Orissa Court January 2003 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.
Rabi Naik and ors. Vs. Baula Dei and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-31-2003
Reported in: 95(2003)CLT354; 2003(I)OLR334
ORDERP.K. Tripathy, J. 1. Heard.2. In this application under Section 482, Cr.P.C. petitioners have prayed to quash Annexure - 3 i.e. order dated 1.2.2002 passed by learned J.M.F.C., Daspalla in I.C.C. No. 74 of 2001.3. It is not disputed at the Bar that relating to self-same occurrence FIR was lodged by the complainant as a result of which G. R. Case No. 139 of 2001 has been registered in the Court of J.M.F.C., Daspalla and the investigation by Gania Police is still continuing. When the matter stood thus the aforesaid complaint was filed by the informant and without complying with the provision in Section 210, Cr.P.C., learned J.M.F.C. conducted an inquiry and passed the impugned order of cognizance.4. Two contentions are raised by the petitioners as against the said order of issue of process.(i) That the accused-petitioners Rabi Naik, Kailash Naik, Patar Naik and Sumati Dei are the members of Scheduled Caste Community and the complainant being a member belonging to the Scheduled Caste...
Collector (Land Acquisition) Vs. Prema Chand Agrawal
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-31-2003
Reported in: 95(2003)CLT430
P.K. Tripathy, J. 1. The above named appellant has filed this appeal under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act (in short, 'the Act'), challenging to the legality and correctness of the award passed by learned Civil Judge (Sr. Division), Dharmagarh, on 19.12.1994 in Misc. Judicial Case No. 9/80 of 1991. The claimant in the Court below is the respondent in this appeal. He has also filed a cross-objection claiming for higher valuation. Both the appeal and the cross-objection are disposed of by this common judgment.2. An area of Ac. 0.40 decimals was acquired by the State Government for construction of staff quarters for the jail staff of Dharmagarh Sub-Jail. Advance possession of the land was taken in the year 1955 whereas the notification under Section 4(1) of the Act was made on 27.8.1980 as per the declaration dated 28.7.1980.Appellant awarded a compensation of Rs. 4,321.15 p. towards the cost, solatium, interest and additional interest. Respondent/ cross-objector raised objection t...
Ashok Das and ors. Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-31-2003
Reported in: 2003CriLJ2267
ORDERB.P. Das, J.1. This revision application is directed against the judgment dated 4-1-1999 passed in Criminal Appeal No. 13 of 1999 by which the Addl. Sessions Judge, Jagatsinghpur, has confirmed the order of conviction and sentence passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate-cum-Asst. Sessions Judge, Jagatsinghpur, in S.T. Case No. 499/ 95 arising out of G.R. Case No. 417/94 convicting petitioner Nos. 6 and 7 under Section 304, Part 11/34 of the Indian Penal Code ('I.P.C.' in short) and sentencing each of them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/-, in default, to undergo R.I. for a further period of two months. The trial Court also convicted petitioner Nos. 1 to 5 under Section 323/34, I.P.C. and sentenced each of them to undergo R.I. for six months and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/-, in default, to undergo R.I. for one month more.2. The petitioners (hereinafter referred to as 'the accused') stood charged under Sections 341/323/324/294/304/34, I....
Lokanath Singh Vs. State of Orissa and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-30-2003
Reported in: 95(2003)CLT278
P.K. Balasubramanyan, C.J.1. The writ petitioner claimed assignment of land on the basis that he was a retired Army Personnel. He was not found to be eligible for assignment of land on that basis. But, he was found to be eligible for assignment of land on the basis that he was a landless person. He was therefore, granted a lease of 2 acres of land in mouza Harida Pada under Bhubaneswar Tahasii. He took possession of the said land. He had put up fence around it and had planted cashew plants. It may be noted that the land was to be used by him for agricultural purpose and he was expected to cultivate the land.2. While he was thus in possession, it appears that a village road was taken through the property. The petitioner has not clearly disclosed the circumstances under which the road was taken through the property that was leased out to him and what steps he took at the appropriate time to assert his right and if he indicated his unwillingness to the passing of the road through his prop...
Rishabh Electricals (P) Ltd. Vs. the Chief Minister of Orissa and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-30-2003
Reported in: 95(2003)CLT348
ORDERP.K. Balasubramanyan, C.J. 1. Petitioner was assessed under the Orissa Sales Tax Act, 1947 and under the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956. Feeling aggrieved, the petitioner filed two appeals before the Additional Commissioner of Commercial Taxes: Pending those appeals, the Additional Assistant Commissioner of Sales Tax issued notice to the petitioner under Rule 50(3) of the Orissa Sales Tax Rules calling upon the petitioner to show cause why the tax demanded by the Sales Tax Officer shall not be enhanced. The petitioner objected to the said notice. The appeals filed by the petitioner were dismissed and addition was made to the tax demanded. Feeling aggrieved, the petitioner filed two second appeals before the Sales Tax Tribunal. The said appeals are pending.2. Pending those appeals, the petitioner made applications praying for stay of the collection of the tax assessed. The Commissioner, of Commercial Taxes considered the plea of the petitioner and the circumstances obtaining and passe...
Regional Director, Employees' State Insurance Corporation Vs. Dharanid ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-30-2003
Reported in: (2003)IILLJ781Ori
B. Panigrahi, J.1. These three writ petitions arise out of a common order passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Cuttack Bench in O.A. No. 456 of 1990 and O.A. Nos. 131 and 132 of 1991 whereby and whereunder the petitioner has been directed to convene a Review Departmental Promotion Committee to consider the cases of the opposite party No. 1 -in all the writ petitions afresh. On the basis of the recommendation of the Review D.P.C., the promotion and/or their seniority/regularisation of their services shall be maintained.2. The skeletal picture of the facts: emerged in these writ petitions are as follows:The opposite party No. 1 in the above writ petitions had challenged their supersession by their juniors even after the Departmental Promotion Committee found them suitable for the purpose of holding the promotional post. The Departmental Promotion Committee in its meeting held that opposite party Nos. 2 and 3 were suitable to hold the promotional post. Therefore, the applicants ...
Smt. Tilatama Bhatra Vs. State Election Commission and Two ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-29-2003
Reported in: 95(2003)CLT299; 2003(I)OLR336
P.K. Balasubramanyan, C.J.1. As per notification dated 10.1.2002, the State Election Commission, Orissa called upon all the Grama Panchayats in the State to elect Ward Members and Sarpanches for the purpose of constituting the Grama Panchayats. The said notification also set down the schedule of election from the commencement of the issue of the notice by the Election Officer under Rule 24 of the Orissa Grama Panchayats Election Rules, 1965 till publication of the name of the duly elected Naib Sarpanch. What is relevant for our purpose is to note that 22.1.2002, was fixed as the date for scrutiny of nominations under Rule 29 of the Orissa Grama Panchayats Election Rules, (hereinafter referred to as the 'Rules') and 23 1.2002 was fixed as the date for publication of the list of the validly nominated candidates under Rule 32(1) of the Rules. Withdrawal had to be done by 25.1.2002, and publication of the final list of contesting candidates was to be published on 25.1.2002. The declaration...
Jayashree Patnaik and anr. Vs. Urban Cooperative Bank and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-29-2003
Reported in: 2003(2)ARBLR294(Orissa); 95(2003)CLT356
P.K. Balasubramanyan, C.J. 1. Defendants 2 and 3 in an arbitration proceeding before the Arbitrator-cum-Assistant Registrar under the Orissa Co-operative Societies Act (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') are the petitioners in this writ petition. The Arbitration proceeding arose out of a claim filed by the first opposite party, a co-operative bank, against defendant No. 1, the borrower and against defendants 2 and 3 presumably on the basis that they were guarantors of the advances made to defendant No. 1. Defendants 2 and 3 filed written statement in answer to the claim disputing the maintainability of the claim as against them. They also contended that the claim did not disclose any cause of action as against defendants 2 and 3. Presumably in view of this pleading, the claimant sought an amendment of the plaint or claim, by incorporating the details regarding the transaction with defendants 2 and 3 and supporting the prayer earlier made in the claim with reference to those facts. T...
Narayan Chandra Mishra Vs. State of Orissa and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-29-2003
Reported in: 95(2003)CLT435
P.K. Mohanty, J. 1. Heard Mr. J. R. Dash, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Rangadhar Behera, learned Standing Counsel for School and Mass Education Department.2. The short facts of the petitioner's case is that after retiring from Government service, he was appointed as a Senior Classical teacher in Bhakta Madhu Vidyapitha on 23.7.1973. The said school is an aided educational institution in terms of the Orissa Education Act. The grievance of the petitioner is that while he was working as such according to the Government Circular the scale of pay of teachers in aided educational institution was revised with effect from June, 1976. The petitioner and other similarly situated persons, therefore, were entitled to get the salary at the scale of Rs. 370-570/-, but the petitioner was granted a fictitious scale of pay of Rs. 270/-. According to the learned counsel in view of the Orissa Revised Scale of Pay Rules, 1974 as well as the 1981 Rules, the petitioner was entitled to the sala...
Tito Alias Sayed Usman Ali Vs. State of Orissa and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-29-2003
Reported in: 2003(I)OLR350
A.K. Patnaik, J.1. This is a habeas corpus petition filed by the petitioner for quashing the order of detention dated 9.5. 2002 passed by the District Magistrate, Kendrapara under Sub- section (2) of Section 3 of the National Security Act, 1980 (for short, 'the Act 1980').2. The brief facts relevant for the purpose of disposal of this writ petition are that the petitioner was arrested in connection with Kendrapara P.S. Case No. 30 of 2002 on 6.2.2002. The offences alleged against the petitioner were under Sections 399/402, I.P.C./25 (A)/27 Arms Act. The petitioner was thereafter forwarded to the jail custody. While the petitioner was in jail custody in Choudwar Jail, the impugned order of detention was passed on 9.5.2002 by the District Magistrate, Kendrapara. The grounds of detention were served on the petitioner on 9.5.2002. The order of detention was approved by the State Government on 15.5.2002. The petitioner submitted representations against the said order on 16.6.2002. The repre...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »