Jharkhand Court January 2008 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.
Court on Its Own Motion (Pil-road of Ranchi Town), Vs. State of Jharkh ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jan-23-2008
Reported in: [2008(1)JCR629(Jhr)]
ORDER1. An affidavit has been filed by Mr. Sahay, one of the Members of the Special Committee and Engineer Liaison Officer, Ministry of Shipping, Department of Road Transport and Highways, on behalf of the Central Government. It is noticed from the said affidavit that in pursuance of the order passed by this Court of 8.1.2008, Special Committee headed by Regional Officer, Patna, and comprising of Chief Engineer (NH), R.C.D., Jharkhand, concerned S.E. (NH), ELO, Ranchi and concerned EE (NH) has been constituted through Ministry's letter dated 22.1.2008 to monitor the progress of the works and to furnish the details of the progress. It is prayed therein that inclusion of the Chief Engineer, Ministry of Shipping. Road Transport and Highways, New Delhi, as part of the Special Committee may please be dispensed with as he is preoccupied with the matters pertaining to Parliamentary Affairs, policy matters, planning etc. But he has assured in the affidavit that the Chief Engineer, Ministry of ...
Jharkhand State Land Reforms Revenue Karamchari Sangh Through Its Secr ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jan-22-2008
Reported in: [2008(2)JCR436(Jhr)]
ORDERN.N. Tiwari, J.1. In this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for a mandamus commanding upon the respondents to grant financial up gradation to the members of the petitioner in the pay scale of Rs. 5,000-8,000 from the date of their eligibility and within a specified period. It has been stated that the petitioner is a registered Association and its members are Revenue employees and they are posted in different Offices/Anchals in the district of Gumla. Some of the members of the petitioner were promoted to the post of Circle Inspector-cum-Kanoongo. Vide Memo No. 5207 dated 14.8.2002 of the Finance Department, Government of Jharkhand, a decision was communicated to the members of the petitioner regarding the admissibility of the benefit of the Assured Career Progression Scheme (ACP) to them. It was, inter alia, provided that no new post is to be created except the existing post and the benefit of ACP shall be extended in the case of isolated post also having no line of promotio...
Krishna Nandan Jha Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jan-22-2008
Reported in: [2008(2)JCR407(Jhr)]
ORDERR.K. Merathia, J.1. Head the parties finally. Petitioner is claiming regularization and payment of salary from the date of his joining Le. 16.12.1980 in view of the order passed by the Public Health Engineering Department, Government of Bihar, Patna vide order No. 577, dated 4.4.1990 (Annexure-7).2. The stand of the respondent, inter alia, is that petitioner was engaged as Work Inspector vide order No. 24 dated 11.12.1980 purely on temporary basis only for three months by the then Superintending Engineer, which was extended up to 30.9.1981. Finally, petitioner was removed from service by the then Superintending Engineer vide letter dated 16.10.1981 on the ground that he was engaged without following the rules and regulations. Further, the petitioner did not work between 16.12.1980 to 19.4.1990.3. It appears from Annexure-6, which is a letter dated 9.1.1989, that the Departmental State Minister directed to consider petitioner's case and treat him posted from 14.4.1988 and pay him s...
Nemi Chand JaIn Vs. State of Jharkhand and anr.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jan-21-2008
Reported in: [2008(1)JCR595(Jhr)]
D.P. Singh, J.1. The present writ application is for issuance of appropriate writ directing the respondents to release the petitioner Nemi Chand Jain from illegal and unauthorised confinement at Dhanbad jail for the following reasons:(1) That the petitioner has been allowed bail in Cr. Appeal (SJ) No. 746/2007 on 9.8.2007).(2) That in spite of this bail order, the petitioner has not been released till the date of filing of this application i.e. on 23.8.2007 by the Dhanbad Jail Superintendent, respondent No. 2.(3) That in stead of releasing the petitioner, he has been sent to Delhi on the basis of production warrant issued from the Court of Sri I.K. Kochhar, Special Judge, Patiala House Courts, New Delhi in connection with RC case No. 5(E)/2005/EOW-II/DLI.2. The main ground taken up by Mr. Mahabir Prasad, the learned Counsel for the petitioner, is that by keeping the petitioner in Dhanbad jail after grant of bail by order dated 9.8.2007 he may not be sent to Delhi Court for remand under...
Janardan Panjiara Vs. Dumka Central Cooperative Bank Through M.D. and ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jan-21-2008
Reported in: [2008(1)JCR605(Jhr)]
ORDERRamesh Kumar Merathia, J.1. Heard the parties finally.2. The petitioner has challenged the order dated 16.1.2007 (Annexure 5) by which he has been compulsorily retired from service under the purported powers under Section 14(3) of the Jharkhand Cooperative Societies Act (for short 'the Act').3. The petitioner's case is that a departmental proceeding was started. In 1986 the suspension was revoked and the departmental proceeding was ordered to continue. But without any findings in any departmental proceeding, the said order of punishment has been passed. It is further submitted that in November, 2006 the petitioner was promoted.Learned Counsel appearing for the respondents could not produce anything to show that any enquiry was held in which the petitioner was found guilty. The respondents also could not show any provision under which the petitioner could be punished without holding any enquiry.4. In the circumstances, the order dated 16.1.2007 (Annexure 5) is set aside with libert...
Kamla Kumari Vs. Steel Authority of India Ltd. Through M.D.B.S. Plant ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jan-21-2008
Reported in: [2008(1)JCR623(Jhr)]
ORDERR.K. Merathia, J.1. Heard the parties finally.2. Mr. Sumeet Gadodia, appearing for the petitioner, submitted that in the advertisement for appointment of Staff Nurse (Annexure 7), the eligibility criteria that the applicant should have passed 'Intermediate by Science' is illegal; and that the respondents should consider the case of the petitioner, who passed Intermediate with Arts, for appointment on such post as she has successfully completed training under the respondents. He further submitted that one Renu Kumari, similarly situated, was appointed as Staff Nurse Grade II on 7.12.1998 and, therefore, there has been discrimination with the petitioner.3. On the other hand, Mr. Rajiv Ranjan, appearing for the respondents, submitted that in view of Clause 5(Kha)(iii) of the Nurses Training-Recognition, Affiliation and Conduct of Examinations of School of Nursing Rules, 1997 (for short 'the Rules') notified on 14.7.1997, the respondents were obliged to put the said criteria of Interm...
Sigma Computer Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jan-21-2008
Reported in: 2008(2)CTLJ358(Jhar); [2008(1)JCR600(Jhr)]
ORDERNarendra Nath Tiwari, J.1. The petitioner, in this writ petition, has prayed for quashing the order, contained in Letter No. JGMTRTC 095/Ranchi dated 9th March, 2007 issued by the respondent No. 4, whereby the Purchase Order Nos. F.O./PKG 5.00/001/Ranchi/053 and F.O./PKG 5.00/001/Dumka/054, both dated 5th February, 2007, for supply of computers and peripherals and delivery of the goods at the respective sites have been cancelled. Petitioner has further prayed for quashing the Notice Inviting Tender published in the newspaper on 1st April, 2007, whereby tenders have been invited for supply of goods for which the purchase orders were issued to the petitioner.2. According to the petitioner, the order was placed for purchase of the computers etc. pursuant to his offer made as per the DGS and D Rate Contract dated 29th January, 2007. Pursuant to that, two referral order were placed, being Ref. Nos. F.O./PKG 5.00/00 l/Ranchi/053 and F.O./PKG 5.00/001/Dumka/054, both dated 5th February, ...
Mishir Rai Vs. the State of Bihar (Now Jharkhand)
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jan-21-2008
Reported in: 2008(56)BLJR1483
D.G.R. Patnaik, J.1. The appellant was convicted for the offence under Section 493 of the IPC and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for five years by the 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Dhanbad in Sessions Trial No. 96 of 1991. In the present appeal, the appellant has challenged the order of his conviction and sentence passed by the trial court.2. Facts of the case in brief is that the appellant had struck acquaintance and developed intimacy with the prosecutrix (PW 7) and both were in love with each other. The appellant had persuaded the prosecutrix to solemnize marriage at the temple and accordingly, a formal marriage ceremony was solemnized at the temple. Thereafter, the prosecutrix on being made to believe that she is the legally marriage wife of the appellant, she lived with him as his wife and allowed the appellant the indulgence of physical relationship with her. As a result, she had conceived and delivered appellant's child. The appellant was expected to undergo a further ceremo...
Brihaspati Devi Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jan-21-2008
Reported in: [2008(3)JCR320(Jhr)]
ORDERN.N. Tiwari, J.1. The grievance of the petitioner is that though she was selected as Anganbari Sevika of Marchadih Anganbari Centre, Sonahatu and had been working since 31.5.2007. she has been removed by the impugned order dated 30.11.2007 passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Ranchi as contained in Annexure-6. The grievance of the petitioner is that the said order by which the petitioner's appointment has been cancelled, is cryptic, mechanical and nonspeaking and the same is violative of the principles of natural justice and is not sustainable as no reason whatsoever has been assigned in support of the said order. There is nothing in the impugned order to show that the concerned authority has applied his mind on the reply to the show cause given by the petitioner.2. Learned J.C. to G.A., on the other hand, submitted that though the impugned order is not speaking, the petitioner's appointment has been cancelled for valid reasons and that the said reasons are known to her. It has been...
United India Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Julekha Bibi and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jan-18-2008
Reported in: [2008(1)JCR444(Jhr)]
ORDER1. This inter locutory application has been filed praying for certain modification, by deleting the following observations made in the order dated 15.1.2008:It appears that the Insurance Company had deliberately issued a single cheque against the award only with a view to delay the payment.2. It is submitted by Mr. U.K. Singh, appearing for the appellant Insurance Company, that after going through the various orders passed by this Court, in depositing one cheque instead of three cheques, they have committed bonafide mistake for which the appellant Insurance Company tenders unconditional and unqualified apology. Mr. Singh further submitted that the Insurance Company will be obeying the order of this Court dated 15.1.2008 in the Lok Adalat to be held on 19.1.2008 by bringing three cheques in terms of the order dated 15.1.2008.3. Mr. R. Mukhopadhyay, appearing for the claimants has got no objection to such prayer.4. Accordingly, the observations made by this Court in the order dated ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »