Jharkhand Court April 2008 Judgments
Bhola Jha Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Apr-30-2008
Reported in: [2008(3)JCR608(Jhr)]
Narendra Nath Tiwari, J.1. In this writ petition the petitioner has prayed for a direction on the respondents to pay the amount of Gratuity and Provident Fund dues for the period from June 1978 to March 1980. It has been stated that the petitioner retired from the service of the respondents on 30.6.96. After his retirement, the petitioner was entitled to get his pensionary benefits and other service terminal benefits, but the same were not paid to the petitioner. Thereafter, the petitioner had moved tills Court in C.W.J.C No. 1600/2001. By order dated 23.4.2001, the said writ petition was disposed of remitting the matter to the Managing Director, Bihar State Housing Board, Patna to determine the claims of the petitioner relating to pension, Gratuity, Provident Fund and to pay the admitted dues. It has been stated that the petitioner, thereafter, was paid the amounts of Provident Fund in part, leave encashment and other retiral benefits. The pension has also been fixed and is being paid...
Tag this Judgment!Ranchi Medical Research and Development Foundation Ltd. and anr. Vs. U ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Apr-30-2008
Reported in: [2008(3)JCR242(Jhr)]
M. Karpaga Vinayagam, C.J.1. Ranchi Medical Research and Development Foundation Pvt. Ltd., the appellants herein, are the writ petitioners. Being aggrieved by the three orders - (1) order dated 4.11.1997 withdrawing the exemption certificates, (2) the order dated 18.12.1997 demanding for the payment of Custom Duty to the tune of Rs. 1,74,12,087/- for importing medical equipments and (3) the order dated 23.1.1998 for seizure of the equipment so imported passed by the respondents under Section 111(1) of the Customs Act, the appellant filed writ petition for quashing the same before the learned Single Judge of this Court.2. Learned Single Judge dismissed the said writ petition. Challenging the same, the petitioner-appellants filed the present Letters Patent Appeal. The brief facts of the case are as follows:(i) The appellants established Advanced Diagnostic Centre at Ranchi. Thereupon in the year 1986, they made an application for import of Whole Body C.T. Scanner and claimed exemptions f...
Tag this Judgment!Junul SurIn @ Junul Munda and anr. Vs. Silas Munda and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Apr-30-2008
Reported in: [2008(3)JCR171(Jhr)]
M.Y. Eqbal, J.1. An interesting question which falls for consideration in the instant case is as to whether report of delivery of possession (Daklialdahani) by the Circle Inspector of executive Court is a public document.2. The facts of the case lie in a narrow compass:In the year 1990, father of the present respondents, filed Title Suit No. 1 of 1990 in the Court of Sub Judge, Simdega against father of the petitioners, namely Masih Das Munda. Petitioners' father contested the suit by filing written statement stating inter alia that in 1977-78, petitioners' father filed restoration case under Section 71-A of the Chhotanagpur Tenancy Act being S.A.R. Case No. 47 of 1977-78 for restoration of land. The said restoration case was decided in favour of the petitioners' father by order dated 3.3.1978 by the Special Officer, Scheduled Area Regulation. Respondents did not prefer any appeal or revision against the said order which attained its finality. Subsequent thereto, the order was passed b...
Tag this Judgment!Baldeo Prasad Jaiswal and ors. Vs. Bharat Refractories Ltd. and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Apr-30-2008
Reported in: [2008(3)JCR346(Jhr)]
ORDERN.N. Tiwari, J.1. In this writ petition the petitioners have prayed for direction on the respondents to release 50% enhancement of ex-gratia payment in their favour in lieu of the revised scale of pay in terms of the Office Order dated 8.12.2000 of the Government of India. Ministry of Heavy Industries and Public Enterprises.2. According to the petitioners, under the provision of the said office order, the employees, who had opted for voluntary retirement, are entitled to get 50% enhancement of ex-gratia payment in lieu of the revised scale of pay. All the petitioners had opted for voluntary retirement and as such under the said provision, they are entitled for ex-gratia payment, calculated on the basis of the revised pay scale. The petitioners, requested the respondents for granting the benefit. The petitioners along with others also filed representation praying for release of 50% enhancement of ex-gratia payment in their favour in lieu of the revised scale of pay in terms of the ...
Tag this Judgment!Toppers Construction (P) Ltd. Vs. the State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Apr-30-2008
Reported in: [2008(3)JCR573(Jhr)]
Narendra Nath Tiwari, J.1. In this writ petition the petitioner has prayed for quashing the order issued by Memo No. 2693 dated 6.7.2007, issued by the Joint Secretary (Engineering), Water Resources Department, Ranchi (respondent No. 3), whereby, the petitioner has been black-listed on the allegation of its failure to properly execute the work, allotted to it.2. Grievance of the petitioner is that the impugned order of black-listing is based on no material on record and the same is contrary to the reports of the Chief Engineer, Minor Irrigation, Ranchi and the Secretary (Technical), as contained in Annexure-11/A and 17 respectively to this writ petition. Annexure-11/A is the report of the Chief Engineer, Minor Irrigation, on the proposal of black-listing the petitioner. The said report is based on the reports of the concerned officials. The report goes to show that the petitioner had executed the work to the full satisfaction of the authorities. On the basis of its overall performance ...
Tag this Judgment!Sanjeev Kumar Sahay and ors. Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Apr-30-2008
Reported in: [2008(3)JCR267(Jhr)]
ORDER1. Respondent No. 2 Jharkhand Public Service Commission, Ranchi issued Advertisement No. 13/2008 publishing in different newspaper dated 29.3.2008 invited applications from the candidates who were law graduates for the post of Civil Judge (Junior Division Munsif) fixing the minimum age of 22 years and maximum age of 35 years for the candidates of general category on the cut off date 31.1.2008.2. Petitioners are the law graduates and most of them are regularly practicing as advocates is different Courts including High Court in the Jharkhand State. The contention of the petitioners is that because of the fixing of maximum age as 35 years for the general category candidates on the cut off date i.e. 31.1.2008, petitioners who have crossed 35 years of age on 31.1.2008 shall be deprived of from appearing in the examination. Petitioner's further case is that no examination for appointment to the post of Civil Judge (Junior Division Munsif) has been held after 2001. Because of the inactio...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Sila Raha Vs. Jharkhand State Electricity Board and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Apr-30-2008
Reported in: [2008(3)JCR575(Jhr)]
ORDERN.N. Tiwari, J.1. In this writ petition the petitioner has prayed for a direction on the respondents to restore her domestic electrical connection, which was disconnected on 1.10.1996.2. It has been stated that the liability of Rs. 6,000/- was tentatively fixed by the Certificate Officer by order dated 12.12.2005 and in compliance of the said order, the petitioner has deposit Rs. 6,000/- in the name of the Jharkhand State Electricity Board, Ranchi. According to the petitioner, inspite of depositing the said amount by her, in accordance with the order of the Certificate Officer, her electrical connection has not been restored.3. The Board appeared in this case on 26.7.2007 and prayed for time to file counter affidavit. Time was granted. Thereafter, the case was adjourned on several dates on the prayer of the Board but till date no counter affidavit has been filed.4. In absence of any counter affidavit, the facts brought on record on behalf of the petitioner remain uncontroverted. O...
Tag this Judgment!Sabita Banerjee Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Apr-29-2008
Reported in: [2008(3)JCR351(Jhr)]
ORDER1. Heard the counsel for the parties.2. In this writ petition by way of public interest litigation, petitioner prays for issuance of a direction to the respondents to show cause why the people residing in different districts of the States are dying of diseases like malaria, diarrhea and lack of maternity facility and mismanagement in-spite of funds allotted by the Government and also for direction upon the respondents to eradicate the prevailing problems and ensure safety of lives of the people residing in the different districts of the State.3. According to the learned Counsel for the petitioner, petitioner is a social worker and co-ordinator of Gramodaya Chetna Kendra which is a society under the Societies Registration Act. Learned Counsel submitted that there are five levels of medical institutions which are allotted funds for providing medical facilities to the people of the State, but inspite of allocation of sufficient funds, many people are dying for want of proper treatmen...
Tag this Judgment!Mahendra Singh Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Apr-29-2008
Reported in: [2008(3)JCR449(Jhr)]
D.G.R. Patnaik, J.1. Challenge in this appeal is against the order of the learned single Judge whereby petitioner's prayer for quashing the order dated 19.11.1994 passed by the D.C.L.R. for restoration of possession of the land in dispute in favour of the respondents 5 to 9, was rejected.2. Case of the petitioner in brief is that the land of Khata No. 192 of village Bongabar was originally recorded as a raiyati land in the name of a tribal Bahira Munda. After his death, his two sons namely, Raghubir Munda and Jhabu Munda had inherited the property. Jhabu Munda died issueless, whereupon his brother Raghubir Munda became the sole raiyat of the land. The petitioner has claimed that after the death of Raghubir Munda, his surviving five sons had settled the land by virtue of Hukumnama dated 1.3.1946 in favour of one/Chhangilal Agrawal. The settlee on coming in possession of the land, filed a Title Suit No. 42 of 1960 for a declaration of his right, title, interest and possession of the land...
Tag this Judgment!Ram Sagar Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Apr-29-2008
Reported in: [2008(3)JCR348(Jhr)]
ORDERR.K. Merathia, J.1. Heard the parties finally.2. The petitioner has filed this writ petition for promoting him in junior selection grade in the pay scale of Rs. 10,000-15,200/- from the date his Juniors have been promoted and to consider his case for promotion to the rank of Additional Collector in the pay scale of Rs. 12,000-16,500/- from the date he is entitled to with all consequential benefits.3. Mr. Dhananjay Kumar Dubey, appearing for the petitioner, submitted that in the meeting of the Departmental Promotion Committee (for short 'D.P.C.') held on 1.12.2004, the case of the petitioner and his juniors were considered, but regarding petitioner, no decision was taken due to nonavailability of his A.C.R. Again when the meeting of the D.P.C. was held on 20.5.2005 regarding the pending cases, the petitioner's A.C.R. for the year 2002-03 was not available and, in that circumstance, one post was kept reserved for him. As the petitioner was not promoted, he filed a representation but...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »