Jharkhand Court December 2007 Judgments
Sewan Singh Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Dec-22-2007
Reported in: [2008(2)JCR366(Jhr)]
ORDERM. Karpaga Vinayagam, C.J.1. Sewan Singh, the petitioner herein, aggrieved by the non-compliance of the order passed by this Court dated 18.9.2006, has filed the Contempt Petition.2. The petitioner is working as Surveillance Worker in the Health Department. As due promotion was not given and payment of salary from June 2004 onwards was not made, he filed a petition before this Court for mandamus seeking for a direction in W.P.(C) No. 2446 of 2006.3. In the said writ petition, the learned Single Judge, after hearing the counsel for the parties, passed the following order:Claim of the petitioner for arrears of salary is already admitted. Petitioner has been paid salary up to April, 2006. Salary for the period May, 2006 onwards be paid to the petitioner and further salary be released regularly. Learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that petitioner has requisite qualification of Matric to his credit. If he has this qualification, let him produce the requisite documents ...
Tag this Judgment!Shree Jagdamba Coke Industries (P) Ltd. Vs. the State of Jharkhand and ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Dec-20-2007
Reported in: [2008(1)JCR572(Jhr)]
M.Y. Eqbal, J.1. Petitioner filed this writ petition for quashing the order dated 17.8.2006 passed by respondent No. 4 - Joint Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (Administration), Dhanbad Division, Dhanbad initiating a suo motu revision proceeding under Section 46(4) of the Bihar Finance Act, 1981 for revising the revised assessment orders passed under the Central Sales Tax Act for the years 1981-82 to 1997-98 and also for quashing the final order dated 8.5.2007 passed in the said suo motu revision proceedings whereby he has quashed the revised/fresh assessment order dated 24.5.2007 passed under the Central Sales Tax Act as also Bihar Sales Tax Act and further for a direction upon the respondent No. 4 to refund the excess payment of Hales tax along with statutory interest.2. The petitioner's cases, inter alia, are as follows:Petitioner, a Private Limited Company running a hard coke plant at Govindpur, Dhanbad, is a manufacturer and seller of hard coke and is a dealer under the Bihar Fina...
Tag this Judgment!Atwa Tirkey and ors. Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Dec-20-2007
Reported in: 2008(56)BLJR1339; [2008(2)JCR76(Jhr)]
M.Y. Eqbal, J.1. These appeals under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent are directed against the judgment dated 21.11.2007 passed in W.P.C No. 1791/2007 whereby the learned Single Judge allowed the writ petition filed by the respondents-appellants and quashed the advertisement notice issued by the respondent-Market Board inviting open bid auction for settlement of Bero Haat/Bajar and further quashed the settlement made in favour of the respondents-appellants.2. The case of the appellants-respondents, inter alia, was that their lands are being used for holding Bero Haat/Bajar by the Market Board. They claimed themselves to be the displaced persons and requested the Market Board to make settlement in their favour for collection of market fee of the said Haat/Bajar. It is stated that a group of persons were allowed to collect market fee for the financial years 2004-05 and the said period was extended up to 2005-06. The said persons became defaulters in payment of minimum guarantee amount to ...
Tag this Judgment!Naween Transport Company Vs. the Presiding Officer, Labour Court and o ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Dec-20-2007
Reported in: [2008(116)FLR766]; [2008(2)JCR142(Jhr)]
M.Y. Eqbal, J. 1. This appeal under Section 30 of the Workmen's Compensation Act is directed against the order dated 18.10.2003 passed by Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Bokaro Steel City in W.C. Case No. 5 of, 1995 whereby a sum of Rs. 93,591/- has been awarded by way of compensation for the death of son of the claimant.2. We have heard Mr. P.K. Prasad, learned Counsel appearing for the appellant and Mr. A.K. Mehta, learned Counsel appearing for the respondents.3. The brief facts of the case is that claimant-Sukri Devi filed application stating inter alia that her son was working under the appellant-M/s Naween Transport Company and was engaged in transportation of coal from C.C.L. Colliery for patching of road work in between Rajrappa Project to Kathara which was being, done by the appellant. While the deceased was engaged by the appellant, for repair of road and alter doing his duty he was coming back by Dumper No. BR 20B-8151 he fell clown from the dumper on the road near Petarwar ...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Composite Tools Company (India) Ltd.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Dec-20-2007
Reported in: (2009)221CTR(Jharkhand)294; [2008(2)JCR118(Jhr)]
M.Y. Eqbal, J.1. This appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is directed against the order dated 15.12.2006 passed by Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Circuit Bench, Ranchi in I.T.A. No. 297/PAT/20Q5 whereby and where under the Tribunal set aside the order passed in appeal by the Commissioner of Income Tax and affirmed the order passed by the Assessing Authority.2. We have heard Mr. K.K. Jhunjhunwala, learned Counsel appearing for the Appellant/Revenue and Dr. Devi Pal, learned senior counsel appearing for the Assessee and with their consent this appeal is disposed of at the admission stage.3. The facts of the case lie in a narrow compass:The respondent/Assessee is an export oriented company. The Assessed filed its return for the assessment year 2001-02. In the regular assessment made under Section 143(3) the assessee claimed inter alia a sum of Rs. 2,11,22,141/- for the revenue expenditure incurred by way of repairs and maintenance of plant and machinery. This said claim ...
Tag this Judgment!Om Service Station Vs. Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd. and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Dec-20-2007
Reported in: [2008(2)JCR386(Jhr)]
ORDERAmareshwar Sahay, J.1. Heard Mr. Sinha, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Jerath, learned Counsel for the respondent H.P.C.L. Initially the prayer of the petitioner in this writ application was for quashing of the letter dated 3.8.2007 issued by the Regional Manager, Tatanagar Retail Regional Officer, Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited, whereby the petitioner was directed to explain the reasons for irregularity/mal practice with reference to the marker test conducted by the representative of M/s. S.G.S. India Pvt. Limited and also for quashing the show cause notice, dated 30th August, 2007, whereby the petitioner was called upon to show cause as to why necessary action be not taken against him in accordance with the terms and conditions of the dealership agreement but during the pendency of the writ application, final order was passed terminating the dealership of the petitioner by order dated 31.10.2007 and then the petitioner filed an interlocutory application for ...
Tag this Judgment!Ajay Thakur Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Dec-20-2007
Reported in: [2008(116)FLR527]; [2008(2)JCR385(Jhr)]
ORDERAmareshwar Sahay, J.1. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties. The prayer of the petitioner in this writ application is for issuance of direction to the respondents to pay his arrears of wages, which, according to him, is due from June. 1992 to 5.1.2003 along with interest etc. and to quash the order dated 12.10.2006 (Annexure-2) by which the claim of the petitioner for payment of arrears of wages from June 1992 to 15.1.2003 along with interest has been rejected by the Divisional Forest Officer, Seraikella hold the claim to be false and fabricated.2. The petitioner had moved this Court earlier in W.P.S. No. 4338/2006 for the aforesaid relief, which was disposed of by order dated 1.9.2006 by the learned Single Judge by remitting the matter back to the concerned authority to consider the claim of the petitioner and pass a final speaking order in accordance with law within a period of six weeks. When the order as directed by this Court was not passe, the petitioner filed contempt ...
Tag this Judgment!Mahesh Kumar Aahuja Vs. the State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Dec-19-2007
Reported in: [2008(2)JCR140(Jhr)]
Narendra Nath Tiwari, J.1. In this writ petition the petitioner has prayed for quashing the order dated 10.9.03/16.1.04 passed by the respondent No.2 whereby the appellate order was set aside and the revision was allowed.2. The petitioner's case is that the Tractor with Trailor No. 8489 loaded with stone was seized illegally from the leasehold area of the petitioner.3. The case of the petitioner is that he runs crusher business in the name and style of M/S Mahesh Stone Industries. For that purpose lease has been granted to the petitioner. He possesses the valid lease document. The petitioner has been also paying royalty for the lease hold area. In the year 2000 on the basis of a false report of Range Officer, a confiscation proceeding was imitated against the petitioner alleging that on 18.5.2000 the petitioner's Tractor and Trailor bearing No. 8489 was seized with stone leaded from the Forest Area. The said case was registered as Confiscation Case No. 35/2000. The petitioner denied th...
Tag this Judgment!Ravi Kant and Dilip Sengupta Vs. State of Jharkhand and anr.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Dec-18-2007
Reported in: 2008(56)BLJR1471
R.R. Prasad, J.1. This application has been filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for quashing the order dated 27.5.2006 passed by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jamshedpur in Complaint Case No. C/2 case No. 2031 of 2006 whereby and whereunder Chief Judicial Magistrate took cognizance of the offence punishable under Section 92 of the Factories Act against the petitioners.2. It appears that a complaint was lodged by the Inspector of Factories- opposite party No. 2 stating therein that on 15.12.2005 when he received an information that on account of fatal accident occurred at Truck-1, Shed of M/s. Tata Motors Limited one worker, namely, Ram Kumar has died, he inspected the accident site and did find that demarcated gangway meant for passage way for movement of men and use of machine was being used as parking and for rectification work of newly built chassis of Tata Motor without adopting any safe measures and that newly built chassis were parked closely to each other in r...
Tag this Judgment!Devilal Bhagat Vs. Rekha Bhagat
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Dec-18-2007
Reported in: [2008(2)JCR240(Jhr)]
M.Y. Eqbal, J.1. In this writ application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India the petitioner has challenged the order dated 15.7.2005 passed by Principal Judge, Family Court, Bokaro in Guardianship Case No. 5/2001 whereby the application filed by the petitioner for appointment of guardian of the person and property of minors has been dismissed holding that the said petition is not maintainable. 2. The facts of the case lie in a narrow compass: The petitioner, being the grand father of the minor, Priyanka Bhagat and also being the head of the family, tiled an application before the District Judge, Bokaro at Chas for his appointment as guardian of the person and property of his minor grand daughter. The said petition was registered as Guardianship Case No. 5/2001. The District Judge, Bokaro, however, transferred the case to the court of Principal Judge, Family Court, Bokaro for disposal. Thereafter, the case remained pending before the Principal Judge, Family Court, Bokaro. T ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »