Jharkhand Court May 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.
Maimun Nisha and Manzoor Ahmad Vs. the State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: May-14-2008
Reported in: 2008(56)BLJR2184
Ramesh Kumar Merathia, J. 1. The petitioners (referred as 'tenant') have challenged the order 16.6.1998 (Annexure 4) passed by the Controller, Hazaribagh (respondent No. 4) in H.C. Case No. 2 of 1998, enhancing the rent of the tenanted premises in occupation of the tenant; the order dated 17.12.1999 (Annexure 5) passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Hazaribagh (respondent No. 3) in H.C. Appeal No. 2 of 1999 by which the appeal was dismissed on the grounds that it was time barred and that the tenant did not pay the arrears of rent as per the provision; the order dated 1.12.2000 passed in the said H.C. Appeal No. 2 of 1999, rejecting the tenant's application for review of the said order dated 17.12.1999; and also the order dated 25.10.2002 (Annexure 6) passed by the Commissioner, North Chotanagpur Division, Hazaribagh (respondent No. 3) in H.C. Revision No. 3 of 2001, dismissing the said revision petition. 2. The relevant facts in short are as follows. The tenant filed H.C. Case No. 3 of 19...
Subodh Rajwar @ Chutun Rajwar Vs. State of Bihar (Now Jharkhand)
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: May-13-2008
Reported in: [2008(3)JCR49(Jhr)]
1. The Sole appellant Subodh Rajwar @ Chutun Rajwar has preferred this appeal against the judgment and order dated 6.5.1996 and 14.5.1996 respectively passed by 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Dumka in Sessions Case No. 154 of 1995/94 of 1995, whereby and whereunder the appellant has been convicted under Sections 302 and 323 of the Indian Penal Code and has been sentenced to undergo RI for life under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and undergo RI for one year under Section 323 of the Indian Penal Code. Both the sentences have been ordered to run concurrently.2. Brief facts leading to this appeal are that in the morning of 22.6.1994 the informant Sunita Rajwarin returned from fields after throwing cow dung to find that her husband Godal Rajwar was being assaulted with lathi by the appellant inside the angan of their house. The appellant is own brother of the deceased, residing in the common ancestral house. According to the informant her husband was asking for share in the house as ...
Jagdish Gope Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: May-13-2008
Reported in: [2008(3)JCR181(Jhr)]
1. Sole appellant Jagdish Gope stands convicted for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to serve rigorous imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 5000/- by the Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court-V, Hazaribagh in Sessions Trial No. 384 of 2002.2. Brief facts leading to this appeal are that informant Sunita Devi, wife of the appellant, was married with him nearly four years back. However, he used to ill-treat her and further assault her after taking wine. According to the informant, about eights months before this occurrence, she has been left at the house of the deceased (her father) by the appellant as she was in the family way where she delivered a son. On 10th of May 2002, the appellant came to his in-laws house and requested the deceased to send back the informant along with the child with him. However, the deceased did not accept his request and asked him to come with his father so that the informant and the children could...
Nand Kishore Sinha Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: May-13-2008
Reported in: [2008(3)JCR295(Jhr)]
ORDERNarendra Nath Tiwari, J.1. In this writ petition the petitioner has prayed for quashing the order dated 10.8.2007 contained in An-nexure-8 whereby the petitioner has been dismissed from the service.2. The petitioner is an Executive Engineer in the Water Resources Development Department. Government of Jharkhand.3. He had joined the services of the State of Jharkhand on 17.10.2004 after bifurcation of the cadre under the provisions of the Bihar Re-organization Act. 2000.4. Before bifurcation of the State, the petitioner was posted in the State of Bihar. While he was posted as the Executive Engineer, Irrigation Division, Birpur, Bihar, he was given a Bank Draft of Rs. 34.23 lacs to be handed over to the Indian Oil corporation (I.O.C.) for supply of Bitumen. The petitioner handed over the said Bank Draft to the I.O.C. in April 1999. but the I.O.C. did not supply the Bitumen. However, the petitioner was departmentally proceeded against alleging lapses and negligence on his part in not ...
Employers in Relation to the Management of Tegulmari Colliery Under Si ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: May-13-2008
Reported in: [2008(3)JCR288(Jhr)]
ORDERNarendra Nath Tiwari, J.1. In this writ petition the petitioner has prayed for quashing the award dated 5.3.2003 of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal No. 2 Dhanbad whereby learned Tribunal has answered the reference in affirmative and directed the Management to assess the age of the concerned workman Smt. Champa Kamin at the fag end of her service.2. The said workman was appointed as Miner Loader at Tetulmari Colliery on 20.1.1973. At the time of her appointment she had declared her date of birth as 6.7.1942, which was entered in the service record of the Company in the statutory Form-B Register.3. There was no variation and alteration in the entry of date of birth of the concerned workman at any point of time, in any record of the Company. Suddenly in the year 1998 the concerned workman raised a dispute complaining that her date of birth was not correctly, entered in the service record and the date mentioned in the record is without any basis and knowledge of the concern...
Shivanand Roy and ors., Mahendra Prasad and anr., Motilal Singh and Sh ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: May-13-2008
Reported in: [2008(3)JCR439(Jhr)]
Narendra Nath Tiwari, J.1. These writ petitions pose the common questions based on identical factual backgrounds and with the consent of the parties, the same have been heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.2. The petitioners have made three fold prayers in these writ petitions:(i) For declaring Section 4(6) of the Jharkhand Reservation of Vacancies in Posts and Services (SC, ST and OBC) Act, 2001 ultra vires, being violative of the provisions of Article 16 of the Constitution of India.(ii) For quashing Memo No. 2377 dated 13.6.2007 (Annexure-5) whereby the respondent Nos. 4 and 5 have published the provisional seniority list of Executive Engineers by giving benefit of 85th Amendment of the Constitution of India to the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes without following the guidelines framed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of M. Nagraj and Ors. v. Union of India and Ors. : AIR2007SC71 .(iii) For direction on the respondents not to grant promotion...
Pre Stressed Udyog (India) Private Limited Through Its Managing Direct ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: May-12-2008
Reported in: AIR2009Jhar32; [2008(3)JCR606(Jhr)]
Narendra Nath Tiwari, J.1. In this writ petition the petitioner has prayed for quashing the demand notice dated 22.11.03 (Annexure-8). It has been stated that the petitioner is a Railway contractor and is engaged in manufacturing Railway sleepers for the use of Railway line. He carries on such business under the supervision of the Railway. For manufacturing the Railway sleepers, the petitioner purchases the stone chips, sand, shelly and boulders from the various sources. The petitioner procures the said components from the persons who hold valid leases and deal in mines and minerals. After manufacturing the sleepers, tie petitioner sells the same to Railway and gets the price and pays all the required duties and taxes. The grievance of the petitioner is that the District Mining Officer, Dhanbad suddenly started pressing the petitioner to obtain the license in Form 'L' alleging that the petitioner carries on business in mines and minerals beyond the leasehold area and for that purpose h...
Rajesh Kumar Vasani Vs. Jamshedpur Notified Area Committee and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: May-09-2008
Reported in: [2008(3)JCR358(Jhr)]
ORDERNarendra Nath Tiwari, J.1. The petitioner, in this writ petition, has prayed for quashing Letter No. 133 dated 8th February, 2008, whereby the petitioner has been directed by the Jamshedpur Notified Area Committee to demolish the illegal construction made by the petitioner within 48 hours, lest the same shall be demolished and in that event, the entire expenses shall be realized from the petitioner.2. The grievance of the petitioner is that before issuing the said letter, no notice was served on him, though in the impugned notice it has been mentioned that two notices were given to him. It has been submitted that the petitioner has not made any new construction. The same old house, which is standing over the plot since several decades, is being repaired and renovated. The impugned notice is contrary to the provisions of law and the rules of natural justice and is not sustainable and fit to be quashed.3. Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Jamshedpur Notified Area Committee,...
Super Briquette Industries Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: May-09-2008
Reported in: [2008(4)JCR143(Jhr)]
ORDERNarendra Nath Tiwari, J.1. In this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for quashing the letter dated 9th April, 2007 issued by the Factory Inspector, Dhanbad Circle, Dhan-bad, whereby the petitioner's licence has been cancelled with immediate effect.2. A short point has been taken by learned Counsel for the petitioner that the impugned order has been passed, cancelling the petitioner's licence, without giving any notice or opportunity of hearing. The impugned order has been passed on the allegation that the petitioner's factory had been closed for the last six months. It has been submitted that the petitioner's factory has been continuously running and that the petitioner has been paying all the rates and taxes and that the impugned order is arbitrary and perverse.3. When the case was taken up earlier on 27th March, 2008, the respondents had taken time for filing counter affidavit. Two weeks' time was granted to them for filing counter affidavit. Subsequently, when the case w...
Md. Sajjad Ali Vs. the State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: May-07-2008
Reported in: 2008(56)BLJR2175
ORDERNarendra Nath Tiwari, J.1. These three writ petitions give rise to a common issue, which relates to the cut off date of training for applying/appointment to the post of teacher in Primary Schools of the State of Jharkhand. While hearing the writ petition, W.P.(S) No. 4259 of 2005, a Division Bench of this Court noticed two different orders in the same matter; one in the case of Shekhar Gupta v. State of Jharkhand and Ors. (W.P.(S) No. 394 of 2005] and another in the case of Krishna Kumar Jha and Anr. v. State of Jharkhand and Ors. (W.P.(S) No. 921 of 2005]. The said Division Bench felt that the said decisions require consideration by a larger Bench and by order dated 27th February, 2006 referred the matter for such consideration.2. In W.P.(S) No. 3056 of 2004 and W.P.(S) No. 4591 of 2004, almost identical issues were raised and as such, the said writ petitions were also referred to this Bench.3. The said writ petitions were heard together and are being disposed of by this common j...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »