Jharkhand Court March 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.
Eastern Coalfields Ltd. Vs. Mariyanus Marandi and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-17-2009
Reported in: [2009(2)JCR442(Jhr)]
ORDERD.G.R. Patnaik, J.1. This Review application has been filed by the respondent-petitioner Eastern Coalfields Ltd. for review of the order dated 1.8.2008 passed in W.P. (C) No. 6602 of 2007.2. Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Counsel for the respondents.3. The contention of the learned Counsel for the petitioner-Eastern Coalfields Ltd. is that the writ petitioner in the aforesaid writ application by making a wrong statement in Para 5 of the aforesaid writ application has obtained the order under which the Eastern Coalfields Ltd. has been directed to assess the compensation amount, payable to the petitioner for the land which was originally acquired under the Coal Bearing Area (Acquisition and Development) Act, 1957, along with the statutory interest. It is further contended that as a matter of fact the land though were acquired for the Eastern Coalfields Ltd. under the aforesaid Act but it was not acquired for any limited period of 15 years and furthermor...
Suman Kumar Sinha Vs. the State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-17-2009
Reported in: AIR2009Jhar53; 2009(57)BLJR1746
M.Y. Eqbal, J.1. In this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for issuance of appropriate writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing the notice dated 21.1.2005 issued by respondent No. 2 - the District Registrar, Hazaribagh whereby he has directed the petitioner to pay a sum of Rs. 82,112/- in respect of Deed No. 13 dated 09.6.1999 being the stamp duly which is liable to be paid for the aforesaid deed of Power of Attorney executed in favour of the petitioner.2. Before deciding the interesting question of law involved in this writ petition, I would like to refer first some of the relevant facts as under:A registered Power of Attorney dated 09.6.1999 being Deed No. 13 was executed by Prakash Kumar, Prabhat Kumar, Prashant Kumar and Sunil Kumar in favour of the petitioner in respect of 0.35 1/2 acres of plot No. 56 under Khata No. 12 situated in the district of Hazaribagh authorizing the petitioner to manage, sell, to defend or file any case and to do all necessary acts including t...
Jaipal Mahli and ors. Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-17-2009
Reported in: [2009(2)JCR424(Jhr)]
ORDER1. This appeal has been filed against the judgment dated 5.01.2009 which reads as under:The present writ petition has been preferred for issuance of an appropriate writ, order or direction commanding upon the respondents to forthwith appoint the petitioners in Class-IV post within the district of Gumla in pursuant to the direction of Hon'ble Court passed in C.W.J.C. No. 166 of 1994 (R) whereby and whereunder this Hon'ble Court has been pleased to direct the respondent No. 2, the Deputy Commissioner, Gumla to consider the case of the petitioners also along with the eligible candidates in accordance with law when the vacancies are decided to be filled up, the respondents have advertised the post to make appointment on the post of Class-IV but without considering the case of the petitioners.The counsel for the respondents in their counter affidavit has specifically stated that no appointment has been made thereafter except for compassionate appointment and as and when fresh appointme...
Ram Prasad Mandal and ors. Vs. State of Bihar Now Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-17-2009
Reported in: 2009CriLJ3642
1. Since both the appeals arise out of the common judgment it were heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.2. The appellant, Ram Prasad Mandal having been found guilty for committing murder of one Baldeo Mandal was convicted under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code whereas the other appellants including Mahadeo Mandal and Thetho @ Titu Mandal @ Thetho Mandal (Both died during the pendency of this appeal) were convicted under Section 302/149 of the Indian Penal Code and all of them were sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life. Further the appellant, Robin Mandal having been found guilty for an offence under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code for making an attempt on the life of Mull Mandal and Kalia Mandal was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 7 years. He was further sentenced along with Ram Prasad Mandal, and Thakur Mandal to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two Years under Section 148 of the Indian Penal Code whereas all other acc...
Tijan Hazam Vs. Rameshwar Hazam and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-16-2009
Reported in: [2009(2)JCR441(Jhr)]
ORDERR.K. Merathia, J.1. Office had raised the question of maintainability. On 23.11.2006, notices were issued to the respondents in admission matter.2. With consent of the parties, this appeal was heard finally and is being disposed of by this order.3. This appeal is directed against the order dated 15.4.2006, passed in Partition Suit No. 4/1990 by learned Sub-Judge-1. Bermo at Tenughat rejecting the petition dated 7.3.2006 filed on behalf of the plaintiff/decree holder under Order XXII, Rule 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure.4. Mr. Atanu Banerjee, learned Counsel appearing for the plaintiff-appellant, relying on : (1995)1SCC407 , Ratna @ Ratnavati (Smt.) v. Syndicate Bank, submitted that the sole defendant-Bhagtu Hazam died during pendency of preparation of final decree and therefore in view of the said judgment, the learned Court below should not have rejected the prayer for substitution and should not have dismissed the proceeding as abated.5. Mr. C.S. Prasad, learned Counsel appear...
Tej Narayan Bhagat Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-16-2009
Reported in: [2009(2)JCR449(Jhr)]
ORDERAjit Kumar Sinha, J.1. This writ petition has been preferred for issuance of an appropriate writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding upon the respondents to fix the pension of the petitioner on the basis of actual service rendered by the petitioner as a Government Teacher with effect from 4,4.1964, i.e. the date of appointment and joining as Government Teacher till 10.5.1972, i.e. the period during which he worked as a Government Teacher and thereafter was not allowed to discharge his duties as a Government Teacher on account of non-acceptance of his joining due to fault of the respondent authorities. The further prayer is for issuance of an appropriate writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding upon the respondents to fix the notional pension of the petitioner taking into account the period with effect from 11.5.1972 till 30.12.2002 i.e. date of retirement during which respondent authorities were guilty of not accepting the joining of the p...
Gajendra Singh Kushwaha Vs. the State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-06-2009
Reported in: 2009CriLJ3659
The sole appellant was put on trial for the charges under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and also under Section 27 of the Arms Act on the allegation that the appellant with his rifle shot dead one Balihari Harijan. Learned trial court having found the appellant guilty for the charges sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life under Section 302 of Indian Penal Code and also to pay fine of Rs. 10,000/- and in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months. He was also sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years under Section 27 of the Arms Act. Both the sentences were ordered to be run concurrently.2. The case of the prosecution is that the informant, Babulal Kahar, P.W. 2, a security guard, as well as Hawaldar, Ram Chandra Singh, and also Balihari Harijan (deceased) had been deputed to keep vigilance at Jamtara railway siding. On the day of occurrence i.e. on 30.1.1997, while the deceased- Balihari Harijan was present in a hut in which he was l...
Arun Kumar Ghose and ors. Vs. State of Jharkhand and anr.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-06-2009
Reported in: [2009(2)JCR339(Jhr)]
D.K. Sinha, J.1. The petitioners have invoked the extraordinary writ jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for quashment of their entire criminal proceeding arising out of Sikaripara P.S. Case No. 30 of 2004 corresponding to G.R. No. 549 of 2004 registered for the offence under Sections 414/120-B, IPC and Section 40(iv) of the Bihar Mines and Minerals Concession Rules, 1972.2. The prosecution story in brief was that on 4.6.2004 at about 2.30 p.m. the police team led by the respondent No. 2 intercepted several trucks on tip off, loaded with stone boulders, carried from the village Chitragarhia Benagarhia site after illegal quarrying and on demand it was alleged that no valid document was produced by the drivers of the Truck Nos. W.B.-67-1086, W.P.-53- 3562, W.M.K.-4168, U.S.P.-4031, B.R.L. 8350 and W.B. 53-0285. On search, about 8 tonnes of boulders were found loaded on each of the trucks. However, in the process of search, one of the drivers escaped ...
Project and Development India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Sri Rajnath Singh
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-06-2009
Reported in: [2009(2)JCR317(Jhr)]
R.R. Prasad, J.1. This appeal is directed against the order dated 7.8.2006 passed by learned single Judge in W.P. (S) No. 2531 of 2004 whereby the order dated 13.10.2003 under which the writ petitioner/respondent herein was reverted to his substantive post of Chargeman retrospectively and the emoluments drawn by him sought to be recovered with interest was set aside.2. The facts giving rise this appeal are that a departmental proceeding was initiated against the respondent, an employee of the appellant's company, on the charge of securing promotion on the basis of fabricated education certificate. On completion of enquiry, the enquiry officer submitted its report dated 21.5.2002 to the disciplinary authority. However, before the disciplinary authority could take any decision on the enquiry report, the writ petitioner applied for VRS which was accepted and was released from service on 2.5.2003. Thereupon the disciplinary authority passed the final order on 13.10.2003 whereby the writ pe...
Dr. Krishna Pratap Singh Vs. the State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-05-2009
Reported in: [2009(2)JCR334(Jhr)]
Ajit Kimar Singh, J.1. This writ petition has been preferred for issuance of an appropriate writ, order or direction for quashing the order dated 21.9.2002 issued by the respondent No. 4 whereby and where under the pay scale of the petitioner has been reduced from Rs. 6500-10500/- to the pay scale of Rs. 5500/- - Rs. 9000/- without giving any notice to the petitioner. His further prayer is for issuance of an appropriate writ, order or direction for confirming the pay scale of the petitioner on the pay scale of Rs. 6500/--10500/- since the a foresaid scale was authenticated by the District Accounts Officer, Giridih as Branch Office of the Finance Department as competent authority in the matter of fixation of pay and further for issuance of a writ In the nature of mandamus commanding upon the concerned respondents to forbear from giving effect to or acting pursuant to or In furtherance of the said impugned order dated 21.9.2002.2. After detailed argument parties have agreed that since th...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »