Jharkhand Court February 2009 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.
Pawanjay Steel and Power Ltd. Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Feb-04-2009
Reported in: AIR2009Jhar105; 2009(57)BLJR1437
D.G.R. Patnaik, J.1. Challenge in this writ application is to the letter No. 5/40/2004-MIV dated 24.08.2006 (Annexure-10), issued by the Respondent No. 6 whereby approval was granted by the Central Government to the proposal for grant of mining lease of iron ore in favour of the private Respondent No. 7 and also against the recommendation made by the Respondent-State Government on the basis of which the Central Government had granted the approval. The petitioner has further prayed for issuance of a direction to the Respondents to reconsider the application of the petitioner for grant of mining lease of iron ore and manganese ore. An alternative prayer has also been made for a direction to the concerned Respondents-authorities to reconsider the grant of mining lease to at least half of the area applied for by the petitioner.2. The facts of the petitioner's case in brief are as follows:The petitioner being a Company registered under the Companies Act and engaged in the business of manufa...
Buddi Lal Soren Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Feb-04-2009
Reported in: AIR2009Jhar73
R.R. Prasad, J.1. This writ application has been filed for quashing the order as contained in memo No. 245 dated 7.3.2007 (Annexure 5) whereby Sub-divisional Officer, Dumka, respondent No. 3 cancelled the petitioner's licence, bearing No. 35/2000 issued to the petitioner in terms of unification order under the scheme of public distribution system.2. Learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that Block Supply Officer, Dumka allegedly made an inspection of the shop on 12.11.2006 and found the shop closed; display board and lists of beneficiaries were not affixed, complaints were received that food grains are being not distributed regularly, rather it is being sold illegally in the black market. Thereupon, a notice was issued to the petitioner to submit his explanation with respect to irregularities found during the inspection. The petitioner did submit his show cause wherein it was denied that the petitioner had ever indulged himself in any malpractice relating to distribution...
Satyanarayn Gope @ Satadeo Gope and ors. Vs. Santosh Kumar Yadev and o ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Feb-04-2009
Reported in: AIR2009Jhar149; [2009(2)JCR330(Jhr)]
Jaya Roy, J.1. This appeal has been filed under Order 43 Rule- 1 of the G.P.C. for setting aside the order dated 30.11.2002 passed in Misc. Case No. 1 of 2002 arising out of Title Appeal No. 113 of 1989 which has been dismissed as abated vide order dated 20.3.2002.2. The plaintiffs who are appellants in this appeal, filed a Suit for partition and prayed for preliminary decree for them for -/12/- annas share in the suit lands given in the plaint which was registered as Title Suit No. 94 /82/14/89. After hearing the parties and considering the oral and documentary evidence, the learned Sub Judge dismissed the suit as not maintainable by its judgment dated 12.6.1989. Against the said judgment and decree the appellants preferred a Title Appeal before the court of District Judge Giridih, which was registered as T.A. No. 113 of 1989. During course of hearing of the appeal the defendant/respondents filed a petition dated 14.3.2002 wherein it has been stated that the appellant No. 1 Kewal Maha...
Rajesh Prasad Vs. the Bihar State Food and Civil Supplies Corporation ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Feb-03-2009
Reported in: [2009(121)FLR69]; [2009(2)JCR409(Jhr)]; (2009)IIILLJ675Jhar
1. This appeal has been filed against the order dated 5.7.2005, passed by learned Single Judge in W.P.S. No. 2652 of 2005 dismissing the writ petition filed by the appellant.2. The appellant was Salesman in Bihar State Food Corporation. A departmental proceeding was initiated against him. Charges were with regard to defaulcation of amounts while posted at different places, insubordination, dereliction of duty etc. In his show cause, the appellant denied the charges. The enquiry officer on consideration of the materials on record found that the charges were proved against him and suggested major punishment. Second show cause notice was issued to which the appellant filed his reply. The disciplinary authority agreeing with the findings of the enquiry officer, passed order of punishment of dismissal; recovery of the defaulcated amount with interest; and payment of only subsistence allowance, during the suspension period. The appellant preferred appeal against such order. The appellate aut...
The State of Jharkhand and ors. Vs. Ejaj Ahmad Khan
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Feb-03-2009
Reported in: [2009(121)FLR70]; [2009(2)JCR282(Jhr)]
1. This appeal by the appellants-State is directed against the judgment dated 28th November, 2006, passed in W.P.(S) No. 3411 of 2006, whereby the learned Single Judge disposed of the writ petition with a direction to the State to allow monetary benefit to the petitioner (respondent herein) of the pay scale of Rs. 10,000-15,200/- with effect from 23rd May, 2001 till 23rd May, 2004.2. The undisputed facts are that: On 27th August, 2001 the respondent was deputed as In-charge Regional Director of Ranchi Regional Forensic Science Laboratory, Ranchi in the pay scale of Rs. 6,500-10,500/-, which he was getting since September, 1993. Subsequently, his pay was fixed in the pay scale of Rs. 10,900/-. Although his case was recommended for regular promotion but no action was taken. As a result, the petitioner filed writ petition being W.P.(S) No. 1059 of 2004, which was disposed of on 25th February, 2004 with a direction to the respondent-State to consider the claim of the petitioner (respondent...
PravIn Kumar Vs. the State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Feb-03-2009
Reported in: AIR2009Jhar103
D.G.R. Patnaik, J.1. In this writ application the petitioner has challenged the order dated 13.12.2006 passed by the State Consumer Redressal Forum Ranchi whereby the order passed by the District Consumer Forum, Garhwa was set aside.2. The petitioner's case is that he has passed his Matriculation Examination in the year 1988 under the Bihar School Examination Board, Patna. He had appeared in the Board Examination from Rama Sahu Arya Vedic High School, Garhwa. An admit card was allotted to the petitioner by the Board for the Matriculation Examination under the Roll No. 03133 and Registration No. 0312005797087. The contention of the petitioner is that in the School Admission Register, his name was recorded as Praveen Kumar son of Rajendra Sao. He had passed the Matriculation Examination and on obtaining the Matriculation Certificate in the year 1988, he found that in the Matriculation Certificate his name has wrongly been mentioned as Pravin Kumar Keshari son of Rajendra Prasad Keshari. ...
Gopal Pandit and ors. Vs. the State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Feb-03-2009
Reported in: [2009(2)JCR319(Jhr)]
D.K. Sinha, J.1. This is an application for condonation of delay In filing the appeal which is time barred by 167 days as per the Office Report.Explaining the delay, it was submitted by learned Counsel for the appellants.that the appeal was filed within the period of limitation, which was accompanied by a photo copy of the impugned judgment and order but inadvertently certified copy of the impugned judgment and order was not accompanied alongwith this appeal. Subsequently the appeal was notified as defective by the Office and thereafter certified copy of the impugned judgment was also filed. The Registry counted the period of limitation from the date of filing of the certified copy of the Impugned judgment and order and, therefore, it became time barred.2. Having perused the reasons for condonation of delay, we are of the view that the appeal having been filed within the prescribed period of limitation from the date of impugned judgment and order, although without the certified copy, a...
Employers in Relation to the Mgt. of Central Mine Planning and Design ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Feb-02-2009
Reported in: [2009(2)JCR285(Jhr)]; (2009)IILLJ618Jhar
1. This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 29.11.2002 passed in CWJC No. 2746 of 1997(R), whereby the learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petition and affirmed the award passed by the Presiding Officer, Central Government Industrial Tribunal No. 1, Dhanbad in Reference Case No. 14/94.2. The facts of the case lie in a narrow compass.Altogether four persons represented through the Union raised the Industrial Disputes on the ground inter-alia that although they have been working since, 1976 in the Central Mine Planning & Design Institute (CMPDI) but their services have not been regularized.The Central Government, Ministry of Labour referred the following matter to the Presiding Officer, Central Government Industrial Tribunal for adjudication.Whether the action of the management of Central Mine Planning and Design Institute Ltd., Regional Institute No. IL P.O. Koyla Nagar, Dist. Dhanbad in not regularizing/absorbing S/Sri P.K. Barat, Hare Ram Pandey as Electrician, Shri A.K....
Basant Kumar Banerjee Vs. State of Jharkhand Through the Chief Secreta ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Feb-02-2009
Reported in: [2009(1)JCR694(Jhr)]
ORDERR.R. Prasad, J.1. The petitioner was appointed as Tahsil Karmachari on 7.1.1957 at Lohardaga Anchal (iii) at Gamhariya within the District of Ranchi. In course of employment, he was transferred from Lohardaga Anchal to Tamar Circle, Ranchi. However, after rendering services for a period of 11 years 26 days, the petitioner on account of ill health asked for pre-matured retirement and for payment of invalid retirement benefits but the pensionary benefits were not given and, therefore, the petitioner approached this Court, vide CWJC No. 1551 of 2001 seeking direction for payment of pensionary benefits. The said writ application was disposed of by directing the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for payment of retiral dues. However, the claim of the petitioner for payment of pension was rejected, vide order dated 26.6.2001.2. Being aggrieved with that order, another writ application being WP (S) No. 1609 of 2004 was filed by the petitioner wherein a counter-affidavit w...
Phoolchand Tripathi Vs. Steel Authority of India Ltd. and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Feb-02-2009
Reported in: [2009(1)JCR697(Jhr)]
ORDERR.R. Prasad, J.1. It is the case of the petitioner that he had been appointed on 19.9.1972 on the post of Electrician in the Chasnala Colliery, a unit of Indian Iron and Steel Company. At the time of appointment, the petitioner had furnished his matriculation certificate showing date of birth as 3.7.1948 and hence, the petitioner was always under impression that the same date of birth has been recorded in the relevant records of the company. In course of time, the petitioner was given promotions and at every occasion, the concerned authority before giving promotion, used to scrutinize documents including educational certificate. But all on a sudden, the petitioner was served with a letter dated 31.3.2007 (Annexure-6) intimating therein that the petitioner is to retire on superannuation on 30.9.2007 as he will be completing 60 years of age on 19.9.2007. Being shocked with the said communication, the petitioner immediately made representation before the respondent No. 3 that as per ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »