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.
Birsa Oraon Vs. Union of India (Uoi) Through Secretary, Department of ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-23-2008
Reported in: [2008(4)JCR50(Jhr)]
M.Y. Eqbal, J.1. Heard Mrs. M.M. Pal, learned Counsel for the petitioner, the learned Counsel appearing for the Union of India and the learned Counsel appearing for the Stale of Jharkhand.2. In this Public Interest Litigation, the petitioner sought direction for establishment of permanent bench of Central Administrative Tribunal at Kanchi for Jharkhand State considering the work load and further, for a direction to provide proper accommodation for the bench at Kanchi preferably in the premises of the District Consumers Forum.3. Pursuant to the order passed by this Court, a counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 3 wherein it is stated that the instant writ petition is third round of litigation to establish a permanent bench of Central Administrative Tribunal at Ranchi. In the earlier writ petition being C.W.J.C. No.3988 of 1992(R), a Bench of the Palna High Court had directed that the matter may be placed before the Chairman of the Central Administrative ...
Ram Autar Singh Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-23-2008
Reported in: [2008(4)JCR108(Jhr)]
ORDERD.K. Sinha, J.1. By order dated 14.2.2008 respondent No. 2, Deputy Commissioner, Chatra, was directed to file counter affidavit and in this connection copy of the petition was also served upon JC to GP II. By order dated 29.2.2008 it was posted on 4.3.2008 and again it has come today (23.7.2008) but without counter affidavit on behalf of the respondent No. 2.2. The present writ petition has been preferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for direction upon the respondents to release the truck No. NL-02D-5864 in favour of the petitioner, who was the registered owner as the same was seized in connection with the forest offence by the Divisional Forest Officer-cum-Authorised Officer, Chatra. North Division in Confiscation case No. 31 of 2004 (An-nexure-3).3. Being aggrieved by the order passed by the Confiscating Officer the petitioner preferred Confiscation Appeal No. 69 of 2006 before the respondent No. 2. Deputy Commissioner, Chatra which is pending since 13.4.2006 a...
Santlal Sah @ Shah Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-23-2008
Reported in: [2008(4)JCR2(Jhr)]
D.K. Sinha, J.1. Appellant Santlal Sah has preferred this appeal under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent against the order passed by the learned single Judge in WP(S) No. 4637 of 2005 on 17.9.2007 whereby the learned single Judge dismissed the writ by refusing to quash the termination order of the appellant as contained in memo No. 765 dated 30.6.2005.2. Appellant was initially appointed as Assistant Teacher on the recommendation of District Establishment Committee pursuant to the letter issued by the Special Secretary, Department of Education, Government of Bihar, Patna in the year 1983. Appellant stated that on account of certain dispute, salary of the appellant and others was stopped for which they preferred writ vide CWJC No. 5860 of 1984 which was disposed of by the Patna High Court on 12.2.1985 with the direction to the respondents-authorities to release their salary. It is further stated that after some time, the respondents-authorities terminated him from the service and against ...
Tata Iron and Steel Company Ltd. Vs. Dr. S.K. Mishra
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-23-2008
Reported in: [2008(118)FLR1085]; [2008(4)JCR105(Jhr)]
ORDER1. This appeal has been preferred against the order dated 4.4.2008 passed by the learned single Judge in WP(L) No. 5885/2007 by which the writ petition was disposed of by remitting the matter to the Labour Court for fresh consideration of Exhibit 1 which is the letter of resignation alleged to have been written by the respondent-doctor resigning from the post of Medical Officer, Tata Main Hospital who was discharging his duty with the appel-lant-M/s. Tata Iron and Steel Company Ltd.2. The order passed by the learned single Judge has been challenged by the appellant-management of M/s. Tata Iron and Steel Company Ltd. on the ground that the Labour Court, after scrutiny of the letter of resignation, had been pleased to record a finding that the respondent had resigned from the services of the appellant-Company voluntarily and he was not under threat and coercion to resign from the post of Medical Officer.3. The submission of the counsel for the appellant-management has been countered...
Vishal Linda and anr. Vs. Etwa Oraon and anr.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-23-2008
Reported in: [2008(4)JCR255(Jhr)]
ORDERM.Y. Eqbal, J.1. Heard Mr. Arvind Kumar Lal, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners and Mr. Ashok Kumar, learned Counsel appearing for respondent No. 1.2. This application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is directed against the order dated 3.5.2005 passed by Sub- Judge IX, Ranchi in Title Suit No. 229 of 1993 whereby he allowed the petition filed by the plaintiff-respondent for exhibiting certified copy of R.S. Khatian and certified copies of the depositions of prosecution witnesses Nos. 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8 and 9 of Sessions Trial Case No. 632 of 2000. It appears that plaintiff-respondent filed the aforementioned suit for declaration of right, title, interest and possession over the suit property.3. Mr. Arvind Kumar Lal, learned Counsel for the petitioners has assailed the impugned order and submitted that the question of accepting deposition of the witnesses of the Sessions Case does not arise for the reason that plaintiffs case was remanded back to the Court o...
Soma Ray Vs. Uttam Kumar Ray
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-22-2008
Reported in: [2008(4)JCR56(Jhr)]
M.Y. Eqbal, J.1. Heard the learned Counsels appearing for the parties.2. This application under Article 227 of the Constitution is directed against the order dated 17.1.2008 passed by the District judge, Chaibasa in Misc. Case No. 06 of 2007 whereby he has refused to set aside the ex parte decree passed in Matrimonial Suit No. 07 of 2005 filed by the respondent under [Section 13 of Hindu Marriage Act.3. From perusal of the impugned order, it transpires that the Court below held that notice by ordinary process was sent and was affixed on the door of the house of the petitioner. Thereafter, registered notice was also sent, but the same was returned with endorsement that the petitioner always not met. Finally, the notice was published in the newspaper. In spite of that, the petitioner did not appear in the suit which resulted in ex parte decree.4. The case of the petitioner was that the suit for divorce was filed against her but she had no knowledge about the suit and notice. It was only ...
Harendra Kumar Singh Vs. the State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-22-2008
Reported in: [2008(4)JCR392(Jhr)]
1. The appellant, Harendra Kumar Singh, has preferred this appeal, challenging the order dated 8.5.2008 passed in I.A No. 1448/2008, wherein the applicant-appellant, Harendra Kumar Singh, had prayed for expunging the remarks made against him by the learned Single Judge in the order dated 10.4.2008.2. It appears that the appellant, Harendra Kumar Singh, who was functioning as the Standing Counsel and was representing the respondent-State in the matter of Hari Bansh Pandey v. State of Jharkhand and Ors. bearing W.P (S) No. $836 of 2002, had failed to appear before the learned Single Judge to defend the State in spite of the direction of the Court to appear in the matter. The learned Single Judge, therefore, had recorded his observation against the Standing Counsel, Harendra Kumar Singh, who is the appellant herein, against which the appellant felt aggrieved and filed I.A No. 1448/2008, offering an explanation therein that he was not entrusted with the case, in which he was directed to ap...
R.N. Singh, Officer (Adm.) and K.H. Gandhi, Senior Manager (P and A) V ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-22-2008
Reported in: 2008(56)BLJR2719
D.K. Sinha, J.1. The petitioners have invoked the inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashment of the impugned order dated 12.11.2003 whereby and whereunder the learned C.J.M., Seraikella took the cognizance of the offence Under Section 16(1)(a)(i) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 in C/2 Case No. 69 of 2003 and further quashment of entire criminal proceeding against the petitioners pending before the S.D.J.M., Seraikella.2. The brief fact of the case as narrated in the official complaint was that on 06.09.2003, the Food Inspector (O.P. No. 2) herein, Jamshedpur collected samples of three packets of Trishul Brand Gram Besan and some Arhar Dal from M/s Tayo Canteen against receipt and forwarded the samples to the public analyst. The public analyst by his report dated 29.09.2003 stated that the samples of Trishul Brand Gram Besan were found misbranded, as such, the prosecution report duly signed by the Civil Surgeon-cum-Chief Medical Officer ...
Sanjay Kumar Samaiyar Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-22-2008
Reported in: [2009(2)JCR398(Jhr)]
1. This appeal has been preferred against the order passed by the learned Single Judge on 11.6.2008 in W.P.(S) No. 385 of 2007 by which the writ petition was dismissed holding therein that the petitioner, appellant herein, could not have been permitted to participate in selection if he had crossed the age of 35 years.2. The appellant/petitioner had filed a writ petition before the learned Single Judge challenging the advertisement No. 10 of 2006 dated 12th July, 2006 issued by the Jharkhand Public Service Commission by which the application for appointment to the post of Inspector Factories and Boiler Inspector was invited wherein minimum age limit fixed for the post as aforesaid was 21 years and maximum was 35 years.3. The appellant/petitioner assailed the advertisement before the learned Single Judge on the ground that the maximum age limit of 35 years could not have been prescribed by the respondent-State and age relaxation ought to have been granted to the applicant since the exami...
Central Coal Fields Ltd. Vs. Regional Labour Commissioner (C) and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-22-2008
Reported in: [2008(3)JCR516(Jhr)]
ORDERR.R. Prasad, J.1. This writ application filed by M/s. Central Coalfields Limited, a Government Company incorporated and registered under the Companies Act, 1956 is directed against the order dated 22.9.2003 passed by Regional Labour Commissioner (C), Dhanbad, respondent No. 1 whereby and whereunder the appellate authority upheld the order dated 27.2.2003 passed by the controlling authority under the payment of Gratuity Act-cum-Assistant Labour Commissioner (C) holding therein that the respondent No. 3 is entitled to receive the gratuity amount to the tune of Rs. 3.50 lacs with interest @ per annum for the period from 1 L6.2002 to 22.4.2003.2. The facts giving rise this application are that a departmental proceeding was initiated against the respondent No. 3, Sri Gupteshwar Nath, while he was posted as Area Finance Manager, Argada Area of M/s. Central Coalfields Limited under Rule 29 of the Conduct, Discipline and Appeal Rules of Coal India Limited on the charges of committing fina...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »