Jharkhand Court February 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.
Shiv Prasad Sahu Vs. State of Jharkhand and anr.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Feb-05-2008
Reported in: [2008(2)JCR64(Jhr)]
D.K. Sinha, J.1. The petitioner has invoked the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the quashment of the entire FIR of Chirkunda (Galfarbari) P.S. Case No. 188 of 2003 corresponding to G.R. No. 3348 of 2002 instituted against the petitioner for the offence under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 and 414/34, IPC pending before the CJM, Dhanbad for appropriate direction in the facts and circumstances of the case.2. The brief fact of the case is that while the respondent No. 2 A.S.I. of Police was on patrolling duty, he received tip off that a truck No. BR 2A 3242 was carrying steam coal on the name of a factory which had no existence, on forged and fabricated document. On such information he intercepted the truck but the driver fled away and in course of search of the cabin of the truck, he found two Challans vide No. 14 dated 14.11.2003 with destination of the coal to Supreme Industries,' Raniganj and another challan No. C-56718 dated 14.11.2003 issue...
B.N. Khirwal Pvt. Ltd. Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Feb-05-2008
Reported in: [2008(2)JCR383(Jhr)]
ORDERM.Y. Eqbal, J.1. Heard Mr. M.K. Dey, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Mr. S.B. Gadodia, learned Advocate General.2. In this writ application the petitioner seeks issuance of a writ directing the respondents to forthwith restore possession of mining lease hold area from where the petitioner has been allegedly dispossessed by respondent Nos. 2 and 3 namely, the Superintendent of Police, Singhbhum (West) Chaibasa and the Officer in charge, Noamundi police station.3. Petitioner's case is that respondent Nos. 5 and 6 who are the mining lessees, transferred the mining lease of iron ore mine in favour of the petitioner sometimes in 1999 and the petitioner has been operating and developing the mine. All of a sudden respondent Nos. 5 and 6 lodged FIR and asked the police for dispossessing the petitioner from the lease hold area.4. Respondent-State filed counter-affidavit wherein it is stated that the respondents, being the Government servants have shown no interest in the matter of m...
Smt. Jamuna Devi Vs. the Jharkhand State Electricity Board and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Feb-05-2008
Reported in: [2008(2)JCR417(Jhr)]
ORDERNarendra Nath Tiwari, J.1. In this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for quashing Letter No. 2100 dated 21st July, 2006 issued by the respondent No. 5 (Annexure-3), whereby she was informed and asked to retire with effect from 30th November, 2006 altering his date of birth to 4th November, 1946. Petitioner's case is that at the time of appointment, her date of birth was recorded as 5th June, 1954. The said date was entered in the service book (Annexure-2). Suddenly, by the impugned letter, she was informed that she would retire on 30th November, 2006 on the basis of her date of birth 4th November, 1946. It has been stated that the petitioner was never given any notice or opportunity of hearing before altering her date of birth in the service record. It has been submitted that the impugned letter is arbitrary, illegal and violative of principle of natural justice and the some is liable to be quashed.2. The respondent-Jharkhand State Electricity Board contested the petitioner...
Prabhakar Jha Vs. Srimati Jayanti Devi @ Minu Devi
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Feb-01-2008
Reported in: [2008(1)JCR635(Jhr)]
D.P. Singh, J.1. The present appeal has been preferred by Prabhakar Jha, husband of respondent Jayantl Devi @ Minu Devi against the judgment of District Judge, Deoghar by which his prayer for divorce has been refused by dismissing the matrimonial suit No. 5 of 1995 with costs.2. Brief facts leading to this appeal are that the appellant got married with respondent No. 1 in May 1990 according to Hindu rites and customs. As further stated both the parties resided in the same locality, and such they continued to live as husband and wife. According to the appellant, during this period before filing of the matrimonial suit he could not succeed in having satisfactory marital relation with the respondent. It has been stated specifically that due to undeveloped female organs, the appellant could not cohabit with the respondent and ultimately on 30.9.1994 the appellant realized that due to this infirmity the appellant would not be able to perform sexual intercourse with the respondent. This lead...
Yadunandan Singh and anr. Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Feb-01-2008
Reported in: [2008(1)JCR643(Jhr)]
ORDERAmareshwar Sahay, J.1. Heard the parties.An advertisement was published in the year 1978 for appointment to the post of Teachers Fellows (Non-Gazetted). The petitioners applied against the said posts and, thereafter, they were appointed in the year 1979 on a fixed salary of Rs. 500/- per month. Since, their services were not regularized even after completion of about 18 years of service; they approached this Court in CWJC No. 1073/1997 for direction upon the respondents for their absorption in the post of Lecturer in the Department of Science and Technology.The said writ petition was disposed of by order dated 9.10.1998 as contained in Annexure-20 to this writ petition.2. From perusal of the order dated 9.10.1998, contained in Annexure-20, it appears that the High Court noticed the fact that it was not disputed on behalf of the State that the petitioners were continuing in the post of Teacher Fellow since 1979 after their selection, on a fixed salary. It was held that when the pet...
Union of India (Uoi) Through South Eastern Railway Vs. Union of India ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Feb-01-2008
Reported in: [2008(2)JCR497(Jhr)]
D.G.R. Patnaik, J.1. This writ application has been filed on behalf of the S.E. Railway through Senior Divisional Operation Manager, Chakradharpur for quashing the order dated 31.5.2006 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal in O.A. No. 24 of 2004 (Annexure-13).2. Respondent/applicant P.S. Sen-gupta was employed as Dy. CHC under the S.E. Railway with Headquarter at Chakradharpur. On 26.4.1998, after obtaining a special duty pass from his superior in office, he proceeded to Rourekela. At Rourekela, he was arrested by the police on some charges. Consequently, he could not attend his duty thereafter. On the charge firstly, that he absented himself from duty on 26.4.1998 unauthorizedly without giving any information and thereby violated certain specific provisions of conduct rules and secondly, that he left the Headquarters on 26.4.1998 without taking permission from the concerned authorities and thirdly, that he failed to do his assigned duty on 26.4.1998, a departmental inquiry wa...
Pandey Singh Vs. Central Coalfields Ltd. and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Feb-01-2008
Reported in: [2008(2)JCR700(Jhr)]
ORDERAmareshwar Sahay, J.1. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties.2. The petitioner, who is presently working as Pump Khalasi in Hendigir Project of the Central Coalfields Limited, has filed this writ petition challenging the order contained in Annexure-5 to this writ application, passed by the General Manager (S) Sayal Area dated 30th October, 2001, whereby the representation of the petitioner for giving him pay protection has been rejected, and has prayed for direction to the respondents to give him the benefit of pay protection, or alternatively adjust him in the equivalent post of Loader.3. The facts, in short, are that the petitioner was initially appointed on 4.1.1967 as Loader. In the year 1988 due to compression fracture of both lumber vertebra spine, he was declared medically unfit for the work of Loader since he suffered from permanent disability. The petitioner was medically examined by the Medical Board constituted by the Central Coalfields Limited and the Medical Board...
Pursotam Bhagat and ors. Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Feb-01-2008
Reported in: [2008(2)JCR707(Jhr)]
ORDERN.N. Tiwari, J.1. In this writ petition, the petitioners have prayed for a direction on the respondents to pay the Honorarium, payable to them, which has not been paid in spite of their repeated requests and representations to the concerned authorities.2. It has been stated that the petitioners have worked a non-formal education supervisors in different projects in different districts and they are entitled to get the prescribed honorarium. When the honorarium, which they were entitled to get, was not paid, they made requests and filed their representation, but no order was passed. Learned Counsel for the petitioners submitted that in a similar circumstance, some persons had moved this Court in W.P.(S) No. 3949 of 2003. The said case was disposed of by order dated 21.8.2003 directing the respondents to pass appropriate order. In compliance of the said order passed in W.P.(S) No. 3949 of 2003, the respondents passed the order allowing the claim of the petitioners of that case. The p...
Tirth Raj Himmat Singka and anr. Vs. State of Bihar (Now Jharkhand) an ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Feb-01-2008
Reported in: [2008(3)JCR277(Jhr)]
ORDERD.K. Sinha, J.1. The petitioners herein have invoked the writ jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India with the prayer for the quashment of Koderma P.S. Case No. 113 of 1999 corresponding to G.R. No. 261 of 1999 in which they have been arrayed as accused for the offence under Sections 419/420/379/341/323 of the Indian Penal Code pending in the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Koderma.2. The prosecution story in short was that the informant- respondent No. 4 Mukesh Kumar was having a truck No. BR1G-3777 with national permit. The informant-respondent No. 4 had sent his vehicle for carrying coal but neither driver Jawahar Roy nor cleaner Amod Kumar of the said truck returned with the vehicle and the informant-respondent No. 4 did not enquire presuming that the driver of the said truck would be carrying goods in trips. Yet, when the truck did not return for long 20/25 days, the informant-respondent No. 4 began to search his truck with its...
Birsi Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Feb-01-2008
Reported in: [2008(3)JCR318(Jhr)]
ORDERN.N. Tiwari, J.1. In this writ petition the petitioner has prayed for a direction on the respondents to pay the death-cum-retiral benefits payable to her after the death of her husband. It has been stated that the petitioner's husband late Maniram was working as Chaukidar in the Public Health Department at Chakradharpur. He died in harness on 3.12.1987. After the death of her husband, the petitioner was entitled to get all the death-cum-retiral dues of her late husband, but in spite of repeated requests and representations nothing has been paid till date.2. When the case was earlier taken up on 20.8.2007, learned G.A. was granted time to seek instruction and file counter affidavit with observation that pendency of the writ petition shall not come in the way of the respondents in redressing the petitioner's grievance. Again when the case was taken up on 11.12.2007. one week's more time was granted for filing counter affidavit. When the case is taken up today, it has been informed t...
- ‹ Prev
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- Next ›