Orissa Court May 2001 Judgments
Shiba Charan SwaIn Vs. G.M. Metal and Scrap Trading Corporation Ltd. a ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: May-28-2001
Reported in: 2002(I)OLR422
P.K. Misra, J.1. The petitioner has filed the writ application for quashing the order under Annexurc-10 and for a further direction to the opposite parties to permit the petitioner to lift the scrap materials under Annexure-4 in respect of Lot Nos. 7, 11, 22 and 25.2. Opposite parties 1 and 2 have been engaged as authorised agents for sale of scrap materials belonging to opposite parties 3 and 4. Pursuant to Tender Call Notice issued by opposite parties 1 and 2, the petitioner had given offer. At the time of making the offer the petitioner had deposited a sum of Rs. 10,000/- as Earnest Money Deposit. Subsequently, in respect of the items indicated in the writ application, the petitioner was permitted to lift the scrap materials subject to payment of the amount as indicated in the agreement, On account of the failure of the petitioner to pay the money, the said arrangement was scrapped and a fresh contract was executed in favour of some other persons. At this stage, the petitioner has f...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Kanti Kumbhar Vs. State of Orissa and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: May-28-2001
Reported in: 2001(II)OLR44
P.K. Misra, J.1. The petitioner is the Chairperson of Dhanakauda Panchayat Samiti. In this writ application, she has prayed for quashing the Notice dated 30.10.2000 issued by the Sub-Collector, Sambalpur Sadar (opposite party No. 2) under Annexure- 2 series fixing the meeting of the Panchayat Samiti on 22.11.2000 for considering the requisition regarding 'no-confidence motion' against the petitioner.2. In the writ application it has been asserted that the petitioner was performing her duty as Chairperson properly and with an ulterior motive, some of the members held a meeting on 3.9.2000 and passed a resolution to send requisition to remove the petitioner from the office of Chairperson without assigning any reason in the said resolution. It is also asserted that notice along with copies of the requisition and proposed resolution of no-confidence of had not been communicated to each member of the Panchayat Samiti. It is further asserted that the resolution dated 3.9.2000. '.....does not...
Tag this Judgment!Bijay Pradhan Vs. the Collector and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: May-28-2001
Reported in: 2001(II)OLR41
P.K. Misra, J.1. The petitioner has challenged the legality of the order passed by the Collector under Annexure-6 holding that the petitioner was disqualified to continue as Sarpanch of Golapada Grama Panchayat.2. The petitioner was the Sarpanch of Golapada Grama Panchayat. Initially he was placed under suspension Under Section 115 (1) of the Orissa Grama Panchayat Act (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'). However, in exercise of power Under Section 115 (3-a) of the Act, the said order of suspension was set aside and the petitioner was restored to office by order dated 7.6.2000 (Annexure-2). The petitioner claims that after such order was passed, the Collector instead of permitting the petitioner to assume office, subsequently passed an order purporting to be one Under Section 26 (1) and (2) of the Act. Before passing such order, the Collector had served notice on the petitioner stating that the petitioner had married Kumudini Pradhan and Bengabati Pradhan and a daughter was born on ...
Tag this Judgment!Shri K.N.B. Rao Vs. the Central Administrative Tribunal, Cuttack and O ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: May-18-2001
Reported in: 92(2001)CLT45
Pradipta Ray, J.1. The writ petitioner was working as Head Clerk in Pass Section in the Personnel Branch, Divisional Personnel Office at Khurda Road. A disciplinary proceeding was initiated against the petitioner and a charge-sheet was issued to him on September 19, 1986. Annexure-3 to the charge-sheet contained a list of documents by which the articles of charges were sought to be substantiated. The said list of documents contained as many as 28 documents including the statements of various persons recorded at the time of fact-finding inquiry.2. On receipt of the charge-sheet the petitioner sent a letter on October 1, 1986 to the Divisional Personnel Officer requesting him to supply the copy of the investigation report submitted by the Vigilance Department particularly when the said report has been quoted to support one of the charges. The Divisional Officer by his letter dated November 18, 1986 turned down the petitioner's request for a copy of the investigation report on the ground ...
Tag this Judgment!K. Pramila Patnaik and Another Vs. State of Orissa and Others
Court: Orissa
Decided on: May-18-2001
Reported in: AIR2001Ori190; 92(2001)CLT373; 2001(II)OLR87
P.K. Misra, J.1. This writ application has been filed by the Chairperson of Nabarangpur Municipality and on elected] Councillor of the said Municipality challenging the action of the State Government in dissolving the Nabarangpur Municipality in exercise of power under section 401(1) of the Orissa Municipal ; Act and consequently appointing the Collector & District Magistrate as the Administrator of the Municipality. The notification relating to dissolution has not been filed by the petitioners. However, opposite parties in their counter have filed a copy of the notification as Annexure-D/3.2. The petitioners have contended that the order regarding dissolution is actuated by mala fides and has been passed without properly considering the nature of allegations and the reply submitted by the petitioners and other Councillors. Subsequently, further affidavit has been filed by the petitioners stating that the impugned order has been passed by the State Government without giving opportunity...
Tag this Judgment!Food Corporation of India Vs. Jugal Kishore Agrawal
Court: Orissa
Decided on: May-18-2001
Reported in: AIR2001Ori158; 92(2001)CLT505; 2001(II)OLR98
A.S. Naidu, J.1. The Food Corporation of India has filed this Miscellaneous Appeal being aggrieved by the order passed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Bhawanipatna in M. J. C. No. 88 of 1997 refusing to restore . the Money Suit No. 133 of 1989.2. The Food Corporation of India, in short, the Corporation' as plaintiff, filed Money Suit No. 133 of 1989 in the court of the then Subordinate Judge, Bhawanipatna, presently redesignated as Civil Judge (Senior Division), Bhawanipatna for realisation of Rs.3,27,189.65 from the respondents, who were defendants in the court below. It is alleged that the said suit was posted to 16-11-1995 for ex parte hearing. However, on the said date, due to certain inadvertent and compelling reasons, the plaintiff could not appear and filed a petition for time. Learned court below rejected the petition for time and dismissed the suit for default. On 31-3-1997 a petition was filed under Order 9 Rule 9 of the Code of Civil Procedure for restoration o...
Tag this Judgment!Kanaklata Mallick Vs. Collector, Kendrapara and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: May-18-2001
Reported in: AIR2001Ori161; 92(2001)CLT677
P.K. Mohanty, J.1. The petitioner, who is the Sarapanch of Kaopada Gcama Panchayat challenges the order of suspension passed against her by opp. patty No. 1, the Collector, Kendrapara. 2. The short fact of the catee is that she, was elected as a Sarapanch of Kaopada Grama .Panchayat under Derabis Block on 22-1-1991 White continuing as such, it is alleged that with a vindictive attitude and for political reasons she has been put under suspension on false and motivated allegations by the order of the Collector dated 30-10-2000 on the pressure of the local M. L. A., who belongs to the present Ruling B.J.D. party. It is asserted that it is not the function or duty of a Sarapanch to identify the persons nor any person for distribution of money under O. A. P. W. P. Progtamme and as such, if any person has been wrongly identified, as alleged, no offence is committed by her, calling for an order of suspension is exercise of the powersvested under Section 115 of the Orissa Grama Parichayat Act ...
Tag this Judgment!Manorama Badu Mohapatra and ors. Vs. Girish Chandra Naik and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: May-18-2001
Reported in: 92(2001)CLT716
P.K. Mohanty, J. 1. The petitioners in the present writ application have approached this Court with the following prayer : 'It is, therefore, humbly prayed that this Hon'ble Coutt be graciously pleased to admit this writ application and direct the opp. parties to show cause as to why action shall not be taken against them for illegally and forcibly demolishing the residential house of the petitioners and to give further show cause as to why the petitioners shall not be protected and compensation be given to them by the opp. patty Nos. 1 and 2 and if the opp. parties fail to show cause and show any insufficient cause, then the aforesaid rule be made absolute ; And pass any other order/orders as may be deemed fit and proper by this Hon'ble Court.' 2. The petitioners allege that the opp. parties have demolished the residential houses, which are the subject matter of Title Appeal No. 51 of 2000 pending before the learned District Judge, Puri and trying to dispossess them forcibly without ...
Tag this Judgment!Advertising Agencies Association of Orissa Vs. Cuttack Municipal Corpo ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: May-18-2001
Reported in: AIR2001Ori154; 2001(II)OLR72
ORDERP.K. Misra, J.1. The petitioner is the Advertising Agencies Association of Orissa. An agreement was executed between the petitioner-association and the Cuttack Municipal Corporation on 28-4-1998 relating to the right of exclusive display of hoardings and advertisements et cetera within Cuttack Town and on the National Highway No. 5 falling within the jurisdiction of Cuttack Municipal Corporation. The agreement was made for three years commencing from 1st April, 1998 to 31st March, 2001. The petitioner claims that the said agreement contained a renewal clause and while negotiations were being carried on between the petitioner and Cuttack Municipal Corporation, opposite party No. 2, the Chief Executive Officer of the Cuttack Municipal Corporation, was negotiating for entering into agreement with opposite party No. 3. The petitioner filed the writ application for a direction to opposite parties 1, 2 and 4 to renew the agreement as per the Minutes of Discussion between the petitioner ...
Tag this Judgment!Tara Prasad Patnaik and ors. Vs. State of Orissa, Rep. Through Secreta ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: May-18-2001
Reported in: 2001(II)OLR134
Pradipta Ray, J.1. The petitioner No. 1 is the elected Chairman and the petitioner Nos. 2 to 11 are the members of the elected Committee of Management of the Capital Urban House Building Cooperative Society Limited (In short the 'Society'), a. primary society within the meaning of the Orissa Cooperative Societies Act, 1962 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). The said Committee of Management (in short the 'Committee') assumed office on September 2, 1997 for a period of 4 years. By an order dated July 30, 1999 the Deputy Registrar of Cooperative Society, Puri Division in exercise of his power Under Section 32 (7) of the Act placed the Committee of the Society under suspension. The petitioners have filed this writ application challenging the said order of suspension.2. The petitioners have challenged the legality of the impugned order of suspension contending inter alia, that the Deputy Registrar had no authority or jurisdiction to exercise power Under Section 32 (7) of the Act; that ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »