Jharkhand Court July 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.
Projects and Development India Limited Vs. the Presiding Officer, Labo ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-26-2006
Reported in: 2007(1)BLJR161; [2006(4)JCR529(Jhr)]
1. This writ petition has been preferred by the petitioner - Management of Projects & Development India Limited against the Award dated 8th September 1995 pronounced on 19th November, 1995, passed by the Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Dhanbad, in Reference Case No. 7 of 1993, whereby and whereunder, the Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Dhanbad, while held that the Management failed to justify its action taken in regard to the dismissal of the concerned workman (2nd respondent herein), set aside the order of dismissal and reinstated the workman in service with full back wages and other consequential benefits.2. As the case can be disposed of on a short point, it is not necessary to discuss all the facts, except relevant one as mentioned hereunder:The workman was preceded departmentally for charges of theft, fraud, dishonesty, deception, corrupt practices in connection with Company's business/property/ work of the Company and for misappropriating the Company's fund temporarily. Followi...
Pran Kumar Dubey Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-26-2006
Reported in: [2006(4)JCR636(Jhr)]
ORDERS.J. Mukhopadhaya, A.C.J.1. This application has been preferred by petitioner for a direction on the respondents to settle 6 decimals of land in his favour, he being a refugee of East Bengal (now Bangladesh).2. Counsel for the State was asked to file affidavit whether any scheme for rehabilitation of refugee has been framed by the State/Union of India or not. Inspite of specific question no specific reply in this regard has been filed by the State. The only plea being taken by the respondents is that the father of the petitioner, late Garib Dubey was provided with a barrack.3. Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the barrack of one room was given to each of the refugees of East Bengal who had settled in the Chousagari Area of Deoghar Town. Three decimals of land in front of the barrack and three decimals of land in the back portion of the barrack total six decimals as available with the barrack have been settled with all other refugees but no such settlement has been made in ...
Hotel Ranchi Ashok Vs. B.S.E.B. and anr.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-26-2006
Reported in: [2006(4)JCR389(Jhr)]
Amareshwar Sahay, J.1. It is stated that during the pendency of this writ application, under the Electricity Act, 2003 a Forum known as 'Vidyut Upbhokta Shikayat Niwaran Forum', has been constituted for redressal of the grievance like in the present writ application which is a three members forum, the Chairman of which is a Judicial Officer and the other two are technically experts.2. In this view of the matter, to resolve the dispute and to decide the claim of the petitioner, this application is being disposed of without going into the merit of the case of the parties by directing the petitioner to file a fresh application raising the grievance which has been raised in this application before the said 'Vidyut Upbhokta Shikayat Niwaran Forum' within a period of four weeks from today. If such an application is filed by the petitioner within the specified period, the aforesaid redressal Forum shall consider the claim of the petitioner, decide the same in accordance with law after hearing...
Dinesh Kumar Gupta Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-26-2006
Reported in: [2006(4)JCR625(Jhr)]
ORDERD.K. Sinha, J.1. The petitioner, Dinesh Kumar Gupta, has preferred this revision petition challenging the legality, propriety and correctness of the order dated 6.12.2005 passed by Shri M.C. Narayan, Judicial Magistrate. 1st Class, Dhanbad in G.R. Case No. 2822 of 2002 arising out of Govindpur Barwadda P.S. Case No. 204 of 2002 whereby and whereunder the Court below was pleased to release only Rs. 45,000/- out of total seized amount to the tune of Rs. 2,56,650/-.2. The petitioner had earlier moved for similar relief for the release of entire seized amount in Cr. M.P. No. 629 of 2003 in the Court, which was dismissed as withdrawn by a Bench of the Court on 27.2.2004 with liberty to the petitioner to move before the Court below for release of the seized amount after conclusion of the trial. Pursuant to that, the petitioner moved for release of the said amount, total to the tune of Rs. 2,56,615/- but by the impugned order only Rs. 45,000/- was released and hence the present Cr. Revis...
New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Smt. Sunita Devi and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-26-2006
Reported in: [2007(1)JCR266(Jhr)]
ORDER1. Reference may be made to the order dated 21.4.2006 which reads as under:This appeal is an example to show as to how the National Insurance Company and their lawyers behave in the matter of payment of compensation.There had been collision between the Trekker and a Truck. The truck was insured with the National Insurance Company and the Trekker was insured with the New India Assurance Company. Three claim cases were filed before the Tribunal. One of the Tribunals disposed of one claim case holding that the accident took place due to gross rash and negligent driving of the Truck driver and accordingly the entire liability was saddled with the National Insurance Company. The National Insurance Company satisfied the award without challenging the same in appeal. Another Tribunal disposed of two remaining claim cases and held that both the drivers of the Trekker and Truck were negligent and accordingly the compensation amount was apportioned at the ratio of 50% and 50% respectively. T...
Rameshwar Singh and anr. Vs. State of Jharkhand and anr.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-26-2006
Reported in: [2007(1)JCR400(Jhr)]
D.P. Singh, J.1. Heard the parties.2. This petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been preferred to quash order dated 29.5.2002 parsed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge XIth, Dhanbad in Criminal Revision No. 125 of 2001 and further to stay the proceedings in Complaint Case No. 185 of 2000 filed by the opposite party No. 2.3. Briefly stated the facts leading to this petition are that complainant, I.D. Prasad, was Train Examiner with railways and he was allotted a railway quarters numbered as 44/A, M Type. Further stated that the said quarters though allotted to hint he applied for better quarters and thereafter quarters No. 38-C Type II was allotted to him, in which he shifted. As per assertions of the opposite party No. 2, he vacated the said quarters No. 44/A, M Type on 30.3.1985. However, the petitioners served four! notices on him on different dates from September, 1999 to January, 2000 alleging therein that he remained in unauthorized occupation the...
Maya Paul Vs. State of Jharkhand and anr.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-26-2006
Reported in: [2007(1)JCR479(Jhr)]
ORDERN.N. Tiwari, J.1. The petitioner, in this writ application, has prayed for quashing the Order dated 7.1.2004 passed by learned Munsif, Ghatsila in Eviction Suit No. 4 of 1993, whereby the tenant-petitioner's defence qua ejectment has been struck off as a penal consequence of delayed payment of rent under Section 15(1) of the Bihar Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act (hereinafter referred to as the said Act).2. According to the petitioner, the Court below, by Order dated 13.2.1996, passed under Section 15 of the said Act directed the petitioner to deposit monthly rent at the rate of Rs. 215/- from January, 1993. Since thereafter she has been depositing the rent regularly. It has been stated that due to non-availability of the Treasury Officer, there was delay of four days in depositing the rent of February, 2001. In the impugned order, learned Court below has noticed that the rent is to be deposited in the bank after passing the Chal-lan through the Treasury Officer an...
Employers in Relation to the Management of Bastacolla Colliery, Bccl V ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-25-2006
Reported in: [2006(4)JCR472(Jhr)]
D.K. Sinha, J.1. The Government of India, Ministry of Labour, in exercise of power conferred on them under Section 10(1)(d) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, had referred the following disputes to the Central Government Industrial Tribunal (NO. 2), Dhanbad for adjudication vide their order No. L-20012(268)/92-I.R.(Coal-I) dated 22nd September, 1993:Whether the action of the management of Golakdih Open Cast Project under Bastacolla Area of BCCL, P.O. Jharia, Dist. Dhanbad in not accepting the date of birth of Shri Shashanko Mishra as 1.7.34 as per service excerpts and refusal to refer the workman to the Apex Medical Board for assessment of his age in case of different dates of birth in Form 'B' is justified? If not, to what relief the workman is entitled?'2. It appears that the aforesaid industrial dispute was raised at the instance of the workman due to his illegal superannuation with effect from 1st July, 1990. It was alleged that though in the service excerpts the date of birth o...
Ex-constable Sukhdev Singh Vs. Union of India Through Secretary, Minis ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-25-2006
Reported in: 2007(1)BLJR354; [2006(4)JCR419(Jhr)]
R.K. Merathia, J.1. The petitioner has challenged the order dated 26.5.1995 (Annexure 6) passed by respondent No. 3 by which he was dismissed from service as well as the order dated 11.9.1995 (Annexure 8) passed by the appellate authority i.e. respondent No. 2 whereby he has confirmed the order of dismissal passed by respondent No. 3.2. The petitioner was a constable in the Central Industrial Security Force (hereinafter referred to as 'the C.I.S.F.') in its Unit at Bokaro Steel Plant A departmental proceeding was initiated against him for the charges of conspiracy to commit theft inside the plant on 29.4.1995 for his wrongful gain; gross dereliction and negligence of duty, in that he was found absent from barracks of 'G' Coy, at 0130 hrs. and 0330 hrs. on 30.4.1995; and for grave misconduct and dereliction of duty in that he attempted to commit the theft of undertaking property from Shed No. C-22 of M.P. Stores on 29/30.4.1995. The petitioner participated in the departmental proceeding...
Harakhlal Bhadani @ Harakhlal Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-25-2006
Reported in: [2006(4)JCR619(Jhr)]
ORDERD.K. Sinha, J.1. The petitioner has preferred this petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for quashing the entire criminal prosecution as well as the order taking cognizance of the offence under Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bokaro on 22.2.2005 in Sector-IV P.S. Case No. 74 of 2005 corresponding to G.R. No. 904 of 2005 (T.R. No. 1149 of 2006) pending in the Court of the Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate. Bokaro.2. The prosecution story in brief is that the Marketing Officer. Bokaro on 23.8.2005 seized 400 litres blue Kerosene Oil contained in two drams. 140 litres blue' Kerosene oil contained in four plastic Jerrycanes and 200 litres in three Rickshaw containers. One of the Rickshaw containers was bearing the name of the petitioner with licence No. 275/85 containing 150 Litres blue Kerosene Oil. It is alleged that petitioner had lifted 200 Litres of Kerosene Oil but had sold 50 Litres at higher price. The...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »