Jharkhand Court May 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.
Raj Kumar Singh Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: May-19-2009
Reported in: 2009(57)BLJR2150
ORDERAjit Kumar Sinha, J.1. The present writ petition has been preferred for issuance of an appropriate writ, order or direction on the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for promotion to the rank of Inspector of Police with effect from the date, the persons junior to him have been considered in the meeting dated 12.8.2006 and promoted by order issued vide memo No. 1662 dated 27.9.2006, treating the petitioner's date of promotion as Sub-Inspector of Police with effect from 30.10.1981 in view of seniority fixed by the respondents vide memo No. 6698 dated 13.9.1997, in compliance of the order passed by the Hon'ble Court which has been affirmed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, with all consequential benefits such as seniority, arrears of salary etc.2. The main contention raised by the counsel for the petitioner is that he was promoted as Sub-Inspector of Police w.e.f. 30.10.1981 and thus he was entitled to be considered for promotion to the rank of Inspector of Police in view...
L.B. Rajan Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: May-19-2009
Reported in: 2009(57)BLJR2144
Ajit Kumar Sinha, J.1. The present writ petition has been preferred for issuance of an appropriate writ, order or direction commanding upon the respondents for the following reliefs:i) To dispose of petitioner's representation dated 26.6.97 and 21.10.99 against the adverse remarks in the A.C.R. for the period 1.4.96 and 6.8.96 and adversary memorandum dated 9.6.99 respectively.ii) To hold and declare that the adverse remarks and adversary memorandum are highly vague and non-specific and non-sustainable in law.iii) To quash the promotion list dated 30.10.99 whereby and whereunder the respondent No. 6 P.N. Thakur and respondent No. 5 Bhagwan Sahai, both Junior to the petitioner, have been granted promotion superseding the petitioner.iv) To hold and declare that the adverse A.C.Rs and the adversary memorandum against which the representation of the petitioner is pending due to the latches of the respondents, cannot be taken into account by the Departmental promotion Committee for consider...
Central Coalfields Ltd. Vs. the State of Bihar and anr.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: May-19-2009
Reported in: 2009(57)BLJR2139; (2009)IVLLJ774Jhar
Ajit Kumar Sinha, J.1. The present writ petition has been preferred for an appropriate writ, order or direction for quashing the letters dated 23.5.1998, 7.4.1999 and 19.4.1999 issued by the respondent No. 2 whereby and whereunder the respondent No. 2 has directed the petitioner to register the water treatment plant at Patratu Water Works of the petitioner under the Factories Act as the said water treatment plant according to the respondent No. 2 comes within the definition of the Factories Act. The further prayer is for issuance of an appropriate writ, order or direction for a declaration that the water treatment plant is not a factory within the meaning of the Factories Act.2. The facts, in brief, are set out as under:The water treatment plant of the petitioner was inserted by the respondent concerned and notice was issued on 23.5.1998 to register the water treatment plant under the provision of Factories Act. The petitioner gave reply vide its letter dated 27.2.1999 stating inter-al...
Ram Chandra Ram Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: May-19-2009
Reported in: 2009(57)BLJR2147
ORDERAjit Kumar Sinha, J.1. The present writ petition has been preferred for following reliefs:A) For quashing the order dated 9th August, 2000 issued by the respondent No. 2 whereby and whereunder the Dy. Commissioner, Giridih was directed to refix the pay scale of the petitioner in the scale of Rs. 5500-9000/- w.e.f. 1.1.96 as they able to recover the excess amount after holding that the petitioner has been paid wrongly the scale of Rs. 6500-10500/-.B) The respondents be directed not to give effect to the order dated 9th August, 2000 and to refix his pay scale In the scale of Rs. 8000-13500/- on the basis of Notification dated 13th Feb., 1999 of Finance Deptt. and to give all consequential benefits thereon.C) The respondents be directed to pay super selection grade which has been arbitrarily withheld since 1994 even after the office order dated 18th Aug., 1994.D) The respondents be directed to fix his pension finally after refix his pay scale of Rs. 8000-13,500/- w.e.f. 1.1.96 and to...
Mukhlal Mahto and ors. Vs. the State of Jharkhand and anr.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: May-18-2009
Reported in: 2009(57)BLJR2477
Narendra Nath Tiwari, J.1. In I.A. No. 1040 of 2009, the petitioners have prayed for sending the lower court record back to the court below, as the documents available on record are required to be produced in a civil suit, being T.S. No. 10 of 1997, pending in the court of Sub-Judge-I, Chatra.2. It has been submitted that by order dated 14th March, 2002, this Cr.M.P. was admitted and lower court record was called for. Further proceeding of the court below was also stayed. However, this case could not be finally heard by this Court.3. It has been submitted that the petitioners have filed the said title suit for declaration of their right and title including other reliefs, as the Opposite Party-Forest Department time and again disputes the petitioners' right, title and peaceful possession over the land and institutes frivolous criminal cases. On the same set of allegation regarding the said land, the Forest Department had earlier brought a complaint case, being U.C. Case No. 412 of 1992,...
Aventis Pharma Limited Vs. the State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: May-15-2009
Reported in: 2009(57)BLJR1900
D.G.R. Patnaik, J.1. Heard Sri A.K. Sinha, learned senior counsel for the petitioner and Sri A. Allam, learned senior counsel for the respondents. With the consent of the learned Counsel, this case is taken up for disposal at the stage of admission.2. Challenge in this writ application is to the order dated 06.08.2008 (Annexure-11) passed by the State Drug Controller and Licensing Authority (Respondent No. 3) whereby the license granted to the petitioner under the provisions of Drugs & Cosmetics Act, 1940 and the Rules thereunder, has been cancelled. Challenge also is to the order dated 20.09.2008 (Annexure-15) passed by the Appellate Authority whereby the petitioner's appeal filed against the impugned order of the Respondent No. 3 was rejected.Besides praying for quashing of the two impugned orders, the petitioner has also prayed for an order staying the operation of the impugned orders and in the alternative, to direct the respondents to allow the petitioner to sell and distribute in...
Central Coalfields Limited Vs. Ajay Transport Company and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: May-15-2009
Reported in: AIR2010Jhar19
M.Y. Eqbal, J. 1. This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 07.9.2007 passed C.W.J.C. No. 227 of 1999 (R) whereby the learned Single Judge allowed the writ petition filed by the respondents and directed the appellant to pay the amount claimed by the respondents together with interest. 2. The facts of the case lie in a narrow compass: The appellant invited tender on behalf of Central Coalfields Limited, Sayal Area for the work for transportation of coal from stock of Urimari to Central Saunda Railway siding vide tender notice dated 25.8.1992. The respondent along with others submitted tenders and the work was finally allotted to the respondent for transportation of coal in between 13.10.1992 to 12.10.1993. The respondent started work and after some time stock of coal available to Urimari stock was exhausted from 10.10.1993 and the appellant closed the work and paid the agreed amount. However, respondent received letter from the appellant dated 3.10.1993 directing the respondent...
Upendra Bhagat Vs. the State of Bihar
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: May-15-2009
Reported in: 2009(57)BLJR2744
1. The appellant was tried for the charge under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code for committing murder of the informant's husband, Baidyanath Bhagat. By the impugned judgment, the appellant has been held guilty and convicted under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life.2. Briefly stated, the prosecution case is that on midnight of Thursday fire broke in the house of the deceased Baidyanath Bhagat, which also engulfed a portion of adjoining cottage of Upendra Bhagat. The said Upendra Bhagat after two days i.e. on Saturday dragged Baijnath Bhagat to his house and assaulted him with Lathi and gave 3-4 blows; resulting into instantaneous death of Baijnath Bhagat. The reason was the alleged damage of a portion of cottage caused by fire, which broke in the house of Baijnath Bhagat.3. On the basis of the fardbeyan of Mala Dholi, wife of the deceased, police registered a case under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and took ...
Anand Rai Vs. Srimati Sita Devi and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: May-12-2009
Reported in: 2009(57)BLJR2973
M.Y. Eqbal, J.1. This appeal by the defendant-appellant is against the judgment of reversal.2. The plaintiff-respondent filed Title Suit No. 08 of 1977 for a declaration that the post of Chaukidar is hereditary and that the order dated 6.10.1969 passed by the Sub Divisional Officer, Jamtara appointing Ratan Rai as Chaukidar is illegal and not binding on the plaintiff. The plaintiff further sought a relief for a decree of recovery of possession of the suit land which is in possession of the defendant allegedly as a trespasser.3. The facts of the case lie in a narrow compass:The plaintiff's case is that his father Bihari Rai was the Chaukidar of village Saluka, P.S. Nala in the district of Jamtara and was in possession of Jote No. 63 as Chaukidari Jagir land. Bihari Rai worked as Jagir Holder Chaukidar of village Saluka for a long time. Subsequently he became physically unfit and, therefore, allowed his brother Ratan Rai to worl as Chaukidar in his place because his son (plaintiff) was m...
their Workmen Being Represented by the Secretary, Janta Mazdoor Sangh ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: May-11-2009
Reported in: 2009(57)BLJR2109
M.Y. Eqbal, J.1. This Letters Patent Appeal by the appellant-Workmen is directed against the judgment dated 4.9.2007 passed in W.P. (L) No. 1851 of 2006 whereby the learned Single Judge allowed the writ application filed by the respondent-Management and set aside the award passed by the Central Government Industrial Tribunal No. 1, Dhanbad in Reference Case No. 64 of 1995. By the said award, the Tribunal held that the concerned workmen were entitled for regularization and, accordingly, directed the Management to reinstate 81 workmen in service.2. It appears from the impugned judgment that the following dispute was referred to the Tribunal for adjudication: Whether the demand of the Union for regularization/employment by the management of Bhalgora Area of M/s. B.C.C.L. of Sh. Rama Ashish Paswan and 81 others (as per list annexed), members of a registered Co-operative Society namely Kustore Shramik Sahyog Samiti Ltd. is justified? If so, to what relief are these concerned workmen entitle...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »