Jharkhand Court July 2006 Judgments
Diwesh Narayan Raizada Vs. the State of Bihar
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-31-2006
Reported in: 2007CriLJ453; [2006(4)JCR393(Jhr)]
D.P. Singh, J.1. Both these appeals, arising from separate judgments and orders dated 8th May, 1997 and 15th May,1997, are directed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed in R.C. Case Nos. 16/85(D) and 17/85(D), whereby and whereunder the learned Special Judge CBI, Dhanbad held the appellant guilty under Section 161 IPC and Section 5(2)(d) read with Section 5(1)(d) of the P.C. Act and sentenced him to undergo RI for one year under Section 161 IPC and one year under Section 5(i)(d) read with Section 5(2)(d) of the P.C. Act, however both sentences were directed to run concurrently in each case.2. The factual matrix giving occasion for these appeals are as follows:Cr. Appeal No. 94 of 1997: The appellant was serving in Jealgora Central Hospital of BCCL as Medical Superintendent on the fateful day of 5th September, 1985, According to the prosecution, one Badlu Harijan, a miner loader of Bhutan Barari colliery of BCCL Area No. XI, has overstayed on leave in July, 19...
Tag this Judgment!Management of the Vikas Vidyalaya Vs. the Presiding Officer, Labour Co ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-31-2006
Reported in: [2006(4)JCR274(Jhr)]
R.K. Merathia, J.1. Petitioner has prayed for quashing the award dated 4.4.1997 passed by the Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Ranchi in Reference Case No. 2 of 1989, whereby and whereunder the termination of respondent No. 2 was declared void ab initio and order was passed for his reinstatement with back wages etc.2. The following dispute was referred for adjudication by notification-dated 19.1.1989. Whether the termination of services of Shri Niranjan Sharma, 3rd grade employee of Vikash Vidyalaya, Neori, Ranchi, is justified? If not, what relief the employee is entitled to?3. Mr. Vijay Gopal, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner, submitted that in the written statement, respondent No. 2 admitted that after his services were terminated on 16.12.1985, he filed a petition on 19.12.1985 begging apology for his misconduct and in para 7, he categorically stated that on such representation he was 're-appointed'. In these circumstances, it was submitted that the Tribunal could not h...
Tag this Judgment!Manoranjan Kuila Vs. the State of Bihar (Now Jharkhand) and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-31-2006
Reported in: [2006(4)JCR275(Jhr)]
Amareshwar Sahay, J.1. The prayer of the petitioner in this writ application is for quashing of the order dated 04/09/1999, contained in Annexure-6 to this writ application whereby the District Superintendent of Education, Singhbhum East at Jamshedpur, whereby by rejecting the representation of the petitioner he cancelled the promotion given to the petitioner with retrospective effect and ordered to recover the excess amount paid to him.2. It appears that on the basis of the decision taken by the District Education Establishment Committee, the petitioner was granted B.A. trained scale by issue of memo No. 3947 dated 03/07/1993 with effect from 01/12/1985. It also appears that the District. Superintendent of Education without following the due procedure and without recommendation of the District Establishment Committee, passed an order on 30/06/1995 granting B.A. trained scale with retrospective effect, i.e. from 01/04/1983. The District Superintendent of Education had no jurisdiction t...
Tag this Judgment!P. Rajiv Vs. Ferro Scrap Nigam Ltd. and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-31-2006
Reported in: [2006(4)JCR272(Jhr)]
R.K. Merathia, J.1. Petitioner has filed this writ petition for quashing the order dated 24.5.1996 (Annexure-4), passed by Deputy General Manager, Personnel and Administration of respondent No. 1, whereby services of the petitioner was terminated w.e.f. 27.5.1996 and also for quashing the order of the appellate authority dated 31.10.1997 (Annexure-7) confirming the said order.2. Mr. B.V. Kumar, learned Counsel for the petitioner, submitted that impugned orders are beyond the evidence on the record. He further submitted that in any event, punishment was too harsh. He also submitted that Shri PVRASN Raju, storekeeper, has been reinstated in the service, who was actually guilty of misconduct.3. Mr. Babhan Lal, appearing for the respondents, submitted that scope of judicial review under writ jurisdiction is very limited and this Court may not sit in appeal over the said orders. He further submitted that the said Raju withdrew his writ petition filed against his dismissal before the Hon'ble...
Tag this Judgment!Dr. Harihar Prasad Pandey Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-31-2006
Reported in: [2006(4)JCR317(Jhr)]
ORDERN.N. Tiwari, J.1. In this writ application the petitioner has prayed for issuance of an appropriate writ commanding upon and restraining the State-respondents from regulating/controlling the admission in Suryamukhi Dinesh Ayurved Medical College, Booty, Ranchi which is a private unaided institution and from compelling the college to fill up 40 seats of the college by the candidates chosen by the respondents for the Session 2006-07 on the basis of Jharkhand Combined Competitive Entrance Examination Board and not to disturb the College by unnecessarily interfering in the administration and management of the said College.2. The petitioner's case is that the said College was established in the year 1980 and has been successfully imparting Degree course in Ayurvedic Medicine. The College does not receive any financial aid from the State and it is purely a private unaided institution. The College is running with the permission of the Central Council of Indian Medicine, Government of Ind...
Tag this Judgment!State of Jharkhand and ors. Vs. A.K. Construction and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-31-2006
Reported in: [2007(3)JCR165(Jhr)]
ORDER1. Heard Mr. R.N. Sahay, learned Sr. SC II appearing on behalf of the appellants and Mr. Rajesh Kumar, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents.2. The appellant-State of Jharkhand is aggrieved by that part of the order of the learned single Judge dated 4.2.2004 passed in WPC No. 969/2003 by which the. learned single Judge, while allowing the respondents to complete the work, directed the State-appellant to pay a sum of rupees one lac to the writ petitioners by way of compensation.3. The writ petition was filed by the respondents (writ petitioners) alleging inter alia, that the work relating to renovation of Sarswatia Irrigation Project has been illegally allotted to respondent No. despite the fact that said respondent No. 6 did not fulfil the requisite criteria.4. The learned single Judge formulated a question as to whether respondent No. 6 has been favoured in giving contract or as to whether the decision making process was arbitrary or not. The learned single Judge...
Tag this Judgment!Shaktidhar Mahto @ Shakti Mahto Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-30-2006
Reported in: [2008(2)JCR340(Jhr)]
R.R. Prasad, J.1. The sole appellant, Shaktidhar Mahto @ Shakti Mahto was put on trial to face charges under Section 307 as well as under Section 324 of the Indian Penal Code on the allegation that he attempted to commit murder of the informant, Prabha Devi (PW 4). The learned trial Court having found the appellant guilty convicted him under Section 325 of the Indian Penal Code and consequently sentenced him to undergo R.I. for 2 years.2. The case of the prosecution is that in the morning of 27.7.2001 while the appellant was cutting the earth of the field belonging to the informant's husband, the informant's son, Lalit Mahto (PW 3) forbade him from doing so. Further case is that on the same day in between 9 to 10 p.m. the appellant came to the house of the informant while she was cooking meal and started hurling abuses by saying as to why they did stop him for cutting the earth from the field and as soon as she came out of the house, the appellant assaulted on her head with 'donda', as...
Tag this Judgment!Shyam Das Singh and Lakshmi Narayan Prasad Vs. the State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-28-2006
Reported in: [2006(4)JCR412(Jhr)]
D.K. Sinha, J.1. This Cr. Revision application has been directed against the order impugned dated 16.9.2002 passed by Sri. S.B. Ojha, Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class Garhwa in Garhwa P.S. case No. 86 of 1997 corresponding to G.R. No. 289 of 1997 whereby and whereunder the petition for discharge of the petitioners herein was rejected.2. The prosecution story as it stands in the written report of the Block Development Officer, Garhwa sent to the Officer-in charge of Garhwa police station was as against the Scheme No. 1 of 1990-1991. A cost of Rs. 3,65,000/- was estimated for the construction of Gowawal High School Dhumria and the work in the first phase was allotted to one Jadunandan Dubey and he completed the work by 24.9.1991 worth Rs. 1,10,250/- but its cost was assessed Rs. 1,09,700/-. Finding certain slackness on the part of the said contractor, part of the work was assigned to another person, Rajendra Jha as against revised estimate of Rs. 4,01,500/-. He received a sum of Rs. 2,93,0...
Tag this Judgment!State of Jharkhand Vs. Rajiv Kumar Singh,
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-28-2006
Reported in: [2006(4)JCR53(Jhr)]
R.K. Merathia, J.1. These cases arise out of common Judgment dated 20th March, 2006 passed by Shri Chamru Tanti, 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Bermo at Tenughat in Sessions Trial No. 122 of 2003 convicting the appellants under Section 302/34 and 307/34 of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing them with death penalty.2. The prosecution version as per the self statement of A.S.I. Narayan Prasad Singh (P.W. 15) in short is that on 11.09.2002, at about 09.40 P.M., while he was on night patrol, he heard hue and cry coming from the side of the place of occurrence whereupon he along with other armed force rushed there and saw three persons fleeing away from the back side of the quarter where the occurrence took place. Only one person could be apprehended who disclosed his name as Guddu Kurnar Pandey (Appellant). He was taken to the front side of the quarter. Inside the quarter, a male and a female were lying dead in the pool of blood on the floor. The injured Devlina Mandal, aged about 9 year...
Tag this Judgment!Dhelo Mahto Vs. Mangar Mahto and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-28-2006
Reported in: [2006(4)JCR596(Jhr)]
ORDERN.N. Tiwari, J.1. In this writ application the petitioner has prayed for quashing the order dated 7.2.2006 passed by learned Munsif, Hazaribagh in Title Suit No. 44 of 1989 whereby the Court below has rejected the petitioner's petition dated 17.1.2006 for recalling the plaintiff and his witness PW 2 for cross-examination.2. It has been stated that at the relevant time, the petitioner's counsel was ailing and he could not attend the Court. Subsequently, the petitioner's counsel died alter prolonged illness. Another counsel was appointed on his behalf. In course of preparation of the case for argument, it was detected that the plaintiff who was examined as PW 1 and another material witness, PW 2, were not cross-examined on behalf of the defendant-petitioner. A petition, thereafter, was filed for recalling the said witnesses for cross-examination which was rejected by the impugned order.3. Learned Counsel submitted that there was no wilfull laches on the part of this petition and he ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »