Jharkhand Court July 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.
Md. Anwarul Haque Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-15-2008
Reported in: [2008(3)JCR550(Jhr)]
ORDERAmareshwar Sahay, J.1. Heard the parties and with their consent this writ application is being disposed of at this stage itself.2. In this writ application the petitioner has prayed for quashing of the order dated 26.8.2004 contained in Annexure-9 issued under the signature of the Director General of Police (Headquarter) Bihar, Patna, by which the claim of the petitioner for 'out of turn' promotion from the post of Sub-Inspector of Police to Inspector of Police has been rejected.3. The grievance of the petitioner is that vide Annexure-9, the claim of the petitioner has been rejected on the ground that in course of combat with the terrorist the petitioner had only lead the team but he did not fire on the terrorist and, therefore, on comparison with the other police officials his performance was not found to be of high standard. It appears that subsequently by issue of Corrigendum contained in Annexure-10. by the office of the Director General of Police (Headquarter), Bihar, Patna i...
Ramprit Kumar and anr. and Anil Kumar and anr. Vs. State of Jharkhand ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-15-2008
Reported in: [2008(3)JCR548(Jhr)]
ORDERD.G.R. Patnaik, J.1. In these writ applications, the petitioners have prayed for appropriate writ for directing the respondents to make payment of salary with effect from November, 2000 till date as stated in WP (S) No. 1293 of 2003 and from August. 2000 to the petitioners in WP(S) 1318 of 2003 and further to allow the petitioners to perform their duties, which has been stopped by the respondents, allegedly by oral communication without giving any written order to the petitioners.2. The claim of the petitioners is based on the following grounds:(a) In response to the local advertisement, the petitioners being members of the Employment Exchange, the petitioners had applied for the post of Clerk. The Employment Exchange had forwarded their candidature for their appointment in the Labour Department to the post of Clerk in the pay-scale of Rs. 1200-1800/-.(b) Their candidature was accepted and they were appointed by the respondents on the said post as per office order No. 8 of 1997 da...
Babu Lal Mandal Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-15-2008
Reported in: [2008(4)JCR89(Jhr)]
Amareshwar Sahay, J.1. Heard the counsel for the parties.2. In this writ application, the petitioner is challenging the order dated 19/10/2001, passed by the Sub-Divisional Officer, Jamtara, contained in Anncxurc-3 to the writ application, whereby the learned Sub-Divisional Officer held that the appointment of Village Head (Pradhan) would be made on the basis of election and during '.hat election the case of Babu Lal Mandal and his other two relatives would be considered and be given priority if they gain bare minimum support of the Raiyat. The petitioner has also challenged the appellate order date 10/12/2007 passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Jamtara, contained in Annexure-4, which was filed against the order of the Sub-Divisional Officer, wherein the Deputy Commissioner directed the S.D.O. to consider firstly the claim of the heirs of the Late Village Pradhan and after consideration, if one of them are not found acceptable to Tetulbandha village, then to go for election.3. The dispu...
Smt. Sangeeta Devi and anr. Vs. State of Jharkhand and anr.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-15-2008
Reported in: [2008(4)JCR701(Jhr)]
ORDERD.G.R. Patnaik, J.1. The instant Revision application is directed against the order dated 15.9.2005 passed by the learned Court below, whereby the prayer of the petitioners under Section 239 of the Cr PC for their discharge from the case was rejected.2. The case against the petitioners was registered on the basis of an FIR lodged by the informant Smt. Bilia Mahtain at Dhansar Police Station. The allegations as contained in the FIR are that the informant is the owner of a piece of land under khata Nos. 24 and 25 which constitutes her 1/5th share inherited from her father. The petitioner No. 1 is the niece of the informant while the petitioner No. 2 is the husband of the petitioner No. 1. Being closely related, both the petitioners had expressed their desire to purchase the informant's land to which she agreed.3. The accused persons, namely, the present petitioners however, persuaded the old lady to accompany them to Kolkata for execution and registration of a sale deed on the plea ...
National Insurance Company Ltd., Lohardaga Branch Vs. Anita Singh and ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-14-2008
Reported in: 2009ACJ2814; [2008(3)JCR533(Jhr)]
1. This appeal has been preferred by the appellant, National Insurance Company Ltd., against the award dated 6.12.2004 passed by the Motor Vehicle Accident Claims Tribunal-cum Additional District Judge, 1st, Lohardaga in Compensation Case No. 118 of 1996, by which a sum of Rs. 2,49,120/- alongwith interest of Rs. 24,912/-, which comes to a total sum of Rs. 2,74,032/-, was awarded to the claimants.2. Learned Counsel appearing for the appellant, National Insurance Company Ltd., while assailing the aforesaid award passed by the Tribunal, submitted that the appellant-Insurance Company is not liable to pay any compensation to the claimants as the accident was not caused by the vehicle in a public area but within a private area, which was in possession and occupation of M/s Aluminum Corporation Ltd. Substantiating this part of the argument, reliance was placed by the learned Counsel on Section 146(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, which reads as follows:146. Necessity for insurance against...
Central Coal Fields Limited and ors. Vs. Sugia KamIn and anr.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-14-2008
Reported in: [2008(3)JCR532(Jhr)]
ORDER1. This appeal has been preferred against the Judgment and order dated 10th May. 2006 passed by the PresldIng Officer-cum-Commissioner under Workmen's Compensation Act. Labour Court. Hazaribagh in W.C. Case No. 2 of 2005. determining a compensation to the extent of Rs. 3.38.660/- and awarding the same to the legal representatives of the deceased an employee, who admittedly was functioning as a Security Guard of the appellant M/s. Central Coalfields Ltd. Darbhanga House. Ranchi.2. Learned Counsel for the appellants assailed the judgment passed by the Presiding Officer essentially on the ground that the compensation could not have been awarded to the legal heirs of the deceased employee as the deceased employee was killed by some hard and blunt substance and his death could not be construed to have taken place in course of discharge of his duty to the employer.3. Initially, we felt Impressed with this argument but the counsel for the respondents Instantly explained the position and ...
United India Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Hashina Khatoon and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-14-2008
Reported in: [2008(3)JCR535(Jhr)]
ORDER1. This appeal has been filed against the award dated 19.7.2006 passed by the Workmen Compensation Commissioner, Hazaribagh in W.C. Case No. 30 of 2004 (Claim) allowing a compensation of Rs. 2,29,144/- to the legal representatives of the deceased, who had been employed to drive the vehicle belonging to the respondent No. 6, Ishwar Singh.2. Admittedly, the deceased driver died during he course of driving the vehicle owned by the respondent No. 6, Ishwar Singh, due to sudden collapse of the roof while he was taking rest outside the Line Hotel. The truck which was driven by the deceased was also admittedly insured with the appellant, United India Insurance Company Ltd., Hazaribagh and hence the Court below was pleased to determine the compensation payable to the legal representatives of the deceased to the extent of Rs. 2.29,144/-. Since the vehicle was insured with the appellant-Insurance Company, the amount of compensation was ordered to be paid by the Insurance Company, but the In...
Md. Yaseen and anr. Vs. State of Jharkhand and anr.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-14-2008
Reported in: [2009(1)JCR56(Jhr)]
D.K. Sinha, J.1. The petitioners have invoked the inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482, CrPC for quashment of the order dated 4th January. 2003 passed by the Judicial Magistrate, Hazaribagh whereby and whereunder having been found a prima facie case after enquiry under Section 202, CrPC, directed the petitioners and co-accused to stand charge for the offence under Sections 420/465/149, Indian Penal Code. The Opposite Party No. 2 complainant in his complaint against the petitioner and four other persons alleged, inter alia, that land of Khata No. 41, Plot No. 544 measuring area of 4 decimal belonged to his father Habib Mian. Habib Mian had three sons viz. the complainant Abdul Rasid, Md. Afjal and one Niyamat Mian. Niyamat died leaving behind his legal heirs and in that manner all the three sons of Habib Mian had equal shares in 4 decimals of land to the extent of about 1.3 decimals each. On 7.6.2002 the complainant came to learn that his full brother accused No. 1 Afja...
Kamlakant Das Vs. the State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-11-2008
Reported in: [2008(3)JCR582(Jhr)]
ORDERAjit Kumar Sinha, J.1. The present writ petition has been preferred to quash the impugned order, as contained in Memo No. 2491 dated 28.4.2001, issued by respondent No. 2, imposing punishment of withholding 10% of pension, recovery of amount and withholding the balance salary during the period of suspension. The petitioner has also sought for a direction to forthwith pay him the gratuity, leave salary and pension with interest at the rate of 18% per annum.2. The facts, as stated by the petitioner, in brief, are set out as under:The petitioner was posted as Block Co-operative Extension Officer and was put under suspension on 7.1.1998. On 30.1.1999 the petitioner superannuated from the post of Block Co-operative Extension Officer. After retirement, a charge-sheet was issued vide letter No. 5127 dated 23.8.1999 and reply was asked for. However, vide memo No. 1512 dated 13.3.2000 respondent No. 2 revoked the order of suspension from the date of his superannuation i.e. 30.1.1999. The p...
Ganpat Tiwary Vs. Bharat Coking Coal Limited and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-11-2008
Reported in: [2008(3)JCR589(Jhr)]
ORDERAjit Kumar Sinha, J.1. The present writ petition challenges the order dated 10th June, 2002, passed by the General Manager (I.R. Section), Department of Personnel, M/s Bharat Coking Coal Limited, Dhanbad (respondent No. 3 herein), whereby and whereunder, he has refused to give the Fitment to the petitioner in Grade-B (Excavation Cadre). The petitioner has claimed the same with effect from 18.6.1992 with consequential benefits.2. The case of the petitioner is that he was a permanent employee of respondent-M/s Bharat Coking Coal Limited and under the orders of the respondents, he underwent training of Pay Loader Mechanic at Mudidih Pay Loader Workshop during the period from 1.12.1980 to 17.7.1982 and by office order dated 19.7.1982 he was declared 'pass' as Pay Loader Mechanic and he, accordingly, joined the post of Pay Loader Mechanic. His further case is that he was not given the benefit of such post, which led to an industrial dispute and the same was finally referred for adjudic...
- ‹ Prev
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 16
- Next ›
- Last »