Orissa Court July 2002 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.
Chakradhar Mohapatra Vs. the Vice-chancellor and Chairman, Board of Ma ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-11-2002
Reported in: 94(2002)CLT494
A.K. Patnaik, J.1. The petitioner was working as Personal Assistant to the Vice-chancellor of Orissa Agricultural of University & Technology (in short 'the O.U.A.T.'), Bhubaneswar. A disciplinary proceeding was initiated against the petitioner for mis-conduct and he was removed from service by order dated 30.3.1973 of the Vice-Chancellor of the O.U.A.T.2. The petitioner filed a writ petition in O.J.C. No. 1234 of 1974 challenging the order of removal and the writ petition was dismissed on 25.8.1976 by this Court. He challenged the order of dismissal passed by this Court before the Supreme Court in S.L.R No. 763 of 1977 but did not succeed in his challenge. Thereafter, he submitted a representation to the Board of Management of O.U.A.T. on 29.4.1981. When the said representation was not considered by the Board of Management, the petitioner filed a writ petition O.J.C. No. 1136 of 1990 before this Court and by order dated 26.8.1992, this Court disposed of the writ petition directing the ...
Bhagawan Bhoi Vs. State of Orissa and 2 ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-10-2002
Reported in: AIR2002Ori201; 94(2002)CLT137; 2002(II)OLR206
P. K. Balasubramanyan, C.J.1. The petitioner, owner of a piece of land, has approached this Court with this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking issue of a writ of certiorari to quash the communicationto him issued by the Divisional Forest Officer, Kalahandi Division calling upon him to stop felling of any tree on the property until further orders. The petitioner has also prayed for the issue of a writ of mandamus directing the Divisional Forest Officer, Kalahandi Division to issue the necessary permission to the petitioner to fell trees and to issue timber transit permit to him- According to the petitioner, owner of the land in question, the land having come to him from his father, he had earlier sought for permission to cut the trees and that by order dated 12.1.2000 he had been granted such permission. The permission was to cut the trees included in a joint verification report. But, subsequently while the petitioner was making preparations for the fel...
T. Chalapati Rao Vs. the State
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-10-2002
Reported in: 94(2002)CLT219
P.K. Mohanty, J. 1. The petitioner assails the order of the learned S.D.J.M., Bhanjanagar in G. R. Case No. 2719 of 1998 taking cognizance of offences under Sections 342, 353, 379, 201 and 114/34 of the Indian Penal Code (in short, 'IPC') and issuing process against him and has prayed for quashing such order of cognizance as against him. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there being no allegation whatsoever in the F.I.R. and the statement ofwitnesses recorded under Section 161, Cr.P.C. by the police as against the petitioner, the learned Magistrate, on the basis of his name in the Charge-sheet could not have taken cognizance and issued process. The learned counsel has placed the F.I.R. and the statements recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. in support of his contention that there is no allegation even, on which the cognizance could be taken. 3. The short fact of the prosecution case is that, on 20.4.1998 at about 7 P.M., when the informant-Constable was keeping watch...
Golak Chandra Bhol Vs. Bhaskar Baral and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-10-2002
Reported in: 94(2002)CLT207
P.K. Mohanty, J. 1. This petition under Section 482, Cr.P.C. is directed against the order of the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate dated 19.12.1983, taking cognizance of the offences under Sections 193/196/198/202/466 and 474 of the Indian Penal Code and issuing notice to the accused-petitioner thereunder fixing a date of appearance in 2(c) C.C. No. 73 of 1983. 2. The short fact of the case giving rise to the present petition is that the petitioner was the plaintiff in Title Suit No. 174 of 1978 in the Court of the learned Munsif, Kendrapara (now Civil Judge, Junior Division) praying for permanent injunction as against the defendant-opp. party in respect of suit schedule land. The plaintiff-petitioner produced a purported statutory certificate in Form-8 dated 9.7.1978 under the O.L.R. Act and the certified copies of order of the O.L.R. Authorities. These documents were produced in connection with Misc. Case Nos. 171 and 176 of 1978 in support of his claim of title, in order t...
Malatilata Samal and ors. Vs. State of Orissa and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-10-2002
Reported in: 94(2002)CLT290; 2002CriLJ3913; 2002(II)OLR216
A.S. Naidu, J. 1. The confirming order passed in a proceeding initiated under Section 56 of the Orissa Forest Act, 1982 (as amended by Orissa Act 9/83) (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') directing confiscation of the offending truck which was used in an offence of carrying unauthorised timber is challenged in this Writ Petition filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India.2. The short facts as revealed from the prosecution case are that on September 25, 1992, the Forester of Balugaon Range while patrolling on National Highway No. V along with his staff intercepted a truck bearing registration number OR-04-8197 near Balugaon. The truck was being driven by driver engaged by the owner Surendra Kumar Samal (who has died in the meanwhile and the petitioners are his legal heirs). The Helper of the truckand another person were also on board the truck. On search, the Forester found ninety two pieces of sawn Teak planks which were illegally transported in the truck. On dema...
Jayaprakash Nanda and Jajranglal Agrawal Vs. General Manager, Orissa S ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-10-2002
Reported in: AIR2002Ori199; 94(2002)CLT578
A.S. Naidu, J. 1. Both these Writ applications have been filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India inter alia praying to issue a Writ in the nature of Certiorari/Mandamus commanding the opposite parties to accept the petitioners' tenders and issue consequential orders to them in respect of construction of 5000 MT Godowns at Malmunda, Phase-I and Phase-II respectively in the district of Bolangir pursuant to acceptance letters, vide Annexure-3 (in both the Writ applications). As the facts and points of law involved in the cases are similar, both the matters are being disposed of by this common judgment. 2. Bereft of unnecessary details, the short facts loading to filing of the Writ applications are that the state Warehousing Corporation, opposite party No. 1, issued a Tender Call Notice on 19.1.2002inviting sealed tenders from registered contractors for construction of 5000 MT Godowns at different places of the State. The present dispute relates to construction of suc...
indra Kirsani Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-10-2002
Reported in: 2002(II)OLR276
B. Panigrahi, J.1. This appeal assails the conviction and sentence passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jeypore under Section 302, I.P.C. in Sessions Case No. 32 of 1994 directing the appellant to undergo imprisonment for life.2. The skeletal picture of the prosecution story as portrayed in the lower Court judgment is as follows :Informant Kandra Kirsani, Late Birsa Kirsani and the deceased Mangala Kirsani were three brothers. But the informant Kandra Kirsani was living in village Upparputa whereas Birsa and Mangala were living in separate houses in village Jhariaguda which was about 1/2 Kms. away from the village Upparputa. Birsa died 10 years before the date of occurrence leaving his wife Muni and three sons including the appellant. After the death of Birsa his other brother Mangala kept Muni as his wife. On 2.6.1993 Wednesday at about evening time P.W.2 followed by P.W.3 came to the informant's house and reported that appellant had informed them to have killed Mahgala Ki...
Smt. Hiramani Panda Vs. State of Orissa and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-10-2002
Reported in: 2002(II)OLR252
A.K. Patnaik, J. 1. Freedom Fighters' Pension Scheme, 1972 was framed by the Government of India. The Scheme provided for grant of pension to living freedom fighters, their families if they are no more alive, and to the families of martyrs. Under the scheme, not more than one member of a family was to be granted pension. The husband of the petitioner late Rangadhar Panda was granted such pension at the rate of Rs. 200/- per month and he was drawing the same. On 4.4.1975 the Government of India, Ministry of Home Affairs, addressed a communication to the Accountant General, Orissa stating therein that the pension sanctioned provisionally in favour of the petitioner has been suspended. On the same day, a memorandum was also issued by the Government of India, Ministry of Home Affairs, suspending the pension of Rs. 200/- per month provisionally sanctioned in favour of late Rangadhar Panda. By the said memorandum late Rangadhar Panda was asked to show cause as to why provisional pension gran...
Land Acquisition Officer-cum-collector, Kalahandi Vs. Baladev Chandrak ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-09-2002
Reported in: 94(2002)CLT262; 2002(II)OLR228
B. Panigrahi, J. 1. This appeal is directed against an order passed by the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Nawapara in M.J.C. No. 67 of 1993 under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act.2. The respondent owned 'Ac. 0.18 cents of land in Mouza Khariar Road under Khata No. 182 and Plot No. 2571. The appellant acquired the said land and compensation was fixed at Rs. 700.00 for 18 cents. Therefore, the respondent being aggrieved by such arbitrary fixation of compensation filed an application under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act for reference to the Civil Court. Accordingly the matter appeared before the Civil Judge, Senior Division, Nawapara who has, of course, determined at the rate of Rs. 20/- per square feet over and above the other statutory entitlement such as solatium and interest. The sole point to be decided in this appeal is whether the compensation payable by the appellant was just and adequate. In determining such issue the price prevalent at the time of notificati...
Prafulla Kumar Mallick Vs. State of Orissa and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-09-2002
Reported in: 2002(II)OLR699
B.P. Das, J.1. This is an application under Section 482, Cr.P.C. with a prayer to quash the cognizance taken against the petitioner in G.R. Case No. 244 of 1999 by the learned J.M.F.C., Khariar. The petitioner is an Officer of Indian Forest Service and at the relevant time was posted as the Divisional Forest Officer, Khariar Division in the district of Nuapada.2. The narration of facts in the application reveals that the opposite party No. 2 is the informant in the aforesaid G. R. Case in which a final form was submitted after the investigation against which a protest petition was filed by opposite party No. 2 and ultimately cognizance was taken for the offence under Section 454/34, I.P.C. read with Section 66 of the Orissa Forest Act, 1972.3. The case of the present petitioner is that basing upon the information regarding illegal felling of trees and confidential messages on 17.11.1999 the Divisional Forest Officer asked the Collector, Nuapada to depute a Magistrate for conducting the...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »