Jharkhand Court April 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.
Bablu Kumar Modak and anr. Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Apr-27-2009
Reported in: 2009(57)BLJR2115
ORDERAjit Kumar Sinha, J.1. The present writ petitions have been preferred for grant of an appropriate writ in the nature of mandamus or an order or direction commanding upon the respondents to regularize the services of the petitioners with consequential benefits within a specified period. Both the writ petitions involving same issues are being disposed of by this common order.2. The facts in brief are stated as under.W.P. (S) No. 6691 of 2002The petitioner No. 1 joined on the post of peon on 11.9.84 and the petitioner No. 2 joined on 24.5.86. According to the petitioners a seniority list was prepared of Class III and Class IV employees posted in different branches who were appointed between 2.8.1985 and 1991. It is further stated that the petitioners are getting monthly wages which is lesser than the regular pay scale. An agreement was entered into on 18.2.1991 between the Dy. Commissioner Administrator-cum-Dy. Development Commissioner, Managing Director and General Manager, Singhbhu...
The Tata Iron and Steel Company Ltd. Vs. Bihar State Electricity Board ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Apr-27-2009
Reported in: 2009(57)BLJR2421
ORDERAjit Kumar Sinha, J.1. The present writ petition has been filed by Tata Iron & Steel Company Ltd. for the following reliefs : (a) For quashing the order dated 19.4.2000 relating to the financial year 1972-73 communicated to the petitioner vide letter No. 584 dated 19.4.2000 passed by the General Manager-cum-Chief Engineer, Singhbhum Area, Jamshedpur whereby and whereunder he has been pleased to reject/dismiss the entire claim of the petitioner, interalia, for the financial year 1972-73 under Clause 13 of the High Tension Agreement.(b) For a declaration that the petitioner is entitled to remission in Maximum Demand Charges for the financial year 1972-73 under the following heads:(i) Remission for the period of non-supply of energy.(ii) Remission for the period of load restriction as the petitioner was prevented from using electricity during the said period as per requirement and the production was hampered due to such load restrictions.(iii) Remission for the period during which th...
Durga Charan Sardar Vs. the State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Apr-27-2009
Reported in: 2009(57)BLJR2435
ORDERAjit Kumar Sinha, J.1. The present writ petition has been preferred for setting aside the order dated 11.8.98 passed in Singhbhum Revenue Revision No. 347 of 87 by the Respondent No. 2, the Commissioner, South Chotanagpur Division, Ranchi contained in Annexure-6 and the order dated 17.8.87 passed in S.A.R. Appeal No. 75 of 85-86 by the respondent No. 3 the Deputy Commissioner, Singhbhum West contained in Annexure-5 and the order dated 26.8.85 passed in S.A.R. Case No. 85 of 79-80 by the respondent No. 4 the S.D.O. Saraikella, Singhbhum West contained in Annexure-4 and further directing the respondents not to disturb the possession of the petitioner over the lands in question.2. The facts in brief are stated as under:The petitioner filed a petition S.A.R. Case No. 85 of 79-80 before Sub Divisional Officer, Saraikella, Singhbhum West for restoration of lands bearing plot No. 339 (of area 0.22 acres) plot No. 340 (Area of 1.53) plot No. 343 of area 0.73 acres and plot No. 354 (of are...
Angilina Tirkey Vs. Commissioner, South Chhotanagpur Division and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Apr-27-2009
Reported in: 2009(57)BLJR2473
ORDERAjit Kumar Sinha, J.1. The present writ petition has been preferred for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari or any other appropriate writ / order / direction for quashing the ex-parte original order dated 28.11.1988 (Annexure-1) passed by Respondent No. 3 whereby and whereunder the Respondents, directed for restoration of the lands under proceeding in the purported exercise of power under Section 71A of the Chhotanagpur Tenancy Act without any application of mind and without giving any opportunity to the petitioner of filing her show-cause and contesting the proceeding merely on the ground of non-appearance by relying upon the collusive report of the Peon as also for quashing the appellate order dated 26.12.1991 (Annexure-4) and the revisional order dated 18.5.1999 (Annexure-5) confirming the said ex-parte order, although the petitioner has acquired the properties in question after grating of due permission by the Deputy Commissioner, and therefore, there was no violati...
Abhay Nath Manjhi Vs. the State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Apr-27-2009
Reported in: 2009(57)BLJR2438
ORDERAjit Kumar Sinha, J.1. The present writ petition has been preferred for grant of an appropriate writ in the nature of certiorari or an order or direction for quashing the Notification issued under Memo No. 627 dated 6th September, 2000 whereby and whereunder the petitioner has been discharged from Bihar Agriculture Service Category-I from the post of Block Development Officer, Chainpur, Gumla.The facts in brief are set out as under:2. The petitioner was appointed as Graduate Instructor on 12.7.1977 and was later promoted to the post of Block Development Officer on 29.6.1987. It appears that the petitioner was suspended on 15.12.1994 under Rule 49 of the Civil Services Classification and Appeal Rules on the allegation that he had obtained the employment by giving a false caste certificate. Pursuant to a complaint the Deputy Commissioner, East-Singhbhum vide its letter dated 25.2.1991 directed the petitioner to produce the caste certificate and the residential certificate alongwith ...
The State of Bihar (Now Jharkhand) Vs. Babulal Prasad and Surya Kant P ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Apr-24-2009
Reported in: 2009(57)BLJR2154
D.K. Sinha, J.1. This State Appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 11.09.1996 passed by the 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Jamshedpur in Sessions Trial No. 442 of 1989 whereby the respondents Babulal Prasad and Surya Kant Patel @ Surya herein were acquitted from the charge framed under Sections 302/201/34 I.P.C. against them.2. The prosecution story in short was that the informant Sub-Inspector of Police of Bistupur Police Station received a call in the mid night of 24th March, 1989 at about 2 a.m. that a dead body was lying on the flank of road towards north which led to Circuit House Area. As the place as pointed out was within the jurisdiction of Bistupur Police Station, the informant on such information immediately rushed to the pointed place and found the information true as a dead body smeared in blood was found lying with the bleeding from his injuries including from nose which appeared to be of a young man aged about 20 years. The informant further gathered tha...
Bharat Mahtha Vs. the State of Bihar (Now Jharkhand)
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Apr-21-2009
Reported in: 2009(57)BLJR2118
1. The appellant has filed this appeal against the judgment dated 03.12.1997, passed by the 3rd Addl. Sessions Judge, Deoghar, in Sessions Trial No. 10 of 1997 whereby learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Deoghar convicted the appellant, for committing the offence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and thereby, sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life.2. The prosecution case, in short, is that on 23.08.1996, at about 10.00 P.M., the appellant, that is the husband of the deceased (Babita Devi), pulled her in his room, situated at Barmashia within Deoghar Police Station and sprinkled kerosene oil on her body and thereafter lighted matchstick on her cloth and bolted the room from outside living his wife inside the room. When Babita Devi, appellant's wife started burning, she raised Hulla of 'Bachao Bachao'. On hearing her cries, her father-in-law i.e. father of the appellant, namely, Moti Mahtha opened the door and tried to remove the saree from the body of the deceased Ba...
Chandra Mohan Gupta Vs. the State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Apr-21-2009
Reported in: 2009(57)BLJR2489
D.N. Patel, J.1. The present writ petition has been preferred mainly for the reason that because of order passed by Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner, Ranchi dated 23rd December, 2008 as well as the order passed at Annexure-5 dated 3rd February, 2009, without giving any opportunity of being heard to the petitioner, the order under Section 7A of the Employees Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provision Act, 1952, and it is also submitted by learned Counsel for the petitioner that even an application has also been preferred on 2nd of January, 2009 for quashing and setting aside of the ex-parte order passed under Section 7A of the Act, 1952 but, the same has not yet been decided by the concerned respondent officer and hence, the orders at Annexures- 4 and 5, deserve to be quashed and set aside.2. Having heard learned Counsel for both the sides and looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, it appears that:(i) Against the present petitioner an inquiry under Section 7A of the Ac...
Rajasthan Sewa Sadan Vs. Bihar State Electricity Board and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Apr-21-2009
Reported in: AIR2010Jhar12; 2009(57)BLJR2163
Ajit Kumar Sinha, J.1. The present writ petition has been preferred for the following reliefs:1. For issuance of an appropriate writ or a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding upon the respondents to raise bills on the basis of tariff of domestic service II and III respectively for connection MS G6/5 and G826 respectively which was being raised all along instead of commercial service tariff, which is being raised from September, 1994.2. For issuance of an appropriate writ or a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing the electric bills from September, 1994 which have been raised on the basis of commercial tariff.3. For a further direction that revised bills from September, 1994 be issued to the petitioner on the basis of domestic tariff and the excess amount realized from the petitioner be immediately refunded alongwith same rate of interest which the Electricity Board is charging from its consumers.2. The main contention raised by the learned Counsel for the petitioner Mr. M....
Panchdeo Singh Vs. Bharat Coking Coal Limited and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Apr-20-2009
Reported in: (2009)IVLLJ223Jhar
M.Y. Eqbal, J.1. In the instant appeal, the short question that falls for consideration is as to whether the appellant after acquittal in a criminal case is entitled to back wages. The learned Single Judge in terms of impugned judgment passed in W.P. (S) No. 5029 of 2003 did not interfere with the order passed by the authority rejecting his claim of back wages.2. The facts of the case lie in a narrow compass:3. The appellant was working as Fan Operator/Switch Board Attendant at Angarpathra Colliery, Katras, a unit of M/s. Bharat Coking Coal Limited. It appears that he was involved in a criminal case under Section 302/149 of the Indian Penal Code and he was convicted by the Court of Sessions Judge in terms of judgment dated 23.12.1988 and was sentenced to undergo life imprisonment. In view of the conviction of the appellant in a criminal case, he was dismissed from service with effect from 22.4.1989. However, against the said judgment of conviction, the appellant preferred appeal which ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »