Orissa Court January 2009 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.
Ramesh Chandra Sahu and anr. Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-19-2009
Reported in: 2009CriLJ1690
B.K. Patel, J.1. This revision is directed against the judgment passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jeypore dismissing the Criminal Appeal No. 50 of 1993 (Criminal Appeal No. 152 of 1992 of the Court of learned Sessions Judge, Jeypore) and confirming the judgment and order passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-Cum-Subordinate Judge, Jeypore in S.C. No. 74 of 1991 (S. C. No. 292 of 1991 of the Court of Sessions Judge, Jeypore) convicting petitioner No. 1 under Section 337 of the I.P.C. and sentencing him to undergo R. I. for three months and to pay a fine of Rs. 200/-, in default R. I. for fifteen days; and petitioner No. 2 Sanjay alias Babuli under Section 307 of the I.P.C. and sentencing him to undergo R. I. for three years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/-, in default R.I. for six months.2. Informant P.W. 1 is petitioner No. 1's estranged wife. Prior to the occurrence the informant was residing in a rented house separately from her husband. Petitioner No. 2 is i...
Kirtan Mallick Vs. Karunakar Das
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-19-2009
Reported in: 2009(II)OLR73
ORDERA.S. Naidu, J.1. Heard2. The judgment dtd. 3.1.2009 passed by learned District Judge, Cuttack in F.A.O. No. 115/2008 is assailed in this Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Opposite Party as plaintiff filed C.S.No. 178/2008 in the Court of Civil Judge (Sr. Division), 1st Court, Cuttack, inter alia, praying for partition of the suit properties. The present petitioner is the defendant in the said suit. In course of hearing, the present petitioner filed a petition under Order 39, Rules 1 and 2 read with Section 151 of C.P.C. alleging that the opposite party-plaintiff is trying to raise construction over the disputed properties with an intention to frustrate the decree. The said petition was registered as Interim Application No. 187/2008. Paragraph-4 of the petition reads as follows:That on 17.4.2008 on all of sudden the opposite party with help of some higher goondas started digging the soil forcible to raise illegal construction on the suit land, the ...
Sudhansu Sekhar Gantayat Vs. State of Orissa and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-16-2009
Reported in: (2009)107CALLT350(NULL)
B.S. Chauhan, C.J.1. This Writ Petition has been filed for quashing the charge sheet I of Disciplinary Proceedings.2. The facts and circumstances giving rise to the case are that certain allegations were made against the Petitioner while he was working as Civil Judge (Senior Division), as per the report submitted by the District Judge, mainly relating to misconduct with one lady Judicial Officer and for not making payment of Cable charges by his son to the Cable operator.3. This Court on administrative side asked the Petitioner to submit his explanation in respect of the aforesaid allegations. Petitioner submitted his explanation to the same. The matter was considered by the Disciplinary Committee and it resolved that-the officer be instructed to keep cordial relationship with the superior officer. The matter was placed before the Full Court wherein vide Resolution dated 22.7.2001 the recommendation of the Vigilance Committee was accepted.4. Subsequent thereto, this Court received some...
Gokha Behera Vs. Principal Secretary, Law Department and 3 ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-16-2009
Reported in: 107(2009)CLT438
B.S. Chauhan, C.J.1. This Writ Petition has been filed to set aside the notification dated 10.12.2003 ( Annex.- 10 ) by which the Petitioner has been dismissed from service after holding the departmental proceedings and further to reinstate him in service with back wages.2. The facts and circumstances giving rise to this case are that the Petitioner, while working as a Munsif in 1993 in the judgeship of Cuttack, decided three suits on priority basis in which it was alleged that one of his relatives had been the Plaintiff. On receiving the complaint this Court on administrative side called for the record and issued a show cause to the Petitioner initiating a preliminary inquiry. The Petitioner filed a show cause dated 18.12.1993 (Annex.- 2) explaining that the allegations were false and none of the parties in the suit was his relative. After considering Petitioner's reply this Court decided to initiate the departmental proceedings against him. The Petitioner was put under suspension in ...
Pramod Kumar Pradhan Vs. Presiding Officer, Labour Court and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-15-2009
Reported in: 107(2009)CLT686
ORDER1. This writ appeal has been filed by the Appellant seeking to challenge the order and Judgment dated 8.12.2008 passed by the Hon'ble Single Judge of this Court in W.P.(C) 2307 of 2007 whereby, Learned Single Judge has been pleased to dismiss the writ application filed by the present Appellant and confirmed the order passed by the Labour Court finding no impropriety or illegality in the said A ward.2. Mr. D.P. Mohanty, Learned Sr. Advocate appearing for the Petitioner, inter alia, submitted that the scope and ambit of Section 33C(1) and 33C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter called 'the Act') are distinct and separate from each other. Accordingly, he submitted that the Learned Single Judge has failed to properly interpret the Judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Chief Mining Engineer, East India Coal C. Ltd. Bararee Colliery Dhanbad v. Rameshwar and Ors. AIR 1968 SC 218. Learned Counsel submitted that Section 33C(2) of the Act, had been enacted for q...
Narottam Kumar Jha Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-14-2009
Reported in: 107(2009)CLT451
B.P. Das, J.1. The case of the Petitioner is that while working as Constable in CISF, he was removed from service with effect from 15.9.1984 in pursuance of the disciplinary proceeding initiated against him on the allegation of a false case of dacoit and ultimately, by virtue of the Order Dated 22.1.1985, the Appellate authority issued an order reinstating the Petitioner in service with full pay and allowances. The Appellate authority also directed that the period of suspension of the Petitioner would be treated as duty and the period from the date of removal to the date of rejoining duty as leave due. On 24.12.1988 the Petitioner was promoted to the rank of Naik with effect from 23.12.1988. On 10.10.1997 the holders of the post of Naik were given the rationalized rank of HC/GD and pay scale of that post. On 15.11.1999 on being found fit by the Review DPC, the Petitioner was given notional promotion to the rank of Naik, w.e.f. 24.11.1986, i.e., the date his batch mates were promoted to...
Sandhyarani Sahoo Vs. District Judge and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-13-2009
Reported in: 107(2009)CLT160
1. This Writ Petition has been filed few seeking a Dr. B.S. Chauhan, C.J. V direction to the Opposite Parties for appointing her as a Stenographer III the judgeship of Balasore against the quota reserved for women.2. The facts and circumstances giving rise to this case are that on 4th March, 1997 an advertisement was made for filling up five existing vacancies of Junior Stenographers and One vacancy which was likely to occur in near future. Petitioner applied and appeared in the test. However, her name found place at serial Nos. 10 in the merit list. The appointment was made strictly on the basis of merit. Petitioner's grievance is that since she belongs to the general category (women), she should have been offered the appointment in reserved category. Hence this petition.3. Mr. Mohapatra, Learned Counsel for the Petitioner has submitted that the reservation for women candidates also applies in the instant case as roster point is available to the to the candidates belonging to general ...
Santosh Kumar Sahu Vs. District Judge and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-12-2009
Reported in: 107(2009)CLT343
ORDERB.S. Chauhan, C.J.1. This Writ Petition was filed on 3.4.2001 seeking a direction to the Opposite Parties to allow the Petitioner to continue as Candidate Peon and to consider his case for regular appointment on the post of Process Server whenever vacancy occurs in future.2. The facts and circumstances giving rise to the case are that Petitioner applied for the post of Candidate Peon and in pursuance of the intimation dated 27.12.1993 issued by the Registrar, Civil Courts, Kalahandi-Nuapada, Opposite Party No. 2, the Petitioner appeared in the written test held for the said post. After having been duly selected, the Petitioner vide letter dated 2.2.1994 was directed to appear before the District Judge, Kalahandi, Nuapada, Opposite Party No. 1 on 11.2.1994 for interview ( Annex. -1). Petitioner also passed the medical test and submitted two character certificates for being enrolled as a Candidate Peon. Petitioner was enrolled as a Candidate Peon vide Order Dated 21.2.1994 and attac...
Ajaya Kumar Dash Vs. State of Orissa and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-12-2009
Reported in: (2009)107CALLT504(NULL)
Indrajit Mahanty, J.1. In this writ application the Petitioner-Ajaya Kumar Dash, a Judicial Officer, has sought to challenge the order of his reversion dated 24.2.2000 passed by this Court purportedly pursuant to the order arising out of Disciplinary Proceeding No. 4 of 1995.2. From the pleadings it appears that the Petitioner had preferred Writ Petition (Civil) No. 15 of 2002 before the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India under Article 32 of the Constitution of India and the Hon'ble Supreme Court by its Order Dated 11.2.2002 was pleased to dismiss the said Writ Petition as withdrawn with liberty to the Petitioner to file a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and accordingly, the present writ application has been filed.3. Shorn of unnecessary details, the case of the Petitioner in brief is that the Petitioner joined in service as a Probationary Munsif in the year 1982 and on completion of his probation, he was promoted to the post of Judicial Magistrate, IInd Class in Ma...
Harekrushna Mahakud Vs. Radhanath Mahakud and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-12-2009
Reported in: 107(2009)CLT720
A.S. Naidu, J.1. The unsuccessful Defendant No. 1 in both the Courts below is the Appellant. This appeal is directed against the Judgment and decree dated 11.5.1989 passed by the then District Judge, Phulbani in Title Appeal No. 5 of 1987 dismissing the appeal and confirming the Judgment and decree dated 28.1.1987 passed by the then Additional Subordinate Judge, Phulbani in T.S. No. 27 of 1984.2. The suit was one for declaration of title as well as for recovery of possession of the lands more fully described in the plaint schedule. Bereft of unnecessary details, the facts necessary for appreciating the inter se disputes, are as follows:One Dukhu Mahakud was the admitted owner in possession of the disputed lands. He died in the year 1976 leaving behind his widow Bila Bewa (Respondent No. 3), and the two sons, namely, Harekrushna Mahakud (Respondent No. 1) and Panchanan (Respondent No. 2). Respondent No. 2 after the death of his father Dukhu claiming to be the 'Karta' of the family and a...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »