Orissa Court May 2006 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.
Brajendra Kumar Mishra Vs. Bengal Chemicals and Pharmaceuticals Limite ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: May-19-2006
Reported in: 102(2006)CLT557
A.K. Samantaray, J.1. The petitioner in this writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India has come with a prayer for quashment of Annexure-11, the order of Disciplinary Authority dated 14.9.2001 inflicting punishment of removal from service and the order of the Appellate Authority under Annexure-14 confirming the said order and has prayed for a direction to the opposite parties for his reinstatement in service with full pecuniary benefits.2. The factual foundation on which the petitioner has structured the writ petition runs as under:The petitioner was appointed as Area Sales Manager under Bengal Chemicals & Pharmaceuticals Ltd. (O.P. No. 1) (hereinafter referred to as 'the Company') being duly selected and joined as such, on 15.10.1988 at Gauhati. In the month of June 1996 he was transferred from Gauhati to Patna and continued as such. On 5.5.1998, he was transferred from Patna Depot to Cuttack Depot under the transfer order Annexure-2. Although his transfer o...
Labanya Senapati Vs. State of Orissa and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: May-19-2006
Reported in: 102(2006)CLT829
A.S. Naidu, J.1. The question that arises for determination in this case is whether a major unmarried daughter can claim maintenance from her old mother under Section 125 CrPC.2. Petitioner Labanya Senapati is the widow of one Souri Charan Senapati. The couple had been blessed with four sons and four daughters, and present Opposite party No. 2 being the eldest daughter. Late Souri Charan Senapati was a Government Employee. After his death in harness in 1998, the Petitioner is receiving family pension and one of the sons of the deceased employee has been given compassionate/rehabilitation appointment in the Excise Department. While matter stood thus, Opposite party No. 2, the eldest daughter, filed petition under Section 125 CrPC before the SDJM, Dhenkanal registered as Crl. Misc. Case No. 186 of 1998. claiming monthly maintenance of Rs. 1.500.00 besides a lump-sum amount of Rs. 10,000.00 towards the litigation expenses from the Petitioner-mother and two brothers alleging that after the...
Ch. Satyabrata Dash Vs. State of Orissa and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: May-18-2006
Reported in: 2006(II)OLR295
I.M. Quddusi, J.1. Heard Mr. Pitamber Acharya learned Counsel for the petitioner, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State and Mr. B. K. Dash learned Counsel appearing on behalf of Orissa Public Service Commission.2. This writ petition has been filed against the judgment and order passed by the Orissa Administrative Tribunal dated 18.5.1999 in O.A. No. 875 of 1998 inter alia with a prayer to direct the Orissa Public Service Commission/opposite party No. 2 to sponsor two names as requested by the State Government vide its letter dated 4.3.1998 for the post of Research Officer in the Department of Housing and Urban Development.3. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner was appointed as Investigator under the Director, Town Planning, Orissa, Bhubaneswar. Later on, the post of Investigator was redesignated as Technical Assistant. Thereafter, he had applied for the post of Research Officer as a departmental candidate to the Orissa Public Service Commission pursuant t...
Akbar Mohammed Vs. State of Orissa and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: May-17-2006
Reported in: AIR2006Ori156; 2006(II)OLR24
ORDERM.M. Das, J.1. Notice Inviting Tender (in short 'NIT') dated 9.11.2004 issued by opp. party No. 4, Executive Engineer, Right Canal Division No.II, Junagarh as per Annexure-1 was published in the newspaper. The writ petitioner offered his tender in response to the said NIT with respect to the works mentioned in SL. Nos. 4 and 5 of the said NIT. For the work in SL. No. 4, the petitioner quoted Rs. 1,02,72,296/-, which was 27% less than the scheduled rate and for the work in SL. No. 5, the petitioner quoted Rs. 1,34,72,608/-, which was 23,97% less than the scheduled rate prescribed for the said work.2. The petitioner admittedly was the lowest tenderer. Under the letter dated 16.12.2004 (Annexure-2), the petitioner was intimated by the Executive Engineer as follows:Your quoted rates stands at First lowest rate being (-) 23.97% less over the amount put to tender.In view of this, you are therefore requested to give justification of rates with analysis for execution of the work within 5 ...
Debraj Routray and ors. Vs. Kanhu Charan Srichandan
Court: Orissa
Decided on: May-17-2006
Reported in: 2006(II)OLR136
N. Prusty, J.1. This writ petition has been filed by the defendants for quashing of the impugned order dated 4.8.2005 and 24.1.2006 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Khurda in C.S. No. 79 of 2003 whereby the learned Court has rejected the petition filed by the defendants to recall P.W. 1 for cross-examination and closed the evidence from the side of the defendants.2. Heard Mr. Sahoo, learned Counsel for the petitioners and Mr. D.K. Das, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the sole opposite party.3. Mr. Sahoo, learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that since the defendants could not appear on the date fixed for their appearance, they have been set ex parte and later on all the defendants appeared and filed an application for setting aside the ex parte order as well as filed their written statement on the very same day along with an application for acceptance of the same. The learned trial Court by its order dated 4.8.2005 was pleased to allow the petition, se...
Sri Akshaya Kumar Parida Vs. the Collector and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: May-17-2006
Reported in: 2006(II)OLR40
ORDERM.M. Das, J.1. The petitioner in the present writ petition challenges the order dated 10.6.2003 passed by the Collector, Jajpur in Misc. Case No. 7 of 2003 under Annexure-13 to the writ petition.2. The facts as revealed in the writ petition leading to the present case are that the petitioner was appointed as a distributor of LPG at Jajpur Town by the Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited (in short 'HPC Ltd.'). He has applied for grant of licence for possession of cylinder under the Indian Explosives Act, 1884 and the same was obtained and also purchased a land and made huge investment by taking land from different sources. After receiving the letter of appointment from the Regional Manager, HPC Ltd. and on execution of the required agreement, the petitioner commenced his business at Jajpur Town. It is alleged that before the petitioner was appointed as LPG distributor for Jajpur Town, the opp. party No. 6-M/s. Devi Gas, a Proprietor concern which is a distributor of LPG under Bh...
Tej Kishore Srivastav and ors. Vs. State of Orissa and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: May-17-2006
Reported in: II(2006)DMC619; 2006(II)OLR181
A.S. Naidu, J.1. The facts leading to the present case had a romantic beginning but a tragic end. Petitioner No. 1 and opposite party No. 2 were students of the same educational institution. They fell in love at a very tender age and as love has no barriers, in spite of stiff opposition from the family members they got married. The initial hurdles created by the orthodox families were successfully fought out by both of them. They led a blissful conjugal life and were blessed with a son. But then they became victims of the wrath of their elders. Opposite party No. 2 wife, it is alleged, was also subjected to un-surmountable hardship and torture. Unable to bear the agony she left her matrimonial house along with her son and took shelter with her grand parents. Criminal cases were initiated among the parties interse. On the basis of an FIR filed by opposite party No. 2 alleging commission of offences under Sections 498-A/34 IPC and Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, G.R. Case No. 673 of ...
Pradipta Kumar Naik Vs. Sub Collector-cum-returning Officer
Court: Orissa
Decided on: May-17-2006
Reported in: 2006(II)OLR400
ORDERA.S. Naidu, J.1. Heard.2. Invoking inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 CrPC, the petitioner seeks to assail the order dated 25.4.2006 passed by the SDJM, Bhawanipatna in 2(a) CC No. 9 of 2006. By the said order the Court below has taken cognizance of offences under Sections 33A and 125A of the R.P. Act, 1951 and under Section 177 of IPC. According to the learned Counsel for the petitioner the limitation for taking cognizance of the aforesaid offences having grossly barred, the Court below could not have taken cognizance thereof.3. Be that as it may, a perusal of the impugned order reveals that the Court below has neither applied its mind to the documents produced before it nor did it arrive at prima facie satisfaction about commission of the alleged offences. In view of the aforesaid infirmity, I quash the impugned order and remit the matter back to the Court below with direction to it to peruse the Case Diary and other materials and thereafter if it is prima fac...
Sri Anil Samal Vs. State of Orissa and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: May-17-2006
Reported in: 2006(II)OLR480
M.M. Das, J.1. The petitioner Anil Samal while in judicial custody in connection with G.R. Case No. 127 of 2004 was served with an order of detention issued under Sub-section (2) of Section 3 of the National Security Act, 1980 (for short, 'the Act') on 3.12.2005. The grounds of detention were also served upon the petitioner along with the order of detention. On receiving the order of detention, the petitioner made a representation to the Government of Orissa on 19.12.2005. The Advisory Board constituted under the Act opined that there is sufficient cause for detention of the petitioner under the Act. The Government of Orissa by order dated 1.2.2006 while rejecting the representation of the petitioner confirmed the said order of detention. The Union Government by letter dated 18.1.2006 also rejected the representation made by the petitioner. The petitioner has, therefore, preferred this writ petition for issuance of writ of habeas corpus challenging the order of detention and the reject...
Sanjukta Behera Vs. Rangalata Dalei and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: May-12-2006
Reported in: 102(2006)CLT108
L. Mohapatra, J.1. This appeal is directed against the order dated 8.11.2002 passed by the Learned District Judge, Puri in Election Misc. Case No. 69 of 2002 declaring the petitioner disqualified to be a member of Puri Zilla Parishad from Zone No. 12.2. Election to the post of Member of Puri Zilla Parishad from Zone No. 12 was held on 23.2.2002. The appellant before this Court contested as an official candidate of Biju Janata Dal whereas the respondent No. 1 before this Court contested for the said post as an official candidate of Congress Party. The present appellant was declared elected having obtained 10,106 votes whereas the respondent No. 1 obtained 6,033 votes and stood at the second position. The respondent No. 1 thereafter presented an application under Section 32 of the Zilla Parishad Act, 1991 (hereinafter called as 'the Act') for declaration that the appellant having three living children was not qualified to contest for the said post and accordingly election of the appellan...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »