Jharkhand Court March 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.
S.K. Mitra Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-04-2008
Reported in: [2008(117)FLR632]; [2008(2)JCR709(Jhr)]
ORDERN.N. Tiwari, J.1. In this writ petition the petitioner has prayed for a direction on the respondents to consider him for promotion to the rank of Additional D.I.G. w.e.f. 24.1.1997 which was given much later w.e.f. 12.8.1997. He has also claimed consideration for promotion to the rank of D.I.G. w.e.f. 1.11.2000.2. When the case is taken up for hearing, Mr. S.K. Ughal, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, informed this Court that the petitioner has already been superannuated and before his retirement, he was given promotion to the post of D.I.G. w.e.f. 29.6.2004.3. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that one Mr. A. Ranganathan, who was junior to the petitioner in the Commandant rank, was given promotion to the post of Additional D.I.G. w.e.f. 24.1.1997 whereas the petitioner was given promotion to the said rank w.e.f. 12.8.1998. Similarly, the juniors to the petitioner were given the rank of D.I.G. w.e.f. 1.11.2000 whereas the petitioner was given promot...
Amar Nath Bhattacharjee Vs. Voltas Ltd.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-04-2008
Reported in: [2008(2)JCR643(Jhr)]
ORDERR.K. Merathia, J.1. Mr. Ananda Sen, appearing for the petitioner, submitted that punishment of termination is disproportionate to the charges.2. Counsel for the respondent supported the impugned order.3. The Labour Court has observed as follows in the award :In view of what has been stated above, it emerges that within a span of about two years, one after another, three charge-sheets alleging misconduct were served upon the workman and out of them he was given token punishment in connection with the first charge-sheet dated 4.3.1992 and for the rest two charge-sheet he has conceded the fairness and propriety of the domestic enquiry as a result of which the charges leveled in both the aforesaid charge-sheets stands admitted by the workman. The charges levelled in both the aforesaid charge-sheets against the workman are also of serious and grave nature misconduct.In the instant case the workman has been found guilty in the serious and gross charges of misconduct. For the charge-shee...
Ratnesh Kumar Singh Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-04-2008
Reported in: [2008(3)JCR100(Jhr)]
ORDERAmareshwar Sahay, J.1. Heard the parties.2. The prayer of the petitioner in this writ petition is for quashing the order contained in Memo No. 648(A) dated 20.9.2007 (Annexure-14) whereby, pursuant to the order passed by this Court in W.P. (S) No. 3692 of 2004, after considering the materials on record, affirmed the earlier order dismissing the petitioner from services as Police Constable.3. The facts in short are that the petitioner who was appointed as a Police Constable, was departmentally proceeded for the charge that on the alleged date and time of occurrence, he came in civil dress and started abusing the Assistant Sub-Inspector of Railway Police. Tata Nagar by uttering words 'Chamar' and he also tried to tear the Station Diary kept on the table of the Munshi and he threw the telephone set on the ground. For the same allegations, an FIR was also registered for committing offence under Sections 385, 352, 506, 323 and 427 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3 of the Scheduled...
Laxmi Paper Products Through Its Proprietor Vs. Bihar State Financial ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-04-2008
Reported in: [2008(3)JCR191(Jhr)]
ORDERN.N. Tiwari, J.I.A. No. 739/20081. In this interlocutory application the petitioner has prayed for a direction on the respondents to release the original the deeds/documents mortgaged with the respondents as the security of the loan amount which has been refunded and deposited by the petitioner. The respondents-Corporation on full satisfaction, have also issued the Dues Clearance Certificate and certified that the petitioner has already paid the entire settlement amount.2. It has been stated that the petitioner had earlier challenged the authenticity of the respondents' order dated 21.6.2007 and during the pendency of the writ petition, the petitioner deposited the amount of Rs. 2,05,939.00 in favour of the respondents-Corporation towards one time settlement of its loan account under 'Plan-A' of the B.S.F.C.O.T.S. Scheme, 2006. Nothing is now due against the petitioner. However, the original mortgaged deeds and other documents have not been returned to the petitioner on the ground...
Sanaul Haque Vs. State of Jharkhand Through Cbi
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-03-2008
Reported in: [2008(2)JCR46(Jhr)]
ORDERR.R. Prasad, J.1. Heard learned Counsel appearing for the appellant and learned Counsel appearing for the CBI on the matter of bail.2. Learned Counsel appearing for the appellant submits that the appellant being one of the partners of M/s. Chhotanagpur Cattle Feed & Supply Company as well as other partners of the said company though has been convicted under Section 120B read with Section 420/409/467/68/471/477A of the Indian Penal Code and also under Section 13(2) read with 13(1), 13(c)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act and has awarded maximum sentence for some of the offences for six years on the allegation that the company without supplying the material took payment of huge amount but there has been absolutely no evidence to the effect that the appellant was responsible for day-to-day affairs of the company, rather as per the case of the prosecution itself, it was Md. Sayeed who was looking after the affairs of the company and the appellant has been convicted and sentenced ...
Anil Chandra Biswas Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-03-2008
Reported in: [2008(2)JCR73(Jhr)]
ORDERR.K. Merathia, J.1. The petitioner has prayed for quashing Complaint Case No. 259 of 2006 filed in the District Consumer Dispute Redressal Forum, Ranchi.2. Respondent No. 3 (Smt. Krishna Basu) filed the said complaint against the petitioner and others mainly on the ground that inspite of several requests, the sale deed of the flat in question has not been executed and registered.3. Mr. P.K. Bhowmik, appearing for the petitioner submitted that 'flat' is not covered under the definition of 'Goods' under the Consumer Protection Act; and, therefore, the Consumer Forum has no jurisdiction; and that the remedy of the complainant is to file a suit. He further submitted that the Consumer Forum cannot direct for execution and registration of proportionate 1/16 share of land with common area. He also submitted that the complaint is barred by limitation.4. The said arguments cannot be accepted In view of the Judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Lucknow Development Authority ...
Vijay Pathak Vs. Bharat Coking Coal Ltd. and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-03-2008
Reported in: [2008(2)JCR51(Jhr)]
ORDERAmareshwar Sahay, J.1. Heard the parties.2. In this writ application, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 16/ 17.8.2007 contained in Annexure-7, issued under the signature of Project Officer, East Katras Colliery, Bharat Coking Coal Ltd., whereby, the petitioner who was a Fitter working in Bharat Coking Coal Ltd., was dismissed from the service after an enquiry made by the Chief Personnel Manager, B.C.C.L.3. A complaint was received by the Management of the BCCL that the petitioner who was working in the East Colliery in the capacity of Fitter was not actually Vijay Pathak and in fact his name was Mandeo Singh, son of Shri Pradeep Singh, Resident of Village - Bhawantola, P.O. -Jayprakash Nagar, P.S.-Bairia, District Balia (U.P.). On receipt of such complaint, the management of Katras area sent a letter to the Superintendent of Police, Balia affixing photographs of Vijay Pathak who was working as a Fitter. East Katras Colliery for verification. It appears that after verif...
Md. Masood Hassan Vs. the Registrar General, Jharkhand High Court
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-03-2008
Reported in: [2008(2)JCR55(Jhr)]
ORDERR.K. Merathia, J.1. Heard the parties and perused the original records.2. The petitioner has challenged the order contained in Letter No. 3082/Acctt. dated 26.6.2004 (Annexure 2) and also the letter contained in Memo No. 3081 dated 28.6.2004 (Annexure 3) whereby his entry in the High Court premises has been restricted.3. Mr. Mahesh Tewari, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner, submitted that petitioner was working as an Advocate's clerk since a very long time. The President of Advocates' Association made a written complaint against the petitioner to the Registrar General of this Court but. without following the rules of natural justice, the impugned orders were passed. No show cause notice was issued along with the copy of complaint and no enquiry was held. The case of the respondent in the counter-affidavit, which was filed on 8.9.2004 was that the petitioner's name did not find place in the Advocate's Clerk Registration Record.4. This position has not been disputed in th...
Nand Kishore Jaiswal Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-03-2008
Reported in: II(2008)DMC107; [2008(2)JCR54(Jhr)]
D.K. Sinha, J.1. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in Complaint Petition No. 837 of 2004 giving rise to Dhanbad (Sadar) P.S. Case No. 389 of 2004 for the alleged offence under Sections 498A/406, IPC as also under Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.2. The petitioner is admittedly the husband of the complainant-informant. The wife of the petitioner Suchita Jaiswal, complainant-informant herein, alleged inter alia that on the eve of their marriage on 27.6.2001 cash of Rs. 1,50,000/- with other household articles worth Rs. 4,00,000/-were gifted but when she came to her matrimonial home, she was tortured in various manner for not providing golden ring and Maruti Car etc. by her parents and it was alleged that her in-laws including her husband started pressurizing to fetch Rs. 50,000/- from her parents for purchasing a car and in this connection she was subjected to mental and physical harassment. It was alleged that she was threatened by her in-laws to be killed after setting her b...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- Next ›