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.
Southern Cooling Towers Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Steel Authority of India Ltd. an ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-07-2008
Reported in: [2008(3)JCR110(Jhr)]
ORDERR.K. Merathia, J.1. Heard the parties at length.2. Petitioner is seeking a declaration that the second Notice Inviting Tender (N.I.T.) floated in the month of September, 2007 by the respondents is bad in law.3. Mr. Choudhary, learned senior counsel, appearing for petitioner, submitted that after opening the Techno Commercial Bid, the parties, who took part in the N.I.T., were asked to submit their revised rate. Accordingly, revised rate was submitted and petitioner was found lowest. Certain negotiations followed. Thereafter petitioner was not informed whether its offer has been accepted or not, but subsequently it learnt that a fresh N.I.T. has been floated in September, 2007. He further submitted that after the price bid was open, respondents could not have floated another N.I.T. and the work order should have been issued in favour of the petitioner.4. Mr. Sinha, learned senior counsel, appearing for respondents, on the other hand, submitted that the decision not to accept petiti...
Jharkhand Forestry Graduates Association, Bau Vs. the Birsa Agricultur ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-06-2008
Reported in: [2008(2)JCR476(Jhr)]
ORDERAmareshwar Sahay, J.1. Heard the parties.2. The petitioner is the Association of students of the Department of Forestry in Birsa Agriculture University, Kanke, Ranchi. In this application the prayer has been made for quashing of the Notice/Appeal dated 23.2.2008 issued by the Dean, Faculty of Forestry, contained in Annexure-3 as also the Final Notice/Appeal dated 24.2.2008 issued to Forestry Students by the Director Students Welfare, contained in Annexure-4, whereby request has been made to the students of the Forestry Department, occupying rooms in Hostel No. 4 of the said University, to shift to Bhairwi Guest House, which has been converted and suitably furnished to accommodate the students.3. It appears that since there was some dispute and unrest among the students of two faculties, i.e. amongst the students of Forestry and Agriculture and, therefore, the administration of the University had to request the students of Forestry faculty to vacate Hostel No. 4 and shift to Bhairw...
Urmila Kumari Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-06-2008
Reported in: [2008(2)JCR66(Jhr)]
ORDERR.K. Merathia, J.1. This writ petition has been filed for a direction to the respondents to issue appointment letter to the petitioner on the post of Primary Teacher.2. Mr. S.N. Pathak, appearing for the petitioner, submitted that though the caste certificate issued by the Block Development Officer, Chas on 17.2.1993 (Annexure 4) was submitted by the petitioner, but even then she was not appointed.3. The stand of respondent No. 3 in the counter-affidavit is that at the time of verification of the documents and testimonials submitted by the petitioner it was found that she is a permanent resident of Shekhpura in the State of Bihar and she had given her temporary address of Bokaro Steel City in the State of Jharkhand. Therefore, in view of the order issued by the Human Resource Department on 24.11.2006 (Annexure D) based on the judgment of Division Bench of this Court in Kavita Kumari Kandhaw v. State of Jharkhand , petitioner could not be given appointment.4. In Kavita Kumari Kandh...
Dugi MundaIn Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-06-2008
Reported in: [2008(2)JCR668(Jhr)]
ORDERM. Karpaga Vinayagam, C.J.1. Admittedly, in pursuance of the order of the Full Bench, order has been passed on 10.1.2008 by the authority concerned. Now counsel for the petitioner would submit that though order had been passed rejecting the claim of the petitioner, the same is not in consonance with the order of the Full Bench, and as a matter of fact, order has been passed against the letter and spirit of the order passed by the Full Bench.2. It is noticed that finding given by the Full Bench is that the work-charged employees working against a post, in regular scale of pay, on their retirement and after their death, their heirs/dependents are entitled to claim death-cum-retiral benefits, such as, pension/family pension, gratuity, leave encashment etc. apart from the G.P.F. and Group Insurance amount. In Paragraph 20 of the judgment, the Full Bench directed the authorities to decide the individual claim of each of the petitioners including the present petitioner and if any amount...
Bagaria Enterprises Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-06-2008
Reported in: [2008(2)JCR475(Jhr)]
1. petitioner has challenged the order dated 2.1.2003 by which the Respondent No. 2, the Joint Commissioner, Sales Tax (Administration) Santhal Pargana Division rejected the application of the petitioner for grant of exemption of payment of Sales Tax under the Industrial Policy, 1995 vide Notification Nos. SO 478 and 479 on the ground that the petitioner did not obtain prior permission from the Industry Department.2. For getting benefit under the 1995 Industrial Policy, the petitioner had to set up its industry in the State of Jharkhand (within the United State of Bihar), prior to 31.8.2000. In August, 2000 the benefit under the said policy was extended for further period of five years for those industrialists who did not set up their industries but obtained prior permission to set up the industry prior to 31.8.2000. It is not in dispute that for the purpose of availing benefit within the extended period of time, prior permission was to be obtained first from the concerned authority. I...
Abdul Hamid and Talat Yousuf Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-06-2008
Reported in: [2008(2)JCR477(Jhr)]
ORDERAmareshwar Sahay, J.1. Heard the parties. The dispute in these cases relates to a portion of land, out of Plot No. 2347, Khata No. 471, situated in Village-Chitarpur, within the district of Hazaribagh (now Ramgarh).2. According to the petitioner in W.P. (C) No. 360 of 2008, 30 Decimals of land out of Plot No. 2347 was settled in favour of his ancestor by the Ex. Landlord through Sada Hukumnama. The Ex. Landlord issued rent receipt in lieu of payment of rent and thereafter, the State also realized rent from the petitioner and granted rent receipts in lieu thereof.3. According to the petitioner in W.P. (C) No. 504 of 2008, 5 Decimals of land out of Plot No. 2347 was settled in favour of his ancestor by the Ex. Landlord through Sada Hukumnama. The Ex. Landlord issued rent receipt in lieu of payment of rent and thereafter, the State also realized rent from the petitioner and granted rent receipts in lieu thereof.4. It is submitted by the learned Counsel for the petitioners that they h...
Munshi Sao and ors. Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-06-2008
Reported in: [2008(2)JCR599(Jhr)]
ORDERNarendra Nath Tiwari, J.1. In this writ petition, the petitioners have prayed for quashing the order dated 30th May, 2007 passed in Mutation Revision Case No. 101 of 2005, whereby the revisional authority upheld the order of the appellate authority dated 4th February, 2006 passed in Mutation Appeal Case No. 7 of 2003-04.2. According to the petitioners, the Circle Office after thorough consideration of the facts and documents on record came to the conclusion about the share of Akal Sao and Dhanua Devi and on that basis passed his order allowing the mutation in favour of the petitioners. The respondent No. 5 challenged the said order before the Land Reforms Deputy Collector, Ramgarh, Hazaribagh, who erroneously held that the Circle Officer has no jurisdiction to pass the said order and arbitrarily allowed the appeal of the respondent No. 5. The petitioners, thereafter, preferred revision before the Deputy Commissioner, who has upheld the order of the appellate authority by the impug...
Dhani Ram Rajak Vs. State of Jharkhand and anr.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-06-2008
Reported in: [2008(2)JCR708(Jhr)]
ORDERN.N. Tiwari, J.1. Learned Counsel for the petitioner confines his prayer only for the consideration that since issuance of the order of suspension 90 days' have already passed and as per Clause 11 (2) of the Bihar Trade Articles (Licences Unification) Order, 1984 (hereinafter to be referred as the 'Unification Order'), force of the order has lapsed.2. It has been stated that since the said order has lost its force, the licensing authority should have restored the licence of the petitioner and should have supplied the articles to the public distribution shop of the petitioner.3. It has been stated that the petitioner was granted licence for running a public distribution shop, being number 2/JBP/ KAT/2001. By order dated 31st July, 2006, the petitioner was issued a notice asking him as to why the said licence be not cancelled for the irregularities found on inspection. Simultaneously the petitioner's licence was also suspended with immediate effect.4. The petitioner had filed reply ...
Suraj Prasad Sah Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-06-2008
Reported in: [2008(3)JCR109(Jhr)]
ORDERR.R. Prasad, J.1. Heard learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned Counsel appearing for the State.2. The petitioner has been apprehending his arrest in Dumka (T) P.S. Case No. 243 of 2007 registered under Section 409 of the Indian Penal Code.3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that as per the case of the prosecution the petitioner while was posted as Block Welfare Supervisor at Dukma Block has been alleged to have taken money through the Cheque in advance for its distribution as scholarship to the students but the petitioner did not distribute the money amongst the students to the extent of Rs. 1,80,095/- and kept it with him and thereby misappropriated the said amount but the entire allegation is false and falsity of the allegation would be evident from that fact that in the year 1997 the services of the petitioner was transferred from Dumka Block to Circle Office, Dumka where he was also assigned duty to distribute the scholarship which he did ...
Ajay Kumar Singh Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-04-2008
Reported in: [2008(2)JCR58(Jhr)]
ORDERR.K. Merathia, J.1. Mr. Nanda, appearing for the petitioner, submitted that he is one of the members of Noamundi Mazdoor Union. He further submitted that pursuant to the order passed by this Court on 24.3.2005 in W.P. (L) No. 1543 of 2005, the Labour Commissioner-cum-Registrar, Trade Union, Jharkhand, Ranchi, passed order on 26.5.2005 in which it was found that there was serious charges against Sri G.T. Reddy, respondent No. 5 herein and a criminal case was pending, his primary membership was suspended by Executive Body after following the procedures of the Constitution, but the same could not be confirmed by the Governing Body clearly and therefore, it was ordered that his primary membership may continue till a decision of a Court is taken and after decision, the Union may take action against Sri Reddy as per its Constitution. He further submitted that Sri Reddy was convicted by judgment dated 8th March, 2006 passed in C-1 Case No. 33 of 2003 (T.R. No. 595 of 2006) by the Judicia...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »