated 27th October, 1999. In this letter it is me...
Tag this Judgment!Satari Laguri and anr. Vs. State of Bihar (Now Jharkhand)
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Nov-30-2006
Reported in: [2007(2)JCR103(Jhr)]
ORDER1. This appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 2.6.1997 and 3.6.1997 respectively passed by Shri Prashant Kumar. 4th Additional Sessions Judge, Singhbhum West at Chaibasa in Sessions Trial No. 112 of 1991, convicting the appellants under Section 302/34, IPC and sentencing them to RI for life.2. The prosecution case in short is as follows:Risal Laguri (PW 2) lodged a fardbeyan on 17.2.1989 that there was a quarrel between his mother and the mother of appellant No. 1 over a basket for collecting cow dung. Thereafter, appellant No. 1 came to the house of informant and abused his mother. He gave a fist blow to his sister-in-law. His father and uncle tried to rescue her, whereupon appellant No. 1 caught his father, who was rescued by his brother. Thereafter appellant No. 1 brought a 'danda' and started assaulting informant's father and his uncle. In the meantime, his brother, appellant No. 2, came with spade and caused injury on his father's h...
Tag this Judgment!Transport Corporation of India Ltd. Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Nov-30-2006
Reported in: [2007(1)JCR551(Jhr)]
ORDERPermod Kohli, J.1. This application is directed against the order dated 7th July, 2006, passed by the learned District Judge, Dhanbad, in Misc. Appeal No. 9 of 2006, dismissing the appeal, preferred by the present petitioner and thereby confirming the order dated 30th January, 2006, passed by the Munsif-II, Dhanbad, rejecting the prayer of the petitioner for interim injunction in Title Suit No. 151 of 2005.2. It is useful to notice the facts, relevant for the purposes of controversies involved in this petition. One Md. Idrish was the owner, in possession of the land, subject matter of the suit. This land was sold to Smt. Malti Devi vide registered sale deed No. 7095 dated 19th April, 1969. Malti Devi further sold this property to Sushil Kumar Sinha vide sale deed No. 3360 dated 6th April, 1981. The land was mutated in the name of Sushil Kumar Sinha in the records of Circle Officer, Nirsa and receipts were also issued. Petitioner, a company, purchases this land from Sushil Kumar Si...
Tag this Judgment!Somra Sahu and ors. Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Nov-29-2006
Reported in: [2007(2)JCR110(Jhr)]
D.P. Singh, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 29.7.2002 and 30.7.2002 passed by the Additional District and Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court, Gumla in Sessions Trial No. 196/2002, whereby and whereunder the learned Sessions Judge convicted the appellants under Sections 307/34 IPC and sentenced them to undergo RI for three years and under Section 148 IPC to undergo RI for two years. However, both the sentences were directed to run concurrently.2. The brief facts leading to this appeal are that the informant Lal Mohan Sahu was taking his supper in the night of 30.4.2001 in his house situated in Mauja Sursuriya, PS Gumla, when all the appellants came there and asked him to come out of the house. As further stated, he went out of the house and then appellants took him at the point of Bhujali, Balua and lathi towards the house of witness Mohan Sahu, PW 2 situated at a distance of 500 yards. According to the Informant, when he reached...
Tag this Judgment!indo Singh and ors. Vs. the State of Bihar
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Nov-29-2006
Reported in: [2007(2)JCR48(Jhr)]
D.P. Singh, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 10.7.2002 passed in Sessions Trial No. 242 of 1987, whereby and whereunder the learned Additional Sessions Judge-Ist-cum Fast Track Court, Giridih held appellant Indo Singh guilty and sentenced him to undergo RI for five years under Section 307 IPC and one year under Section 148 IPC and appellants Ganesh Sao, Nago Singh, Madan Hazam, Budhan Hazam, Butan Singh, Jagdish Hazam @ Beni Hazam and Raj Kishore Hajra are sentenced to undergo RI for six months under Section 147 and two years under Section 325 and five yeas under Section 307 read with Section 149 IPC. However, sentenced were directed to run concurrently.2. The brief facts leading to this appeal are that the informant and appellant Ganesh Sao are son and father, who have got dispute regarding the share in the properties. As further stated, appellant No. 1 married second time after the death of the mother of the informant fifteen...
Tag this Judgment!Shyam Murmu Vs. Raska Tuddu and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Nov-28-2006
Reported in: [2007(1)JCR454(Jhr)]
ORDERM.Y. Eqbal, J.1. This application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India at the instance of the defendant/petitioner is directed against the order dated 5.4.2005 passed by Sub-Judge, I, Rajmahal in Title Suit No. 41/2001, whereby he has dismissed the petition filed by the petitioner seeking permission to adduce evidence by examining witnesses in the suit. 2. The facts of the case lie in a narrow compass:The plaintiff/respondents filed Title Suit No. 41/01 against the defendants for declaration that plaintiffs are the rightful owner being the heirs of late Hukka Tudu and for permanent injunction restraining the defendant/petitioner from claiming any right in the property. The defendant/petitioner appeared in the said suit but no written statement was filed. Petitioner was thereafter, debarred from filing written statement by order dated 7.7.2004. The hearing of the suit, thereafter, proceeded and the petitioner examined witnesses. On 8.2.2005 petitioner filed application pr...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Punam Kumari Vs. the State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Nov-28-2006
Reported in: [2007(1)JCR576(Jhr)]
M.Y. Eqbal, J.1. This Letters Patent Appeal is directed against the judgment dated 8.8.2006 passed in W.P. (S) No. 3096 of 2004 whereby the learned Single Judge disposed of the writ application with certain directions.2. The aforementioned writ application was filed by the appellant seeking a direction for payment of arrears of salary for the period 10th July, 2002 to 5th January, 2004 and also for issuance of pay slip for future salary.3. The facts of the case lie in a narrow compass:By notification dated 16th April, 2004, the appellant who was working as District Education Officer, Pakur, was transferred as Principal, Government Teachers Training College, Hazaribagh. The appellant joined the place of posting on 10th May, 2002. Within a period of two months, the appellant was again transferred vide order 30th June, 2002 from Hazaribagh to Koderma as District Education-Officer. The appellant challenged the said order by filing a writ application being W.P. (S) No. 4003 of 2002. The wri...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »