Orissa Court July 2000 Judgments
Subrata Kumar Mohanty Vs. State Bank of India and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-24-2000
Reported in: (2001)IIILLJ1332Ori; 2000(II)OLR255
P.C. Naik. J.1. The challenge in this writ petition is to the order dated December 18, 1995 (Annexure-5) whereby the petitioner was placed under suspension. It is his case that he having been suspended once in contemplation of a departmental enquiry and said suspension having been revoked, the authorities could not place him under suspension for the second time in connection with the same charge. 2. The facts relevant for the purpose of this writ petition are stated thus: While the petitioner was posted at Bantala Branch of the State Bank of India, he was charged for having committed serious irregularities which have been detailed in Annexure-2 to the writ petition. In contemplation of the departmental enquiry, he (petitioner) was suspended in terms: of the order dated December 27, 1993 (Annexure-1). This suspension, as the order indicates, was passed under paragraph 521 (4) (j) of Sastry Award and Desai Award. A charge-sheet was also served to which, according to the petitioner, an ex...
Tag this Judgment!Gagan Behari Panda Vs. Suresh Chandra Pradhan and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-24-2000
Reported in: 2000(II)OLR307
P.K. Tripathy, J.1. Heard further argument. Hearing is concluded and the judgment is as follows :This revision has been preferred challenging order of acquittal of the opposite party members in Sessions Trial Case No. 101 of 1992 of the Court of 1st Addl. Sessions Judge, Cuttack. Both the opposite party members were charged for the offences punishable Under Sections. 304B, 498A read with Section 34, IPC for the death of Nayana (hereinafter referred to as the deceased). She was the wife of the accused/opposite party No. 1. The accused/opposite party No. 2 is the 'Bhauja' (sister-in-law) of accused/opposite party No. 1.2. Prosecution alleged was that under a false representation that he is well-placed in service accused No. 1 got married to the deceased. After marriage, the deceased could discover that not only accused No. 1 was a jobless person but also having illicit relationship with accused No. 2. When she protested to such extra-marital relationship there was ill-treatment and cruel...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Bijaya Chatterjee Vs. Commissioner, Land Records and Settlement a ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-24-2000
Reported in: 2000(II)OLR349
P.K. Misra, J.1. The order passed by the Commissioner of Land Records and Settlement, Orissa, and the consequential order passed by the Tahsildar are being challenged in the present writ application. The present petitioner claims to be the heir of late Hiranbala Chatterjee, as she claims to be the daughter of the brother of late Hiranbala Chatterjee, who is stated to have died issueless. During preparation of Settlement Record-of-Rights, the disputed land was recorded in the name of Bijaya Chatterjee (petitioner), daughter of Rajatkanta Chakraverty. Present opposite parties 4 to 9 had filed revision before the Commissioner of Land Records and Settlement, Orissa. Under Annexure-9, the revision was allowed and the matter was remanded to the Tahsildar. Thereafter, the Tahsildar as per his order, annexed as Annexure-15, has deleted the name of the petitioner and recorded the names of opposite parties 4 to 9.2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has submitted that opposite par...
Tag this Judgment!Talcher Sarakarakhana Shramik Sangha, Through Its General Secretary De ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-20-2000
Reported in: 91(2001)CLT397; (2001)ILLJ1527Ori
Pradipta Ray, J.1. The Talcher Sarakarakhana Shramik Sangha, a Registered Trade Union, recognised by the management of Talcher Unit of the Fertiliser Corporation of India Limited (hereinafter referred to as 'Talcher Unit') has filed this writ application questioning the legality and propriety of the decision of the management of Talcher Unit reducing the rate of compulsory provident fund contribution from 10% to 8.33% (Annexures 10 & 12). The Fertiliser Corporation of India (in short, 'F.C.I.') was formed on January 1, 1961 as a Government of India undertaking under the Fertilisers and Chemical Companies Amalgamation Order, 1960, Due to its considerable growth the Government of India undertook to reorganise the Fertiliser Corporation of India and its sister concerns, the National Fertiliser Limited of India. With effect from April, 1, 1973 the said two concerns were divided into five separate Government Companies, namely; (1) Fertiliser Corporation of India Limited, (2) Rastriya Chemic...
Tag this Judgment!Gyanendra Nath Mohapatra and Another Vs. State of Orissa, Through Its ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-20-2000
Reported in: 91(2001)CLT391
Pradipta Fay, J.1. The petitioners, two Class--'A' Contractors empanelled by the Cuttack Development Authority (in short 'C. D. A.') for execution of various works under C. D. A. have filed this writ application questioning the legality and propriety of awarding the job of development of land and infrastructure in sector-10 to K. C. S. Private Limited to the opp. party No. 4.2. The petitioners have stated that the said development works in sector-10 have been awarded to opp. party No. 4 without inviting any tender, without complying with the prescribed procedure at rates higher than the rates the petitioners would have offered. The petitioners along with other contractors were separately awarded the different development works in other sectors, but the C. D. A. did not give them any opportunity to submit their offers for execution of the development works in sector-10. The C. D. A. invited only the opp. party No. 4 to submit his offer and through negotiation entrusted the development w...
Tag this Judgment!Orissa Mining Corporation Ltd. and Government of Orissa Vs. M/S Ashok ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-19-2000
Reported in: 91(2001)CLT58
B.P. Das, J.1. These two revisions, one at the instance of the Orissa Mining Corporation Ltd. (for the sake of brevity referred to as 'O.M.C.') and the other at the instance of Government of Orissa, arise out of order dated 9-2-98 passed in Execution Case No. 50 of 1994 on the file of the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Bhubaneswar and they were heard analogously and are disposed of by this common judgment.2. Brief facts giving rise to the revisions may be statedthus:M/s. Ashok Transport Agency, a registered partnership firm, brought a Money Suit bearing- M.S. No 491 of 1986 against M/s. O. M. C. Alloys Ltd. for realisation of Rs.3,90,210|-with interest, both pendente Lite and future. The suit was decreed ex parte by judgment dated 12-11-91. For realisation of the decretal dues, execution vide Execution Case No. 50 of 1994 was levied arraying M/s. O. M. C. Alloys Ltd., O. M. C. Limited and Government of Orissa as judgment-debtors. The case of the plaintiff-decree bolder is that O.M.C. A...
Tag this Judgment!Land Acquisition Collector, Cuttack Vs. Bholanath Acharya
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-19-2000
Reported in: 92(2001)CLT529
P.K. Tripathy, J.1. This appeal is directed against the award dated 5-3-1983 passed by learned Subordinate Judge. Jagatsinghpur in L. A. Case No. 17 of 1982, a proceeding registered on receipt of a reference under section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (in short the 'Act').2. The petitioner/Respondent's land to the extent Ac. 0.03 in village Gobindamohanty, P.S, Tirtol in the district of Cuttack (undivided) having been acquired for the project Gopalpur Distributory No. 12-E of Tarpur Canal as per Gazette Notification No. 1762 of 1977 under settion 4(1) of the Act and a sum of Rs. 207.11 being determined as the compensation amount the petitioner/respondent raised objection relating to adequacy of the quantum of compensation which resulated in a reference under section 18 of the Act in the aforesaid manner. The petitioner advanced the contention that at the time of acquisition of the land the adjacent land was being sold at Rs. 700 to Rs. 800/-per guntb, the acquired land is better...
Tag this Judgment!Bethel Green Growth Limited Vs. Gospel for Area and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-19-2000
Reported in: 90(2000)CLT674; 2000(II)OLR198
L. Mohapatra, J.1. Civil Revision No. 261 of 1998 has been filed against the order dated 4.8.1998 by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Sambalpur in Title Suit No. 154 of 1994 and Civil Revision No. 262 of 1998 has been filed against the order dated 4.8.1998 passed by the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Sambalpur in Title Suit No. 66 of 1995. Since the question involved is same, both the cases are taken up for hearing and covered by this judgment. 2. In T.S.No. 154/98 (Civil Revision No. 261/98) an application was filed under Order 22, Rule 4-A of the Civil Procedure Code by the plaintiff-petitioner stating that the defendant No. 1 died on 2.8.1997 and that the legal heirs of defendant No.1 are not living in India and they have left India since long deserting the defendant No. 1 and whereabout of the legal heirs are not available or known to the plaintiff. As the defendant No. 1 has ot no legal representative, the estate left by the deceased defendant No.1 should be represented ...
Tag this Judgment!Sri Chintamani Behera and ors. Vs. Land Acquisition Officer
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-19-2000
Reported in: 2000(II)OLR193
L. Mohapatra, J.1. This revision arises out of the order dated 24.12.1996 in Misc. Case No. 126 of 1995 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Bhubaneswar rejecting the application of the petitioners filed under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure. 2. Land Acquisition Misc. Case No. 68 of 1989 pending in the Court of the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Bhubaneswar was posted to 20.4.1992 for hearing in which the present petitioners are also petitioners. On the said date the petitioners failed to appear in Court as they did not receive any intimation through the clerk of their Advocate. Later on 13.3.1995 they come to know that the case was closed on 20.4.1992 and filed application under Section 141 of the C.P.C. for restoration of the case. No objection was filed on behalf of the opposite party. The learned Civil Judge rejected the application stating that the Land Acquisition Misc. Case has not been dismissed for default but an order was passed confirming t...
Tag this Judgment!Chintamani Khuntia and Others Vs. Shri Jagannath Temple Managing Commi ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-18-2000
Reported in: 91(2001)CLT362
L. Mohapatra, J.1. Plaintiffs are appellants before this Court against a reversing judgment.2. Plaintiff No. 1 is a Khuntia Sevak and plaintiff No, 2 is a Mekap Sevak of Lord Jagannath. They filed the Suit in their individual and representative, capacity under Order 1, Rule 8 of the Code of Civil Procedure representing all the Khuntias and Mekaps of Lord Jagannath. Their case is that Seva Nos. 13 and 15 of the record-of-rights prepared under Shri Jagannath Temple Act, 1955 ('the Act', for short) enumerate the seva or Khuntia and Mekaps. Seva Nos. 13 and 15 also enumerate the duties and remunerations of Kbuntias and Mekaps for performance their respective duties. The donations made by the pilgrims to the Deities for Darsan are called 'Veta' and 'Pindika' and offered to the Deities at places, such as, Aruna Stambha, Garuda Stambba, Bbitara Kotha, Bijaya Dwar, Ratna Simhasan, Baisi Panacha, Mandir Bedba and other places inside the temple. Claim of the plaintiff is that Khuntias and Mekaps...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »