Jharkhand Court December 2006 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.
Lal Bahadur Singh Ashant and ors. Vs. State of Jharkhand Through Its S ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Dec-04-2006
Reported in: [2007(1)JCR514(Jhr)]
ORDERRamesh Kumar Merathia, J.1. Heard the parties.2. The petitioners, who are the retired Teachers of the Government Elementry School are claiming statutory interest on arrears of pay from 1.1.1971 to 31.3.1973 and on their G.P.F. amount from 30.11.1976 till November 1985.3. Mr. Dubey, learned Counsel for the petitioners relied on the order dated April 30, 2003 passed by the Division Bench in L.P.A. No. 651 of 2002 Hare Ram Pandey v. State of Jharkhand and Ors.4. In the case of Hare Ram Pandey (supra), this Court found as follows:In the year 1973, the Government had taken a decision to deposit the amount of arrears of salary of the teachers from 1.1.1971 to 31.03.1973 in their provident fund account. If such arrears were deposited in 1973, the appellant would have earned statutory interest thereon prescribed for the provident fund account. For such default on the part of the authorities, the appellant cannot be made to suffer, and he is entitled to get statutory interest treating the ...
Gobind Kumar Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Dec-04-2006
Reported in: [2007(2)JCR98(Jhr)]
Ramesh Kumar Merathia, J.1. Heard the parties,2. Petitioner has filled this writ petition for a direction to the respondents to recruit him in Army in General duty. His case is that he was never at fault in completion of the formalities rather the respondents did not complete the same expeditiously and the petitioner cannot be made to suffer.3. Counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondents denying such allegation and saying, inter alia, that petitioner was given relaxation of 1 Centimeter in height but it did not increase despite his becoming more than 18 years of age and moreover he was told In December, 2002 to report on 8.1.2003 for despatch, but he failed to do so and he reported only in February, 2003.4. No rejoinder has been filed on behalf of the petitioner to the said statements made in the counter affidavit which was filed way back on 18.7.2005.5. Thus the allegation made by the petitioner about the fault on the part of the respondents is denied and disputed. T...
Ashwini Kumar Singh and anr. Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Dec-02-2006
Reported in: [2007(2)JCR334(Jhr)]
ORDERD.K. Sinha, J.1. The present petition has been filed under Section 482, Cr PC by the petitioners for quashment of the order dated 2.2.2006 passed by the CJM Jam-shedpur whereby and whereunder the cognizance of the offence was taken under Sections 287/288/338 of the IPC arising out of Golmuri (Burma Mines) P.S. Case No. 187/05 corresponding to G.R. No. 2112/05 presently pending in the Court of Shri D.C. Awasthi, Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Jamshedpur. It is further prayed for the quashing of the entire criminal proceeding as against the petitioners.2. The prosecution story in brief is that on 28.9.2005 while one Mukesh Singh (since deceased) was working in Golbana Engineering Department, under the supervision of contractor of Tube Company, namely Suresh Singh, Supervisor Nagina Sharma and the Engineer A.K. Singh and Ranjit Singh (Petitioners) the workman Mukesh Singh was asked to hand over a hammer to the supervisor, and pursuant to that, while he was moving towards the supervi...
Vinoda Nand Jha Vs. the State of Jharkhand,
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Dec-01-2006
Reported in: 2007(1)BLJR689; 2007CriLJ1979
ORDERD.K. Sinha, J.1. The petitioner has preferred this petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing the entire criminal prosecution in G.R. No. 2949 of 2003 arising out of Ranchi S.C. & S.T. P.S. Case No. 29 of 2003, now pending in the court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ranchi for the alleged offence under Section 3(1)(x)(2)(vii) of the S.C. and S.T. (Prevention of Attrocities) Act 1989 read with Section 504 of the Indian Penal Code.2. The brief fact of the case as stands narrated in the written report presented by the Opposite party No. 3 before the Harijan Police Station was that he at the relevant time was posted as Section Officer in the Jharkhand Vidhan Sabha, Ranchi. He was the member of the Scheduled Caste and used to work under the Speaker and Deputy Speaker of the Assembly but his incharge of the work was the Deputy Secretary, Vinoda Nand Jha (Petitioner). On 17.10.2003 at about 1.15 p.m. while the informant was proceeding towards the office of Shri Kumar Jai Kishore ...
Bharat Ram Mahato and ors. Vs. Ramesh Chandra Sharma and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Dec-01-2006
Reported in: [2007(1)JCR403(Jhr)]
M.Y. Eqbal, J.1. This application under Article 227 of the Constitution is directed against the order dated 31.7.2006 passed by Munsif 1st Court, Dhanbad whereby he has allowed the objection filed by the judgment-debtor under Section 47 of the Code of Civil Procedure (shortly CPC) and dismissed the Execution Case No. 05/2003 as being barred by limitation.2. The facts of the case lie in a narrow compass:The original plaintiffs, namely Sheo shankar Mahto and Dasrath Mahto filed a suit in the year 1971 being Title Suit No. 187 of 1971 in the court of Munsif, Dhanbad against the original defendants, Bishwanath Thakur and Ful Kumari Devi for declaration of their possession or in the alternative, recovery of possession of the. suit property by evicting the defendant 1st party there from besides a decree of permanent injunction and for removal of structures from the portion of the land. The suit was decreed in terms of judgment dated 11.3.1977. The respondent, Bishwanath Thakur preferred an a...
Bifr Vs. Umi Special Steel Ltd.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Dec-01-2006
Reported in: [2007(1)JCR511(Jhr)]
ORDERR.K. Merathia, J.1. I.A. No. 3231 of 2006.Heard the parties. It is submitted that the advance copy sent by IDBI was received by Official Liquidator on 30.6.2006. However, the next days being Saturday and Sunday, the original copy was served only on July 3, 2006.In the circumstances, the affidavit regarding proof of debt submitted by IDBI should be treated to have been filed in time and the delay in filing such affidavit is condoned.So far the matter of assignment by IDBI to SASF is concerned, the matter may be taken up with the Official Liquidator, who will take a decision on the same in accordance with law. I.A. disposed of.2. I.A. Nos. 3073 and 3074 of 2006.Heard the parties. Mr. Lakhan Sharma, appearing for the petitioners in these Interlocutory applications submitted that his clients did contract work in the Company under liquidation and certain machinery tools were left in the factory, the present value of which will be about Rs. 25.Q00/-. He further submitted that security m...
Mohd. Zahir Ansari Vs. State of Jharkhand and anr.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Dec-01-2006
Reported in: [2007(2)JCR144(Jhr)]
D.K. Sinha, J.1. The petitioner, Mohammad Zahir Ansari has preferred this quashing petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure against the impugned order dated 26.5.2006 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, (F.T.C. II) Bokaro in Cr. Revision No. 39 of 2006 whereby and whereunder the order passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magstrate, Bermo at Tenughat in C.P. Case No. 318 of 2006 on 22.2.2006 was set aside by the Additional Sessions Judge with the direction to the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate to pass an order afresh in accordance with law.2. The brief fact of the case is that the petitioner, Mohammad Zahir Ansari had filed a complaint case No. 215 of 2004 against the accused Hadish Ansari and six other for the offence under Section 376/302/202/34 of the Indian Penal Code in the Court of A.C.J.M., Bermo at Tenughat which was sent to Petarwar police station under Section 156(iii) of the Cr PC for institution of FIR and to submit report after investigatio...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next ›