Jharkhand Court March 2010 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.
Rama Shankar Singh @ R.S. Singh and ors. Vs. the State of Jharkhand,
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-29-2010
R.K. Merathia, J.1. In WP(C) No. 3362 of 2009, petitioners being the employees of Electro Steel Integrated Ltd. ( the Company for short) have prayed for quashing the entire proceedings initiated against them under Bihar Public Land Encroachment Act (BPLE Act for short) being B.P.L.E. Case No. 2 to 11 of 2009-2010, pending in the court of Collector cum Divisional Forest Officer, Bokaro Forest Division, including the orders passed therein restraining them and the Company from carrying on non-forestry work in the forest area in Plot Nos. 1159, 1120 and 1389.WP(C) No. 2515 of 2009 has been filed by the petitioner company for restraining the respondents from interfering with the possession and enjoyment of the lands in question, purchased by the company, in any manner.2. As common questions are involved in both the writ petitions, they were heard together and are being disposed of by this order.3. Submissions on behalf of the petitioners are as follows:(i) That the said proceedings under BP...
Ravishankar Dubey Vs. the State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-29-2010
D.N. Patel, J.1. The present petition has been preferred mainly against an order, passed by respondent No. 4 dated 22nd May, 2008, which is at Annexure 18 to the memo of petition, whereby, the services of the petitioner have been terminated, only on the ground that the petitioner has not got his Teachers Training from a recognized institution by the National Council for Teachers Education under the National Council for Teachers Education Act, 1993 (hereinafter to be referred as 'the Act, 1993'), though the Act, 1993 came into force with effect from 1st July, 1995 and the petitioner got appointment on 28th April, 1995, as per Annexure 6 to the memo of petition, and the petitioner actually joined the services as a Teacher with effect from 2nd May, 1995 (Annexure 7 to the memo of petition). Both these dates are prior to coming into force the Act, 1993 and, therefore, the petitioner is challenging the termination order at Annexure 18 to the memo of petition.2. Learned Counsel for the petit...
Meghan Yadav Vs. Union of India (Uoi),
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-29-2010
ORDERM.Y. Eqbal, J.1. By this application the petitioner has prayed for quashing the order dated 9.9.2008 passed by Central Administrative Tribunal, Patna Bench (Circuit Court at Ranchi) in O.A. No. 49/09 whereby the Tribunal disallowed the prayer of the petitioner for payment of arrears as well as current pension.2. The facts of the case lie in a narrow compass:In the year 1986, the petitioner was appointed as EDA in the Branch Post Office in the district of Giridih. According to the petitioner he became entitled and eligible for promotion to Group D cadre mail peon in the year 1990, but the promotion matter was kept pending by the respondents and did not conduct D.P.C. However, petitioner was promoted to Group D cadre by the D.P.C. held on 28.6.96. Petitioner's case is that the promotion matter was kept in abeyance by the respondents as a result several persons who were junior to the petitioner were considered for promotion much earlier than the petitioner. Petitioner ultimately supe...
Chanku Oraon Vs. the State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-27-2010
Amareshwar Sahay, J.1. In this writ petition the petitioner has challenged the order dated 29/03/2000 (Annexure 3), passed by the Special Officer, Ranchi, the appellate order dated 03/09/2001 (Annexure 4), passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Ranchi and the revisional order dated 14/03/2002 (Annexure 5), passed by the Commissioner, South Chhotanagpur Division, Ranchi, whereby, the application filed by respondent Nos. 6 to 8 under Section 71 A of the Chhotanagpur Tenancy Act for restoration of the lands, was allowed.2. The facts, in short, are that the lands of Khata No. 85 measuring 8.29 acres was recorded in the names of Tona Oraon, Cherga Oraon, Letho Oraon and Jhuba Oraon. Tona Oraon and Letho Oraon died issueless. Cherga Oraon had one daughter Nagia Orain, who was married to one Jata Oraon. The said Jata Oraon was taken in as 'Ghar Damad' by Cherga Oraon. According to the petitioner, as per Oraon customary law Jata Oraon became the legal heir and successor of Cherga Oraon. The petiti...
Krishna Murari Singh Vs. the State of Jharkhand,
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-26-2010
D.G.R. Patnaik, J.1. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties.2. The petitioner, in this writ application, has prayed for quashing the order dated-29.04.2003 (Annexure-6), passed by the Superintendent of Police, West Singhbhum, (Respondent No. 4), whereby the punishment of dismissal from service was awarded to the petitioner. The petitioner has also challenged the order dated-04.02.2004 (Annexure-8), passed by the Appellate Authority, whereby the appeal preferred by the petitioner against the impugned order of his dismissal, was dismissed.3. The main grounds on which the petitioner has challenged the impugned orders are as follows:(i) The departmental proceeding was conducted against the petitioner in a most illegal and arbitrary manner without affording opportunity to the petitioner to cross-examine the witnesses and even the material witnesses were not examined.(ii) The findings recorded by the Enquiry Officer are against the weight of evidence on record and perverse and based on co...
Zahid HussaIn and ors. Vs. State of Jharkhand, Commissioner-cum-secret ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-26-2010
D.G.R. Patnaik, J.1. Heard.2. The prayer of the petitioners in this writ application is now confined to the relief for directing the respondents to pay them the salary with effect from 16.05.2001, till the date when they were absorbed in service. Initially the main prayer of the petitioners was for issuance of a direction upon the respondents to absorb them in service. During the pendency of this writ application, the petitioners have been absorbed in service under the respondents but their claim for salary for the period from 16.05.2001 till the date of their absorption, has been refused on the ground that the petitioners did not work during the aforesaid period and therefore on the principle of 'no work no pay', they are not entitled to claim salary for the said period.3. Learned Counsel for the respondents submits that at the time of their absorption, it was clearly mentioned to the petitioners that their absorption in service in the various departments of the State Government was b...
irmiah Kujur Vs. the State of Jharkhand,
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-26-2010
D.G.R. Patnaik, J.1. Heard counsel for the parties.2. Petitioner in this writ application has prayed for a direction upon the respondents to consider his case for grant of the benefit of Junior Selection Grade on Graduate Trained Scale with effect from 01.04.1981 and of Senior Selection Grade with effect from 01.04.1983.3. The grounds on which the petitioner has raised his claims are two fold - firstly, the policy decision taken by the State Government in the concerned department, as reflected in the Government Circular dated 18.12.1984, and secondly, that the same benefits have been granted to other teachers similarly situated like the petitioner.4. From the admitted facts of the petitioner's case, it appears that he was initially appointed as a teacher on the Matric Trained Scale. Subsequently he obtained a higher qualification of Intermediate whereupon he was given the scale applicable to the Intermediates. Later, he obtained a graduate degree and in pursuance of such degree, he was...
Hemlal Mahto, Vs. the State of Bihar Now Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-26-2010
Jaya Roy, J.1. The appellants have preferred this appeal against the judgment dated 1.5.1992 passed by 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Hazaribagh in S.T. No. 28 of 1985 whereby the appellants have been convicted under Section 302/34 I.P.C. and Section 323 of the I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo R.I. for life for the offence under Section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code and no separate sentence has been passed under Section 323 of the Indian Penal Code.2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that the informant Pati Sao (P.W.5) along with his brother Khirodhar Sao (deceased) and brother-in-law Kaila Sao (P.W.4) at about 7.00 A.M. on 15.6.1992, went to plough the field popularly known as Katash Tanr belonging to Kaila Sao. When they ploughed a small portion of the field then all the aforesaid accused persons along with the wife of Jitan Mahto and two wives of accused Jugeshwar Mahto and the wife and the daughter of accused Hemlal Mahto, all having Lathi and danda in their hands arrived there ...
Sadanand Satua Vs. the State of Jharkhand Represented Through the Depu ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-26-2010
D.G.R. Patnaik, J.1. Heard.2. Challenge, in this writ application, under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is to the order dated-22.02.2007, passed in Title Appeal No. 19 of 2004 by the 02nd Additional District Judge, Jamshedpur, whereby the prayer of the petitioner/appellant for adducing additional evidence in the Appeal, under Order 41 Rule 27 of the C.P.C., has been rejected.3. Facts of the petitioner's case, stated briefly, are as follows:The petitioner/plaintiff filed a Title Suit vide Title Suit No. 13 of 2000 before the Court of Munsif at Ghatshila for a decree for declaration of his right, title and interest over the suit property, besides confirmation of possession and alternatively, for recovery of possession.His claim was based primarily on a Sale Deed purportedly executed in his favour by one Badal Dolai and which was claimed to have been registered on 03.06.1998 before the Sub-Registrar, Jamshedpur.The Respondent No. 2 being the defendant No. 1, had contested the cl...
Kailash Kumar Das Vs. the State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-26-2010
D.G.R. Patnaik, J.1. Heard counsel for the parties.2. The petitioner in this writ application has prayed for a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to revise and fix his pay and other allowances as per the order of his promotion under ACP Scheme as contained in the order dated 14.07.2005 of the Superintending Engineer, Works Circle, REO, Dumka.A further prayer has been made for a direction upon the respondents to revise the pension and other retiral benefits as per the revised pay scale of the petitioner arrived upon revision in accordance with the promotion given to him under the ACP Scheme and commutation of pension thereon and further for a direction for payment of difference amounts of pension and other retiral benefits and arrears thereon arising due to revision of pension and other retiral benefits with statutory and penal interest forthwith.3. From the admitted facts it appears that the petitioner was posted as a Draughtsman Grade-II in the office of the Superintending Eng...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »