Jharkhand Court November 2008 Judgments
Shri Blacious Toppo and ors. Vs. the State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Nov-28-2008
Reported in: [2009(1)JCR412(Jhr)]
ORDERAjit Kumar Sinha, J.1. The present writ petition has been preferred for issuance of an appropriate writ, order or direction to declare that the Vigilance Bureau of Vigilance Department in which the petitioners are working as a distinct and separate cadre from the department of regular police force In the State. It has further been prayed for issuance of a mandamus to consider the case of promotion of the petitioners to the post of Inspector of Police, Vigilance Bureau. The petitioners submit that even the advertisement was made by the State Government for recruitment of police constables for the Vigilance Department.2. The counsel for the respondents have submitted that the vigilance Bureau of Jharkhand is not a separate and distinct cadre from the Department of regular Police Force rather it is a supplementary unit of Jharkhand State Police made for special investigation of criminal cases concerned with the allegations of corruption and disproportionate assets against the State G...
Tag this Judgment!Ashok Kumar Sinha and Mahendra Pratap Singh @ M.P. Singh Vs. Bihar Sta ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Nov-28-2008
Reported in: AIR2009Jhar42
ORDERAjit Kumar Sinha, J.W.P.(C) No. 505 of 2002:1. The present writ petition has been preferred by the petitioner against the impugned order dated 10.1.2002, passed by the Managing Director, Bihar State Financial Corporation, Patna (respondent No. 2) vide which the initial amount of Rs. 5,00,000/- and Rs. 50,000/-, deposited by the petitioner towards the earnest money, was forfeited. The petitioner has also prayed for a restraint order against the respondents for restraining them to hand over the assets of M/s Aren Chemicals (Pvt.) Ltd. in favour of respondent No. 4.2. The facts, in brief, are summarized as under:One M/s Aren Chemicals Pvt. Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as 'the loanee') was sanctioned a term loan of Rs. 12.25 lakhs in the year 1974 out of which Rs. 11.90 lakhs was disbursed. The company committed default in making repayment and accordingly notices were issued under Section 29 of the State Financial Corporation Act, 1951. Upon receiving no response to the notice under ...
Tag this Judgment!Archana Devi Vs. Jharkhand State Electricity Board and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Nov-27-2008
Reported in: 2009(57)BLJR669; [2009(1)JCR410(Jhr)]
R.R. Prasad, J.1. Heard learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned Counsel appearing for the J.S.E.B.2. Learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that Pradeep Prasad Choudhary-father-in-law of this petitioner, had electric connection in his house bearing No. HI-265, situated at Harmu Housing Colony, Ranchi, but electric connection was disconnected as the father-in-law of this petitioner, was allegedly found consuming electric energy stealthily for which a criminal case was lodged wherein loss was assessed as Rs. 1,56,400/- tentatively.3. However, when the father-in-law of this petitioner, preferred anticipatory bail application before this Court, it was told to this Court that the loss assessed by the informant, which has been mentioned in the first information report, is without any basis and if the amount of loss is calculated in terms of the provision, the tentative amount would come to Rs. 1,24,000/- though that assessment was confined only with respect to ...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Sulo Devi Vs. Sitanath Mahto and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Nov-26-2008
Reported in: [2009(2)JCR274(Jhr)]
Ramesh Kumar Merathia, J.1. This second appeal has been filed against the judgment and decree dated 26.7.1999 passed by learned IInd Additional Judicial Commissioner, Khunti in Title Appeal No. 89 of 1996 dismissing the appeal filed by the appellant, and also the judgment and decree dated 17.10.1996 passed by learned Munsif, Khunti, Ranchi in Partition Suit No. 4 of 1987.2. On 27.4.2001, the following substantial question of law was formulated:Whether in absence of any finding that Exhibit 1 was invalid and was not acted upon, plaintiff could have been denied her claim for partition in the suit property?3. Mr. V.K. Prasad, learned Counsel appearing for the plaintiff-appellant argued on the said question of law. He submitted that it was admitted case of the parties that Tileshwari Devi (Defendant No. 21) had l/4th share in Schedules A and B property and, therefore, the appellant being purchaser from Tileshwari Devi was entitled to maintain the suit for partition against the other co-sha...
Tag this Judgment!Goutam Kumar Ganguly Vs. the State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Nov-21-2008
Reported in: [2009(2)JCR329(Jhr)]
D.K. Sinha, J.1. This appeal has been preferred against the order dated 22.9.2008 passed by the learned Single Judge in C.W.J.C. No. 11457 of 2000(F), by which the writ petition was dismissed considering the fact that the petitioner-appellant herein could not have been allowed to be regularized or absorbed in the service of the respondent-State against the post of Junior Instructor as his appointment on the post was for a fixed term on the basis of a letter issued to lime clearly indicating that his appointment was to remain effective only for a period of six months. The appointment of the petitioner-appellant thereafter was renewed for the second time for a further period of six months and thereafter his services were dispensed with. The petitioner-appellant thus was not in service when he had filed the writ petition claiming regularization/absorption in the service of the respondent-State on the post of Junior Instructor.2. The petitioner had further prayed for payment of his salary ...
Tag this Judgment!Shefali Bala Devya and Gautam Kumar Dubey Vs. Bharat Coking Coal Ltd. ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Nov-20-2008
Reported in: [2009(1)JCR452(Jhr)]
D.G.R. Patnaik, J.1. Petitioner in this writ application has prayed for quashing the letter dated 16.06.2005 (Annexure-9) whereby the respondent authorities had rejected the request of the petitioner No. 2 for his appointment under the respondents against acquisition of land of the petitioners in Mouza Kunji. A corresponding prayer has also been made for issuing a direction upon the respondents to appoint the petitioner No. 2 in terms of the understanding pursuant to the negotiations dated 13.01.1994 (Annexure-1) and the agreement dated 09.04.1995 (Annexure-2) under which, the respondent B.C.C.L. had agreed to grant 7 employments in lieu of acquisition of 13.04 acres of land.2. The case of the petitioner is that altogether 13.04 acres of Raiyati lands were acquired by the B.C.C.L. Pursuant to the negotiations and in terms of the agreement (Annexure-2) entered into between the respondent B.C.C.L. and the land holders, 7 employments were to be provided by way of compensatory benefits for...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Neela Sangeeta Lakra and ors. Vs. Jhalko Devi and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Nov-20-2008
Reported in: [2009(1)JCR537(Jhr)]
Ramesh Kumar Merathia, J.1. This appeal has been filed against the judgment dated 15.9.2003 passed by Subordinate Judge VI, Ranchi in Title Suit No. 19 of 1993/354 of 2003.2. The Plaintiffs-appellants filed said suit claiming the following reliefs:(i) The defendant No. 1 to 5 may be directed to execute and register the deed of sale in favour of the plaintiff or their nominee or nominees in respect of the suit property as per their agreement after obtaining necessary permission from the Deputy Commissioner, Ranchi and fulfilling other legal formalities, failing whereof, this learned Court may be pleased to execute and register the deed of sale on behalf of defendant Nos. 1 to 5, pursuant to the agreement dated 26.9.88 and 10.10 88 after taking necessary permission after completing other legal formalities.(ii) That further relief or reliefs be granted which the Court seems good and proper.(iii) Cost of the suit be decreed.The Schedule 'A' of the plaint was as follows:Land situated in vil...
Tag this Judgment!Sundari Marandi and ors. Vs. Maharani Hembram
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Nov-20-2008
Reported in: AIR2009Jhar65; [2009(1)JCR11(Jhr)]; [2009(1)JCR378(Jhr)]
M.Y. Eqbal, J.1. The defendants are appellants and this appeal is against the judgment of reversal. The appeal has been admitted for hearing on the following substantial question of law:Whether the finding of the appellate court below on the point of adoption is in accordance with law?2. The plaintiff filed Title Suit No. 30/83 for declaration that adoption of first defendant never took place and the deed of adoption is ineffective document and the same is liable to be cancelled. Plaintiff's case was that she and defendants are residents of the same village and are by caste Marandi. Lakhan Marandi had a son Bhatu Marandi, who has two daughters Mukhi Marandi and Sundari Marandi. Mukhi Marandi was married to Gopal Hembram in Gharjamai form. Their daughter Maharani Hembram was also married with Sital Tudu in Gharjamai form. Maharani Hembram is plaintiff in this case. Sundari Marandi, the second daughter, was not married in Gharjamai form. The plaintiff's further case was that after the de...
Tag this Judgment!Jashmati Devi Vs. the State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Nov-20-2008
Reported in: [2009(1)JCR627(Jhr)]
ORDERD.G.R. Patnaik, J.1. The petitioner's husband Late Manbodh Baraik died in harness on 29.1.2003 while working as Kamdar in Plant Conservation Centre, Palkot, Gumla under the respondents. Upon his death, the petitioner being his widow, applied for compassionate appointment. The Deputy Director, Agriculture, Plant Conservation, Ranchi vide memo No. 376 dated 2.10.2004 recommended the case of the petitioner to the Deputy Commissioner-cum- Chairman, District Compassionate Committee, Gumla,2. When despite such representation seconded by the Deputy Director, Agriculture, Plant Conservation, Ranchi, petitioner was not given any compassionate appointment, she moved this court vide W.P.(S) No. 2393 of 2005. By order dated 22.6.2005, this court disposed of the writ application with a direction to the Deputy Commissioner-cum-Chairman, District Compassionate Committee, Gumla to take a decision on the application of the petitioner for compassionate appointment as expeditiously as possible prefe...
Tag this Judgment!Fulmani Devi Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Nov-20-2008
Reported in: [2009(1)JCR126(Jhr)]
R.R. Prasad, J.1. This writ application is directed against the order as contained in pension payment order issued by the Accountant General vide memo No. Pen III-07-08-3980 dated 16.6.2007 (Annexure 1) whereby Rs. 3,60,954/- has been shown as Government dues and has been ordered tobe debited from the amount of pension. Further order as contained in memo No. 4231 dated 19.7.2007 issued by Senior Superintendent of Police, Ranchi has also been sought tobe quashed whereunder Senior Superintendent of Police directed the Treasury Officer, Ranchi to adjust Rs. 3,60,954/- from the amount of pension and gratuity of the petitioner.2. It is admitted case of the partes that the petitioner was appointed against the post of Sweeper in the year 1964 but at the time of her appointment, her date of birth was not noted in the service book. However, when in the year 1994-95 the above defect was detected, the petitioner was sent to Civil Surgeon, Ranchi for assessment of her age. On examination, age of t...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »