Orissa Court February 1971 Judgments
Mithunlal and anr. Vs. the State
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Feb-26-1971
Reported in: 37(1971)CLT396; 1971CriLJ1494
ORDERS.K. Ray, J.1. Petitioner No. 2, Ram Nivas, has a grocery shop at Pipli. Petitioner 1 is a relation of petitioner 2 and works as a helper in the said shop. There was a bag of Arhar Dal in the shop on 17-8-1961 for sale. That day, at about 12 noon, the Food Inspector purchased 750 grams of Arhar Dal on payment of 95 paise. After serving on the two petitioners notice as required Under Section 11 of the Food Adulteration Act, the Food Inspector obtained a receipt (Ext. 2) under the joint signature of the petitioners. In that receipt the petitioners acknowledged having sold 750 grams of Arhar Dal at the market price of 95 paise. The Food Inspector divided the purchased-sample into three parts, and sealed them in three clean bottles; one bottle was given to the accused-petitioners, one was sent to the Public Analyst, and the third was kept by the Food Inspector for production in Court at the time of trial.2. The Public Analyst reported that the sample contained foreign material 30 per ...
Tag this Judgment!Mangaraj Vs. Election Officer-cum-s.D.O. and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Feb-25-1971
Reported in: AIR1972Ori59
A. Misra, J.1. This writ application has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution for quashing the orders of the Election Officer (opposite party No. 1)dated 29-12-70 rejecting the nomination paper of the petitioner for election to the office of the Chairman of Maneswar Panchayat Samiti on the ground that his name does not find place in the electoral roll of the Grama within the jurisdiction of the Samiti. The petitioner alleges that he is known as Mangaraj Senapati alias Mangaraj. He filed two nomination papers duly proposed and seconded; that his name finds place in the electoral roll contemplated under Section 4 (1) of the Orissa Gram Panchayat Act and that the rejection of his nomination was illegal and without jurisdiction. Opposite Party Nos. 1, 2 and 5 filed counter opposing the application. According to them, during the last general election of Gram Panchayats held in the year 1970, the Block Development Officer who was the Election Officer published the electoral roll ...
Tag this Judgment!Uttareswari Rice Mills Vs. Sales Tax Officer, Intelligence Wing, Vigil ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Feb-24-1971
Reported in: 37(1971)CLT310; [1971]28STC168(Orissa)
G.K. Misra, C.J. 1. Though a number of grounds had been taken in the writ application, ultimately Mr. Rath filed a typed statement showing that he would press only the following two grounds : (1) In the absence of an assessment proceeding or escaped assessment proceeding under Section 12(8) of the Orissa Sales Tax Act or penalty proceedings or proceeding for realisation of tax, notice issued under Section 16(1) of the Orissa Sales Tax Act is illegal and without jurisdiction. (2) In the absence of rules prescribing the conditions for the exercise of power under Section 16(1) of the Act, the power remains in abeyance and no action could be taken in exercise of the said power. 2. Facts relevant to the aforesaid contentions, shorn of details, may only be stated. For the assessment years 1964-65 and 1965-66 the assessments were made on 13th January, 1966, and 22nd March, 1967, respectively. On 9th January, 1968, an order (annexure A) was recorded by the Sales Tax Officer which runs thus : ...
Tag this Judgment!S. Sadasiva Rao Vs. the Government of Orissa and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Feb-19-1971
Reported in: (1971)IILLJ67Ori
A. Misra, J.1. This is an application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for quashing the decision of the Government of Orissa (opposite party No. 1) contained in its Office Memo No. 8950(3)/LEH., dated 1-8-67 (Annexure G) by which it refused to refer the dispute under Section 12(5) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 and direct reference of the dispute for industrial adjudication on a reconsideration of facts and circumstances.Government of Orissa,Labour, Employment & Housing Department.Office MemorandumSub: Industrial Dispute between the management of Shree Durga Glass Works, Barang, Cuttack and their workman Shri S. Sadasiva Rao.Ref: Letter No. 3725(2) Co. dated 2-6-67 of the D.L.O. Conciliation Officer, Cuttack.2. On consideration of the above report of the Conciliation Officer, the State Government are satisfied that there is no case for reference of the dispute for adjudication as Shri Rao remained absent unauthorisedly with effect from 7-9-65 and on that date he was...
Tag this Judgment!B. Baliarsing and anr. Vs. Bamdev Misra and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Feb-16-1971
Reported in: 37(1971)CLT435
A. Misra, J.1. Defendant Nos. 3 and 4 are the appellants. Plaintiff-respondent No. 1 filed the suit for declaration of title, confirmation of possession or in the alternative for recovery of possession of the disputed land measuring 24' x 9' appertaining to khata No. 93. plot No. 1026 in Markandeswar Sahi of Puri town. He also claimed Rs. 100/- as damages from defendant Nos. 1 and 2 and a permanent injunction restraining the defendants from interfering with his possession and damaging any of the trees or plants grown on the suit land.2. Plaintiff's case, in brief, is as follows: The strip of land in dispute adjoins his house on the west while defendant Nos. 3 to 5 have their houses on the eastern side of the plaintiff's house on plot No. 1027. Defendant No. 6 is the landlord of both the plots Nos. 1026 and 1027. The piece of land on which plaintiff's house is situate was originally leased out to one Jaina Parida, who constructed a house thereon with the permission of the municipality s...
Tag this Judgment!Rama Chandra Sahu Vs. Sanyasi Behera and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Feb-15-1971
Reported in: 37(1971)CLT383
R.N. Misra, J.1. This is an application under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution asking for a writ of Certiorari to quash the appellate decision of the learned Additional District Magistrate (Judicial) Ganjam (Opposite Party No. 3),2. The opposite party No. 1 applied before the House Rent Controller, Berhampur in House Rent Control Case No. 11 of 1969 impleading the petitioner and the opposite party No, 2 as respondents and asked for eviction of the respondents from the house as the landlord wanted the premises for his own occupation and wanted a direction from the Controller regarding payment of arrears of rent The landlord alleged that he was the owner of the house and the respondent No. 1 was the tenant under him. The tenant had admitted that he was liable to pay Rupees 670/- by way of arrears of rent and had acknowledged that fact in writing on 23-10-1968.The respondent No. 1 (the present petitioner) denied the assertion made by the landlord about title and claimed that the l...
Tag this Judgment!Sudhir Ch. Das Vs. State of Orissa and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Feb-12-1971
Reported in: (1971)IILLJ65Ori
G.K. Misra, C.J.1. The petitioner was appointed as a work-sarkar under work-charged establishment of the Public Health Sub-division in Baripada. The appointment was purely temporary and was liable to be terminated at any time without prior notice and without assigning any reason. His services were terminated on 15-10-69 by the following order:Sri Sudhir Chandra Das, Work-Sarkar is discharged from service from 15-10-69 forenoon.It is this order which is assailed in this writ application under Article 226 of the Constitution as being contrary to law, inasmuch as, though ex facie it appears to be innocuous, it was given by way of punishment. The facts referred to in the petition to make out a case of punishment are that the Superintending Engineer, Bhubaneswar Circle wrote a letter to the Chief Engineer on 9-10-69 to the following effect:I have to inform you that Sri Sudhir Chandra Das, Work-Sarkar under work-charged Establishment of Baripada P.H. Divn. has been arrested by the Police in ...
Tag this Judgment!Norbet Kispatta Vs. Mst. Tersa Kerketa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Feb-10-1971
Reported in: 1971CriLJ1496
ORDERS. Acharya, J.1. The petitioner in this revision, who was the opposite party in the court below, has been directed to pay Rs. 20/- p. m. towards the maintenance of a child born to the opposite party, who was the petitioner in the court below. The said child, as found by the court below, was born to the opposite party through her union with the petitioner.2. Mrs. Padhi, the learned Counsel for the petitioner mainly contended that the court below was legally not justified in granting maintenance for the child as in the petition Under Section 488, Criminal P.C. filed in the court below by the opposite party, maintenance was claimed for a female child, whereas the opposite party in her deposition in the court below claimed maintenance for a male child. Mrs. Padhi in this connection contended, that the relief given Under Section 488, Criminal P.C. being of a civil nature the petition in the court below is in the nature of a plaint in a civil suit, and the claim made therein being for t...
Tag this Judgment!Lingaraj Nanda Vs. State of Orissa Represented by the Secretary, Reven ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Feb-09-1971
Reported in: AIR1972Ori61
G.K. Misra, C.J.1. The application for leave to appeal is under Article 133(1) (a), (b) and (c) of the Constitution of India. The petitioner's writ application was O.J.C. No. 813 of 1968.2. The facts of the writ application, bereft of all details, may be stated in short to appreciate the points in controversy. The petitioner is the proprietor of a local theatre known as Annapurna Theatre. Cm 18-9-1958 he applied to the Government for lease of plot No. 723 situate in the City of Cuttack with an area of 0.923 acre for the purpose of having a theatre at the place. The Collector and the Revenue Divisional Commissioner recommended the lease in favour of the petitioner and negatived the claim of Shri Alekh Sahu (opposite party No. 6), the proprietor of Raj Tarangini Films, who had applied for lease of the same for locating a cinema. At one stage it appears to have been decided that the land would be settled by public auction. The petitioner alleged that while matters had not been finalised h...
Tag this Judgment!Narendranath Tripathy Vs. the Director of Public Instructions (Schools ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Feb-08-1971
Reported in: (1971)IILLJ63Ori
G.K. Misra, C.J.1. Facts are not very much in dispute. The petitioner was an Assistant Teacher of Kalamari U.P. School in the District of Ganjam. He tendered his resignation on 3rd of October 1969. On 7-10-69 he withdrew his resignation. The resignation was however accepted on 31-10-69 with effect from 4-10-69. On 27-4-1970 the Director of Public Instructions (Schools) (Opposite Party No. 1) directed the District Inspector of Schools (Opposite Party No. 2) to reinstate the petitioner in his former post. Subsequently on 19-5-70 opposite party No. 1 recalled his order dated 27-4-70 as the resignation had been accepted on 31-10-69 with effect from 4-10-69. The petitioner assails the order dated 19-5-70 as being contrary to law.2. Position of law is well settled that a Government servant has no right of withdrawing the resignation once it is accepted. But if he withdraws the resignation before its acceptance, Government cannot accept the resignation saying that the petitioner has no locus ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »