Jharkhand Court December 2007 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.
Anil Kumar Vs. State of Jharkhand and anr.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Dec-06-2007
Reported in: [2008(1)JCR413(Jhr)]
ORDERD.K. Sinha, J.1. This Letters Patent is directed against the order dated 17th July, 2003 passed in W.P.(S) No. 4627 of 2002 by the learned Single Judge dismissing the writ petition of the appellant/petitioner in limini with the observation:No case of illegality, inequality and discrimination has been made out by the petitioner.This writ petition is dismissed.2. The appellant filed an interlocutory application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act for condonation of 1266 days delay in filing the LPA on the ground that no communication was made to him by the learned Counsel on the record after he had filed W.P.(S) No. 4627 of 2002.2.2. Yet, the appellant having come to know about appointment of some candidates from the panel prepared in 2002, he enquired from the clerk of his counsel sometimes in the month of October/November 2006 about the result of his writ petition from whom he came to learn that Mr. Maurya Bijay Chandra had left India and was living some where in England and tha...
Dhirendra Nath Mandal and ors. Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Dec-06-2007
Reported in: [2008(2)JCR205(Jhr)]
M. Karpaga Vinayagam, C.J.1. The petitioners, requesting for issuance of a direction for appointment against Class IV posts in Muffasil Offices within the district of Sahibganj. filed writ petition in CWJC No. 10918 of 1996 before this Court. On 22.9.1997, this Court disposed of the writ petition directing the authorities to prepare and finalize the panel for appointment against Class IV posts within a period of three months, giving weightage in favour of daily wage employees and aged persons. This Court further directed that the authority concerned would make recommendation out of the persons whose names would appear in the panel and the vacancies of all Muffasil Offices were to be filled up within one year from the date of approval of such panel.2. In spite of the fact that time frame has been stipulated, no action was taken. Therefore, the petitioner filed an application for contempt in MJC No. 3183/2000. The Secretary, Cabinet Co-ordination, appeared before this Court and reported ...
State of Bihar Vs. Chinibas Mahto and anr. and Soma Debya and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Dec-06-2007
Reported in: [2008(1)JCR451(Jhr)]
M.Y. Eqbal, J.1. More than 10,000 families who are the members of the Scheduled Caste, Scheduled Tribes and other communities were dispossessed from their agricultural lands 45-50 years back under the provisions of Land Acquisition Act when their lands were acquired in the year 1959-1962 for the purpose of construction of 4th Steel Plant at Bokaro for erection of Iron and Steel, ancillary works and industries and on the said land Bokaro Steel Plant of Steel Authority of India was established and possession of the said land was given by the State to the Bokaro Steel Plant in 1964. Unfortunate part is that those raiyats and land losers have still not been paid heir rightful and legitimate compensation amount so enhanced by the Land Acquisition Judge because of the fact that the State of Bihar, now Jharkhand have challenged those awards passed by the Land Acquisition Judge by filing these appeals before this Court which are pending for the last 16 years.2. About 46 appeals and 10,312 appl...
Ots Limited Vs. United India Insurance Company Ltd. and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Dec-06-2007
Reported in: [2008(2)JCR183(Jhr)]
M.Y. Eqbal, J.1. By this application the defendant/petitioner has challenged the order dated 4.8.2007 passed by Sub-Judge-IV at Bokaro in Money Suit No. 21 of 2006 whereby he has rejected the application filed by the petitioner making a prayer for return of the plaint on the ground that the Court at Bokaro has no jurisdiction to (sic) the suit.2. The plaintiff-United India Insurance Company filed suit against the present petitioner and others for a decree for payment of Rs. 15,17,889/- which the plaintiff-Insurance Company paid to the insured in terms of the Insurance Policy. The insured/Bokaro Steel Plant purchased certain machines and machineries from M/s I harat Aluminium Company Limited, Korba. The insured had booked the muehineries for transportation of the same from Korba to Bokaro Steel City with defendant/petitioner. Defendant/petitioner was entrusted with the said insured goods for its transportation to Bokaro. When the goods were not delivered by the petitioner to the consign...
K. Radhakrishnan Nair Vs. the Union of India (Uoi) Through Secretary, ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Dec-06-2007
Reported in: [2008(2)JCR313(Jhr)]
Ramesh Kumar Merathia, J.1. The petitioner has challenged the order dated 12th March, 1997 passed by respondent No. 4 by which the petitioner's appeal was rejected. The petitioner has further prayed for a direction on the respondents to determine and fix the inter se seniority of the petitioner in the Civilian Officer Grade III (for short 'C.O. Grade III') with retrospective date vis-a-vis that of Shri B.L. Mukherjee, from 6th November, 1984.2. Admittedly the petitioner was appointed in General Reserve Engineer Force on 17th December, 1976 as Supervisor Non-Technical Grade I. After completion of initial probationary period of two years, the petitioner has been confirmed in the post of Supervisor Non-Technical Grade I with effect from 17th December, 1978 and then he was promoted in the grade of C.O. Grade HI with effect from 8th November, 1989.3. General Reserve Engineer Force (Non-Technical Officer) Recruitment (Amendment) Rules, 1984 (hereinafter to be referred to as 'the Rules') came...
Smt. Pallavi Vs. Shri Raj Kamal
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Dec-05-2007
Reported in: AIR2008Jhar79; 2008(56)BLJR951; [2009(1)JCR248(Jhr)]
M. Karpaga Vinayagam, C.J.1. Smt. Pallavi, the appellant herein, is the wife. Shri Raj Kamal, the respondent herein, is the husband. The husband filed a matrimonial suit for decree of divorce before the Family Court. The wife-the appellant appeared before the Family Court and filed an application under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act for maintenance during the pendency of the divorce proceedings and also for cost of litigation. On 05.0.2006, the Family Court allowed the said application directing the husband, the respondent herein, to pay Rs. 5000/- per month as maintenance per month and Rs. 500/- as litigation cost per date.2. The husband, the respondent herein, challenging the same filed a writ petition under Article 225 of the Constitution of India before this Court. The learned Single Judge entertained the same and reduced the maintenance amount from Rs. 5000/- per month to Rs. 3000/- per month and litigation cost of Rs. 500/- per date to Rs. 5000/- as lump sum.3. Aggrieved by...
Ashok Kumar Singh Vs. Sri Prabhat Kumar Ghose and the Jharkhand State ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Dec-05-2007
Reported in: AIR2008Jhar76; [2008(1)JCR445(Jhr)]
ORDERM.Y. Eqbal, J.1. This application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is directed against the order dated 4.8.2007 passed by Sub. Judge-IX, Ranchi in Misc. Case No. 05 of 2006 whereby the petition filed by the Plaintiff-petitioner under order IX, Rule 8 read with Section 15 C.P.C. for setting aside the order dated 26.6.2006 and for restoration of Title Suit No. 304 of 2003 has been dismissed on the ground that the petition is not maintainable.2. The facts of the case lie in a narrow compass.The plaintiff file Title Suit No. 304 of 2003 for declaration that defendant No. 1 has no right, title, interest or possession in the suit property and that plaintiff is in rightful possession of the said property. Defendant-respondents on being summoned appeared and filed written statement and contested the suit. Both parties filed their respective issues and the court below settled the issues on 5.5.2005 and the suit was posted for evidence. Since plaintiff failed to produce witnes...
Neelam Lata Vs. State of Jharkhand and anr.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Dec-05-2007
Reported in: 2008(56)BLJR1352
R.R. Prasad, J.1. This application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed for quashing the order dated 9.3.2006 passed by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Koderma whereby and where under cognizance of the offence under Sections 420 and 408 of the Indian Penal Code has been taken against the petitioner and others.2. Before adverting to the submissions made on behalf of the parties the fact giving rise this application needs to be notice of.It appears that opposite party No. 2 lodged a complaint alleging therein that when he came to know that a scheme for construction of Morang/soil road from village Jamkati to Pogdanda has been sanctioned, he met petitioner posted as Block Development Officer, Chandwara Block who asked him to meet with the Head Clerk Girja Prasad and the Assistant, Jitendra Kumar and thereupon when he met with those two persons, they asked for money in lieu of appointing him as an agent for execution of the said scheme and thereupon the complainant...
Shyam Bahadur Sinha and anr. Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Dec-05-2007
Reported in: [2008(2)JCR206(Jhr)]
Narendra Nath Tiwari, J.1. In this writ petition, the petitioners have prayed for quashing the order, as contained in Memo No. 4236 dated 10th December, 2001 (Annexure-8), whereby the circular issued by Letter No. 909 dated 28th August, 1996 giving benefits of Time Bound Promotion, pension, gratuity etc. from the date of their earlier appointment has been cancelled with retrospective effect, making the same effective from the date of their absorption in the Government Service.2. It has been stated that the petitioners, who are working as Revenue Karamchari at Dhanbad, were earlier appointed as Chowkidar/Tahsildar. Subsequently, the petitioners were absorbed in a regular post of Revenue Karamchari. The Department of Revenue and Land Reforms, Government of Bihar, as then was, issued a circular by Letter No. 1835 dated 4th September, 1986, communicating the decision of the Government that the Chowkidar/Tahsildar absorbed on the post of Revenue Karamchari would be given the benefits of tim...
Dr. Awadh Kishore NaraIn and ors. Vs. the State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Dec-05-2007
Reported in: [2008(2)JCR338(Jhr)]
Narendra Nath Tiwari, J.1. In this interlocutory application, the petitioners have prayed for remission of more sets of court fees on the ground that though there are 44 petitioners, they have made common prayer for quashing the advertisement dated 19th April, 2007 (Annexure-5).From perusal of the relief prayed for, it is evident that no separate relief has been sought by the petitioners and as such, the court fee paid by them is sufficientIn view of the above, this interlocutory application is allowed. The objection regarding non-payment of more than one set of court fee is overruled.I.A. No. 2769 of 2007 is disposed of.W.P. (S) No. 3532 of 2007 & I.A. No. 3222 of 2007:In this writ petition, the petitioners have prayed for quashing Advertisement No. 4 of 2007 dated 19th April, 2007 published by the Jharkhand Public Service Commission, whereby 75 posts of Tutor/Senior Residents, Medical Officers and Senior Surgical Officer have been advertised for appointment, whereas the petitioners h...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »