Jharkhand Court April 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.
Radhe Biscuits Pvt. Ltd. Vs. State of Jharkhand Through the Secretary ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Apr-10-2006
Reported in: [2006(2)JCR449(Jhr)]
ORDERM.Y. Eqbal, J.1. In this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for quashing the order dated 4.3.2006 passed by the Excise Commissioner. Jharkhand, Ranchi whereby he has put a condition for renewal of retail licence of Group I and Group II shops for the year 2006-07 and directed that in cases where Group I and Group II excise shops of a district has been settled with one person/firm, the licence for both the groups shall be renewed together and, in no circumstances, the renewal of one group shall be made after leaving another group.2, The facts of the case lie in a narrow compass:In 2004, Government of Jharkhand came with a new excise policy on 21.2.2004 according to which all retail country liquor and spiced country liquor shops falling within the district would be constituted and settled in one group and all retail foreign liquor, wine and beer shops in a district would be constituted and settled in another group. Pursuant to the aforesaid policy decision, a sale notification ...
Manish Kumar Gupta and ors. Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Apr-10-2006
Reported in: [2006(2)JCR469(Jhr)]
ORDERAmareshwar Sahay, J.1. Heard Mr. Jai Prakash, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and Mr. Mishra, learned G.P.-II.2. With the consent of the parties, this application is being disposed of at this stage itself.3. In this application the petitioners have prayed to quash the order dated 24-5-2003, passed by the Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Dhanbad refusing to discharge the petitioners and also for quashing of the entire criminal prosecution against them for the alleged commission of the offence under Section 290/294-A of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3/4 of Bihar Ban on Lotteries Act, 1993. It is stated that the petitioners were doing the business of selling lottery tickets of the State of Sikkim and Bhutan but against them an FIR was lodged being Jharia PS Case No. 244/2002 for the alleged commission of the aforesaid offences on the ground that there was ban on selling of the lottery tickets of the other State and, therefore, the petitioners, who were doing the busi...
Subhash Singh Vs. the State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Apr-10-2006
Reported in: [2006(3)JCR442(Jhr)]
R.K. Merathia, J.1. Both the connected writ petitions are being disposed of by this common judgment.2. Writ petitioner-Subhash Singh is aggrieved by the order dated 27.9.1996, passed by the Revisional Authority-Commissioner, by which he directed to demarcate the area where the actual building claimed by Subhash Singh stands along with a reasonable set off, and to restore the rest of the land in favour of Buchwa Oraon. It is further ordered that Subash Singh will pay compensation to Buchwa Oraon only for such demarcated area.Writ petitioner-Anil Linda is aggrieved by the same order to the extent that the Commissioner has not passed order in his favour in view of the fact that he purchased a portion of the land from Buchwa Oraon.3. Buchwa Oraon, a scheduled tribe, filed an application under Section 71A of the Chhotanagpur Tenancy Act (the Act for short) for restoration of his 84 decimals of land of plot No. 1039-Khata No. 26, which was registered as S.A.R. Case No. 86/1984-85. His case w...
Bhikhari Pandey and ors. Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Apr-07-2006
Reported in: [2006(3)JCR214(Jhr)]
R.K. Merathiha, J.1. Petitioners have challenged the final Notification dated 2.3.1993 (Annexure-6), issued under Section 15(1) of the Bihar Land Reforms (Fixation of Ceiling Area and Acquisition of Surplus Land) Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) whereby 27.84 acres of their land have been acquired. Petitioners have further challenged the reopening of the L.C. Case No. 11/1973-74, under Section 45B of the Act and all the orders passed subsequent thereto. 2. The only contention raised by Shri Devi Prasad, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioners, is that before re-opening the proceedings under Section 45B of the Act, no notice was given to the petitioners and therefore the order of re-opening and all subsequent orders are illegal. 3. The relevant facts, in short, are as follows: Pursuant to notice under Section 8(1) of the Act the landholder (father of petitioner No. 1) filed return. The Circle Officer inter alia reported that petitioner No. 3 (grandson of the l...
Sadhu Sharan Prasad Bhagat and Mohan Prasad Bhagat Vs. the State of Bi ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Apr-07-2006
Reported in: [2006(3)JCR228(Jhr)]
R.K. Merathiha, J.1. Petitioners have challenged the orders dated 12.7.1988, passed by respondent No. 3, in Eviction Appeal No. XV/10 of 1987-88 (Annexure-11) and Eviction Appeal No. XV/11 of 1987-88 (Annexure-11A), whereby it is ordered that if half of the amount mentioned in Hukumnama is deposited by respondent No. 4, the lands of Khata No. 69/42, plot No. 849/1667/669 of Village Aan, P.S. Chandwa, District-Palamau, shall be restored to respondent No. 4; and also orders dated 24.7.1996, passed by respondent No. 2 in S.A.R Revision Case No. 239/88 (Annexure-13) and S.A.R. Revision Case No. 240/88 (Annexure-13A), whereby respondent No. 2 dismissed the revisions filed by the petitioners. 2. Petitioners' case in short is that-father of respondent No. 4 surrendered half of the lands in question on 16.3.1934 to the then landlord by Sada Hukumnama and other half by registered Istifanama dated 17.1.1944. After taking possession, the Jamindar settled the same orally in favour of Kaushlaya Dev...
Naresh Kumar JaIn Vs. Deputy Commissioner,
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Apr-07-2006
Reported in: AIR2006Jhar96; [2006(3)JCR202(Jhr)]
R.K. Merathia, J. 1. Petitioner had prayed for a declaration that he is not required to take prior approval of the Central Government under the Forest Conservation Act, 1980 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') for his lease hold area. He had further prayed for quashing the office order contained in Memo No. 1751 dated 25.10.1996 (Annexure 7) whereby his application for grant of second renewal of the stone mining lease with respect to a portion of the leasehold area i.e. Plot No. 711 of an Area of 4.50 Acres of Hazaribagh Thana No. 250 at Village Bamhani, District Hazaribagh was rejected. 2. Mr. Anoop Kumar Mehta, learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that one Rajni Kant Patel was granted mining lease for stone in the year 1976 for a period of five years. He did stone mining operation in certain area. His mining lease was cancelled on 6.9.1983 for nonpayment of dues and possession was taken over from him. Petitioner was granted mining lease on 4.7.1986 vide Annexure 1 for five...
Babloo Singh Vs. State of Bihar (Now Jharkhand)
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Apr-07-2006
Reported in: 2006CriLJ4189; [2006(2)JCR476(Jhr)]
Amareshwar Sahay, J.1. This appeal has been filed by one of the convicts, namely Babloo Singh who along with other co-convict namely Bansidhar Ghosh was charged for commission of the offence under Sections 376/511 and 458 of the Indian Penal Code. By the impugned judgment passed by the Assistant Session Judge, Raj Mahal in Session Case No. 14 of 1993, the accused Bansidhar Ghosh was convicted for committing the offence under Section 376/511 of Indian Penal Code and was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of ten years for the offence under Section 376/511, IPC and seven years for the offence under Section 458, IPC.2. So far the present appellant Babloo Singh is concerned he was convicted only for the offence under Section 458, IPC and was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of seven years. The co-convict Bansidhar Ghosh did file a separate Criminal Appeal before this Court being Cr. Appeal No. 255 of 1994 challenging the judgment of conviction and...
Ganesh Sao Vs. Commissioner, Palamau Division and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Apr-07-2006
Reported in: [2006(2)JCR474(Jhr)]
R.K. Merathia, J.1. I.A. No. 243 of 2003 was filed by Mr. P.P.N. Roy, for substitution of heirs and legal representatives of respondents Nos. 4 and 5, Bandhan Tana and Jauru Tana, Mr. Sahani has got no Objection to such prayer.2. Accordingly, the application for substitution is allowed, respondents Nos. 4 and 5 are deleted and Mahrang Tana Bhatat, Suita Tana Bhagat, Dineshwar Bhagat, Mahavir Tana Bhagat and Bablu Bhagat are substituted as respondents Nos. 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8 in their place.3. LA. No. 243 of 2003 stands disposed of.4. Petitioner has prayed for quashing the order dated 31.1.1994 (Annexure-4), passed by the respondent No. 1 (Commissioner, Palamau Division, Daltonganj), in Land Restoration Case No. 25/93 whereby the order dated 24.11.1992 passed by the respondent No. 2, (Addl. Collector, Palamau at Daltonganj), in appeal No. 7/5 of 1991-92, was set aside and also for quashing the orders dated 17.12.1991/6.3.1991 (An-nexure-2), passed in Land Restoration Case No. 1 of 1990-91,...
Jatal Rabidas Vs. State of Bihar (Now Jharkhand)
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Apr-07-2006
Reported in: [2006(2)JCR458(Jhr)]
D.P. Singh, J.1. The sole appellant Jatal Rabidas stands convicted under Section 304, Part II of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to serve rigorous imprisonment for six years by the Sessions Judge, Jamshedpur in Sessions Trial No. 172 of 1998.2. The brief facts leading to conviction of the appellant are that in the noon at about 12.00 hours on 11th February, 1998, the informant while working in his agricultural field, heard some cries and saw the appellant assaulting a lady with fists and kicks mercilessly. It is further alleged that the appellant thereafter took a stone and assaulted the lady on her head resulting in bleeding injuries, saying that he will not leave her. The informant raised alarms and went towards the appellant to rescue the lady. Other witnesses attracted by the alarms raised by the informant also came rushing there, seeing which the appellant tried to run away. However, the appellant was caught hold by the villagers and the injured lady was brought to hospital fo...
Birla Institute of Technology Vs. the State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Apr-07-2006
Reported in: [2006(4)JCR358(Jhr)]; (2007)ILLJ963Jhar
Narendra Nath Tiwari, J.1. In this writ application the petitioner has prayed for quashing the order dated 29.07.1997 passed by the Deputy Labour Commissioner-cum-Appellate Authority under the Minimum Wages Act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as the said Act').2. The grievance of the petitioner is that the learned Appellate Authority has erroneously set aside the order of the Assistant Labour Commissioner without proper application of mind on the facts and the grounds which were considered by the Assistant Labour Commissioner.3. The claim applications were filed before the Assistant Labour Commissioner under Section 20(2) of the said Act by the workmen of Birla Institute of Technology through their Legal Advisor and Advocate Shri C.K. Mehta praying for a direction to pay wages at par with the wages being paid to the regular employees. Show cause notice was issued to the employer, who appeared and filed reply stating, interalia, that the applicants were engaged on casual basis/daily wage...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 8
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »