Jharkhand Court July 2013 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.
Dhaneshwar Rawani Vs. Ms Bharat Coking Coal Limited Represented Throug ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-18-2013
INTHEHIGHCOURTOFJHARKHANDATRANCHI W.P.(S)No.498of2013 DhaneshwarRawani ..... Petitioner Versus M/s.BharatCokingCoalLimited&Ors. . Respondents CORAM: HONBLEMR.JUSTICESHREECHANDRASHEKHAR ForthePetitioner :Mr.JitendraTripathi,Advocate FortheRespondents :Mr.KaustavPanda,Advocate 3/18.07.2013 Issuenotice. Mr. Kaustav Panda, learned counsel waives notice on behalfoftherespondents. Thepetitionerisdirectedtomakedetailedrepresentation before the Respondent No.3 within a period of two weeks and RespondentNo.3isdirectedtodecidetheclaimofthepetitionerbya reasoned order within a period of further two weeks specifically dealingwitheachandeverycontentionraisedbythepetitioner. AcopyofthedecisiontakenbyRespondentNo.3should beplacedonrecordimmediatelythereafter. Callthematteraftersixweeks. (ShreeChandrashekhar,J.) R.K....
Jetu Teli Vs. Bokaro Steel Plant Through Its Managing Director and ors
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-18-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI L.P.A. No. 509 of 2012 Jetu Teli Appellant Versus' Bokaro Steel Plant & others .. Respondents ---------- CORAM: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HONBLE MR. JUSTICE APARESH KUMAR SINGH For the appellant : Mr. Brij Bihari Sinha For the Respondent : Mr. Rajiv Ranjan ----------- Order No.05 Dated 18th July, 2013 Admit. No notice is required to be issued to the respondents. In the meanwhile, petitioner- appellant may accept the payment of Rs. 50,000/- which will not be prejudiced the petitioner's interest in the appeal. (Prakash Tatia, C.J.) (Aparesh Kumar Singh,J.) Pandey / A. Mohanty...
Mrs.Manorma Verma and anr Vs. State of Jharkhand and anr
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-18-2013
In the High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi Cr.M.P. No.1414 o1. Mrs. Manorma Verma 2. Mr.Bimal Kumar Verma.............Petitioners VERSUS State of Jharkhand and another......Opposite Parties CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE R.R.PRASAD For the Petitioners:Mr.Mukesh Kumar Sinha For the State : A.P.P For the O.P.No.2 : Mr.Rakesh Kumar Sinha 5/ 18.07.13. Learned counsel appearing for the opposite party no.2 submits that counter affidavit shall be filed in course of the day, copy of which would be served upon the counsel appearing for the petitioners today itself. In that view of the matter, let this matter be listed on 25.7.2013. Till then, interim order passed on 26.2.2013 shall continue. ( R.R. Prasad, J.) ND/...
Anil Kumar Singh Vs. Police
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-18-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(S) No.3331 of 2012 Anil Kumar Singh . Petitioner Versus State of Jharkhand & Ors. ...Respondents Coram : The Honble Mr. Justice Narendra Nath Tiwari For the Petitioner : Mr. R.N.Prasad, Advocate For the Respondents : J.C. to S.C.I ----- I.A.no.3819 o07. 18.07.2013 In this application, the petitioner has prayed for fixing an early date of hearing of W.P.(S) no.3331 of 2012. It has been submitted that the petitioner's case is covered by the order passed in W.P.(S) no.5988 of 2012[Ganesh Ram Ravi @ Ganesh Ram Vrs. State of Jharkhand & Ors.] and the same may be disposed of in terms of the said order. Learned J.C. to S.C.I, appearing on behalf of the respondents, submitted that instead of fixing a date, the writ petition itself can be disposed of in terms of the order passed in W.P.(S) no.5988 of 2012. Learned counsel for the petitioner also agrees for the same. In view of the above, the parties have been heard and the writ petition is being dis...
Nasim Alias Nasim Ansari and anr Vs. the State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-18-2013
INTHEHIGHCOURTOFJHARKHANDATRANCHI B.A.No.5282of2013 1.Nasim@[email protected] 2.Ashed@WahidAnsari .... .... . Petitioners Versus TheStateofJharkhand .... .... .... Opp.Party CORAM :HON'BLEMRS.JUSTICEJAYAROY ForthePetitioners :Mr.MaheshTewari,Advocate FortheState :A.P.P. FortheInformant :Mr.InduShekharGupta,Advocate 02/18.07.2013 Heard counsel appearingforthepetitionersandcounsel appearingfortheState. PetitionersareaccusedinthiscaseregisteredunderSections 147/149/341/323/307/380/504/506oftheIndianPenalCode. Counselappearingforthepetitionershassubmittedthatthe disputearosebetweenthepartiesregardingputtingearthinthepassage. Earlierpetitionerno.1hasfiledacaseagainsttheinformantpartytothe presentcasei.e.Pakur(T)P.S.CaseNo.38of2013.Itisalsosubmitted thatthepetitionerhasreceivedsomeinjuries.F.I.R.ofthecasefiledby petitionerno.1isannexedinthisapplicationasAnnexure2. Counsel appearing for the informant has opposed and submittedthattheinformanthasreceivedseriousinjuriesonhishead. Counse...
Ganesh Prasad Sinha Vs. Human Resource Development
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-18-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(S) No. 2312 of 2013 Ganga Prasad Sinha .. Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand & Others .. Respondents ----- CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA NATH TIWARI ----- For the Petitioner - Mr. R.P.Srivastav For the Respondents - Mr. J.C to G.P-II ----- 2/18.7.2013 I. A. No. 4891/2013 In this application, the petitioner has prayed for disposal of W.P.(S) No. 2312/2013 in terms of the order passed in W.P.(S) No. 3910/2012 (Prabhaker Kumar & Anr. Vs. State of Jharkhand & Ors.). It has been submitted that the petitioner's case is exactly identical to the case of the petitioners of the said writ petition and this writ petition may be disposed of in terms of the said order. Learned J.C to G.P-II appearing on behalf of the respondents has no objection in disposing of this case with similar order, as has been passed in the said case. In view of the above, this writ petition is being disposed of by separate order. This application stands disposed of. ...
Chaklu Alias Imran Ansari and anr Vs. the State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-18-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 5235 o1. Chaklu @ Imran Ansari @ Imran Changlu Ansari @ Chaglu 2. Israfil Ansari @ Chhotu ... ... Petitioners Versus The State of Jharkhand ... ... ... Opposite Party --- CORAM : HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE JAYA ROY For the Petitioners : Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Advocate For the State : A. P. P. 02/18.07.2013 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State. Petitioners are accused in a case for the offence registered under Sections 395, 397 of the Indian Penal Code. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the petitioners are not named in the F.I.R. It is also submitted that though the petitioners are in custody since 20.07.2012 i.e. nearly one year, but till date none of the petitioners was put on T.I. parade. It is also submitted that from the possession of the petitioners few Arms were recovered, but for the said offence a separate case has been registered under Arms Act in which both the petitioners have ...
Rakesh Kumar Goswami Vs. Human Resource Development
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-18-2013
INTHEHIGHCOURTOFJHARKHANDATRANCHI W.P.(S)No.502of2013 RakeshKumarGoswami Petitioner Versus 1.TheStateofJharkhand 2.Director,PrimaryEducation,Deptt.ofHRD, GovernmentofJharkhand,Ranchi 3.Director,SecondaryEducation,Deptt.ofHRD, Govt.ofJharkhand,Ranchi 4.DeputyCommissioner,Godda 5.DistrictSuperintendentofEducation,Godda 6.DistrictEducationOfficer,Godda 7.InChargeHeadMaster,HighSchool,Sarotia, Godda,Jharkhand Respondents CORAM :HON'BLEMR.JUSTICESHREECHANDRASHEKHAR ForthePetitioner :Mr.PradeepKumarVerma,Advocate FortheRespondents :M/s.AparajitaBhardwaj& AshishKr.Shekhar,J.C.toG.P.VI 4/18.07.2013 In the writ petition the petitioner has made the followingprayer: (i) Foradirectiontosetasidetheletterno.677(Law) dated 27/29.09.2012 issued by the Director, Primary Education whereby and whereunder she rejected the claim of the petitioner for officiating allowanceanddeputationallowance; (ii) for direction upon the respondents to pay the Officiatingallowancebecausepetitionerworkedas a High School Te...
Pankaj Kumar Singh Vs. the State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-18-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A No. 5274 of 2013 Pankaj Kumar Singh ........... Petitioner -- Versus -- The State of Jharkhand ...... ......... Opposite Party ---- CORAM: HONBLE MRS. JUSTICE JAYA ROY ---- For the Petitioner : M/s. Indrajit Sinha/ Ajay Kumar Sah, Advocate For the State : A.P.P. ---- 2/ 18.07.2013 Heard the counsel for petitioner and counsel for the State. The petitioner is accused in this case registered under Section 25(1- B)A/26 of the Arms Act. The counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that on chase when the petitioner was apprehended one country made pistol loaded with 1.315 bore cartridge was recovered. It is also submitted that the petitioner is in custody from 5.3.2013 i.e. nearly 4 months. Counsel for the State opposed but not disputed the period of custody of the petitioner. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the period of custody, the petitioner, namely Pankaj Kumar Singh ...
Basanti Devi Vs. Union of India and ors
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-18-2013
INTHEHIGHCOURTOFJHARKHANDATRANCHI W.P.(PIL)No.3464of2013 BasantiDevi ...... Petitioner Versus UnionofIndiaandors. ....... Respondents CORAM:HONBLETHECHIEFJUSTICE HONBLEMR.JUSTICEAPARESHKUMARSINGH .... ForthePetitioner :Mr.LalanKumarSingh,Adv. FortheRespondents :JCtoAdvocateGeneral & Mr.RamNivasRoy,Adv. Orderno.2 Dated18th July,2013 1. TherespondentStatemayclarifywhetherbyconstructionof theRailwaysiding,theonlywayinquestionisbeingblockedornot.2. Postthismatteraftertwoweeks. (PrakashTatia,C.J.) (ApareshKumarSingh,J) G.Jha/...
- ‹ Prev
- 101
- 102
- 103
- 104
- 105
- 107
- 108
- 109
- 110
- 111
- Next ›
- Last »