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.
Mithilesh Kumar Mishra Vs. the State of Jharkhand Through the Principa ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-07-2008
Reported in: [2008(3)JCR649(Jhr)]
Ramesh Kumar Merathia, J.1. Heard the parties finally.2. Mr. A.K. Verma, appearing for the petitioner, submitted that inspite of order dated 25.7.2006 (Annexure 7) passed in W.P. (S) No. 1396 of 2004, the respondents has rejected petitioner's claim on the ground that he was appointed on compassionate ground.3. Counsel for the State submitted that petitioner was actually appointed as Matric Trained Teacher and not as B.Sc. Untrained Teacher, as the formalities for appointing B.Sc. Untrained Teacher were not complied while appointing the petitioner; and that there is difference between appointment on a post and grant of pay scale.4. In reply, Mr. Verma submitted that the petitioner was rightly appointed as Science Teacher in B.Sc. Untrained scale. He referred to Circular No. 223 dated 2.6.1988 to show that the Matric Trained Teacher does not come under the category of Science Teacher. He submitted that the petitioner was directly appointed as B.Sc. Untrained Science Teacher which will al...
Banshi Mahto and ors. Vs. State of Bihar
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-07-2008
Reported in: [2008(3)JCR484(Jhr)]
D.G.R. Patnaik, J.1. This appeal has been filed by the appellants against the judgment and order of conviction and sentence passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Jamshedpur, in Sessions Trial No. 87 of 1991 whereby the appellants have been convicted under Sections 304/149. IPC and sentenced to undergo five years imprisonment and further appellant Nos. 4 and 5 have been convicted also under Section 323 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for three months.2. The case against the appellants was registered on the basis of a written report of the informant/deceased Gopal Chandra Mahto lodged on 21.9.1983 at 11.30 a.m. at the Jadugora Police Station.The case of the prosecution is that on 21.9.1983 in the morning at about 11.30 a.m., while the informant was obtaining water to his field by digging a drain across the land, the appellants arrived there and diverted the flow of water towards their field by obstructing the drain. The informant and the members of his f...
Durga Kumari Vs. Central Coalfields Limited and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-07-2008
Reported in: [2008(118)FLR932]; [2008(3)JCR629(Jhr)]
ORDERR.K. Merathia, J.1. Heard the parties finally. Counsel for the petitioner is permitted to delete the name of Kesho Devi (petitioner No. 2) as it is said that she is now dead.2. Mrs. Nivedita, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that father of the petitioner-Ram Lakhan died in harness on 12.8.1999 leaving behind his widow-Kesho Devi; two major sons and one married daughter. Mother of the petitioner, namely, Kesho Devi applied for appointment of petitioner on compassionate ground on 10.1.2000. Though, the brothers of petitioner filed suits against such claim of employment, but ultimately, the said suits were dismissed for non-prosecution. She further submitted that the claim of petitioner for compassionate appointment has been wrongly rejected on 19.9.2005 on the ground that she crossed the age of 35 years. The respondents have relied on Clause 9.3.4 of NCWA-VI, whereas, as per Clause 9.5.0. (ii), the female dependant up to the age of 45 years can be employed.3. O...
Rishi Cement Company Limited Vs. Jharkhand State Electricity Board and ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-03-2008
Reported in: [2008(3)JCR479(Jhr)]
R.K. Merathia, J.1. Mr. Poddar, learned senior Counsel, appearing for the petitioner, submitted that on 09.06.2008 a purported inspection was made; F.I.R was lodged alleging theft of electricity and loss to the Board to the tune of 41,82,384/-and the line was disconnected, but till now no order of provisional assessment in terms of Section 126 of the Electricity Act 2003 (the Act for Short) has been served on the petitioner.2. Mr. Shankar, learned counsel, appearing for the Board, submitted that the provisional bill was served on the petitioner. He produced a copy of the calculation of the bill amount i.e. 41,82,384/- which he said is also reproduced in the counter affidavit.3. Section 126 of the Act, inter alia, provides that if on an inspection of any place or premises, or after inspection of records, the assessing officer comes to the conclusion that there has been unauthorised use of electricity, he shall provisionally assess to the best of his judgment the electricity charges paya...
Pradeep Kumar Singh Vs. the State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-03-2008
Reported in: [2008(3)JCR462(Jhr)]
R.K. Merathia, J.1. Heard the Parties finally.Initially, petitioner sought direction for payment of salary since 25.2.1989. During pendency of the writ petition, the approval of the petitioner's appointment has been refused by order dated 11.2.2008 by the Director, Secondary Education, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi, which has also been challenged by way of amendment petition (I.A. No. 718 of 2008).2. It appears that petitioner was appointed by the Managing Committee of PunjabiKanya Uchh Vidyalaya, Agrico, Jamshedpur (respondent No. 5), sometime in the year 1982 after notifying requirement on the notice board and after holding interview. He got trained on or about 25.02.1989. Then the District Education Officer by letter dated 31.2.1989 forwarded his name to the Director, Secondary Education, Bihar, Patna for approving his services. By letter dated 31.12.1990, the Director, Secondary Education, forwarded the petitioner's name to the Vidyalaya Seva Board, Patna, but no order either app...
Divisional Manager, Life Insurance Corporation of India and anr. Vs. M ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-03-2008
Reported in: [2008(3)JCR631(Jhr)]
Narendra Nath Tiwari, J.1. The petitioner, in this writ petition, has prayed for setting aside the award dated 28th August, 2007 passed by Permanent Lok Adalat, Hazaribagh in P.L.A. No. 1 of 2006, whereby learned Permanent Lok Adalat has directed the opposite parties/petitioners to pay Rs. 5.00 lacs (rupees five lacs) to the applicant/respondent as insurance claim within two months.2. The said award has been assailed broadly on the ground that the Permanent Lok Adalat has got no jurisdiction to pass the impugned award and that the Permanent Lok Adalat has also not considered the facts, materials and evidences properly and on that ground also, the award is vitiated.3. Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner in support of his contention has relied on a decision of the Supreme Court in State of Punjab and Anr. v. Jalour Singh and Ors. : [2008]296ITR257(SC) and unreported judgment of the Supreme Court in S.L.P (C) No. 17758 of 2006 (United India insurance Ltd. v. Ajay Sinha a...
State of Bihar Vs. Ghasi Ram Mahto and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-03-2008
Reported in: [2008(3)JCR466(Jhr)]
D.G.R. Patnaik, J.1. This State has preferred this appeal against the judgment passed by the Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Khunti, in Case No. F 32 of 1997 (TR No. 276 of 1999) acquitting the respondent Nos. 1 to 4 from the charges for the offences under Sections 41 and 42 of the Indian Forest Act and Section 2 of the Forest Conservation Act, for which they were tried.2. Heard the counsel for the appellant and the counsel for the respondents.3. Facts of the case in brief is that a truck which was driven by the appellant No. 2 was stopped at the check post. On search and inspection by the officials of the Forest Department, it was found that 19 pieces of logs of semul tree were loaded on the truck. The driver, respondent No. 2 produced, on demand, the road permit/road challan and on perusal of the papers, it transpired that it was issued by a saw mill for transportation of logs of mango trees. On the basis of the discrepancy and on the belief that the driver in connivance with other r...
Janardan Prasad Saha and anr. Vs. the State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-03-2008
Reported in: [2008(4)JCR142(Jhr)]
Narendra Nath Tiwari, J.1. In this writ petition the petitioners have prayed for quashing the orders dated 8.3.07 (Annexures-3 & 3/1) to the extent the respondents have sought to recover the amount paid to the petitioners in excess towards the difference of revised scale of pay. It has been stated that the petitioners were the employees of Gumla and Simdega Central Co-operative Bank. The petitioner No. l retired on 31.5.05 and the petitioner No. 2 on 31.3.05. During the service period, the pay scale of the petitioners was revised by Memo No. 114 dated 26.3.04 and the benefits of pay revision was given to the petitioners. Subsequently, the said order of revision of pay was cancelled by order dated 7.12.04. Thereafter, the respondents issued another letter dated 16.8.05 whereby the order of recovery of the excess amount from the petitioners' recital benefits has been passed on the ground that the excess amount was paid to the petitioners towards the revised scale of pay and the order of ...
Jaga Mahto Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-03-2008
Reported in: [2008(4)JCR517(Jhr)]
ORDERAjit Kumar Sinha, J.1. In the instant writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing the order/judgment dated 27.4.2001, passed by respondent No. 3 (Additional Collector, Garhwa) in Land Ceiling Appeal No. 11 of 1992-93 and the order dated 03.07.2002, passed by respondent No. 2 (Additional Member, Board of Revenue, Ranchi) in Revision Case No. 19 of 2001.2. I have heard the learned Counsel at length and the facts, in brief, are reproduced as under:The case of the petitioner is that he purchased Plot No. 836 and Plot No. 837, measuring an area of 0.22 Acres and 0.06 Acres respectively from opposite party No. 2 by registered deed of sale on 12.10.1988. The same was transferred by a registered deed of gift on 7.4.1989 in favour of the Bhagina of the petitioner. Thereafter, opposite party No. 1 filed a petition on 15.4.1989 under Section 16(3) of the Bihar Land Reforms (Fixation of Ceiling Area and Acquisition of Surplus Land) ...
The Management of Steel Authority of India Ltd. Vs. Presiding Officer, ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-03-2008
Reported in: [2008(4)JCR60(Jhr)]
ORDERAjit Kumar Sinha, J.1. In the instant case, the writ petitioner-Management of the Steel Authority of India Limited has prayed for issuance of an appropriate writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari for quashing the award dated 22.08.2001, pronounced on 02.04.2002, passed by the learned Labour Court, Bokaro Steel City, Bokaro, in Reference Case No. 22 of 1993.2. The facts, in brief, are set out as under:It appears that respondent No. 2 was appointed in the year, 1972 and continued in service. Thereafter he remained absent from 14.9.1980 to 10.11.1980. However, he joined thereafter and continued in service. Respondent No. 2 again remained absent unauthorisedly with effect from 25.3.1981 to 24.10.1981. It is the contention of learned Counsel for respondent No. 2 that he was unwell and was under medical treatment for which he had duly intimated the Management under Certificate of Posting and the same has also been recorded in the impugned award under challenge.3. According...
- ‹ Prev
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 15
- 16
- 17
- Next ›
- Last »