Orissa Court March 1971 Judgments
Apurba Suna Vs. D. Kosala
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Mar-25-1971
Reported in: 37(1971)CLT425; 1971CriLJ1670
ORDERR.N. Misra, J.1. This is a reference Under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure made by the learned Sessions Judge, Koraput at Jeypnre in the following circumstances:Apurba Suna laid a complaint in the court of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Malkangiri. On 21-11-69 the complainant was examined Under Section 200, Cr.PC and the Sub-Divisional Magistrate directed an inquiry Under Section 202 of the Code. One of the persons complained against was a police constable. From the order sheet of the complaint case No. I.-C.C. 21/69 registered Under Sections 354/328, I.P.C. it appears that the enquiry report from the Tahsildar and Magistrate, First Class, Malkangiri had not been received until 24-2-70. The case was thereafter adjourned to 20:3-70. In the meantime on 2-3-70, the Court Sub-Inspector of Malkangiri made a petition for withdrawal of the case Under Section 494, Cr.PC On that day the learned Sub-Divisional Magistrate passed the following order:The Court Sub-Inspector, Malk...
Tag this Judgment!Basudev Sarangi Vs. Inspector of Schools and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Mar-10-1971
Reported in: 37(1971)CLT330
A. Misra, J.1. The facts, in brief, so far relevant on which this application under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution is founded, are as follows:Uchashikshyasram High School of Village Kadaliban was started as a private institution in which the petitioner was appointed as an Asst. teacher by the Managing Committee in the year 1943 and he continued to serve there. In the year 1962, the State Government took over this institution along with other similar institutions situate at different places in the State declaring them as Government managed full deficit aided High Schools. The Managing Committee was abolished and a set of Rules as at Annexure' 1 were introduced for the management and administration of the institutions. Subsequent to the taking over of management of such institutions opposite parties effected transfers of teachers from one school to another, in the course of which, petitioner was transferred to Kolar-Joypur High School but later on ordered to rejoin his original...
Tag this Judgment!Guru Charan Behara and ors. Vs. Adikanda Behara and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Mar-08-1971
Reported in: AIR1972Ori38
S.K. Ray, J.1. This is a second appeal by the plaintiffs from the concurrent decision dated 5-8-66 of Sri D. Hota, Subordinate Judge. . Kendranara. passed in Title Appeal No. 73 of 1966/172 of 1965 by which the suit has been dismissed.2. Plaintiffs brought the suit for setting aside the sale-deed dated 7-4-61 executed by defendant 6 in favour of defendant 1. and for declaration that neither defendant-1. nor the original defendant-6 had, nor the present defendants 6 to 8 have any right, title or interest over any part of the suit-land, and also for declaration that plaintiffs have title and possession over the suit-land -and for permanent iniunction restraining defendants 1 to 5 from disturbing their possession over the same.3. Plaintiffs 1 to 3 had a brother, named Durga Charan. Plaintiff-4 is their mother. Durga Charan died unmarried in a state of iointness with them. Before, his death, he had been betrothed to defendantNo. 6. His marriage with defendant No. 6 could not take place on ...
Tag this Judgment!Gopabandhu Das Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Mar-08-1971
Reported in: AIR1972Ori35
Patra, J. 1. On the coming into force of the Orissa Grama Panchayat Act. 1964, the Gram Panchayat of Anandnur within the jurisdiction of which is included the town of Anandpur, was constituted. Section 417-A of the Orissa Municipal Act. 1950 (hereinafter called the Act) empowers the State Government to constitute any area into a notified area. In exercise of this power, the Government of Orissa issued Notification No. Spl. Con.- 47-70-14956/ U. D. dated 17th July. 1970 constituting the Anandnur town into a notified area (Annexure 1). The notification runs thus:'Government of Orissa Urban Development Department Notification. Dated Bhubaneswar, the 17th July. 1970. No. SPL-Con 47-70-14956/UD. In exercise of the Dowers conferred by Sub-section (1) of Section 417-A of the Orissa Municipal Act. 1950 (Orissa Act 23 of 1950), the State Government do hereby declare that it is necessary to make administrative provision for all purposes of the said Act, in the local area of the district of Ke...
Tag this Judgment!Sri Gouranga Sundar Mohanty Vs. District Transport Manager and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Mar-08-1971
Reported in: (1971)IILLJ83Ori
B.K. Patra, J.1. The petitioner was a conductor in the State Transport Service, having been so appointed by the Assistant Transport Manager, Balasore (Annexure-1). A departmental inquiry was started against him on certain charges which were duly enquired into. On a consideration of the inquiry report, the District Transport Manager, Balasore Zone, who is an authority superior to the officer who appointed the petitioner, came to the conclusion that the charges against the petitioner has been duly proved and issued a notice to the petitioner to show cause why he should not be discharged from service. The material portion of the notice runs thus:This conductor has already been punished thrice for committing similar offences. Since he was constantly giving very unsatisfactory income, he was kept as spare for a period of six months only for deputation in very short routes when there was shortage of conductors. In spite of the above punishment, there has been no improvement in him. Hence it ...
Tag this Judgment!Ramesh Chandra Sahu and ors. Vs. State of Orissa and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Mar-03-1971
Reported in: (1971)IILLJ80Ori
R.N. Misra, J.1. Five petitioners came before this Court in an application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India king for the quashing of an order of retirement passed against them on 1-6-68, by the Superintendent of the Government Press. The petitioner No. 1 was a senior assistant and the petitioner No. 2 was an assistant overseer while the petitioner No. 3 was a head computer. The petitioners 4 and 5 were an overseer and a lower division clerk respectively.2. Mr. S. B. Nanda for the petitioners does not want to proceed with the application of the petitioner No. 5, Therefore, his claim in the writ petition is not considered. So far as the petitioner No. 4 Sri Soloman P.D. Sahu is concerned, Mr. Nanda wants leave to file a separate writ petition making appropriate allegations and impleading proper parties. There was an application before this Court during the pendency of the writ petition by one Dayanidhi Harichandan for permission to intervene on the allegation that he was a ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- Next ›