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.
Dr. Sushama Sara Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-12-2008
Reported in: [2008(3)JCR338(Jhr)]
ORDERR.K. Merathia, J.1. Heard the parties finally.2. This writ petition has been filed for a direction upon the respondents to consider the petitioner's case for appointment against Scheduled Caste vacancy.3. Mr. Prem Chand Yadav, learned Counsel, appearing for the petitioner, submitted that pursuant to an advertisement No. 2 of 2004-05 for filling up the post of Veterinary Doctor in the Animal Husbandry Department, petitioner applied as a Scheduled Caste candidate with a caste certificate. She was declared successful in the examination. Pursuant to a Press Notice issued by Animal Husbandry Department, she appeared on 20.9.2006 with the required documents, but thereafter she did not receive the letter of appointment and therefore she made representation but as nothing was done, she has filed this writ petition. Relying on certain documents, Mr. Yadav submitted that still there is vacancy in Scheduled Caste category.4. Learned Counsel appearing for the respondents submitted that petiti...
Rameshwar Mahto and ors. Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-12-2008
Reported in: [2008(3)JCR349(Jhr)]
ORDERD.G.R. Patnaik, J.1. Heard the counsel for the petitioners and the counsel for the State.2. Petitioners were convicted by the trial Court for the offences under Sections 323, 341 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to six months of imprisonment. Against the order of their conviction and sentence, as passed by the trial Court. The petitioners had preferred an appeal before the Sessions Judge. The lower appellate Court after elaborating the evidences on record, have concurred with the findings of the trial Court and observed that there was sufficient and reliable evidence to hold the accused/petitioners guilty for the aforesaid offences.3. Counsel for the petitioners would argue that the trial Court as also the appellate Court erred in placing reliance on the testimony of the witnesses, all of whom happen to be the interested witnesses inasmuch as. they are the members of the same family and, other witnesses named in the charge-sheet, have not been examined. It is also ple...
Tata Steel Ltd. Vs. Awtar Singh and anr.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-11-2008
Reported in: [2008(2)JCR637(Jhr)]
ORDERR.K. Merathia, J.1. Heard the parties finally.2. Petitioner has prayed for quashing the order dated 4.4.2007, passed by the Labour Court, Jamshedpur in M.J.C. Case No. 35 of 2002 filed by the respondents under Section 33C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act (ID Act for short).3. The respondents were terminated on 27.7.1982. On 30.6.1988, an award was passed for reinstatement with 2/3rd back wages. The Management challenged the said award by filing writ petition, which was dismissed. The Management went to Supreme Court by filing Special Leave Petition, which was also dismissed on 7.4.1997. Thereafter, the respondents entered into an agreement with the Management on 18.6.1997 foregoing their claim of reinstatement if payment is made to them in lieu of their service till they reached the age of superannuation, in terms of the agreement.4. In 2004, there was a settlement between the Management and the recognized Union for Grade Revision and other benefits notionally with effect from 1....
Smt. Renu Rani Singh Vs. State of Jharkhand and anr.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-11-2008
Reported in: [2008(2)JCR466(Jhr)]
ORDER1. The present application has been preferred by the petitioner-complainant Smt. Renu Rani Singh, being aggrieved with the judgment passed by the learned lower Court in C/1 Case No. 553 of 2003 on 14.11.2006 by which the O.P. No. 2 Vinod Kumar Lall has been acquitted of the charges under Sections 380/468 of the Indian Penal Code. The respondent has appeared through lawyer on notice.2. Brief facts leading to this miscellaneous petition are that the petitioner-complainant and the opposite party No. 2 are closely related as sister-in-law and brother-in-law. According to petitioner, Vinod Kumar Lall used to help her after death of her husband. During this period a relation of trust developed as the respondent used to help her in getting withdrawn the investments made by her late husband. However, to the utter surprise, on 4.12.2002 she received a notice by pleader by which she came to know that she has issued a cheque in favour of the O.P. No. 2 on 26.11.2002 for a sum of Rs. 2,35,000...
Binod Kumar Lall Vs. State of Jharkhand and anr.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-11-2008
Reported in: IV(2008)BC203; 2008CriLJ3353; [2008(2)JCR465(Jhr)]
ORDER1. The present application has been preferred by the petitioner-complainant Binod Kumar Lall, being aggrieved with the judgment passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No. III, Jamshedpur in Cr. A. 309 of 2006 dated 12.3.2007 by which the O.P. No. 2 Renu Rani Singh has been acquitted of the charges under Section 138 of the N.I. Act. The respondent has appeared through lawyer.2. Brief facts leading to this miscellaneous petition are that the petitioner-complainant and the opposite party No. 2 are closely related as brother-in-law and sister-in-law. According to petitioner, after the death of husband of O.P. No. 2, he used to help her and during this period a relation of trust developed. The petitioner-complainant has filed the complaint case C/1 Case No. 1187 of 2002 regarding the bouncing of cheque issued by the O.P. No. 2. According to the petitioner-complainant, the O.P. No. 2 taken a loan of Rs. 2,35,000/- from him after the death of her husband. When, petitio...
Padma Lochan Kalindi Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-11-2008
Reported in: [2008(2)JCR636(Jhr)]
ORDERM. Karpaga Vinayagam, C.J.1. By order dated 23.8.2006 three directions have been given by this Court-(i) The respondents were directed to refund the amount already recovered from the petitioners within one month from the date of receipt/production of a copy of the order failing which they will pay interest @ 5% from the date such amount was recovered till the amount is paid; (ii) The respondents were also directed to finalize the pension of the petitioner within two months from the date of receipt/ production of a copy of the order and pay the admitted arrears on such finalization of pension along with 5% interest to be calculated from the date of retirement of the petitioner and (iii) In case of non-payment, the respondents will be liable to pay cost of Rs. 20,000/-, apart from the interest as ordered above.2. The aforesaid order of the learned single Judge was affirmed by the Full Bench in L.P.A. and further two months' time was also granted to the respondents for finalization o...
Ram Chandra Pathak Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-11-2008
Reported in: [2008(2)JCR642(Jhr)]
ORDERN.N. Tiwari, J.1. In this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for a direction on the respondents to pay the retiral dues, payable to him, as also the salary for the month of March 2000, which is still arrear and has not been paid to him.2. It has been stated that the petitioner retired from the services of respondents on attaining the age of superannuation on 30th June, 2002, while he was working as Supervisor of Tasar Seed Supply, Dumka. After his retirement, the petitioner was entitled to get all the arrears and the retiral benefits, but the benefits payable to the petitioner were not paid to him. Arrear of salary for the month of March, 2000 was also not paid to the petitioner.3. A counter-affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondents, stating, inter alia, that the respondents have already paid the entire dues and nothing is due to be paid to the petitioner. It has been further stated that the petitioner is not entitled to get salary for the month of March, 2000 du...
Jharkhand State Commercial Taxes Employees Association and anr. Vs. St ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-11-2008
Reported in: [2008(3)JCR102(Jhr)]
Narendra Nath Tiwari, J.1. In this writ petition, the petitioners have prayed for quashing the office order dated 1st November, 2007 passed by the respondent No. 3, whereby the employees of the cadre of Clerks/Assistants/Steno-typist of Commercial Taxes Department have been transferred outside their zones/divisions in violation of rules/guidelines.2. The petitioner No. 1 is said to be an Association of the Jharkhand State Commercial Taxes Employees representing the employees of Jharkhand Commercial Taxes Department working within the territorial jurisdiction of the State of Jharkhand.3. The State of Bihar, Department of Commercial Taxes, vide letter dated 12th July, 1979 had taken a decision that a divisional cadre will be constituted for Class-III and Class-IV employees except the Head Clerks and Senior Statistical Assistant.4 Various divisions were formed in the Department and the employees working in their respective regions were treated as the members of the Divisional Cadre. Vide ...
Bokaro Karmchari Panchayat Vs. Hindustan Steel Works Construction Ltd. ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-11-2008
Reported in: [2008(3)JCR120(Jhr)]
ORDERN.N. Tiwari, J.1. In this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for a direction on the respondents to make payment of Dearness Allowance (D.A. for short) commencing from 1.1.1999 onwards to each and every members of the petitioner's union at par with the rate of the D.A. paid to the employees of the Central Government being 55% of the basic pay: and for holding the letter dated 22/23.9.1999 as unconstitutional, arbitrary and discriminatory.2. It has been stated that the petitioner's members are entitled to get D.A. @ 55% of basic pay as per the revised D.A. admissible to the employees of the Central Government and other Public Sector Undertakings. By letter dated 22/23.9.1999, issued under the signature of the Under Secretary, Ministry of Steel and Mines, Government of India, New Delhi addressed to the Chairman-cum-Managing Director, Hindustan Steel Works Construction Ltd., it has been arbitrarily directed that the D.A. instalments announced by the Government and not paid till ...
Shailendra Kumar Verma Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-11-2008
Reported in: [2008(3)JCR21(Jhr)]
ORDER1. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties.2. By order dated 24.7.2006 passed in OA No. 109 of 2006, the Central Administrative Tribunal dismissed the claim of the petitioner with reference to his claim for regularization as TSM on the ground that the committee constituted for the purpose of verification of the number of work days the petitioner had worked found that he had worked for 105 days only during the period in question. Challenging the said order, this petition has been filed on behalf of the petitioner.3. It is strenuously contended by the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner that even according to the earlier counter filed by the respondents, the petitioner worked upto 8th September, 1993 and on the other hand, calculation has been made upto 31.1.1992 and this is wrong. So. in the circumstances, we sought for clarification from the respondents to verify whether the petitioner actually worked for 240 days in view of the certificate issued on 3.1.2001 i...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 8
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »