Orissa Court February 2005 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.
Ballava Kumar Jaysingh Vs. Dr. Pramod Kumar Panda and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Feb-10-2005
Reported in: 99(2005)CLT439
A.K. Patnaik, J.1. This is a revision under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short, 'the CPC').2. The facts briefly are that the Opp. Party No. 1 filed a suit C.S. No. 1 of 2003 in the Court of the Learned Civil Judge (Jr. Divn.), Aska. The case of the Opp. Party No. 1 in the plaint was that he was a registered medical practitioner and a member of the Indian Medicine Central Council and has been enrolled on the State Register of Indian Medicine Practitioners of Ayurved, Siddha and Unani system of medicines. The Indian Medicine Central Council Act, 1970 provided for the constitution of a Central Council of Indian Medicine and the maintenance of a Central Register of Indian Medicine and matters allied to it and Section 3 of the Act provided that the Central Government shall constitute a Central Council consisting of the members mentioned therein. Some of the members of the Central Council were to be elected by members enrolled on the State Register and one member fro...
Paayal Engineers and anr. Vs. Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner (C ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Feb-10-2005
Reported in: 2005(I)OLR413
ORDERA.S. Naidu, J.1. Heard Mr. Udgata, learned counsel for the petitioners, and Mr. Satpathy learned counsel for the Provident Fund authorities.2. The order of assessment dated 11th July, 2003, Annexure-3, passed by the Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner in Case No. 7A/02/2003 is assailed in this Writ Petition. Mr. Satpathy raised a preliminary issue with regard to maintainability of the Writ Petition and submitted that as an Appeal is stipulated under the Act, this Writ Petition is not maintainable. Mr. Udgata at the other hand submitted that the order is palpably illegal and an apparent error has been committed apparent on the face of records for which the petitioners should not be directed to file an Appeal at Delhi, as such direction would cause irreparable loss and harassment to them. According to Mr. Udgata if a palpable illegality has been committed by the Provident Fund authorities, only because alternative remedy is available the doors of a Writ Court should not be shut.3....
Ranjita Rani Sahoo Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Feb-09-2005
Reported in: 2005(I)OLR604
Pradip Mohanty, J.1. The petitioner is said to be the registered owner of the Maruti Van bearing registration No. OR 05 M 0561. She Challenges the legality of the order dated 15.07.2004 of the J.M.F.C. (R), Cuttack in G.R. Case No. 631 of 2004 rejecting her petition filed under Section 457 of the Cr.P.C. and the judgment dated 19.08.2004 passed by the learned Sessions Judge I/C, Cuttack in Criminal Revision No. 53 of 2004 confirming the aforesaid order of the learned J.M.F.C. (R), Cuttack.2. On 01.07.2004 near the O.T.M. Bazar of Coudwar the Tangi Police found the aforesaid vehicle transporting Aluminium Conductors weighing 3.10 quintals in violation of the provisions of the Orissa Electric Supply-Line Material (Unlawful Possession) Act, 1988 (for short, 'the Act'). The materials were seized and Tangi P.S. Case No. 88 of 2004 under Sections 379, 411 and 34, I.P.C. read with Section 3 of the Act corresponding to the G.R. Case, referred to above, was initiated. Subsequently, on 01.07.200...
Union of India (Uoi) Represented Through Its Secretary, Ministry of Su ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Feb-09-2005
Reported in: 99(2005)CLT639
I.M. Quddusi, J.The petitioners, Union of India and Ors. have filed this Writ Application against the Order dated 7.1.2002 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Cuttack Bench, Cuttack in O.A. No. 177 of 2001 by which the O.A. of the opposite party was allowed and it was directed that Consolidated Over Time Allowance (COTA) should be paid to the opposite party from January, 1993 till issue of Order dated 22.1.2001.2. The brief facts of the case are that the opposite party was appointed as Radio Technician in the year 1983 and was posted at Decca Navigation Chain Station at Savarkundla in Gujarat. At that time the scheme existing for payment of COTA was at the rate of 20% of the monthly pay along with D.A. The said allowance was paid for the work on all holidays and weekly off days to such staff including the opposite party. Vide Order dated 17.12.1992 the petitioners had discontinued the COTA with effect from 1.1.1993 Paragraph 3 of the order speaks as under :'Payment of Consol...
Sabitri Pradhan Vs. State of Orissa and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Feb-09-2005
Reported in: 99(2005)CLT802; [2005(106)FLR451]
I.M. Quddusi, J.1. The petitioner who has been allegedly discriminated from amongst similarly situated persons has sought relief of regularization of her service by way of this Writ Petition.2. The petitioner was initially appointed as a Junior Typist in Cuttack Development Authority on casual basis for a period of 44 days on a consolidated salary of Rs. 2,679/- per month, vide appointment Order No. 3798 dtd. 27.3.1998 as an unreserved woman candidate. Thereafter she continued to work as Junior Typist by periodical appointments of 44 days each. In the meantime the State Government in Housing and Urban Development Department, vide Order No. 14445/HUD/TP-OM-272000 dtd. 4.5.2000, ordered that no post be filled up and no appointment/ engagement of staff (Regular/ H.R./D.L.R./N.M.R./Casual Labour/Work Charge) be made in any cadre of the Planning Authority without prior approval of the State Government. Further vide Order No. 39794/F dtd. 26th September, 2000 the State Government in Finance ...
Mustari Begum and anr. Vs. Mirza Mustaque Baig
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Feb-08-2005
Reported in: II(2005)DMC94; 2005(I)OLR636
R.N. Biswal, J.1. This revision is preferred against the order-dated 5.11.1997 passed by the Judge, Family Court, Cuttack, in Criminal Proceeding No. 524 of 1994 wherein he refused to exercise his jurisdiction.2. The parties are Muslims. On 26.9.1994 petitioner Nos. l and 2 filed a proceeding under Section 125 Cr.P.C. for maintenance against the opposite party claiming themselves to be his wife and son respectively before the Judge, Family Court, Cuttack. Notice was served on the opposite party asking him to file show cause, if any, in response to which he submitted show cause taking the plea inter alia that he divorced petitioner No. 1 on 3.11.1993 and as such the proceeding was not maintainable in view of Section 3 of Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986 (hereinafter referred to as 'The Act'} which came in to force with effect from 25.6.1986. Petitioner No. 1 denied the plea of previous divorce advanced by the Opp. Party. Without proceeding further the Court below...
Sri Purna Ch. Dehury and ors. Vs. State of Orissa and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Feb-08-2005
Reported in: 99(2005)CLT642; [2005(106)FLR32]
I.M. Quddusi, J.1. The present Writ Application has been filed against the interlocutory Order dated 18.3.2002 passed by the Orissa Administrative Tribunal, Bhubaneswar in O.A. No. 367 of 2002 refusing the petitioner's prayer for stay of the impugned order of termination of the petitioners from service. Further the petitioners have prayed for allowing them to get the scale of pay of Rs. 300-410/- with effect from 1.1.1974, Rs. 840-1240/- with effect from 1.1.1985, Rs. 950-1500/- with effect from 1.5.1989 and Rs. 3050-4500/- with effect from 1.1.1996 and not to retrench them till implementation of the award of the industrial Tribunal in I.D. Case No. 20 of 1988.2. Since the original application filed by the petitioners against the impugned order of termination is still pending before the Tribunal and the Tribunal vide interim order though did not grant relief sought for by the petitioners, i.e., stay of termination order; it directed the respondents (opposite parties)-State that if the ...
Ram Avtar Vs. Union of India (Uoi) Represented Through Its Secretary t ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Feb-08-2005
Reported in: 99(2005)CLT698; [2005(106)FLR280]
ORDER1. Heard Mr. R. K. Rath, Learned Counsel for the petitioner and Mrs.' Bharati Dash, Learned Additional Standing Counsel for the Central Government.2. Initially, this Writ Petition was filed by the petitioner with a prayer to quash the Department Proceeding initiated against him by the opposite parties, to declare the ex parte enquiry as violative of the principles of natural justice in which the petitioner was not allowed to engage a Defence Assistant to defend his case and to direct the opposite parties to hold a fresh and impartial enquiry in the Departmental Proceeding.3. But during the pendency of the Writ Petition the opposite parties have concluded the Departmental Proceeding and passed the impugned order of dismissal of the petitioner from service and, as such, by way of amendment, the petitioner has also challenged the said order of his dismissal from service passed by the opposite parties.4. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner was a member of the Central R...
Shri Aswini Kumar Patra Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Feb-08-2005
Reported in: 2005(I)OLR402
R.N. Biswal, J.1. This Revision is directed against the order dated 4.11.2004 passed by the S.D.J.M., Bonai in Misc. Case No. 34 of 2004 arising out of G.R. Case No. 299 of 2004 wherein he rejected the petition filed under Section 457 Cr.P.C. by the petitioner for interim release of the tipper bearing registration No. OR-09-D-9623 in his favour.2. The factual matrix as found from the F.I.R., impugned order and the Revision petition leading to filing of this Revision in succinct is that on 11.9.2004 at about 3.00 P.M. while the C.I. of police of Karua Circle and his staff were performing patrol duty at Dengula-Kusumdihi road, receiving reliable information ' that manganese ore being illegally raised from Kandarkala hill were transported, they proceeded towards that hill. On the way the police personnel seeing the aforesaid tipper loaded with manganese ore coming along Bandala Panchayat road towards Dengula, intercepted it. In the meantime out of five occupants of the tipper, four includ...
Gandharba Pal Vs. Bulei Sethi and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Feb-07-2005
Reported in: 2005(I)OLR657
A.K. Patnaik, J.1. This is an appeal under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short C.P.C.).2. The facts for disposal of this appeal briefly are that the appellant herein filed T.S. No. 124 of 1988 in the Court of the Civil Judge, (Senior Division), Jagatsinghpur for a declaration that the bricks which were the subject matter of the suit belong to the appellant. The respondents filed written statement in the suit and controverted the allegations made in the plaint. BY judgment and decree dated 17.1.1995, the learned Civil Judge, (Senior Division), Jagatsinghpur, dismissed the suit. Aggrieved, the-appellant filed Title Appeal No. 74 of 1995 in the Court of the learned Addl. District Judge, Jagatsinghpur. The said appeal was posted to 10.11.1998 for hearing when the learned Addl. District Judge, Jagatsinghpur passed the following orders :'10.11.98 Counsel for both sides have not taken steps today. This is an appeal of the year 1995.Hence the case is to be disposed of o...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »