Jharkhand Court March 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.
Suresh Kumar Agarwal Vs. State of Jharkhand and anr.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-24-2006
Reported in: [2006(3)JCR90(Jhr)]
D.K. Sinha, J.1. Petitioner has preferred this petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for quashing of the order impugned dated 5.11.2003 passed by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jamshedpur in C/2 Case No. 6246 of 2005 which was presently pending in the court of Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Jamshedpur.2. The fact reported in brief is that prosecution was launched before the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, East Singhbhum, Jamshedpur on the prosecution report of the competent authority-cum-Civil Surgeon-cum-Chief Medical Officer against the Managing Director/Manager, Rani Salt Refineries Pvt. Ltd. Gandhidhum, Gujarat as also against Sri Suresh Kumar Agrawal, petitioner on the ground that sample of the Rani Salt collected from the retail shop of the petitioner was found adulterated due to less quantity of iodine contents as per requirement in item No. A.15.01 of appendix B of Prevention of Food Adulteration Rules, 1955 as reported by the Public Analyst, Mineral...
Phulchand Mandal Vs. State of Bihar (Now Jharkhand)
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-24-2006
Reported in: [2006(2)JCR453(Jhr)]
1. The accused appeals.2. The appellant, Phulchand Mandal, was tried for an offence of murder on the allegation that at 7.00 p.m. on 10.8.1987, he caused the death of the deceased, Kumhan Mandal, son of Tulo Mahto, who was examined as PW 1, by strangulation. The learned trial Judge, finding the appellant guilty, sentenced him to imprisonment for life, which is being challenged in the above appeal.3. A year prior to the date of incident, the appellant, Phulchand Mandal, was appointed by the villagers as Banrakshi but he was not discharging his duties properly and therefore, in his place, the deceased, Kumhan Mandal, was appointed about three months before the date of occurrence. The appellant, according to the prosecution, was nurturing a grievance against the deceased on account of the above fact and also threatened him on one or two occasions that he will murder him.4. At 7.00 p.m. on 10.8.1987, the appellant went to the house of Kumhan Mandal and called him. Kumhan Mandal's father, P...
Md. Waris Vs. Union of India (Uoi) Through Chief Project Manager Railw ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-24-2006
Reported in: AIR2006Jhar116; [2006(3)JCR503(Jhr)]
R.K. Merathia, J.1. Heard the parties.2. Petitioner had prayed for a direction restraining the respondents from causing damage to his land by drawing overhead electricity transmission line by railways between D.V.C. Grid Sub-Station, Naisarai, Ramgarh and Railway Sub-Station at Barkakana; and for directing the respondents to get his damages determined in accordance with law on account of putting up traction towers on the portion of his land.3. It is not in dispute that the said electrical transmission was completed during the pendency of this writ petition as no stay was granted in this writ petition.4. Mr. V. Shivnath, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, with reference to Section 11 of the Railways Act, 1989, submitted that the railways should have acquired the property of the petitioner under the Land Acquisition Act. In the alternative, he submitted that the petitioner is entitled for compensation under the provisions of Section 19 of the Indian Electricity...
Laxmi NaraIn Ramaswarup Shivhare and Co. and ors. Vs. State of Jharkha ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-24-2006
Reported in: [2006(3)JCR485(Jhr)]
M.Y. Eqbal, J.1. In all these writ petitions, since common question of law and facts are involved, they have been heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.2. Petitioners, who are the licensees in respect of shops of Country, Liquor, Spiced Country Liquor and Indian Made Foreign Liquor in the different districts of the State of Jharkhand, have challenged the notification dated 10.1.2005, issued by the Commissioner of Excise-cum-Secretary, Department of Excise & Prohibition, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi whereby Clause 14(kha) of the Sale Notification has been amended.3. Facts of the case lie in a narrow compass:In the year 2004, Sale Notification was issued on 14.5.2004 by the Commissioner of Excise for settlement of Country Liquor, Spiced Country Liquor and Indian Made Foreign Liquor shops in the different districts of the State of Jharkhand. Immediately after the publication of the Sale Notification, the Commissioner of Excise issued another notification date...
Minaral Area Development Authority Vs. the Presiding Officer, Labour C ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-23-2006
Reported in: [2006(110)FLR270]; [2006(2)JCR390(Jhr)]
S.J. Mukhopadhaya, J.1. This writ petition has been preferred by the Mineral Area Development Authority, Dhanbad (hereinafter to be referred as 'M.A.D.A.') against the Award dated 27th December, 1999, passed by the learned Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Dhanbad, pronounced on 17th October, 2000, in Reference Case No. 6 of 1996, whereby, the concerned workmen/respondent Nos. 2 to 13 have been reinstated with full back wages and other consequential benefits.During pendency of the writ petition, respondent No. 13 having died, his heir has already been substituted in his place vide order dated 22nd February, 2006.2. The following plea have been taken by the petitioner to assail the judgment/award:(i) The workmen having not completed 240 days of continuous service, were not entitled to any benefit under Section 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947;(ii) The services of the respondents having been terminated on the ground of illegal appointments, no discrimination can be alleged on the ...
Daroga Yadav Vs. the Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-23-2006
Reported in: [2006(110)FLR277]; [2006(2)JCR353(Jhr)]
S.J. Mukhopadhaya, J.1. The petitioner was in the services of the Border Security Force (hereinafter referred to as the B.S.F.). In the extremist attack in Jammu & Kashmir State, he sustained bullet injuries resulting into complete blindness. He was declared 100% disabled. By the impugned order No. A 228/Estt-1/2004/33930-39 dated 31st December, 2004, he has been made to retire from service on the ground of physical disability, declaring him unfit for the services w.e.f. 31st December, 2004 under the cloak of Rule 25 of the B.S.F. Rules, 1969, whereas the petitioner claimed protection under the provision of 'The Persons with Disabilities (equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995 (hereinafter referred to as the Disabilities Act, 1995).2. In the present case, the questions arise for determination are:(a) Whether the petitioner is entitled to get protection under Section 47 of the Disabilities act? (b) Whether the impugned order of retirement dated 31st...
Omprakash Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-23-2006
Reported in: [2006(2)JCR382(Jhr)]
S.J. Mukhopadhaya, J.1. This application has been preferred by the petitioner against the judgment and order dated 27th June, 2005, passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Circuit Bench at Ranchi, in O.A. No. 5 of 2005, whereby and whereunder, the application, preferred by the petitioner and others, has been dismissed.2. In the aforesaid application, the petitioner and others challenged a notice, inviting applications for drafting fifteen persons as PCNL(Power Controller)/CCNL(Crew Controller), as was circulated by Memo dated 22nd December, 2004. Further prayer was made to grant them the pay scale of Rs. 6,500-10,500/- along with all the benefits and to maintain their seniority. The Tribunal while held that the petitioner and others can not be regularized against the posts of Power/Crew Controllers, posts having been abolished and added to the posts of Drivers under 1998 Scheme, rejected rest of the prayers.3. It is not in dispute that the petitioner and others were Goods Driver...
Khago Mandal, Vs. the State of Bihar (Now Jharkhand)
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-23-2006
Reported in: 2006CriLJ3556; [2006(2)JCR380(Jhr)]
1. The appellants were arrayed as A-1, A-5 and A-6 before the Additional Sessions Judge, Deoghar. They were tried along with Jitlal Mandal, Basudeo Mandal and Dongan Mandal, who were arrayed as A-2, A-3 and A-4. In the judgment, the appellants, who were arrayed as A-1, A-5 and A-6, were convicted under Section 302/34 and 201/34 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment under Section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code and further to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years under Section 201/34 of the Indian Penal Code and the sentences were ordered to run concurrently and the other accused, who were acquitted and arrayed as A-2, A-3 and A-4 will be referred to as the A-2, A-3 and A-4, in the same order, as they were arrayed before the trial court, for the sake of convenience.2. The deceased Baldeo Mandal is the son of Ganashyam Mandal, PW-1, and his mother is Degni Devi, PW-6. PW-7, Ugiya Devi, is the wife of deceased. PW-3, Sabita Devi, is the daughter of th...
K.S. Saluja Vs. Ram Kishore Agarwalla and anr.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-23-2006
Reported in: [2006(3)JCR79(Jhr)]
Narendra Nath Tiwari, J.I.A. No. 681 of 2006 1. Heard the parties. 2. In this application the petitioner has prayed for addition of prayer for quashing the order dated 07.10.2005 passed by learned Sub Judge VII, Dhanbad whereby he has refused to accept the certified copy of the order of the Sub Divisional Officer in evidence, which is a public document. 3. Learned Counsel for the respondents contested the interlocutory application. 4. On perusal of the application and other record and after hearing the parties, I find that amendment prayed for does not go to change the nature of the writ application and the same is intended to bring on record to avoid multiplicity of legal proceeding and for the ends of justice. 5. Considering the above, this interlocutory application is allowed. Let the writ application be amended as prayed for in the interlocutory application. W.P.(C) No. 273 of 2005 6. Heard the parties. 7. In this writ application the petitioner has prayed for quashing the order da...
Smt. Pratibha Singh and Madhusudan Prasad Singh Vs. Smt. Shanti Devi P ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-23-2006
Reported in: [2006(2)JCR511(Jhr)]
ORDERNarendra Nath Tiwari, J.1. In this civil revision application the petitioner has prayed for setting aside the impugned order dated 17.12.2005 passed by the learned Judicial Commissioner in Miscellaneous Civil Appeal No. 15 of 2005 affirming the order dated 05.10.2005 passed by the Sub Judge II, Ranchi in Misc. Case No. 31 of 2005, which arose out of Execution Case No. 1 of 1983 A.2. The case has a chequered past. In the year 1981 a suit being Title Suit No. 125 of 1981 was filed by the opposite party praying for a decree for specific performance of the contract to sell eight kathas of land of Plot No. 595 in his favour. The suit, on contest, was decreed by a judgment and decree dated 18.10.1982. The decree holder-opposite party then levied execution in Execution Case No. 1 of 1983 and deposited the balance consideration amount of Rs. 37,001/-. The defendant-petitioner on the other hand preferred First Appeal No. 27 of 1983(R). In the said appeal the proceeding of Execution Case No...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »