Orissa Court December 1998 Judgments
Sundergarh Professional Education Society, Rourkela and Etc. Vs. State ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Dec-23-1998
Reported in: AIR1999Ori163
P.K. Mohanty, J.1. Original Jurisdiction Case No. 17167 of 1997 is filed by the Sundargarh Professional Education Society through its President for quashing the order of the Director, Higher Education, communicated by the Deputy Director, +2 Education in Annexure 5 constituting a Governing Body of Utkal Gaurav Madhusudan Mahavidyalaya, Rourkela in the district of Sundargarh under Rule 24 of the Orissa Education (Establishment, Recognition and Management of Private Junior Colleges/Higher Secondary Schools) Rules, 1991 and for a director to the Collector, Sundargarh to constitute the Governing Body and the Director, Higher Education to approve the same.2. Original Jurisdiction Case No. 15091 of 1997 is filed by Sri Sunil Kumar Mohanty, claiming to be the Principal-in-charge of the said Utkal Gaurav Madhusudan Mahavidyalaya with a prayer for directing the opp. parties to allow the petitioner to function as the Principal-in-charge and to prohibit opp. parties 4 and 5 from interfering. Both...
Tag this Judgment!Shri Somnath Rath Vs. Shri Bikram Keshari Arukh and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Dec-23-1998
Reported in: AIR1999Ori119
ORDERA. Pasayat, J.1. This election petition has been filed by Shri Somnath Rath challenging election of Shri Bikram Kashari Arukh (hereinafter referred to as the 'elected candidate') to the Orissa State Legislative Assembly, 1995 in respect of 66-Bhanjanagar Assembly Constituency. Though nomination papers submitted by the petitioner, the ejected candidate (respondent No. 1) and respondent Nos. 2 to 4 were accepted, nomination papers submitted by respondents Nos. 5 to 7 were rejected. In other words, petitioner and respondents 1 to 4 were in the election field, and respondent No. 1 was declared elected by the Election officer. Nomination papers of respondents 5 and 6 were rejected on the ground that they were defective. Nomination paper if respondent No. 7 was rejected on the ground that he was a dealer under the Public Distribution Systems (in short, 'PDS') and as such was ineligible. Though originally election of respondent No. 1 was challenged on the ground of alleged corrupt practi...
Tag this Judgment!Kailash Chandra Das Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Dec-23-1998
Reported in: 88(1999)CLT335; 1999CriLJ1701; 1999(I)OLR365
P.K. Misra, J.1. The petitioner has been convicted Under Sections 27(d) and 28 of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/-, in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for four months under the former charge and rigorous imprisonment for two others under the latter charge. Both . the sentences were directed to run concurrently. The said order of conviction and sentence having been confirmed by the appellate Court, the present revision has been filed.2. The prosecution case is as follows :The accused is the Proprietor of M/s.. Das Ausadhalaya, a medicine shop in village Indupur. On 8.8.1988, the Drugs Inspector (P.W. 1) along with the Assistant Drugs Controller (P.W.3) raided and searched the medicine shop of the accused who was not present at the time of search. The shop was being managed by the salesman (P.W. 2). In course of search, it was found that the accused...
Tag this Judgment!Dipak Kumar Sahoo Vs. State of Orissa Rep. by Its Secretary in School ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Dec-23-1998
Reported in: 1999(II)OLR176
R.K. Patra, J.1. The petitioner in this writ petition assails the validity of the Order No. 5368 dated 22.4.1996 at Annexure-5 by which the Inspector of Schools, Bolangir Circle, Bolangir, has refused to approve his appointment as 4th Peon in the school.2. The case of the petitioner is that pursuant to the resolution of the Managing Committee dated 12.12.1991, he came to be appointed as 4th Peon in Chaitanya Panigrahi High School, Batharla. He joined the post on 18.12.1991 and has been discharging his duties as such from that day without any break. The said school was notified to be an aided educational institution by Government Order No. 12889 dated 2.5.1995. The Headmaster of the school accordingly forwarded the names of the members of staff to the Inspector of schools, Bolangir for approval of their appointment in letter dated 19.6.1995 at Annexure-3. On 31.10.1995, the Inspector of Schools made a visit to the school and verified the records and relevant attendance registers and for...
Tag this Judgment!Dr. Pranab Mohapatra and ors. Vs. State of Orissa, Represented Through ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Dec-23-1998
Reported in: 1999(I)OLR292
A. Pasayat, J.1. These writ applications along with large number of others have been filed questioning legality of the process of selection of candidates for prosecuting Post-Graduate Studies in the Government colleges of the State. As grounds of challenge and rebuttal are essentially common, they are disposed of by this judgment which shall govern each one of them.2. For selection of candidates for Post-Graduate Courses in the Government Medical Colleges of Orissa, Prospectus was issued for 1998. Similar Prospectus simultaneously was issued for 1999. Examinations were held for both the years and petitioner in each case appeared at the examinations, but was not selected.3. In Chandan Mishra and Ors. v. Governor, M.B.B.S./ B.D.S. Selection Board and Ors. : 77 (1994) CLT 624, one of us (Pasayat, J.) had referred to Shakespeare's classic expression in Othello 'Chaos is come again'. The observation was made in the context of admission to M.B.B.S./B.D.S. Courses. Year after year large numbe...
Tag this Judgment!Noorjahan Begum (Ms.) and ors. Vs. Orissa State Leather Corporation Lt ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Dec-22-1998
Reported in: (1999)IILLJ527Ori
Pradipta Ray, J. 1. The writ petitioners, one of whom was working as Personal Assistant to the Managing Director, Orissa State Leather Corporation Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the 'Corporation') and Ors. as Assistant Managers and Accounts Superintendents in the Corporation have filed this writ application challenging, inter alia, the closure of the Corporation and the consequential termination of employment. They have also challenged various steps and decisions taken for closing down the Corporation including the permission given by the State of Orissa under Section 25O of the Industrial Disputes Act. 2. The Corporation was incorporated under the Indian Companies Act, 1956 as a Government Company on April 19, 1976. It suffered heavy loss and its cumulative loss in the financial year 1994-95 was Rs. 507.43 lakhs which was much more than the paid-up capital of Rs. 425.04 lakhs in the said financial year 1994-95. The State Government constituted a Cabinet Sub-Committee to review the f...
Tag this Judgment!Sri Raghunath Adhikari Vs. Chairman, Rushikulya Gramya Bank and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Dec-18-1998
Reported in: 87(1999)CLT260; 1999(I)OLR519
Susanta Chatterji, J.1. The writ petitioner has challenged the impugned order of suspension in the manner as prayed for. For better appreciation the prayer is quoted hereinbelow :'...... to issue Rule Nisi calling upon the opposite parties to show cause as to why a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or writs shall not be issued quashing the order of suspension dated 19.7.1988 i.e. Order No. R.G.B. 42-2191, and if the opposite parties fail to show cause or show insufficient cause to make the Rule absolute.....'2. It is stated in details that the petitioner was appointed as a Daily Wage Labourer-cwm-Messenger in Nalbantha Rushikulya Grama Bank on 2.4.1982. He was appointed on daily wage of Rs. 8/- for one year. Thereafter his wage was revised to Rs. 10/- per day and again Rs. 11/- per day in the same Branch for one and half years. Subsequently, the petitioner was given a consolidated sum of Rs. 700/- per month. The petitioner continued till 2.4.1984 in Talabantha Branch. Then...
Tag this Judgment!Gadadhar Mishra Vs. Smt. Biraja Devi and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Dec-17-1998
Reported in: AIR1999Ori226
P.K. Misra, J.1. Plaintiff No. 1 is the appellant in all the three appeals against the common order dated 2-2-1996 passed by the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Baripada, rejecting the three separate petitions for injunction. Since the three appeals are directed against the common order in one suit and common questions of fact and law arise for determination, all the appeals are being disposed of together by the present order.2. Plaintiff No. 10 is a Society registered under the Societies Registration Act (Act 21 of 1860) having its registered office at Bhanjapur. Late Prasanta Kumar Mohanty was admittedly the President of the said Society till his death on 6-I2-1993. It is claimed that after the death of Prasanta Kumar Mohanty, plaintiff No. 1 who was the General Secretary, in consultation with plaintiff No. 2 who was the Vice-President, convened a meeting and plaintiff No. 1 was elected as the President and plaintiff No. 3 was elected as the General Secretary. It is further claimed th...
Tag this Judgment!Shri Damodar Jena Vs. Shri Sanjaya Chandra Verma and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Dec-16-1998
Reported in: 87(1999)CLT855; 1999(I)OLR221
P.K. Mohanty, J.1. The first party members in a proceeding Under Section 133 of Cr.P.C. are in the petitioners, challenging the revisiona! order passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Cuttack remanding the matter to the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Cuttack for an enquiry Under Section 137, Cr.P.C.2. A proceeding Under Section 133 of the Code of Criminal Procedure was initiated by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate at the instance of the first party-petitioner. The claim of the first party was that the disputed plot No. 1529 even though has been recorded in the name of the second party members in the Consolidation record of rights, it is a road corresponding to plot No. 1332. It is further alleged that during the consolidation operation, there was exchange of plots between the first party and the second party members and in pursuance of that exchange, it was agreed that the first party would use the disputed plot as road. Dispute having arisen FIR was lodged and also a proceeding Under Section ...
Tag this Judgment!Khali Rout and ors. Vs. Additional District Magistrate and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Dec-15-1998
Reported in: 87(1999)CLT69; 1999(I)OLR111
R.K. Dash, J.1. Revisional orders passed by the Additional District Magistrate (Land Reforms), Cuttack, confirming the orders of the appellate authority have been challenged in these writ petitions. Since the facts and questions of law involved in these writ petitions are similar, they were heard analogously and are disposed of by this common judgment.2. These petitioners and others filed separate applications under Section 15(1)(d) of the Orissa Land Reforms Act, 1960 (for short, 'the Act') before the Revenue Officer-cum-Tahasildar, Tigiria, praying to determine the dispute regarding existence of relationship of landlord and tenant between them and Madan Mohan Jew of Nuapatna-opposite party No. 4 as envisaged in the Act, since they were restrained to cultivate their respective lands by the trustees. Opposite party No. 4 on being noticed challenged the maintainability of the proceedings containing, inter alia, that in a proceeding finder Section 42 of the Orissa Hindu Religious Endowme...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »