Orissa Court January 1996 Judgments
Amarendra Kumar Dash Vs. Orissa Forest Development Corporation Ltd. an ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-31-1996
Reported in: 81(1996)CLT393; (1996)ILLJ1239Ori
D. MISRA, J:-1. Invoking the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner calls in question the propriety of the action of opposite party No. 1, the Orissa Forest Development Corporation Ltd. ('Corporation', in short) conferring promotional benefit on opposite parties 2, 3 and 4 ignoring the case of the petitioner, for the post of Senior Auditor and further promotion of opposite party No. 2, to the rank of Section Officer. The challenge is also in respect of the order passed by the Managing Director of the Corporation promoting the petitioner to the post of Senior Auditor retrospectively from December, 1985 instead of August, 1983, without pecuniary benefits.2. The factual back drop which gives rise to the present writ application is hereunder delineated. The petitioner was appointed to the post of Auditor by office order No. 1195 dated August 22, 1979 as per Annexure-1. As averred, he retained the first position in the merit l...
Tag this Judgment!Garuda Adabar Vs. State of Orissa and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-31-1996
Reported in: 1997(II)OLR521
A. Pasayat, J. 1. Petitioner was appointed as a teacher of Bankighiridi High School in the district of Sonepur in place of one Rabindranath Das whose services were terminated by the Managing Committee of the said school which is an aided educational institution. Aforesaid Rabindranath Das preferred an appeal before the Director of Secondary Education, Orissa who by his impugned order (Annexure -13) held that terminated of Rabindranath Das was bad and directed his reinstatement. Petitioner calls in question legality of the order passed by the Director, primarily on the ground that he was not a party in the appeal in the appeal filed by the said Rabindranath Das and therefore, the order was passed in violation of the principles of natural justice. This plea has foundation on the fact that on reinstatement of Rabindranath, petitioner's service comes to and end. It is further submitted that order passed by the Director is not tenable in law.2. So far as first stand of petitioner is concern...
Tag this Judgment!Jagabandhu Sahu and ors. Vs. Commissioner of Land Records and Settleme ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-31-1996
Reported in: 1996(I)OLR393
A. Pasayat, J.1. Petitioners call in question legality of the order of the Commissioner, Land Records and Settlement, Orissa, Cuttack (in short, 'the Commissioner'), passed under Section 15 of the Orissa Survey and Settlement Act, 1958 (in short, 'the Act') holding that petitioners' note of possession could not have been recorded while preparing the settlement records. The Executive Officer, Cuttack Municipality (opp. party No. 2) had filed the revision against recording of possession note in respect of plot Nos. 201, 202, 207 and 211 under Hal Khata No. 157 relating to Cuttack town unit No. 21, Ranihat in Settlement records recorded and finally published in favour of the Municipality. Stand of the Municipality was that it being the owner of the aforesaid plots and the Hal Record-of-rights (in short, 'the ROR') having been prepared accordingly, note of possession in respect of the present petitioners, and 11 others should be deleted. Stand of present petitioners and 11 others who were ...
Tag this Judgment!Land Acquisition Officer Vs. Rama Sundari Dei
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-30-1996
Reported in: AIR1996Ori125; 81(1996)CLT408
P.K. Misra, J. 1. Land Acquisition Officer, Puri, has filed this appeal under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') against the award dated 16-3-84 passed by the Subordinate Judge, Puri, in a reference under Section 18 of the Act. 2. An area of Ac. 0.80 decimals appertaining to Plot Nos. 195, 196 and 405 in mousa Inchal was acquired by the Government by notification dated 17-5-80. The Land Acquisition Officer passed award on 14-3-83 and granted Rs. 9,441.67 paise including solatium at the rate of 15 per cent. The Land Acquisition Officer had inter alia fixed Rs. 11,100/- per acre for Bari land. Being dissatisfied, the respondent filed an application for enhancement for compensation and accordingly the matter was referred to the Subordinate Judge, Puri, under Section 18 of the Act. So far as Plot No. 196 with an area of Ac. 0.10 decimals is concerned, the Subordinate Judge found that the calculation given by the Land Acquisition Officer was correc...
Tag this Judgment!Jyotirmoy Mohapatra Vs. Indian Tourism Development Corpn. and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-30-1996
Reported in: 81(1996)CLT526; (1998)IIILLJ70Ori
P.K. Misra, J.1. The petitioner in this writ application has prayed for quashing the order dated December 31, 1994 (Annexure 20) accepting the resignation of the petitioner. He has also prayed for a direction for enquiring into the harassment and torture undergone by him and to pay him compensation.2. The petitioner was initially appointed as Accounts Clerk in the year 1988 under I.T.D.C. and was posted in Hotel Kalinga-Ashoka at Bhubaneswar. It is alleged that though the petitioner was basically appointed as Accounts Clerk having no specific knowledge about kitchen control, he was asked to control work in kitchen at the behest of opposite party No. 4. The petitioner reluctantly joined in the kitchen control work in the year 1993. When the petitioner was on leave, opposite party No. 3 wrote to the petitioner alleging certain discrepancies and the petitioner submitted letter dated January 27, 1993 (Annexure 1) explaining the situation and seeking for an additional help to enable him to ...
Tag this Judgment!Jagannath Cotton Company Vs. State Government of Orissa and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-30-1996
Reported in: 81(1996)CLT297; 1996(I)OLR195
P.K. Misra, J. 1. The petitioner is a small-scale industrial unit engaged in 'processing' (or re-cycling) of 'waste cotton'. In OJC No. 1166 of 1992, it has challenged the order of re-assessment under Section 12 (8) of the Orissa Sales Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') for the assessment year 1989-90 and the notices issued under Section 12 (8) of the Act have been challenged in OJC Nos. 6, 162, 181 and 182 of 1993. Earlier, all these cases were heard together and by judgment dated 29-7-1994, the writ applications were disposed of. The order of re-assessment impugned in O. J. C. No. 1166 of 1992 and the notices impugned in other writ petitions were set aside on a finding that the order of re-assessment was illegal. The earlier judgment is reported in (1995) 96 STC 291 (Jagannath Cotton Company v. State of Orissa and Ors). Against the aforesaid judgment, the Commissioner of Sales-Tax and the Sales Tax Officer, Sambalpur (opp. parties 2 and 3) filed appeals in the Supreme Cou...
Tag this Judgment!N. Ganesh Reddy Alias Nilapu Ganesh Reddy Vs. State of Orissa and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-30-1996
Reported in: 1996(I)OLR373
D.P. Mohapatra, A.C.J. 1. In this writ petition fifed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner, N. Ganesh Reddy alias Nilapu Ganesh Reddy, has prayed for a writ of habeas corpu directing his release from custody holding that the order of the District Magistrate, Ganjam (O. P. No. 2) dated 28-7-1995 (Annexure-1) directing his detention under Section 3 of the National Security Act, 1980 and the order of confirmation dated 21-9-1995 (Annexure-3) are illegal and invalid.2. The short point raised by Shri Panda in support of the writ petition is that the detention order under the National Security Act, 1980 was passed when the petitioner was already in detention in a criminal case and was lodged in Chatrapur Sub-Jail, The detaining authority while passing the order of detention, as the records reveal, has neither applied his mind to the fact of petitioner's detention nor has he considered that the petitioner is likely to be released, and in that event, he will ...
Tag this Judgment!Ajit Kumar Ray, Vs. Director, Higher Education Orissa and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-29-1996
Reported in: 1996(I)OLR209
R.K. Dash. J. 1. Since common questions of law and fact are involved in these two writ applications this order is passed which shall govern both the cases. For the sake of convenience we shall first tike up the case in OJC No. 339 of 1995.2. Petitioner Ajit Kumar Ray as well as opp. party No. 4 Smt. Sanghamitra Nayak are two Lecturers in Sociology of Lokanath Mahavidyalaya, Patkura. The controversy between them relates to inter se seniority for holding the second post in Sociology. This is the second round of litigation between the parties for resolution of the self-same dispute, the earlier being in OJC No. 8419 of 1992 which was filed by opp. party No. 4. While disposing of the aforesaid proceeding the Court directed that the Secretary of the college will convene a meeting of the Governing Body for consideration of the question of inter se seniority and the Governing Body will consider the same giving opportunity of hearing to the parties and determine the inter se seniority stating ...
Tag this Judgment!Sanjaya Kumar Gadodia Vs. State of Orissa and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-29-1996
Reported in: 81(1996)CLT498; 1996(I)OLR366
R.K. Dash, J. 1. The short and simple question for determination in the present writ application is whether the Collector and Excise authorities of Sundargarh district have powers under the Orissa (Mahua Flower) Rules, 1974 (for short 'the Rules') to levy and collect fees for inter-district movement of Mahua flowers.2. Petitioner's case in short, is that although on the strength of a valid permit he has been procuring Mahua flowers from within the district of Sundargarh and transporting the same to his depot at Rajgangpur which is within the very same district for storage, for such transportation the Collector and Excise authorities have been illegally levying and collecting fees when rules do not permit them to do so. Challenging such action of the authorities he had approached this Court by filing OJC No. 5494 of 1994 which was ultimately dismissed as withdrawn. This is the second writ application he has filed praying that it be declared that imposition of fees for transportation of ...
Tag this Judgment!Nirmal Chandra Sahoo Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-29-1996
Reported in: 82(1996)CLT41; 1996CriLJ1902; 1996(I)OLR322
R.K. Dash, J. 1. This petition being one under Section 482, Cr PC is directed against the order of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bhubaneswar in S. T. No. 22/445 of 1994 whereby he declined to discharge the petitioner from the offence under Section 20(b) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short, 'the Act').2. The petitioner, it is alleged, was having 12 K.Gs. of 'Ganja' and 125 grams of opium in this house which the police seized in presence of the witnesses, drew samples therefrom and sent for chemical examination. Upon examination the Analyst reported that one of the sample packets contained partly powdered cannabis leaves (Bhang) with seeds and as regards the other sample packet, he could not find any opium therein. On charge-sheet being submitted, the learned Additional Sessions Judge, framed charge under Section 20(b) of the Act and feeling aggrieved thereby, the petitioner moved this Court in Criminal Misc. Case No. 1018 of 1995. He also file...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »