Orissa Court July 2009 Judgments
State of Orissa and ors. Vs. Kali Ch. Ratha and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-21-2009
Reported in: 2009(II)OLR573
L. Mohapatra, J. 1. The order of the Orissa Administrative Tribunal, Bhubaneswar Bench, Bhubaneswar, in O.A. No. 1329 of 1989 dated 15.2.1999 is the subject matter of challenge before this Court.2. Opposite party No. 1 was the applicant before the Tribunal. The case of the opposite party No. 1 is that he being a Matriculate joined the Army on 4.8.1960 and was discharged therefrom on 12.11.1964. During the tenure of his service in the Army, he completed Class-II Course (Mechanic). He then joined the post of Assistant Sub-Inspector of Police (Mech.) on 1.3.1966. He completed Grade-ll Mechanic Course in 1984. Though he had not completed Grade-I course, he was exempted from completing the same by the Director General of Police by order dated 29.1.1980 making him eligible for consideration for promotion and he was allowed to officiate as S.I. (Mech.) by Order dated 29.1.1971. He continued as such till 24.7.1972. Again, in another spell he was allowed to officiate as S.I. on 17.5.1979 and co...
Tag this Judgment!Niranjan SwaIn and 8 ors. Vs. State of Orissa and Three ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-21-2009
Reported in: 2009(II)OLR706
ORDER1. Heard Mr. P. Mohanty, learned Counsel for the petitioners and Mr. R.P. Kar, learned Additional Standing Counsel for the Revenue.2. The case of the petitioners is that they are the traditional fishermen and small traders of sea-fish and residents of Puri Municipality. They catch fish from the Bay of Bengal and after catching fish, they carry the same to the Railway Station for being dispatched to West Bengal and other States. Some fish are also utilized inside the Puri Municipality. According to the petitioners, in course of transit of fish to outside the State by trains, Entry Tax is levied by the O.P.-Sales Tax Authorities at the Platform of Puri Railway Station. The petitioners allege that levy and collection of Entry Tax at the Railway Platform, i.e., at the point of exit, wherefrom the fish are dispatched to outside the State of Orissa, is illegal and arbitrary and is in violation of the provisions of law.3. Mr. P. Mohanty, learned Counsel for the petitioners, draws our att...
Tag this Judgment!Paradeep Phosphates Ltd. Vs. State of Orissa and Three ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-21-2009
Reported in: 2009(II)OLR769
ORDER1. Heard Mr. B.K. Mohanti, learned senior counsel for the petitioner and Mr. R.P. Kar, learned Additional Standing Counsel for the Revenue.2. The petitioner, which is a limited company and a TIN dealer and is engaged in manufacturing of different types of fertilizer, has filed this writ petition challenging the order of assessment dated 21.2.2007 passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Sales Tax, Cuttack II Range, Cuttack, for the period from 1.4.2005 to 30.9.2006 under Section 42 of the Orissa Value Added Tax Act, 2004, vide Annexure-1.3. The limited ground of challenge to the order of assessment is against the rejection of the input tax credit claimed by the petitioner on purchase of furnace oil worth Rs. 9,27,53,164/- on the ground that the furnace oil is not directly used in manufacturing of finished products.4. Mr. Mohanti for the petitioner submits that the Assistant Commissioner of Sales Tax in the order of assessment on one hand has given a finding that the material, i.e.,...
Tag this Judgment!Silu Panigrahi Vs. Registrar, Civil and Sessions Court
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-21-2009
Reported in: 2010(I)OLR12
I.M. Quddusi, A.C.J.1. This writ petition has been filed praying for quashing of the impugned order dated 22.1.2009 (Annexure-10) passed by opposite party No. 1 rejecting the prayer of the petitioner to appoint her under Rehabilitation Assistance Scheme in the judgeship of Koraput at Jeypore with a further prayer to direct the opposite parties to consider the case of the petitioner for appointment under Rehabilitation Assistance Scheme as done in case of similarly situated persons, who have been appointed vide Annexures-5, 6 and 7.2. The brief facts of the case are that the father of the petitioner who was serving as Daftari in the office of the District Judge, Koraput died in harness on 7.12.2004. After his death, the petitioner who is a handicapped girl having completed her graduation, type writing and DCA in computer application, applied in the year 2005 in the prescribed form to the District Judge, Koraput with all necessary documents for compassionate appointment. Thereafter, the ...
Tag this Judgment!Gangadhar Barik and anr. Vs. State of Orlssa and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-20-2009
Reported in: 2009(II)OLR317
ORDERR.N. Biswal, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioners and learned Addl. Standing Counsel on the petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C.2. The petitioners have challenged the order dated 23.07.2007 passed by the learned S.D.J.M., Bhadrak in G.R. Case No. 1491 of 2006, wherein he took cognizance of the offence under Section 498A/302/304B/34 I.P.C. read with Section 4 of the D.P. Act so far as they are concerned. The petitioners are father and son. The deceased Kanakalata Barik married Mohan Barik, another son of petitioner No. 1 on 3.6.2005. It is alleged that she was tortured by the relatives of her husband and the husband himself for non-fulfilment of their demand of dowry, Ultimately, in furtherance of their common intention, they committed her murder. On this allegation, the F.I.R. was lodged. After investigation, charge sheet was submitted under Sections 498A/302/304B/34 of I.P.C. read with Section 4 of the D.P. Act against the petitioners, the husband of the deceased and h...
Tag this Judgment!Kalia @ Kalandi Chandra Pradhan and anr. Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-20-2009
Reported in: 2009(II)OLR459
ORDERR.N. Biswal, J.1. Even though this matter is listed to date for admission, on consent and request of learned Counsel for both the sides. It is taken up for final disposal and the following order is passed.2. Heard.3. The petitioners have challenged the order dated 23.6.2007 passed by the learned S.D.J.M., Kamakhyanagar in G.R. Case No. 389 of 2006 wherein he took cognizance of the offence under Sections 279/304/109 of I.P.C. read with Section 181 of the M.V. Act. even though on the same facts and circumstances, earlier he had taken cognizance under Section 279/304(A)/109 of I.P.C. read with Section 181 of M.V. Act vide order dated 3.11.2006.4. Learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that the I.O. first submitted charge sheet under Sections 279/304(A)/109 of I.P.C. and Section 181 of M.V. Act against the petitioner on 27.10.2006. Basing upon the said charge sheet and other materials on record, learned court below took cognizance of the offence under Sections 279/304-A/109 of I....
Tag this Judgment!Chaudhury and Partners Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-20-2009
Reported in: 2009(II)OLR756
ORDER1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioners and the learned Counsel for the Revenue.2. This is a reference under Section 24(1) of the Orissa Sales Tax Act, 1947 referred to by the Tribunal for determination of the following questions:(i) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is justified in observing that the series of sales break at every sale or purchase transaction made by an unregistered dealer and, therefore, the tax benefit of one point levy on the same goods in the same series of sales or purchases as contemplated under Section 8 of the OST Act, 1947 is not available to the dealer-applicant and available to registered dealers only?(ii) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, levy of tax by the learned Assistant Commissioner of Sales Tax, Ganjam Range, Berhampur on the basis of his findings is correct in law?3. Let us take up question No. 1 first. In this case the assessee-petitioner is a works contract who had executed c...
Tag this Judgment!Prasanna Kumar Pani Vs. State of Orissa and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-17-2009
Reported in: 108(2009)CLT319
B.N. Mahapatra, J.1. This Writ Petition has been filed challenging the order of the Orissa Administrative Tribunal (in short 'the Tribunal') dated 26.06.2008 passed in O.A. No. 31/2004 refusing to quash the Order Dated 04.12.2003 (Annexure-6) by which the Petitioner had been relieved from government service with effect from 04.12.2003 under the Voluntary Retirement Scheme (in short, 'VRS').2. The facts & circumstances giving rise to the present Writ Petition are that the Petitioner who claims to be a permanent government servant joined service as a Peon on 19.10.1967. He was due to retire from service on 30.06.2009 after attaining the age of superannuation, i.e. at the age of sixty years. On 11.03.2003, while working as night-watcher under the Executive Engineer, M.I.I. Division, Berhampur (O.P. No. 3), he applied for voluntary retirement from government service in pursuance of the Government of Orissa Finance Department Resolution dated 27.01.2003 proposing to take voluntary retiremen...
Tag this Judgment!State of Orissa Vs. Chhabi Jhodia
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-14-2009
Reported in: 108(2009)CLT693; 2009(II)OLR571
A.S. Naidu, J.1. The judgment and order of acquittal dated 12th September, 1996, passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Koraput, in Sessions Case No. 276 of 1995 is assailed by the State of Orissa in this appeal. The respondent faced trial for commission of offence under Section 302 I.P.C. It is alleged that he intentionally committed murder of one Damuni Jhadiani.2. The gist of the prosecution case as would be evident from the F.I.R. lodged by the son of deceased is that one Jaya Jhodia of Bhaliaguda village picked up quarrel with him on the allegation that his mother was practising sorcery on 19.4.1.995. Few days thereafter one Kesab Jhodia of Bhaliaguda village requested his mother to go to his house and treat his son. At his request his mother went with Kesab. Later on, he came to know that Jay Jhodia also called her to his house. On the said day, she did not return home. On the next, her dead body was found floating inside Bitument Pit. On coming to know about the said fact, an F.I...
Tag this Judgment!Binod Bihari Singh Vs. Cuttack Madhu Baisya Bhadraki Gudia Samiti and ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-07-2009
Reported in: 108(2009)CLT261
Indrajit Mahanty, J.1. In the present writ application the Petitioner namely Binod Bihari Singh has sought to challenge an Order Dated 5.1.2007 passed by the Learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), First Cuttack, Cuttack in C.S. No. 37 of 2005 rejecting his application for intervention under Order 1, Rule 10 C.P.C.2. Civil Suit No. 37 of 2005 has been filed by Opp. Party No. 1- Cuttack Madhu Baisya Bhadraki Gudia Samiti, wherein prayer has been made for eviction of the Defendants (tenants) from the suit schedule property namely, Indumati Rath and Sanjaya Rath who were Defendants 1 & 2. It is further stated that Indumati Rath has in the meanwhile passed away leaving behind her adopted son, Sanjaya Rath (Defendant No. 2) as her only legal heir/successor.3. The intervener-Petitioner claims that he is a close friend of Defendant No. 2 and was closely associated with Defendant No. 1 (since deceased). Since Defendant No. 2 was residing at Bhubaneswar and Defendant No. 1 was residing at Cuttac...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »