Jharkhand Court December 2012 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.
Ms Koderma Gas Agency Through Pankaj Kumar Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Dec-19-2012
In the High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi Cr.M.P. No.2537 of 2012 with Cr.M.P.No.2538 of 2012 Pankaj Kumar and others.....Petitioners (Cr.M.P.No.2537 of 2012) M/s. Koderma Gas Agency.... Petitioner (Cr.M.P.No.2538of 2012) VERSUS State of Jharkhand ...................... ........................Opposite Party CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE R.R.PRASAD For the Petitioners:Mr. H.K.Shikarwar For the State : Mr.S.S.Sahay, A.P.P 3.19.12.12. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the District Supply Officer, Koderma, who upon making search and seizure of the LPG Cylinders and other documents of Koderma Gas Agency has lodged a case and also put the office of the agency and go-down under lock has no authority to make search and seizure to secure due compliance of the provision of Liquefied Petroleum Gas (Regulation of Supply and Distribution) Order, 2000 and thereby any case based on such search and seizure is fit to be quashed and that since the office and go-down of the Koderma G...
Rakesh Kumar Dubey Vs. C.M.D.,central Coalfileds Ltd.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Dec-19-2012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(S) No. 4408 of 2010 Rakesh Kumar Dubey ..... Petitioner Versus The Chairman-cum-Managing Director, C.C.L., Ranchi & Ors. . Respondents CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK SINGH For the Petitioner : None For the Respondents : ----- 5 /19.12.2012 I.A. No. 3658 of 2011 None to press this interlocutory application. Dismissed as not pressed. (Alok Singh, J.) R.K....
Arun Kumar Chakraverty Vs. Coal India Ltd. and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Dec-19-2012
INTHEHIGHCOURTOFJHARKHANDATRANCHI W.P.(S)No.3360of2004 ArunKumarChakraverty...Petitioner Versus CoalIndiaLimited&others......Respondents CORAM:HONBLEMR.JUSTICEAPARESHKUMARSINGH ForthePetitioner :Mr.A.K.Sahani,Adv. FortheRespondents:Mr.AnandaSen,Adv. 15/19.12.2012 Heardlearnedcounselfortheparties. ThepetitionerhadcomebeforethisCourtchallengingtheorder dated24thFebruary,2004(Annexure11)passedbyrespondentno.2as also the order contained in Memo No. 262 dated 17th January, 2007 (Annexure8),wherebythepunishmentofwithholdingofoneincrement with cumulative effect was passed and confirmed by the Appellate Authority.However,itissubmittedonbehalfofthepetitionerthatthe saidpunishmentofwithholdingofoneincrementhasceasedtohave effect and now the petitioner intends to press his second prayer for considerationofhiscaseforgrantofpromotionfromE3toE4Gradein Secretarialdisciplinefromthedateonwhichthesimilarlysituatedhave gotsuchpromotionswithallconsequentialbenefits. Inview ofthe aforesaid submissions made...
Md Manir Mian Alias Md Manir Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Dec-19-2012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A.No.4129 o1. Md. Manir Mian @ Md. Manir.2. Md. Jalil. ... ... ...Petitioners -Versus- 1. The State of Jharkhand.2. Babujan Mian. ... ... ...Opp. Parties ---------- CORAM: THE HONBLE MR. JUSTICE D.N.UPADHYAY For the Petitioners: Mr. Pratiush Lala, Advocate. For the State: A.P.P. For the O.P.No.2: Mr. Pran Pramar, Advocate. ---------- 02/ 19.12.2012 The petitioner is an accused in a case registered under Sections 420/467/468/471/34 of the Indian Penal Code. This case has been lodged with the allegation that the accused persons giving fake details, obtained employment in B.C.C.L. against acquisition of their land. It is submitted that the matter has been settled between the parties the Complainant and the petitioner no.1 are own brothers. Learned Counsel appearing for the Complainant does not dispute the progress. Since the matter has been settled between the parties, the petitioners are directed to surrender before the court-below within thre...
Samir Kumar Ghosh Vs. State Bank of India
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Dec-19-2012
INTHEHIGHCOURTOFJHARKHANDATRANCHI W.P.(C)No.6592of2012 SamirKumarGhosh. ...Petitioner. Versus StateBankofIndia&Ors. ...Respondents. CORAM:HONBLEMR.JUSTICENARENDRANATHTIWARI ForthePetitioner : Mr.P.Modi,Advocate FortheBank : Mr.RajeshKumar,Advocate ForRespondentNo.2: Mr.LakhanSharma,Advocate 04/19.12.2012: The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 4th September, 2012, rejecting his application for allowing him to crossexamine the witnessSujash Kumar Das, an Officer of the Bank, passed in P.T. Case No.5 of 2004 by Debts Recovery Tribunal,Ranchi.2. Ithasbeenstatedthatthesaidwitnesshasfiledaffidavitin support of the plaintiffBank, giving false and misleading statements.Inordertotesthisveracity,itwasnecessarytocross examinethesaidwitness.Forthatpurpose,thedefendantfiled applicationbeforethelearnedDebtRecoveryTribunal.Bythe impugnedorder,thesaidapplicationhasbeenrejectedonthe groundthatcrossexaminationofthesaidwitnessisnotrequired forthepurposeheissoughttobecrossexamined.3. Learned coun...
Ashratul Bibi Alias Lofon Bibi Vs. the State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Dec-19-2012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No.3812 of 2012 ---- Ashratul Bibi @ Lofon Bibi ... .... Petitioner ---Versus--- 1.The State of Jharkhand 2.Hakim Sk. 3.Afsana Khatun .... ......... .........Opposite Parties ---- CORAM: HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE JAYA ROY ---- For the Petitioner : Mr. Raja Ravi Shekhar Singh, Advocate For the State : A.P.P. ---- 5 / 19.12.2012 Counsel for the petitioner is permitted to add the complainant namely Hakim Sk. and his daughter Afsana Khatun as opposite party nos. 2 and 3 in this application. Issue notice to the newly added opposite party nos.2 and 3 by registered post with A/D as well as under ordinary process, for which requisites etc., must be filed by 7th January, 2013, failing which, this application, shall stand rejected without further reference to the Bench. Till further order, the police will not arrest the petitioner namely Ashratul Bibi @ Lofon Bibi in connection with the present case i.e. Rajmahal (Radhanagar) P.S.Case No.237 of 2011, con...
Abdul HussaIn Vs. Kauleshwar Kishore Singh
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Dec-19-2012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P. (C) No. 6497 of 2012 Abdul Hussain & others ....Petitioners Versus Kauleshwar Kishore Singh & others Respondents -------- Coram: THE HONBLE MR JUSTICE P.P. BHATT -------- /19.12.2012: Learned counsel for the petitioners states that he will take necessary steps for removal of the defects during course of the day. Petitioners, by way of filing the present writ petition, under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, have prayed for setting aside the order dated 13.9.2012, passed in T.S. No. 19 of 1994, by the learned Sub-Judge-VI, Hazaribagh, whereby the learned court-below has rejected the petition dated 28.8.2012 filed by the plaintiffs for leave to file copy of plaint and accept the document by condoning the delay in filing the same. Upon hearing the learned counsel for the petitioners and on perusal of the material on record, let notice be issued to the respondent Nos. 1 to 10. Learned counsel for the petitioners seeks permission to serv...
Sunil Kr Jha and ors Vs. Human Resource Development
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Dec-19-2012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W. P. (S) No. 7337 of 2012 --- 1. Sunil Kr. Jha 2. Jagarnath Panigrahi 3. Bhuneshwar Mahto Petitioners Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand through the Secretary, H.R.D. Deptt., Ranchi 2. District Superintendent of Education, Ranchi Respondents --- CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK SINGH --- For the Petitioner : Mr. Madan Mohan Pan, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr. Sunil Singh, J.C. to S.C. II --- 2/19.12.2012 Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that headmaster of Yogoda Satsang Middle School, Jagannathpur, Ranchi has submitted bill, annexure no. 2 on 02.11.2012 to the respondent no. 2 for payment of the arrears of the salary to the petitioner. However, respondent no. 2 has not taken any decision thereon. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that an appropriate decision in accordance with law shall be taken by the respondent no. 2 on annexure no. 2 preferably within 60 days from today and amount found due, if any shall be released in ...
Kauser Parween and anr Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Dec-19-2012
INTHEHIGHCOURTOFJHARKHANDATRANCHI W.P.(S)No.2166of2012 KauserParween&Anr. ... Petitioners Versus TheStateofJharkhandthroughitsSecretary&Ors.... ... Respondents CORAM: HONBLEMR.JUSTICEALOKSINGH ForthePetitioners :Mr.UmeshKumarChoubey,Advocate FortheState :Mr.RajeshKumar,G.P.V FortheIntervenor :None I.A.No.1897of2012 05/19.12.2012 NoneispresenttopressthisIntervenorapplication. Accordingly,presentapplicationisdismissedasnotpressed. W.P.(S)No.2166of2012 Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that now Jharkhand EducationTribunalisworking,therefore,hemaybepermittedtowithdraw thispetitionwithlibertytoapproachtheJharkhandEducationTribunal.He, however,submitsthatappropriatepetitionshallbefiledbeforetheJharkhand EducationTribunal,therefore,Tribunalbedirectedtodecidethecaseofthe petitionerwithoutanyunduedelay. Accordingly, present petition is permitted to be withdrawn with the aforesaidliberty. It goes without saying, if appropriate petition is filed before the JharkhandEducationTribunal byt...
Sushil Kumar Mishra Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Dec-19-2012
INTHEHIGHCOURTOFJHARKHANDATRANCHI W.P.(S)No.2360of2004 SushilKumarMishra ...Petitioner Versus TheStateofJharkhand&others ......Respondents CORAM:HONBLEMR.JUSTICEAPARESHKUMARSINGH ForthePetitioner :Mr.SouravArun,Adv. FortheRespondents:J.C.toS.C.(L&C) 18/19.12.2012 Heardlearnedcounselfortheparties. Thepetitionerhadinitiallycomeagainsttheshowcausedated4th March, 2004 (Annexure4) issued by the respondent no.2, Additional Secretary, Water Resources Department, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi,askingthepetitionertoreplyastowhyhisappointmentbenot terminated. Itissubmittedonbehalfofthepetitionerthatwhenthematter wastakenupon30thApril,2004,thisCourtpassedanorderofstatus quo.Itisfurthersubmittedonbehalfofthepetitionerthatbyvirtueof aninterimorderhecontinuedtowork,butsometimeintheyear2009 vide order dated 22nd June, 2009 issued by the respondents he was terminatedfromservicedespitetheorderofstatusquo.Thesaidorder of termination was challenged in I.A. No. 3652 of 2009 filed in the presentwritapplic...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »