Jharkhand Court February 2008 Judgments
Deodahri Dhobi and ors. Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Feb-29-2008
Reported in: [2008(3)JCR115(Jhr)]
ORDERN.N. Tiwari, J.1. In this writ petition, the petitioners have prayed for quashing the order dated 11th June, 2007 passed by the learned Commissioner, North Chhotanagpur Division, Hazaribagh in Revenue Case No. 63 of 2004, whereby the learned Commissioner has dismissed the revision upholding the appellate order passed by the Additional Collector, Hazaribagh in Appeal No. MAN-44/2003 dated 14th July, 2004.2. It has been stated that the petitioners have claimed right, title and possession over the land appertaining to Khata No. 11, Plot No. 135, Area 1.98 Acres and Plot No. 161, Area 1.29 Acres; total area 3.27 Acres of village Basrai, P.S. Barhi, District Hazaribagh, on the basis of settlement made by the ex-landlord. It has been stated that the recorded tenant, Tipan Hazam. son of Karu Hazam, had surrendered the said land to the ex-landlord, Raja Surendra Nath Karandeo, in the year 1930. Thereafter, the ex-landlord settled the said land in 1939. On the basis thereof, the petitioner...
Tag this Judgment!Maya Devi, Smt. Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Feb-29-2008
Reported in: [2008(4)JCR747(Jhr)]
M.Y. Eqbal, J.1. In the instant writ application the question that falls for consideration is as to whether the action of the respondent-Jharkhand State Electricity Board (in short JSEB) and its authorities refusing to provide electrical connection in the premises of the petitioner is illegal, arbitrary, discriminatory and unjustified.2. The facts of the case lie in a narrow compass:The petitioner is a purchaser of the building in question from the erstwhile owner. The building was in occupation of a Training College on rent. The petitioner, after purchase, got the rent fixed by the Rent Controller. The said college ultimately vacated the building premises in July 2002 and handed over the same to the petitioner. The petitioner, thereafter, applied for fresh connection but the respondents refused to accept the application form of the petitioner and informed that electric bill of Rs. 1,49,048.00 is lying due on the said premises against the occupier-Training College and as per law, for n...
Tag this Judgment!Satendra Prasad Yadav Vs. Heavy Engineering Corporation Ltd. and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Feb-28-2008
Reported in: [2008(2)JCR538(Jhr)]
ORDER1. The appellant after retirement In 2001 has filed writ petition being W.P. (S) No. 5766 of 2002 making a grievance that in the year 1999 petitioner's juniors were promoted although he was senior and better person for promotion. The writ petition was dismissed by the impugned judgment dated 27.8.2007.' For better appreciation, the impugned judgment dated 27.8.2007 is quoted here-in-below:Heard the parties.Petitioner claims promotional benefits from E-5 to E-6 grade w.e.f. 1.2.1999.Mr. Anwar, appearing for the petitioner, submitted that by order dated 1.2.1999 petitioner's juniors were promoted, whereas petitioner's career was unblemished and he was senior and better than the persons promoted, in all respect. Petitioner retired in May, 2001.2. The stand of the respondent as set out in paragraph 15 of the counter-affidavit, inter alia, is as follows. Petitioner was not considered for promotion in grade E-6, as it is a selection grade for which the criteria is merit and not the seni...
Tag this Judgment!Paras Nath Sinha Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Feb-28-2008
Reported in: [2008(2)JCR651(Jhr)]
ORDERAmareshwar Sahay, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties and with their consent, this writ petition is being disposed of at this stage itself. The petitioner, who was President of District Consumer Forum. Palamau, and retired on 1.10.2000, has filed this writ petition for a direction to the respondent-State of Jharkhand to pay his arrears of salary/dearness allowance, amounting to Rs. 1,36,033/- for his serving as President, Consumers Dispute Redressal Forum, Palamau, from 14.5.1996 to 1.10.2000.2. It appears that pursuant to letter dated 27.7.2006. issued by the Deputy Secretary to the Government, Department of Food, Civil Supplies and Consumers Affairs, as contained in Annexure-8 to the writ petition, the President, District Consumers Forum, Palamau, vide letter dated 1.11.2006, as contained in Annexure-9 to the writ petition, has already asked for allotment of necessary fund for payment to the petitioner against his legal dues. It further appears that prior to letter dated ...
Tag this Judgment!Kumar and Kumar Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Feb-27-2008
Reported in: [2008(2)JCR23(Jhr)]
ORDERAmareshwar Sahay, J.1. Heard the parties.2. The petitioner had moved this Court earlier in WPC No. 224/2004 making a grievance that he being the lowest bidder was issue work order for supplying two lifts of OTIS make by the Director, State Institute of Rural Development but subsequently by letter dated 29.12.2006, the Deputy Director of the said Institute cancelled the work order without any notice or opportunity to explain the allegations made against the petitioner and. therefore, it was against the principle of natural justice.3. The said writ petition was allowed by order dated 26.2.2007 only on the ground that the work order was cancelled in violation of principle of natural justice and it was observed that if the respondents intend to proceed against the petitioner they may do so in accordance with the procedure established by law after giving proper opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.4. Thereafter, it appears that a notice was issued to the petitioner by the responden...
Tag this Judgment!Veena Anjana Lakra Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Feb-27-2008
Reported in: [2008(2)JCR124(Jhr)]
ORDERNarendra Nath Tiwari, J.1. In this writ petition the petitioner has prayed for quashing the Letter No. 1917 dated 4.4.2000 issued by the Director. Welfare Department, Government of Bihar as also the Letter No. 2066 dated 19.10.2001 issued by the respondent No. 4 whereby the direction has been issued to the concerned officer including the respondent No. 5 to pay the revised scale of pay to the untrained teachers working in the Welfare Department as is being paid to the untrained teachers of the Human Resources Development Department in the Government Schools and also for quashing the order whereby recovery of the excess amount paid to such teachers has been sought to be made. The petitioner has further prayed for a direction on the respondents to pay the revised scale of Rs. 5500-9000 which she is entitled to get.2. It has been stated that the petitioner was appointed as Assistant Teacher in the Welfare Department in the pay scale of Rs. 1500-2750. In the letter of appointment ther...
Tag this Judgment!Binay Kumar Prasad Vs. the State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Feb-27-2008
Reported in: [2008(2)JCR525(Jhr)]
Amareshwar Sahay, J.1. Heard the parties.On being raised an Industrial dispute by the petitioner Binay Kumar Prasad, a reference was made for adjudication of the dispute under Section 10(1) of the Industrial Dispute Act as to whether the termination of the petitioner as Accounts Clerk, Road Division, Chaibasa was proper, if not? Whether he should be reinstated on work and should get compensation?2. The said industrial dispute was registered as Reference Case No. 12 of 1994 by the Labour Court, Jamshedpur. The Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Jamshedpur vide his award dated 25th February 2004 as contained in Annexure-5 to the with petition, held that the termination of the petitioner was illegal and accordingly, he set aside the termination of the petitioner from service and directed to reinstate him with full back wages and continuance of service with consequential benefits.3. Pursuant to the said order when the petitioner was not being allowed to join, he moved this Court in W.P.S. No...
Tag this Judgment!Jyotilal Mahato and ors. Vs. Udhir Mahato and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Feb-27-2008
Reported in: [2008(3)JCR15(Jhr)]
ORDERN.N. Tiwari, J.1. In this CMP. the petitioners have prayed for restoration of FA No. 163 of 1969, which was dismissed for default on 3rd January, 1985.2. It has been stated that the said first appeal was filed in the Patna High Court. Patna and was admitted. Notices were issued. Respondents had appeared. Requisites were also deposited and the appeal was to be heard finally. In the meanwhile, the appellant No. 2, Haripada Mahato, who was looking after the case on behalf of the appellants, fell seriously ill and ultimately died. Other appellants were not in the know of the progress of the appeal. In the meanwhile, Ranchi Bench of the Patna High Court was constituted and all the cases arising out of the territorial jurisdiction of Ranchi Bench were normally transferred to Ranchi Bench. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the remaining appellants were in the hope that their case, which arises out of the land situated within Singhbhum District, shall be transferred to Ra...
Tag this Judgment!Kanahaiya Prasad Singh Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Feb-27-2008
Reported in: 2008CriLJ3343
ORDERR.R. Prasad, J.1. Heard learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner, learned Counsel appearing for the State and learned Counsel appearing for the informant.2. the petitioner is an accused in Chandil P.S. case No. 60 of 2007 registered under Sections 302/201 of the Indian Penal Code.3. Learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that when a dead body of a person was found lying at NH-33 near village Ashan Bani, it was identified as that of the dead body of Suresh Singh from identity card and a case was registered against unknown but in course of investigation, the petitioner was booked in this case only on the basis of the suspicion as it is said that some monetary dispute was there with the deceased who had been asked by the petitioner to come to Jamshedpur and that the petitioner had had knowledge that the deceased is coming to Jamshedpur and had had a talk with the deceased through Mobile before the deceased reached Jamshedpur and also at the time of his arrival at Ja...
Tag this Judgment!SamsudIn Ansari Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Feb-26-2008
Reported in: 2008(56)BLJR1489; [2008(2)JCR501(Jhr)]
Amareshwar Sahay, J.1. Heard the parties.In this writ application, the petitioner has prayed for quashing of the order dated 18/04/2007, contained in Annexure-5 to the writ application, whereby the petitions has been dismissed from service.2. The facts in short and that the petitioner was departmentally proceeded for the charge that be being a Driver of Jeep allegedly threw keys of the Car on the table of the Additional Collector, Dhanbad in June 2004 and refused to drive his vehicle.3. In the departmental proceeding the Enquiry Officer held that the charges against the petitioner were proved and, thereafter, the Disciplinary Authority passed the impugned order for dismissal of the petitioner from service. The said order of dismissal has been challenged by the petitioner in this writ petition.4. In course of argument, Mr. Das learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner, drew my attention to Annexure-3, i.e. the order sheet of the conducting officer showing that he was directed to dism...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »