Orissa Court January 1995 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.
Panchu Mahakud and ors. Vs. P.C. Mohanty and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-09-1995
Reported in: (1995)IILLJ1203Ori; 1995(I)OLR355
A. Pasayat, J.1. A short, but interesting question has been raised in this case. Whether on the death of an employer, there is scope for substitution of his legal heirs, in aproceeding under Section 33C(2) of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (in short, the 'Act') is that question.2. A brief reference to the factual aspects is necessary for clearing the deck relating to the legal position. One B.C. Mohanty (hereinafter referred to as the 'employer') was the lessee under State Government. In respect of chromite mine at Sukinda, and he was proprietor of his business concern. On account of advanced age, he sought for permission from the State Government to transfer the lease. Such permission was granted on October 30, 1980, On April 27, 1981 a transfer deed was executed, and the concern was taken over by a company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 styled as M/s. E.G. Mohanty and Co.Ltd. with effect from April 28, 1981. An application under Section 33C(2) of the Act was filed by the p...
Jagannath Barik Vs. Orissa Khadi and Village Industries Board and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-09-1995
Reported in: (1998)IIILLJ479Ori; 1995(I)OLR430
D.P. Mohapatra, J.1. The disputes raised in these three cases are inter-linked and parties are the same. Therefore, with consent of learned counsel for the parties the cases were heard together and they are being disposed of by this common Judgment.2. The controversy relates to payment of the dues of Jagannath Barik, a retired employee of Orissa Khadi and Village Industries Board. While OJC Nos. 2730/1990 and 2731/1990 have been filed by the President, Orissa Khadi and Village Industries Board against Jagannath Barik, OJC No. 2686/1990 has been tiled by Jagannath Barik against the Orissa Khadi and Village Industries Board. In OJC No. 2730 of 1990 the petitioner has prayed for quashing the order of the Labour Court, Bhubaneswar dated December 30, 1989 in Industrial Dispute Misc. Case No. 37 of 1988 (Annexure-l) computing the amount due to the applicant Jagannath Barik at Rs. 12,846 towards last month's pay and earned leave encashment. In OJC No. 2731/1990 the petitioner has prayed for q...
Lingaraj Pallai Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-09-1995
Reported in: 1995(I)OLR380
S.K. Mohanty, J.1. The appellant stands convicted by the Assistant Sessions Judge, Puri, for the offences under Secs. 458 and 376. IPC with having committed house breaking during the night of 2-11-1991 and committing rape on PW 8, daughter of PW 9. He has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years on each count with the direction that the same shall run concurrently.2. Prosecution story in brief was that at the relevant time PW 8 and her mother PW 9 were working in the cashew nut factory of PW 5 Bihari Palai in village Khandualpur within Bramhagiri Police Station and residing in the factory premises. On the night of 2-11-1991 they had slept inside their room by closing the door and shutting the same by means of a bamboo. The appellant after scaling over the wall of the factory pushed open the said door and entering their room gagged the mouth of PW 9 and after tying her hands by means of her saree, committed rape on PW 8, the informant.3. Appellant took the plea of d...
Madan Mohan Panigrahi and ors. Vs. Revenue Officer and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-09-1995
Reported in: 1995(I)OLR394
D.P. Mohapatra, J. 1. The core question which falls for determination in this case is whether there exists the relationship of landlord and tenant between petitioners and opp. party No. 4, Balakrushna Panigrahi, within the meaning of Section 2 (31) of the Orissa Land Reforms Act, 1960 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') in respect of the land in dispute. The land in question is 22 acres in extent in village Nuagaon,2.The revisional order of the Additional District Magistrate,Ganjam (opp. party No 3) dated 23-12-1989(Annexure-9) in which he set aside the appellate order of the Officer-on-Special Duty (opp party No. 2) dated 29-9-1937 (Annexure-5) and confirmed the order of the Revenue Officer, Digapahandi (opp. Party No 1), dated 22-1-1987 (Annexure 4) is assailed in the writ petition. The petitioners have prayed tor quashing the order as per Annexures- 4 and 9.3. The proceedings were initiated on the applications filed by the petitioners individually in the year 1975 under Section 3...
State of Orissa Vs. Ramwatar Agarwalla and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-09-1995
Reported in: 1995CriLJ2053
ORDERP.C. Naik, J.1. The order of discharge dated 24-9-1987 passed by the Sub-divisional Judicial Magistrate, Balasore in 2(c)CC case No. 145 of 1983 discharging the opposite parties/accused persons under Section 245(1), Cr. P.C. having been brought to the notice of this Court and the Court being of the opinion that the said order is not proper, a suo motu revision was initiated and accordingly, notices were issued to the accused persons to show cause why the order of discharge be not set aside. On notice being served, the opposite parties (accused persons) have entered appearance through their counsel.2. The facts of the case in brief are that on receiving a prosecution report under Section 16(1) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act (hereinafter referred as 'the Act') against the present opposite parties, 2(c)CC case No. 145 of 1983 was registered in the court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Baiasore and notices were ordered to be issued for appearance of opposite parties. Ini...
Sachindra Kumar SwaIn Vs. the State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-06-1995
Reported in: AIR1995Ori224; 1995(I)OLR439
Pasayat, J. 1. Petitioner calls in question legality of the order passed by the Director of Estate and Ex-Office Joint Secretary Government of Orissa, Bhubaneswar (opposite party No. 2) determining the lease executed on 7-5-1984, and registered on 22-6-1984 in respect of plot No. N/1-117 granted in favour of the petitioner. The ground on which the determination has been done as appears from the impugned order dated 27-2-1991, a copy of which is annexed as Annexure-6 to the writ application, is that the petitioner's wife had purchased a house from the Bhu-baneswar Development Authority on 22-10-1982, and there was omission to indicate this aspect in the petitioner's affidavit dated 19-2-1984, on the strength of which lease was granted. Since petitioner's wife had purchased a house at Bhubaneswar prior to the grant of lease, he was not eligible for allotment/grant of lease. 2. The stand of the petitioner is that before such determination, no opportunity was granted to the petitioner thou...
Brahmananda Das Vs. State Transport Authority, Represented Through Its ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-06-1995
Reported in: 1995(I)OLR461
A. Pasayat, J.1. The only question that needs adjudication in this writ application relates to conditions which may be attached to a permit issued by a Regional Transport Authority (in short, 'RTA') to a stage carriage under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (in short, the 'Act').2. The impugned condition imposed by the concerned transport authority reads as follows:'Full concession to blind and physically handicapped persons to the extent of 50% and above and 50% concession to blind and physically handicapped persons between 40% - 30%. Two seats should be kept reserved for blind and physically handicapped persons.' According to petitioner, this is not one of the twenty-three conditions specified in Sub-section (2) of Section 72 of the Act, and this is also not one of the conditions which can be encompassed by Clauses (i) to (xxiv). It is stated that though the condition obligated the stage carriage owner to forego fare or collect a part of it, no consequential reduction in the tax payable ...
Basanta Kumar Sahu Vs. Bhikari Charan Sahu and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-06-1995
Reported in: 1995(I)OLR516
A. Pasayat, J. 1. Petittioner calls in question legality of order passed by the Commissioner of Consolidation, Orissa in a proceeding underSection 37 of Orissa Consolidation of Holdings and Prevention of Fragemantation of Land Act, 1972 (in short, the 'Act') accepting plea of adoption raised by Bhikari Charan Sahu (opp. party No. 1) and reversing adjudications in favour of petitioner as done by the Consolidation Officer, Kendrapara and Deputy Director, Consolidation, Range -Ill, Kendrapara. 2. A brief reference to the factual aspects is necessary. The genealogy so far as relevant is essentially as follows :Mana_________________________________|_________________________| | |Radha Madhu Gadei| | |Sobani Chintamani ____________ | | | | Dinabandhu Banambar Dukhei: Ullucha Sukhei|BasantaPetitioner's claim is based on adjudication in T. S. No. 16 of 1936 of the Subordinate Judge, Cuttack. According to him land in question was allotted to him in the final decree proceeding in the aforesaid ca...
Karunasindhu Nayak Vs. State of Orissa and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-06-1995
Reported in: 1995(I)OLR541
A. Pasayat, J. 1. This is the fifth journey of the petitioner to this Court on the question of his date of birth. According to the authorities, his date of birth is 25-7-1930, but the petitioner claims it to be 10-5-1934. He places reliance on several certificates issued by institutions where he claims to have prosecuted studies at different points of time. Since the authorities proposed to superannuate him on his completing 60th year, on the basis of the date of birth as recorded in the service records i.e., 25-7-1930, petitioner moved this Court earlier for interference. Earlier writ petitions were disposed of with directions. The Inspector of Schools was directed to deal with petitioner's case on consideration of all relevant materials. The Inspector of Schools before whom the petitioner was making his grievance, initially did not decide the case on merits and had not granted adequate opportunity to the petitioner. On that basis, on the four earlier occasions, matter was sent for re...
Jagannath Naik and ors. Vs. Addl. District Magistrate (L.R.), Balasore ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-05-1995
Reported in: AIR1996Ori16
Pasayat, J. 1. Petitioners call in question legality of order passed by the Addl. District Magistrate (L.R.), Balasore upsetting views of Revenue Officer, Soro and Officer on Special Duty (L.R.), Sadar Sub-Division, Balasore. Krushna Chandra Biswal, opposite party No. 3 herein lodged a claim that he was a bhag tenant under petitioners and sought for a declaration to that effect. On considering background facts with which we shall deal with infra, original as well as appellate authorities held that claim was untenable. Moreover, their conclusions were reversed by revisionai authority on the ground that they had not drawn proper conclusions,2. A brief reference to the background facts as found by the authorities below is necessary for decision of the question whether revisionai order suffers from any infirmity. The case land was purchased in Court auction by one Mohan Nayak, uncle of petitioner No. 3. Case land originally belonged to one Bhagabat Biswal, a remote ancestor of opposite par...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »