Jharkhand Court September 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.
Veer Singh Vs. the State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Sep-12-2007
Reported in: [2008(1)JCR234(Jhr)]
Ramesh Kumar Merathia, J.1. Heard the parties finally.2. Mr. P.K. Prasad, appearing for the petitioner, submitted as follows. The petitioner working as Development Officer in Ranchi Industrial Area Development Authority (for short 'RIADA'), retired on 28.2.2001. The pay scale of the Development Officer was treated equivalent to the Deputy Director, Industries Department up to the recommendation of the 4thPay Revision Committee report.3. In view of the recommendation of the 5th Pay Revision Committee report, the pay scale of the Deputy Director and equivalent post was fixed at Rs. 3000-4500/- against which the Deputy Director protested and by Resolution dated 8.2.1996, the Pay Anomaly Committee revised the same in the scale of Rs. 3700-5000/- but the petitioner was paid the earlier scale of Rs. 3000-4500/- and, therefore, he is entitled to the difference of pay with effect from 1.3.1989 from which date monetary benefits were to be given. He further submitted that such claim was recommen...
Nagendra Baitha and anr. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) Through the Secretar ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Sep-12-2007
Reported in: [2008(1)JCR66(Jhr)]
ORDERR.K. Merathia, J.1. Since the points involved in both the writ petitions are same and similar, they have been heard together and are being disposed of by this common order.2. Petitioners have prayed for quashing the order passed by the Secretary, Department of Forest and Environment, Government of Jharkhand dated 29.10.2004 (Annexure 9) rejecting the petitioners' representation on the ground that--promotion from State Forest Service to Indian Forest Service under the provision of Indian Forest Service (Appointment by Promotion) Regulation, 1966 is applicable in which there is no provision for reservation in promotion and the gradation list Is to be prepared as per the seniority.Petitioners are further aggrieved by the notification dated 21.7.2006(Annexure 15) issued by the Ministry of Forest and Environment, Government of India promoting 17 persons of different batches, subject to the final outcome of these two writ petitions.3. Mr. R.R. Mishra, learned G.P. II, appearing for the ...
Smt. Reebha Singh Vs. Dr. Ashok Kumar Singh
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Sep-12-2007
Reported in: AIR2008Jhar53; [2008(1)JCR325(Jhr)]
1. This appeal has been filed by the appellant-wife against the Judgment and decree dated 2.5.1998 passed by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Dhanbad in Title Matrimonial Suit No. 9 of 1996 whereby the marriage has been dissolved by a decree of divorce under Section 13(1) (ia) and (iii) and Explanations (a) and (b) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.2. Before taking up the matter for final hearing, we tried for re-conciliation between the parties who have been living separately for the last 14 years but they are not ready to restore their relationship.3. However, the parties jointly filed a petition and settled the dispute on the following terms and conditions:3. That the appellant therefore does not press this appeal in so far the decree of divorce is concerned. However, so far claim for maintenance and marriage expenses of the appellant and two daughters are concerned the parties have mutually settled their claim on the following terms and condition:(a) the respondent shall pay a sum ...
Laldeo Prasad Singh and anr. Vs. Bihar State Electricity Board and ors ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Sep-12-2007
Reported in: [2008(2)JCR392(Jhr)]
ORDERN.N. Tiwari, J.1. In this writ petition, the petitioners have prayed for quashing the award dated 31st October, 2006 passed in Reference Case No. 4 of 2003 by the Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Ranchi, where the petitioners' termination has been held justified. The award has been upheld merely on the ground that the learned Presiding Officer has not considered the evidences and materials on record in right perspective and has arbitrarily come to the finding that the termination of the concerned workmen was justified.2. It has been stated that the concerned workmen were engaged as daily rated muster roll workers and were posted in Electric Supply Sub Division of Purnea and Bhagalpur. Since the place of posting was far away from their home district, they had made representations and considering the same, were transferred to Daltonganj and Garhwa, respectively.3. Subsequently, the services of the petitioners were terminated. They preferred writ petition, being CWJC No. 2284 of 1992...
Ashish Kumar Kar Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Sep-11-2007
Reported in: 2008(56)BLJR348; [2008(116)FLR132]; [2007(4)JCR573(Jhr)]
Amareshwar Sahay, J.1. Heard the parties and with their consent this application is being disposed of at this stage itself.2. The prayer of the petitioner is this writ application is for direction to the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for appointing him on compassionate ground either in Class-III or in Class-IV post.3. The case of the petitioner is that his father, who was an employee of the State Government and was working as Assistant Teacher in Kalidaspur Primary School at Chakulia, died in harness on 26/02/1990 leaving behind his widow and four children including the petitioner being the eldest son. It is state that his father was the sole bread earner and there is no other source of income. After death of his father a sum of Rs. 1,20,000/- approx. was paid as death cum retiral benefits and a meager amount as family pension is being paid to the mother of the petitioner. The mother of the petitioner by filing an affidavit on 19/10/1992 applied for appointment of ...
Tata Steel Ltd. and ors. Vs. Jharkhand State Electricity Board and ors ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Sep-11-2007
Reported in: AIR2008Jhar60; 2008(56)BLJR412; [2008(1)JCR580(Jhr)]
Narendra Nath Tiwari, J.1. This batch of writ petitions raises the common issue, questioning the respondents' right to recover the short charged amount of the Load Factor Rebate from the petitioners. All the writ petitions were heard together with the consent of the parties and are now being disposed of by this common judgment.2. Reliefs prayed for in the said writ petitions, in summary, are for the following direction/order:(i) for setting aside the supplementary bill(s) raised towards the realizable amount of Load Factor Rebate as, per the order of the Chief Engineer (Commerce & Revenue), Jharkhand State Electricity Board in the light of the revised guidelines of the Jharkhand State Electricity Regulatory Commission. Ranchi (for short JSERC);(ii) to refund the realized amount and issue current bill(s) on the basis of the Load Factor Rebate calculated by the Jharkhand State Electricity Board (for short JSEB) for more than two years before issuance of the letter dated 15th September, 2...
Kamal Gorai Vs. Smt. Menka Gorai and anr.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Sep-11-2007
Reported in: AIR2008Jhar36; I(2008)DMC260; [2007(4)JCR575(Jhr)]
1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dated 23.12.1988 passed by Principal Judge, Family Court, Dhanbad, in Matrimonial Suit No. 329 of 1995 whereby he dismissed the suit filed by the appellant-husband for dissolution of marriage by a decree of divorce.Notice of appeal was sent to the respondent-wife but in spite of service of notice she has not appeared. 2. The appellant-husband filed the aforementioned suit for dissolution of marriage by a decree of divorce on the ground of adultery and cruelty as contemplated under Section 17(l)(i)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. The case of the appellant, as alleged in the application, is that the marriage between the appellant and the Respondent was solemnized in 1979 and after the marriage both of them led their conjugal life till 1990. Out of the said wedlock a female child was also born. The appellant alleged that the respondent-wife started mixing with the persons of the locality and she developed illicit relationship...
Employers in Relation to the Management of Giddi Washery of Central Co ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Sep-11-2007
Reported in: [2008(1)JCR326(Jhr)]
Narendra Nath Tiwari, J.1. In this writ petition the petitioner has prayed for quashing the award dated 14.8.06 made by the Central Government Industrial Tribunal No. 1, Dhanbad whereby the learned Tribunal has answered the reference in favour of the respondent-Union directing regularization of the concerned workmen.Mr. A. K. Mehta, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, tried to assail the said award on the ground that the learned Tribunal has failed to take into consideration that the concerned workmen were engaged by a contractor and their engagement was not regular and only miscellaneous works were required to be done by them. Learned Counsel submitted that the workmen also failed to establish their case that they have been continuously working against the sanctioned posts. In absence thereof, the learned Tribunal should not have recorded its finding holding that the concerned workmen are continuously working and that they are entitled for regularization. Learned Co...
Yadu Bansh Singh Vs. the Owner of the Truck No. Bho 6847 Sri Pramod Ku ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Sep-10-2007
Reported in: 2009ACJ644; [2008(1)JCR327(Jhr)]
M.Y. Eqbal, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and award dated 18th August 2004 passed by Motor Vehicle Claims Tribunal, Dhanbad, whereby the Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs. 4,34,000/- by way of compensation for the injury sustained by the claimant.2. The claimant-appellant is in the police service and at the relevant time he was posted as, A.S.I. of Bihar Police at Mahuda P.S. within the district of Dhanbad. In the night of 2.8.1995 while the claimant was on patrolling duty in a jeep, it collided with a truck bearing registration No. BHO-6847 causing serious injuries to the claimant, Because of the injuries, right leg above the knee and at the middle of the thigh has been amputated. The defendant-respondent No. 2 is the insurer of the truck. The claimant claimed compensation of Rs. 6,00,000/-. The defendant-respondent No. 2 Insurance Company appeared and filed written statement, wherein insurance of the vehicle was admitted. The owner of the truck produced valid driving l...
Dilip Soren Vs. the State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Sep-10-2007
Reported in: 2008CriLJ1164
D.K. Sinha, J.1. The present appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed by the Sessions Judge, Dumka(S.P.) in Sessions Case. No. 151 of 2001 whereby and whereunder the appellant, Dilip Soren was convicted under Section 366 and 376 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for five years and ten years respectively on each count.2. The prosecution story, as it stands narrated in the written report (Ext. 1) presented by the prosecutrix Mani Murmu (P.W.3) before the Officer-incharge of Shikaripara police station on 14.7.2000, was that on 15.6.2000 at about 8.30. p.m. while she was alone in the house, the appellant, Dilip Soiren came and enquired the whereabouts of her husband, Sangram Hembruin (P.W.1) who was running Crusher Machine at Digalpahari. On the reply of the prosecutrix that he had not returned back, it was alleged that the appellant forcibly dragged her out at the point of dagger and took away with him to vill...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »