Orissa Court July 2004 Judgments
Bhubaneswar Singhdeo Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-29-2004
Reported in: 98(2004)CLT201; 2004CriLJ4377
M.M. Das, J. 1.This is an application under Section 438, Cr.P.C, for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner, but the case has assumed importance due to regular and wide publicity made in the Press and Electronic media. Considering the above, though the Court is not required to go into the details of facts while considering an application for anticipatory bail which is a discretionary power of the Court under Section 438, Cr.P.C., in my view, it would be proper to state the case of the rival parties as it stands today.2. It is contended by Mr. I. Mohanty, learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner Bhubaneswar Singhdeo along with his wife, namely, Smt. Puspalata Singhdeo brought Prasanta Nahak, a boy of about 8/9 years from his village Sodaka in the district of Ganjam. The said boy was an orphan and none was there to bring him up. The couple, therefore, with permission of the grand-father of Prasanta, namely, one Dandasi Nahak brought the said child to Khariar and were ...
Tag this Judgment!A.E.S. Orissa Distribution Private Limited and ors. Vs. Grid Corporati ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-28-2004
Reported in: AIR2004Ori198; 2005(1)ARBLR217(Orissa)
ORDERP.K. Tripathy, J.1. The above noted revision petitioners have filed the three Civil Revisions under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (in short, 'the Code') as against the judgment of learned District Judge, Khurda at Bhubaneswar passed on 15-12-2003 in Arbitration Proceeding No. 293 of 2003. On consent of the parties, all the three Civil Revisions have been heard analogously being against the same order and are disposed of by this common judgment.2. Central Electricity Supply Company Limited (in short, 'CESCO') is a Company of which petitioners and the opposite party No. 1 are shareholders. They entered into an agreement on 31-9-1999 to act as shareholders of CESCO, which had obtained licence for distribution and retail supply of electricity energy Annexure-1 is that Agreement. Clause 28-2 of that Agreement provides that the parties irrevocably submit to the appropriate Courts in Orissa. Clause 28-3 provides that any dispute or differences between the GRIDCO and th...
Tag this Judgment!Babu Alias Umakanta Nayak and anr. Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-28-2004
Reported in: 2005CriLJ865
R.N. Biswal, J.1. This appeal is directed, at the instance of the above two accused persons against the order of conviction and sentence dated 29-3-1995 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Balasore in S.T. No. 11/77 of 1994 wherein he convicted them under Sections 302/201/324 read with Section 34, IPC and sentenced each of them thereunder to undergo imprisonment for life, R.I. for two years and one year respectively.2. Shorn of unnecessary details the prosecution case is that there was a prolonged civil litigation between Kunimani Nayak and Khudamani Nayak in one hand and Surendra Nayak on the other in respect of a particular piece of land. Ultimately Khudamani and Kunimani got the decree in their favour. They sold the land in question to the wife and two grand-children of late Baidhar Singh in the year 1992 and gave delivery of possession thereof to them. Being annoyed and frustrated Surendra Nayak and his sons including the accused persons created 'Gandagol' with Baidhar...
Tag this Judgment!Prafulla Kumar Sahoo Vs. Central Electricity Supply Company of Orissa ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-27-2004
Reported in: AIR2005Ori54; 98(2004)CLT783
A.K. Patnaik, J.1. The case of the petitioner in this Writ Petition is that he is in occupation of part of holding No. 396 in Ward No. 27 (presently renumbered as Ward No. 13) of Cuttack Municipal Corporation. He submitted an application on 27.6.2002 to the SDO II, CESCO, Badambadi, Cuttack Town for supply of electricity to the residential portion of the holding occupied by him and another application dated 23.7.2002 for separate connection to the commercial establishment, namely, 'Laxmi Ladies Tailors', run by the wife of the petitioner in one of the rooms of the said holding. He deposited a sum of Rs. 1650/- towards security, Rs. 100/- towards the connection charges and Rs. 10/- towards processing fees on 10.8.2002 on the instruction of the Junior Engineer (Elect.), CESCO. Thereafter, the electricity supply was given for the commercial establishment, but was not given for domestic purpose. The petitioner approached the Executive Engineer II (Electrical), CESCO, City Distribution Divi...
Tag this Judgment!Paradip Port Trust Vs. their Workmen and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-23-2004
Reported in: 98(2004)CLT593
L. Mohapatra, J.1. The Management of Paradip Port Trust is the petitioner in this writ application against the award passed by the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Bhubaneswar in Tr. Industrial Dispute Case No. 112 of 2001.2. The Central Government by order dated 27.11.1996 referred three disputes for adjudication to the Tribunal. The references are quoted below :'Whether the Management of Paradip Port Trust is justified in withholding their decision to sanction the leave for the period from 31.5,1995 to 29.9.1995 (122 days) and from 24.10.1995 to 30.10.1995 (7 days) to Sri Sudhakar Mantry, Sr. JE (Mechanical)? If not, to what relief the workman is entitled ?''Whether the Management of Paradip Port Trust is Justified in withholding and recovering the payment made to Sri Sudhakar Mantry, Sr. JE (Mechanical) in view of the award of the Industrial Tribunal and Paradip Port Trust Management's Office Order No. DM/FLD/P/Con/2/89, dated 1.6.1989 If not, to what relief ...
Tag this Judgment!Management of Executive Engineer (Electrical), E.H.T. Construction Div ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-22-2004
Reported in: (2005)ILLJ681Ori
A.S. Naidu, J.1. The Management seeks to challenge the award dated March 8, 2000 passed by the Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Jeypore in Industrial Dispute Case No. 17 of 1998.2. Opposite party No. 3 workman, alleged that he was appointed as an N.M.R. employee under the Junior Engineer, Electrical, E.H.T. Construction Section, Aska, which was under the administrative control of the petitioner-Management. He worked continuously from December 1, 1982 to January 28, 1986. Thereafter without any rhyme or reason and without observing the mandatory provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), his name was struck off from the Roll, which amounts to retrenchment. It is further averred that the employees who were junior to him were: allowed to continue in service and also some new employees were engaged after his retrenchment. On the basis of a petition filed, a conciliation proceeding was initiated by the Labour Court. The conciliation having failed, on b...
Tag this Judgment!Nivas Majhi Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-21-2004
Reported in: 98(2004)CLT656
P.K. Tripathy, J. 1.The case at hand is an example of a perfunctory investigation and pandour prosecution giving benefit to the accused inasmuch as after hearing the parties at length and scanning the evidence, we feel that the accused is entitled to the benefit of doubt and order of acquittal for the offence under Section 302, IPC, though dead body of the deceased was recovered from his possession after allegedly they were last seen in the preceding night i.e., in the of occurrence. In that respect we set forth the reason as noted hereinafter.2. Facts which are not in dispute may be noted at the outset. Minaketan son of P.W. No. 12 is the deceased and the suffered a homicidal death in the night between 2nd and 3rd January, 1994. His dead body was recovered at the instance of the police from the residential premises of the accused/appellant. That room was under lock and key by the time police visited and on being compelled by the police appellant unlocked the door and thereafter the de...
Tag this Judgment!Babu Alias Iswar Rout Vs. State of Orissa and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-21-2004
Reported in: 2005CriLJ273
L. Mohapatra, J.1. The order of detention dated 12-11-2003 passed by the District Magistrate, Cuttack under sub-section (2) of Section 3 of the National Security Act, 1980 against the petitioner is under challenge before this Court.2. On perusal of the records it appears that the District Magistrate, Cuttack passed an order of detention on 12-11-2003 to prevent the petitioner from acting in any manner prejudicial to the maintenance of public order. The said order in Annexure-1 is quoted below :'Whereas, I Sri Deoranjan Kumar Singh, IAS, District Magistrate, Cuttack, have been empowered in Government of Orissa, Home Department Order No. 5478/C dated 22-92003 to exercise the powers conferred by sub-section (2) of Section 3 of the National Security Act, 1980.AND WHEREAS, I am aware that Sri Babu alias Iswar Rout, aged about 25 years, son of Ganeswar Rout of Shankarpur, P.S. Madhupatna in the district of Cuttack is presently lodged in the Circle Jail, Cuttack at Choudwar being arrested and...
Tag this Judgment!Divisional Manager, Orissa Forest Development Corporation Ltd. Vs. Kan ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-21-2004
Reported in: (2005)IILLJ121Ori
ORDERA.S. Naidu, J. 1. The Divisional Manager, Orissa Forest Development Corporation seeks to impugn the award dated March 10, 1997 passed by the Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Koraput, Jeypore in I.D. Case No. 59/95. The said industrial dispute was referred to the Labour Court by Government in exercise of power conferred upon it under Sections 10 and 12 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The reference runs as follows:'Whether the termination of services/refusal of employment of Sri Kanista Bisoi, ex employee of Orissa Forest Development Corporation Ltd., Puruna,. Katak by the management of Divisional Manager, OFDC Ltd. (C) Boudh Divn. with effect from December 1, 1992 is legal and/or justified? If not, what relief the workman is entitled to?' 2. The case of the workman before the Labour Court was that he had been duly appointed as a Watcher in the year 1988 in Badla Bamboo Depot by the management. He served without any break till December 1, 1992 when the management without any j...
Tag this Judgment!Executive Engineer, Bhubaneswar Electrical Division, Gridco Vs. Presid ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-20-2004
Reported in: 98(2004)CLT393
A.S. Naidu, J.1. The petitioner-management has filed this Writ application challenging the award dated 24.3.1998 passed by the Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Bhubaneswar in Industrial Dispute Case No. 29 of 1995.2. Ten NMR workers including opposite party Nos. 2 to 8 had raised an industrial dispute challenging the order of their termination from service under GRIDCO. After failure of conciliation Government of Orissa in exercise of its power conferred under Sections 10 and 12 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') made a reference to the Labour Court at Bhubaneswar on 29.1.1995 in the following terms :'Whether the termination of services of the 10 (ten) NMR workers as per list given below by the Executive Engineer, Bhubaneswar Electrical Divn. Bhubaneswar with effect from 1.6.92 is legal and/or justified If not, what relief they are entitled to ?' 3. In their claim statement filed before the Labour Court, the workmen specifically pleaded that the...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »