Jharkhand Court July 2007 Judgments
The Ranchi Khunti Central Co-operative Bank Ltd. and ors. Vs. Ashok Ch ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-31-2007
Reported in: [2007(4)JCR142(Jhr)]
M.Y. Eqbal, J.1. This appeal under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent is directed against the judgment dated 13.4.2005 passed in CWJC No. 3562 of 1999(R) whereby the learned single Judge allowed ' the application, quashed the order of dismissal of respondent No. 1 (writ petitioner) from services and further held that the writ petitioner is entitled to salary for the period of his suspension.2. The facts of the case lie in a narrow compass:The writ petitioner (respondent No. 1 herein) was working as Assistant Accountant in Ranchi Khunti Central Cooperative Bank Ltd. (in short 'the Bank'). In 1994 the writ petitioner informed the Bank that the Development Officer, namely, Lal Rabindra Nath Sahdeo, started misappropriating the Bank money after obtaining his signature on the cheque. Consequent thereupon, a First Information Report was lodged by appellant No. 2-Managing Director of the Bank alleging misappropriation of huge amount of the bank. The writ petitioner was put under suspension by or...
Tag this Judgment!Raj Refractories (P) Ltd. Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-31-2007
Reported in: [2007(4)JCR136(Jhr)]
ORDERNarendra Nath Tiwari, J.1. In this interlocutory application, the applicant-Electrosteel Castings Limited has prayed for its addition as a respondent in the writ petition. It has been stated that the State Government has decided to grant mining lease in favour of the applicant and has forwarded its application to the Central Government for approval.The writ petitioner has challenged the process of the lease, in question, in which the decision has been taken in favour of the applicant and as such, the applicant is the interested party in the matter and its presence is necessary for proper and effective decision on the Issues involved in the writ petition.Learned Counsel appearing for the writ petitioner, as well as the respondents have not disputed the said position and contention of the applicant.Considering the above, this interlocutory application is allowed. The applicant M/s. Electrosteel Castings Ltd. is permitted to intervene and is added as respondent No. 6 in the writ peti...
Tag this Judgment!National Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Payal Choudhary and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-31-2007
Reported in: 2008(56)BLJR444; [2009(1)JCR488(Jhr)]
1. Heard Mr. Manish Kumar, learned Counsel for the appellant-National Insurance Company Ltd. and Mr. D.C. Ghose, learned Counsel for the United India Insurance Company Ltd.2. The claimant-Respondent filed an application for grant of compensation on account of death of one Indu Devi in a motor vehicle accident. The facts of the case are that the deceased was travelling on a Maruti Van, bearing Registration No. BR-12A/2244 and while coming towards Dumka, it was dashed by a Truck, bearing Registration No. - WB-39-0367, as a result of which, the deceased sustained severe injuries and ultimately died. The Maruti Van was insured with the appellant-Insurance Company, whereas, the Truck was insured with the Respondent-United India Insurance Company Ltd. The Tribunal recorded a finding that the accident took place due to rash and negligent driving of both the vehicles. Consequently, the amount of compensation was apportioned between the two Companies equally.3. Mr. Manish Kumar, learned Counsel...
Tag this Judgment!Uma Shankar Prasad Vs. Hazaribagh Mines Board,
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-31-2007
Reported in: [2009(1)JCR475(Jhr)]
ORDERR.K. Merathia, J.1. Heard the parties finally.2. Petitioner has challenged the letter No. 472 dated 18.7.2005 (Annexure 2) issued by the Hazaribagh Mines Board (Board for short), informing him that he is going to superannuate from service w.e.f. 31.7.2005 on attaining the age of 58 years. Petitioner's case is that the Board decided to enhance the age of superannuation to 60 years but it has arbitrarily decided to apply the said decision to the employees retiring after 14.8.2006, whereas as per the Government Resolution dated 13.4.2005 the age of superannuation is enhanced to 60 years w.e.f. 20.1.2005.3. Mr. P. P.N. Roy, learned senior counsel, appearing for the petitioner submitted that by Resolution dated 26.10.2004 (Annexure 1) the age of superannuation of the State Government employees has been enhanced from 58 years to 60 years. He submitted that copy of such Resolution was circulated to various Government Departments and other institutions which means that the said Resolution...
Tag this Judgment!The State of Jharkhand Through Executive Engineer, Minor Irrigation Di ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-31-2007
Reported in: [2009(1)JCR664(Jhr)]
R.K. Merathia, J.1. Heard the parties finally.2. The State of Jharkhand on behalf of Minor Irrigation Department, Chaibasa, has filed this writ petition praying for setting aside the award dated 26th August, 2003, passed by the Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Jamshedpur, East Singhbhum, in Reference Case No. 2 of 1998.3. By Notification dated 28.3.1998, issued by the State Government, the following dispute was referred for adjudication.Whether the termination of services of S/Shri Pranay Kumar Srivastava, Gopal Jha, Kaushal Chandra Jha and Raj Bali Pal-daily rated workmen of Executive Engineer, Minor Irrigation Division, Jamshedpur is Justified? If not, what relief they are entitled to?4. The Labour Court held that petitioner is an Industry and there has been violation of Section 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act (The I.D. Act for short) and therefore termination of the respondents was unjustified. It directed their reinstatement with full back wages and other consequential benefits ...
Tag this Judgment!Manglu Prasad Yadav Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-30-2007
Reported in: [2007(4)JCR301(Jhr)]
M.Y. Eqbal, J.1. This Letters Patent Appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 9.8.2006 whereby the writ petition being W.P. (S) No. 1877 of 2002 filed by the petitioner for regularization and/or absorption of his service has been dismissed by the learned single Judge holding that the petitioner was not appointed against any post after following the procedure of appointment. The impugned judgment/order reads as under:Admittedly the petitioner was engaged on daily wage and thereby he had no right to hold any post. He was not appointed against any post after following the procedure as such advertisement, interview and recommendation of the Selection Commission. In this background no direction can be given to regularize his services.This writ petition is accordingly dismissed.2. The case of the petitioner-appellant is that in the year 1983, the petitioner, having come to know about the vacancy in Class-IV post in Public Health Engineering Department, applied for the said pos...
Tag this Judgment!Binda Devi Vs. United Insurance Company Ltd. and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-30-2007
Reported in: [2008(0)JCR743(Jhr)]
ORDER1. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties.2. This appeal by the claimant appellant has been filed for enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Tribunal in M.V. Claim Case No. 05 of 87/08 of 2003.3. The fact of the case is that on 20.10.1984, the deceased was going to his house from a grocery shop and as soon as he came to the road, a truck bearing Registration No. BRY 2928 coming in a very high speed dashed the deceased as a result of which he died. The appellant claimed Rs. 1.20 lakhs as compensation. The Tribunal has taken a very erroneous view that the liability of the insurance company is to the extent of rupees fifty thousand only and therefore awarded the said amount as compensation.4. According to the learned Counsel for the appellant, the appellant is entitled to get compensation of Rs. 1.20 lakh as claimed in the claim application and the insurance company is liable to pay the entire amount.5. Having regard to the fact that the minimum liability of the insurance ...
Tag this Judgment!Mohata Concerns Limited Vs. the Deputy Commissioner and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-27-2007
Reported in: [2008(4)JCR725(Jhr)]
D.G.R. Patnaik, J.1. Both these appeals are disposed of by this common judgment since they arise out of the same impugned order passed by the Land Acquisition Officer under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act.2. Facts of the case in brief are that by notification dated 1.2.1982 published under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, the State Government sought to acquire 14.81 acres of land situated at Jhumaritelaiya belonging to several recorded tenants, for the purposes of construction of buildings of the Krishi Bazar Samittee. The appellant in FA. No. 37 of 1997 namely Mohata Concerns Limited had owned and possessed 3.97 acres of land out of aforesaid total area on which a bungalow and outhouses were constructed. The land was purchased by the appellant for the purposes of establishing its own factory and business. The appellant filed its objection under Section 5 of the Act, praying for release of the lands and in the alternative, to pay compensation at the rate of Rs. 30,000/- pe...
Tag this Judgment!State of Bihar Through Special Land Acquisition Officer Vs. Rameshwar ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-27-2007
Reported in: [2007(4)JCR485(Jhr)]
D.G.R. Patnaik, J.1. This appeal filed by the State through the Special Land Acquisition Officer is directed against the order dated 31.07.1998 and its corresponding award dated 15.09.1998 passed in 24 Land Acquisition Cases commencing from Case No. 3 of 1994 to 26 of 1994 under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act by the Special Judge, whereby the court below had enhanced the compensation amount assessed by the Collector payable for the lands of the appellants acquired by the State Government.2. The case relates to the acquisition of land in different plots, each comprising of different areas, total measuring 19.53 acres under Khata No. 142 situated within Village Tisra Pokhara in the district of Palamau belonging to the Respondent Nos. 1 to 4. The Notification No. 4 under the Land Acquisition Act was published on 15.12.1992. Almost four years prior to the date of Notification, the possession of the land was taken by the Land Acquisition Officer on 05.09.1998. The Land Acquisition O...
Tag this Judgment!Food Corporation of India and anr. Vs. Bhagwan Das Sao and anr.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-27-2007
Reported in: [2007(4)JCR325(Jhr)]
D.G.R. Patnaik, J.1. The appellant Food Corporation of India has filed this appeal against the judgment dated 20.1.1998 and its corresponding decree dated 7.2.1998 passed by the learned Subordinate Judge, Chaibasa in Money Suit No. 9 of 1993 whereby the suit of the plaintiff/respondent was decreed in favour of the plaintiff respondent.2. The suit was filed by the plaintiff/respondent against the present appellant for realization of a sum of Rs. 2,73,476/-together with interest pendente lite. The case of the plaintiff is that the plaintiff was engaged as a transport contractor for transportation of food grains from the Rail head to different godowns situated at Chakradharpur. The defendent No. 2, namely, the Food Corporation of India appellant represented by its Senior Regional Manager was the principal employer of the plaintiff for the purpose of the employees provident fund and other schemes. Prior to the allotment of the contract to the plaintiff, a tender was floated by the defendan...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »