Orissa Court November 2001 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.
Sk. Rezani Vs. State of Orissa, Represented Through Its Secretary, Foo ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Nov-13-2001
Reported in: 2002(I)OLR110
R.K. Patra, Actg. C.J.1. By this application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner seeks to challenge the detention order dated 28.7.2001 issued by the District Magistrate, Kendrapara under Sub-section (2) of Section 3 of the Prevention of Blackmarketing and Maintenance of Supplies of Essential Commodities Act, 1980 and prays of a writ of habeas corpus directing his release after quashing the same.2. The District Magistrate, Kendrapara has filed counter affidavit.3. Shri Sahoo, learned counsel for the petitioner, raised the following three contentions :(i) The order of detention was made by the District Magistrate without showing his awareness that the petitioner had already been arrested and was in judicial custody by the relevant date;(ii) There is no mention in the grounds of detention about the authority to whom the petitioner could make representation for reconsideration of his release; and(iii) The representation of the petitioner dated 14.8.2001 made to ...
William George Benedict (Bhakta Das) Vs. State of Orissa and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Nov-12-2001
Reported in: 92(2001)CLT613
B.P. Das, J. 1. This writ application has been filed by the petitioner with a prayer for directing reinvestigation of the Criminal case which is subject matter of G. Ft. Case No. 716 of 2000 pending in the court of the S.D.J.M., Puri wherein the petitioner has been arrayed as an accused for commission of offences under Sections 376/34 I..P.C. by another agency preferably by the C.B.I.2. The brief facts leading to this writ petition are that an F.I.R. was lodged by one Maria Schmidova alias Mangala Devi alleging therein that she and her daughter were sexually abused by the petitioner. According to petitioner there was no medical evidence to show that there was any proof of rape by the petitioner on the daughter of Maria and also there was no injury detected on the private part of the victim. According to the petitioner the medical evidence clearly disproves either the case of attempted rape or actual rape. It is the fact that the investigating agency in the meantime has submitted a char...
Sessions Judge-cum-special Judge and ors. Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Nov-12-2001
Reported in: 2002(I)OLR252
B.P. Das, J.1. The aforesaid Criminal Reference arises out of a reference made by the learned Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, Cuttack, under Section 395 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (in short 'Cr.P.C.'). It is stated by the learned Special Judge that during the course of hearing of G. R. Case No. 257 of 1993 wherein the accused persons were facing trial under Sections 341, 323, 294, 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code (in short 'I.P.C.') and under Section 3 of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, the learned counsel for the defence prayed to drop the proceeding on the following grounds :'(1) For non-compliance of Rule 7 of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Rules, 1995.(2) Further progress in cases under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act pending in the Special Courts is bad without committal proceeding in view of the principle enunciated in (2000) 18 O.C.R. 364.'The le...
Prakash Kumar Rout Vs. Dhenkanal Gramya Bank and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Nov-09-2001
Reported in: [2002(93)FLR745]; 2002(I)OLR493
P.K. Mohanty, J.1-6. The writ petitioners in all the three writ applications who were promoted and working as Field Supervisors, having been reverted to the post of Senior Clerk-cum-Cashier, have challenged the order of reversion passed by the Chairman, Dhenkanal Gramya Bank (opp. party No.l) dated 14.1.1995.After discussing the facts and circumstances, the Hon'ble Court held :7. In view of the pleadings of the parties and the submissions made at the Bar the main question that needs consideration is as to whether the petitioners who are promoted to the post of Field Supervisors in view of the selection made on the basis of seniority-cum-merit, copy of which has been annexed to the writ application as Annexure-3 forwarded by letter under Annexure-2 dated 25.10.1990, the petitioners could have been reverted to their former post of Senior Clerk-cum-Cashier in terms of the judgment of this Court in O.J. C. No. 1477 of 1991 and Ors.. This Court in O.J.C. No. 1477 of 1991 which was followed ...
Sri Madhusudan Sahu Vs. Chairman, Paradip Port Trust and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Nov-09-2001
Reported in: 2002(I)OLR237
P.K. Mohanty, J.1. The petitioner calls in question the action of his disciplinary authority, the Chairman, Paradip Port Trust, in seeking approval of the Central Government in respect of the minor penalty, imposed/proposed to be imposed on the petitioner and in reopening and de novo starting the enquiry, on the advice of the Central Government, as illegal and unauthorised.After discussing the facts and submissions of counsel appearing, the Hon'ble Court held :8. In order to appreciate the contentions raised, it is necessary to consider some relevant provisions of law relating to disciplinary proceeding. In exercise of power conferred by Section 28 read with Section 126 of the Major Port Trust Act, 1963, the Central Government made a regulation to deal with the disciplinary matters of the employees of the Paradip Port Trust called 'Paradip Port Employees (Classification, Control and Appeal) Regulation, 1967' which came into force with effect from 1st November, 1967. In Part-I general p...
State of Orissa and anr. Vs. Gatikrushna Satapathy and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Nov-08-2001
Reported in: 93(2002)CLT116
R.K. Patra, A.C.J. 1. This writ petition at the instance of the State Government is directed against the common order dated 14.2.2000 passed by the Orissa Administrative Tribunal, Cuttack Bench, Cuttack in O.A. No. 415 (C) of 1998 requiring it to fill up the posts of O.A.S Class-ll by giving appointment to four persons after retrenching the junior most hands.2. The opposite party No. 1 filed the aforesaid O.A. No. 415 (C) of 1998 challenging fixation of five numbers of vacancies reserved for ex-servicemen category out of 399 vacancies for Orissa Civil Services. According to him, he is an ex-serviceman and as such, at least 3 per cent of 400 vacancies (i.e. 12 vacancies ) should have been reserved for ex-servicemen in view of the Orissa Ex-Servicemen (Recruitment to State Civil Services and Post) Rules, 1985.3. Facts in brief are necessary to be noted for the purpose of decision. The Orissa Public Service Commission made an advertisement on 1.1.1997 for combined competitive recruitment ...
Nabeena Chandra Sahu Vs. Debasis Sahu
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Nov-07-2001
Reported in: 93(2002)CLT614
M. Papanna, J.1. The order dated 25.7.2000 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Aska in Title Suit No. 65 of 1997 is under challenge in Civil Revision No. 400 of 2000, preferred by the Plaintiff for rejecting his prayer for some amendment in the plaint and is also under challenge in Civil Revision No. 59 of 2001, preferred by the defendant for allowing Plaintiff's prayer for some other amendment in the said plaint.2. The Plaintiff in the above sit is the petitioner and defendant in the said suit is the opposite party in Civil Revision No. 400 of2000 and likewise the said defendant is the petitioner and the said Plaintiff is the opposite party in Civil Revision No. 59 of 2001.3. Both the Civil Revisions having arisen out of the impugned order dated 25.7.2000 passed by the learned trial Judge in Title suit No. 65 of 1997, were heard analogously on the consent of the learned counsel for both the parties and are being disposed of by this common judgment.4. Relevant facts ne...
Labangalata Panda Vs. the State of Orissa and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Nov-07-2001
Reported in: AIR2002Ori147; 93(2002)CLT119; 2001(II)OLR666
A.S. Naidu, J. 1. The order passed by the Revenue Divisional Commissioner (Southern Division ), Berhampur, in O.P.L.E. Revision No. 2 of 1992 directing eviction of the petitioner from the encroached land, after realising penalty and assessment, is impugned in this writ application.2. The subject matter of the dispute has a chequered career. The petitioner asserts that she is in possession of Ac. 0.74 cents of land appertaining to Sabik plot No. 800/2 of mouza Ankuli near Berhampur. The said plot corresponds to Hal plot No. 91 having an area of AC. 0.597 decimals and Hal plot No. 93 having an area of Ac. 0.202 decimals in mouza Kolapur in Berhampur town (hereinafter referred as the 'case lands'). The opp. party No. 5 also claims to be in possession of the case lands. The petitioner asserts that in view of her continuous, uninterrupted and exclusive possession since 1929, she has acquired valid right, title and interest over the land by way of adverse possession. At the other hand, oppos...
Kanista Barik Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Nov-07-2001
Reported in: 93(2002)CLT96; 2002CriLJ3701
M. Papanna, J.1. The impugned judgment dated 30.9.1993 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bargarh in S.T. No. 144/6 of 1992-93 convicting the accused Kanista Barik under section 302. I.P.C. and sentencing him to imprisonment for life is under challenge in the present Criminal Appeal preferred from Jail.2. Prosecution case is that Mahadev Khamari (hereinafter referred to as 'the deceased') and Saileshnandan Chhuria (P.W. 2) have taken lease of a stone quarry locally known as Tamparsara situated at Daltangarhpara, hamlet of village Bhaludunguri where accused (appellant) including accused Jhumuru and Ramesh who have absconded after the occurrence were engaged as labourers to cut stone from the quarry for which they were paid a sum of Rs. 18,000/- towards the advance wages but the work done by them the date of occurrence justified wages for 3,000/- only. Accused Thelu and absconders Jhumuru and Ramesh were residing in a temporary hut at Bhaludunguri near the quarry site where...
Haraparbati Thakurani Bije Vs. Ramakanta Gupta
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Nov-07-2001
Reported in: AIR2002Ori89
L. Mohapatra, J. 1. The plaintiff's prayer for restraining the defendant respondent from alienating the suit property by sale, deed, mortgage or otherwise having been rejected by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), First Court, Cuttack, this appeal has been preferred.2. The plaint schedule property originally belonged to one Kamala Devi who is the mother of the defendant. After death of said Kamala Devi the defendant succeeded to the property as the sole owner. Plaintiff is the public deity installed in a temple and the suit land is situated in front of the temple intervened by a road. The Unnayana Samiti representing the deity with intent to acquite some immoveable properties for the diety, approached the defendant having come to know that the defendant intends to sell the plaint schedule property. It is the case of the plaintiff that the Secretary of the said Unnayana Samiti convened a meeting on 3-2-1997 to discuss about the purchase ofplaint schedule properly and prior notic...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »