Orissa Court April 1997 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.
Saroj Kumar Mishra Vs. Board of Directors of Orissa State Financial Co ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Apr-08-1997
Reported in: 1997(I)OLR537
R. K. Patra, J. 1. Is stoppage of increments with cumulative effect a major penalty This is the prime question that arises for consideration in this application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India filed by the petitioner who seeks quashing of the penalty of stoppage of two increments with cumulative effect inflicted on him by the Board of Directors, Orissa State Financial Corporation (vide Annexure-6).2. Facts necessary for the purpose of the case may be briefly noted. A set of charges as per Annexure-1 was served on the petitioner calling upon him to explain why penalty as envisaged under Regulation 44 of the Orissa State Financial Corporation Staff Regulations. 1975 (hereinafter referred to as the Staff Regulations) should not be imposed on him. The gravamen of the charges is that during his incumbency as Branch Manager, Orissa State Financial Corporation, Bolangir Branch, he committed irregularities by sanctioning and disbursing term loan in favour of one Md. Aziz and in ...
Narayan Karjee Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Apr-03-1997
Reported in: 1997(I)OLR466
P.K. Mohanty, J. 1. This is an appeal from jail against the order of conviction under Section 302, IPC and sentence of life imprisonment in Sessions Cose No. 14 of 1992 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Parlakhemundi.2. Prosecution case, briefly stated, is that the accused-appellant is the brother of deceased Laxmi Karjee. It was alleged that on the evening of 15-10-1990, accused Narayan Karjee killed his sister Laxmi Karjee by means of stone in spite of the protests made by his two wives. The eye-witnesses reported the matter to the Ward Member of the village, who in turn lodged the First Information Report in the police station. After completion of investigation, the Investigating Officer submitted the charge-sheet against the accused for having committed murder of his sister under Section 302, IPC. 3. The defence plea is one of complete denial and that the deceased expired due to fall on the stone and this false case has been registered without any basis.4. The deceas...
Radhasyam Mishra Vs. Republic of India
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Apr-02-1997
Reported in: 1997(II)OLR27
C.R. Pal, J.1. In this application under Section 482, Cr. P.C. the petitioner who is serving the sentences awarded against him in seven cases instituted by Special Police Establishment has prayed for issuance of a direction that the sentences awarded against him in S.P.E. Case Nos. 12 and 17 of 1990 and 8, 9, 10, 11 and 12 of 1991 shall run concurrently. 2.The facts which gave rise to this petition are as follows : The petitioner who was working as the Post Master in the Extra Departmental Post Office at Bharauja in the district of Bolangir faced his trial for a charge under Section 409, I.P.C. in the aforementioned seven cases. After trial, the petitioner was sentenced by the learned Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bhubaneswar on 31.5.1993 for the offence under Section 409, I.P.C. in S.P.E. Cases No. 12 of 1990 to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of five months and to pay fine of Rs. 2000/- and in default, to further R.I. for two months, in S.P.E. Case No. 17 of 1990 to und...
Himanshu Sekhar Lenka and anr. Vs. Orissa State Leather Corporation Lt ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Apr-02-1997
Reported in: 1997(II)OLR84
Susanta Chatterji, J.1. The present writ petition filed by the employees of the Orissa Leather Corporation Limited, Jajpur Unit working as Peon-cum-Watchman in the Sports Goods Unit seeks the following reliefs:'......to issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or any suitable writ quashing Annexures - 5(a) and 5(b) and directing opposite party Nos. 1 and 2 to regulairse the services of the petitioners under opposite party No. 1 and pay them salary at par with the regular Scale Attendant/Peon-cum-watchman under the Corporation as is being done in case of opposite party No. 3.' The petitioners further pray that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to quash order of retrenchment on a finding that the same is void ab initio and declare that petitioners would be deemed to be continuing in service ignoring the Annexure-B and to grant petitioners all consequential financial and service benefits arising therefrom and be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus to that effect.'2. The petitioners in fact ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›