Jharkhand Court August 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.
Narayan Mahto @ Narayan Chandra Mahto Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Aug-01-2006
Reported in: [2006(4)JCR218(Jhr)]
ORDERAmareshwar Sahay, J.1. Heard the parties.2. In the instant writ application, the petitioner has prayed for quashing of the entire -criminal proceedings including the FIR of Nala (Binda Pathar) P.S. Case No. 16/2005 registered under Sections 379 and 411, IPC against the petitioner and two others as contained in Annexure-4 to this writ application. The said FIR was instituted on the basis of the fardbeyan of Aiyeen Mahto.In the FIR it is alleged that in course of patrolling duty to prevent the illegal theft of stones, the informant reached the village Simalbari, Tola Hassi Pahari on 14.3.2005 and then he saw that towards the northern side of the land of Sita Ram Mahto there was Government parti land on which large number of stones and boulders were stacked and some persons were lodging the same on a tractor. Thereafter, he gave information to the police at this the police party reached at the place of occurrence and then those persons, who were loading the stones and boulders on the...
Suraj Mandal Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Aug-01-2006
Reported in: [2006(4)JCR608(Jhr)]
D.K. Sinha, J.1. The petitioner has preferred this Cr. Revision against the order impugned dated 3.5.2006 passed by Shri. S.K. Singh, 1st Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, S.C. & S.T. (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, Deoghar in Special Case No. 4/05 arising out of Sarwan P.S. Case No. 55/04 whereby and whereunder the discharge petition filed by the petitioner under Section 227 of the Criminal Procedure Code was dismissed for the alleged offence under Sections 147/148/149/323/307/379/353/341/448/427/504, IPC as also under Section 3(X) of the S.C. & S.T. (Prevention of Atrocities) Act and Section 136(2) of Representation of People Act.2. The brief fact of the case as it stands narrated in the written report of the informant Avirath Chand Mandal presented before the Officer-in-Charge, Sarwan was that he was the Head Master in the Middle School. Pindrahat. During parliamentary election in the year 2004 he was deputed at the Booth No. 170 within Jarmundi Assembly Constituency at P...
Subhash Simon Mundu Vs. State of Bihar (Now Jharkhand) and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Aug-01-2006
Reported in: [2006(4)JCR281(Jhr)]
Amareshwar Sahay, J.1. The prayer of the petitioner In this writ application is for direction to the respondents to pay the admitted dues of salary and the current salary in the revised scale of pay.2. It appears that before admission of this writ application, this Court by order dated 27.9.2000 has already passed an order directing the respondents to release the payment and in the event, the same had already been released then same shall be received by the petitioner.3. Mr. P.P.N. Roy, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that though he has no further instruction regarding the actual position as on today but he submits that the petitioner might have received those amounts therefore this petition can be disposed of with an observation that if the petitioner is still aggrieved he may represent his case before the authority concerned.4. In the counter affidavit filed by the respondents it is specific stated in para-graph-9 that the salary for the deputation period ...
Anil Kumar Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Aug-01-2006
Reported in: [2006(4)JCR284(Jhr)]
Amareshwar Sahay, J.1. Nobody appears on behalf of the petitioner, However, this writ application is being disposed of on the basis of the materials on record.2. In this writ application, the petitioner has prayed for quashing of the order dated 2.8.1999 passed by the Commissioner, North Chotanagpur Division, Hazaribagh as contained in Annexure-5 whereby, the appeal preferred by the petitioner against the order dated 7.12.1998 passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Hazaribagh cancelling the Trade License of the petitioner under Clause 11 of the Bihar Trade Articles (Licenses Unification) Orders, 1984.3. From perusal of the order passed by the Deputy Commissioner cancelling the trade licences of the petitioner (Annexure-4), it appears that the business premises of M/s. Satyam Enterprises situated at Barhi in the district of Hazaribagh was inspected and it was found that the business was being run by a person who was other than the licensee and at the time of inspection, no Stock Register, C...
Dr. Nanda Ghosh Vs. Ranchi University and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Aug-01-2006
Reported in: [2006(4)JCR435(Jhr)]
ORDERM.Y. Eqbal, J.1. In this case the petitioner has prayed for issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to immediately implement the order and direction of this Court passed on 16.12.1999 in CWJC No. 2104 of 1997 (R) and further to promote the petitioner as University Professor from the due date in accordance with law.2. The facts of the case lie in a narrow compass:Petitioner was appointed as Lecturer in the Ranchi University and joined one of its constituent College i.e. Ranchi Women's College on 14.11.1972. She did her Ph.D. from Ranchi University on 3.11.1985 and subsequently she was promoted to the post of Reader on 14.11.1985. Thereafter, she was promoted to the post of University Professor on 14.11.1988 under the statute as approved by the Chancellor vide letter No. BSU-27/85-4032 GS (1) dated 24.12.1986. It is contended that under the said statute Reader possessing qualification of University prescribed by the University Grant Commission serving in a Universit...
Tulsi Mahto Vs. Central Coalfields Ltd. and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Aug-01-2006
Reported in: [2007(1)JCR276(Jhr)]
ORDERPermod Kohli, J.1. Petitioner is aggrieved to the order dated 3/8th of November, 2001 passed by the respondent No. 1 Company, whereby the claim of the petitioner for compassionate appointment has been rejected on the ground of delay in making application. Admittedly, there is a delay of 23 days in making the application. Respondents even after the passing of the order impugned, issued a letter dated 17th of February, 2003 asking the concerned Staff/Officer of various Collieries to process the cases, which have been regretted due to late submission but within 30 days. Petitioner's case is covered under this letter.2. Apart from that Mr. Sahani has brought to my notice a judgment of the Division Bench of this Court dated 18th of August, 2004 passed in L.P.A. No. 379 of 2003, wherein, this Court had directed that period for making application should be one year from the date of the death of the employee. This was in view of the Circular dated 12th of December, 1995. It is agreed too ...
Santosh Kumar Vs. Central Coal Fields Ltd. and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Aug-01-2006
Reported in: [2008(4)JCR26(Jhr)]
ORDERPermod Kohli, J.1. Petitioner claims to be son of Late Ram Bahadur, a former employee of the respondent-Company, who died in harness on 20th May, 1995. He applied for compassionate appointment after the death of the deceased employee. His claim was earlier rejected vide order dated 23rd/26th April, 1999.2. Petitioner filed a writ petition before his Court, being CWJC No. 3382 of 1999(R). This petition was disposed of vide order dated 21st June 2001, wherein following directions were issued:In the aforesaid background, the impugned letter can not be upheld. Accordingly, the order contained in letter dated 23/26. 4. 1999 is set aside. The case is remitted to the respondents to decide the claim of petitioner for compassionate appointment taking into consideration the evidences as brought on record of the present case. If necessary, the respondents may request the S.P. to enquire the question as to whether the petitioner is the son of Late Ram Bahadur or not and obtain affidavit from ...
- ‹ Prev
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- Next ›