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.
Bharti Enterprises (Through Its Proprietor) Vs. United Commercial Bank ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-11-2008
Reported in: [2008(3)JCR73(Jhr)]
ORDERR.K. Merathia, J.1. Petitioner has chal lenged the notice dated 20.7.2006 issued under Section 13(2) Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act. 2002 (the Act for short). Mr. Sunil Kumar Sinha, appearing for the petitioner submitted that the respondent-Bank has not disposed of petitioner's objection filed on 24.9.2006 against the said notice. He relied on para graph 80 of the judgment reported in : AIR2004SC2371 . Mardia Chemicals Ltd. and Ors. v. Union of India and Ors. and etc.2. Mr. Rajan Raj, appearing for respondent-Bank, referring to materials brought on the record submitted as follows:The proprietor of M/s Bharti Enterprises (petitioner) has availed loan from Bihar State Financial Corporation (B.S.F.C.) against the mortgage of its unit and was later declared defaulter. Ultimately the said unit was sold in auction by B.S.F.C. Mrs. Mithu Mohanti purchased it vide Sale Order No. N-45 dated 23.2.2000, but she did not pay the f...
Jharkhand Rajya Vishwavidyalaya Awam Mahavidyalaya Karmchari Sangh and ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-10-2008
Reported in: [2008(2)JCR471(Jhr)]
M. Karpaga Vinayagam, C.J.1. These two writ petitions have been filed by the Karmchari Sangh and Federation, seeking for a declaration that the Jharkhand State Universities (Amendment) Act, 2002, omitting Section 67(a) of Bihar/Jharkhand State Universities Act, 1976, and making the age of superannuation of the employees of the Universities to be 60 years is ultra vires and for issuance of further direction by way of declaration that the age of such employees of the Universities, who were appointed prior to commencement of the Bihar State Universities Act, 1976, shall be 62 years.2. Though several points have been urged to quash the notification impugned in these petitions, we cannot give such a declaration with reference to the Jharkhand State Universities (Amendment) Act, 2002, as the prayer becomes infructuous on account of the fact that the said notification has been substituted by further amendment under the Amendment Act, 2005.3. As per Section 67(a) of the Amendment Act, 2002, th...
Shio Nath Singh Vs. Bharat Coking Coal Ltd.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-10-2008
Reported in: [2008(2)JCR481(Jhr)]
M. Karpaga Vinayagam, C.J.1. The delay in filing this appeal is condoned. IA. No. 2512/07 is disposed of.2. This Letters Patent Appeal is directed against the order passed by the learned single Judge on 15.6.2007 in W.P. (S) No. 1432 of 2003, dismissing the writ petition.3. The appellant filed the said writ petition before the learned single Judge for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding upon the respondents to pay compensation and provide employment to his dependents in pursuance of the Land Losers' Scheme against the acquisition of his land measuring 7.43 acres. The same was dismissed by the learned single Judge in the light of the facts disputed by the respondents. Hence, this LPA.4. According to the petitioner-appellant, he, a cultivator, owned and possessed the land measuring 13.5 acres in the village Solunga, which he acquired through registered sale deed from one S.P. Agrawala on 26.10.1995. For extension of South Tisra Open Cast Project, a proposal for acquis...
Gopeshwar Gope, Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-10-2008
Reported in: [2008(2)JCR587a(Jhr)]
M. Karpaga Vinayagam, C.J.1. These writ petitions have been filed by the non-teaching employee of the University for the issuance of direction declaring Jharkhand State Universities (Amendment) Act (Act 05, 2005) published in the Jharkhand Gazette (Extra-ordinary) dated 25.7.2005 to be ultra vires to the Constitution of India, whereby and whereunder Section 67(a) of the Jharkhand State Universities Act, 2000 has been amended, providing age of retirement to be 62 years for the teachers of Universities and Colleges and such officers as declared equivalent to them, whereas providing 60 years for the non-teaching employees with effect from the date of notification of the Act in the official Gazette.2. The petitioners, being non-teaching employees, have a grievance that by Amendment Act of 2005, the date of retirement of teachers of University or College has been enhanced to 62 years whereas the date of retirement of non-teaching employees has been allowed to continue to be 60 years.3. Acco...
Awadh Kishore Singh Vs. State of Jharkhand Through Cbi
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-10-2008
Reported in: [2008(3)JCR105(Jhr)]
ORDERR.R. Prasad, J.1. This application has been filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for quashing the order dated 5.6.2007 passed by learned Special Judge, CBI, Ranchi in R.C. Case No. 1(A) of 2000-Pat whereby and whereunder cognizance of the offence under Sections 120-B/201/409/420/468/471 of the Indian Penal Code as well as under Section 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(c)(d)(e) of the Prevention of Corruption Act has been taken against the petitioner and others.2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that though the petitioner, who at the relevant point of time was posted as Telecom Revenue Assistant (TRA), Department of Telecom, Hazaribagh has been alleged to have misappropriated Government fund to the tune of Rs. 3,12,276/- in connivance with other officials of the Telecom Department by showing deposit of less amount than what they had actually received from the subscribers as telephone charge by manipulating the documents but there has been abso...
National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Toldi Prasad @ Todi Sao and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-10-2008
Reported in: [2008(2)JCR639(Jhr)]
ORDER1. The appellant-National Insurance Company Limited has filed this appeal challenging the order dated 29.3.2004 passed by Commissioner, Workmen's Compensation, Hazaribagh in W.C. case No. 32 of 2003 whereby a sum of Rs. 3,22,297/- has been awarded for the death of one Ramesh Sao Gupta while himself driving the truck.2. Mr. Alok Lal, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant-Insurance Company, very seriously and forcefully assailed the impugned order mainly on the ground that the truck was not insured with the appellant-Insurance Company and on the basis of fake and fabricated copy of insurance policy the Commissioner, Workmen's Compensation awarded compensation.3. Mr. Rajiv Anand, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents, on the other hand, supported the impugned order by submitting that the vehicle was duly insured with the appellant and the copy of insurance policy was filed before the Commissioner, Workmen's Compensation.4. On this conflicting submissio...
Manbhui Mahto Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-10-2008
Reported in: [2008(3)JCR22(Jhr)]
ORDERN.N. Tiwari, J.1. The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 23.7.2002 passed by the Commissioner, North Chota Nagpur Division in Revisional Survey Appeal No. 28/98 whereby the Commissioner has upheld the order dated 24.1.1998 passed by the Charge Officer, Dhanbad in Revision Case No. 18148/96 and allowed the revision filed by the respondent Nos. 5 to 8 against the order passed under Section 83 of the Chota Nagpur Tenancy Act.2. The grievance of the petitioner is that by the impugned order dated 24.1.1998, the Charge Officer sat over the order dated 9.10.1996 passed in the Revision Case No. 18148/96 whereby revision was declared as time barred and the same was not entertained. By the subsequent order dated 24.1.1998, the same Charge Officer has not only revived the revision, but also condoned the delay and allowed the revision.3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that once the Charge Officer did not allow the revision on the ground that it is time barred, he has no ...
Achyutanand Tiwary and Mahesh Prasad Singh Vs. State of Jharkhand and ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-10-2008
Reported in: [2008(3)JCR108(Jhr)]
ORDERR.K. Merathia, J.1. Mr. Anil Kumar Sinha, senior counsel appearing for the petitioners in both the cases, State counsel appearing on behalf of the State of Jharkhand in both the cases and Mr. Bhanu Kumar, appearing on behalf of Md. Ainul Haque Ansari (respondent No. 6) in W.P.(S) No. 581 of 2008.2. The petitioners grievance is that as per the order of transfer dated 18.12.2007, they joined their respective place of posting but even then the said order of transfer was cancelled and they have been again transferred by the impugned order dated 22.1.2008 which is against the judgment of Smt. Jyotsna Kumari v. State of Bihar and Ors. 2000 (2) PLJR 332.3. Mr. Bhanu Kumar, appearing for Md. Ainul Haque Ansari (respondent No. 6 in W.P. (S) No. 581 of 2008) submitted that the writ petitioner Mahesh Prasad Singh got himself posted in the same District of Sahebganj for about 20 years against the rules and, therefore, his order of transfer dated 18.12.2007 was rightly cancelled. He further su...
Banwari Lal Agarwal and ors. Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-10-2008
Reported in: [2008(3)JCR106(Jhr)]
ORDERNarendra Nath Tiwari, J.1. In this writ petition, the petitioners have prayed for a direction on the respondents to issue 'No Objection Certificate' to the petitioners with respect to the lands belonging to Mouza Ghatbai, P.O. & P.S. Bermo, District Bokaro.2. It has been stated that the petitioners' name in respect of the said lands, measuring 18.31 acres, were mutated and the jamabandi has been running in their names. The said lands belonging to the petitioners are under the process of acquisition for the purpose of Bharat Coking Coal Ltd. and the petitioners required 'No Objection Certificate' for the purpose of their claim for compensation before the concerned authorities. The petitioners applied for 'No Objection Certificate' before the Additional Collector, Bokaro, but instead of issuing the said certificate to the petitioners, he referred the matter to the Deputy Commissioner, Bokaro. The Deputy Commissioner, Bokaro after making necessary enquiry held that the petitioners ar...
Narayan Sao, Vs. the State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-10-2008
Reported in: 2008CriLJ3341
D.K. Sinha, J.1. The petitioners have invoked the inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for the quashment of the entire criminal prosecution against them in Markacho P.S. Case No. 10 of 2007 corresponding to G.R. No. 31 of 2007 as also for the quashment of the cognizance of the offence taken by the C.J.M., Koderma on 14.8.2007 for the offence under Sections 341/323/325/307/504/34 I.P.C. against the petitioners.2. The prosecution story lies in a narrow compass.3. The informant Sitaram Sao in his written report presented before Markacho police alleged that on the day of reporting i.e. on 15.1.2007 at about 7 a.m. all the seven named accused persons including the petitioner No. 1 Narayan Sao and petitioner No. 3 Miss Sulochana Kumari @ Sulakshna Kumari attacked the inmates after entering in his house. In the same transaction it was alleged that the accused Mahendra Sao inflicted Farsa blow on the wife of the informant as a result of which she fell down after sustai...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »