Orissa Court March 2010 Judgments

Gayatri Datta Nayak and ors. Vs. State of Orissa and ors.

Court: Orissa

Reported in: 109(2010)CLT766

B.P. Das, J.1. The aforesaid three writ applications have been filed challenging the interim Order Dated 26.2.2010 passed by the Orissa Administrative Tribunal, Cuttack Bench, Cuttack in O.A. No. 218 (C) of 2010 & a batch of Original Applications, directing the Orissa Public Service Commission (OPSC) not to proceed with the viva voce test & the selection of candidates to be appointed in the post of Civil Service pursuant to Orissa Civil Service (Main) Examination, 2006.2. W.P.(C) No. 4635 of 2010 & 4886 of 2010 have been filed by some of the candidates, who are yet to appear in the viva voce test after being successful in the O.C.S. (Main) Examination. W.P.(C) No. 4826 of 2010 has been filed by the OPSC. Opp. Parties 3 to 16 in W.P.(C) No. 4886 of 2010 are the applicants before the Orissa Administrative Tribunal, Cuttack Bench, Cuttack.3. Since in all the three writ applications, the interim order of the Tribunal was under challenge, the same were heard together & are being disposed of...

Dibakar Maharana Vs. State of Orissa and ors.

Court: Orissa

Reported in: 109(2010)CLT776

I.M. Quddusi, A.C.J.1. In this writ application, the Petitioner has prayed for setting aside the Order Dated 3.11.2007-passed by the Learned District Judge, Cuttack in Disciplinary Proceeding No. 11 of 2004 (LVIII-5/08) which was subsequently confirmed by the Appeal Committee of this Court on 18.3.2009 dismissing the Petitioner from service with immediate effect & observing that the same shall be a disqualification for future employment.2. The facts as reveal from the record are that the Petitioner was appointed as a Peon in the Court of the Learned S.D.J.M., Cuttack on 29.7.19776. Thereafter, on the authority being satisfied with his conduct, sincerity & obedience in due discharge of his duties, he was promoted & worked as Library Attendant in the Court of the Learned District Judge, Cuttack with effect from 3.11.1984 upto 30.9.2004. During the said period of his service, there were no adverse entries against the Petitioner, While the matter stood thus, on 30.9.2004 as per Rule 12 of ...

M/S. Kukumina Constructions (P) Ltd. Vs. Sub-registrar-cum-stamp Colle ...

Court: Orissa

1. This writ petition has been filed seeking a direction to opposite party no.1-Sub-Registrar-cum-Stamp Collector, Khurda to return the original sale deed No.2814/2007 to the petitioner and for quashing the notice dated 16.2.2008 under Annexure-3 by which the opposite party no.1 directed the petitioner either to deposit the deficit amount of stamp duty and registration fee as calculated by him or else to contest the matter to be referred to the next higher forum.2. Short facts giving rise to this writ petition are that for maintenance of day-to-day affairs of Shree Lord Jagannath Temple, the Managing Committee after receipt of approval of the Government of Orissa for sale of the property in question published a sale notice bearing No.142 dated 8.1.1996 inviting applications from prospective purchasers. Pursuant to the said notice, prospective purchasers applied for the same. On 8.6.1996, an open auction was held. In the said open auction, the present writ petitioner became the highest ...

M/S. Harshpriya Construction (P) Ltd. Vs. the Inspector General of Reg ...

Court: Orissa

1. The short question that arises for consideration in this writ application is whether the Registering Officer under the Indian Registration Act can retain possession of the original registered instrument (sale deed) where it raises a dispute in terms of Section 47-A of the Indian Stamp (Orissa Amendment) Act with regard to the stamp duty payable on such instrument.2. The facts leading to the formulation of the aforesaid question have been depicted in the writ petition as follows: The petitioner, a private limited company registered under the Companies Act, represented through its Director carries on business of development of land and construction of apartments. For the purpose of its business, the petitioner purchased a piece of Sarad non-irrigative variety of land measuring Ac.0.927 dec. pertaining to Sabik Plot No.1807 and Sabik Khata No.507 of Mouza Gadakana under Bhubaneswar Tahasil of Khurda district corresponding to Mutation Plot No.3803 and Mutation Khata No.1053/29, which fu...

GeomIn Minerals and Marketing (P) Ltd. Vs. State of Orissa and ors.

Court: Orissa

1. The petitioner, Geomin Minerals & Marketing (P) Ltd. which is a Company incorporated under the Indian Companies Act, 1956, has filed this writ petition, inter alia with the following prayers:"Order the opposite parties to dispose of all pending applications for Mineral Concessions filed by the petitioner and set out in the petition in accordance with its vested right to preferential consideration in view of the fact that the petitioner's applications have been filed on the first date of availability and eligibility.Issue a writ of prohibition or any other appropriate writ, order or direction restraining the opposite parties from considering applications for Mineral Concessions of later applicants to the petitioner until the applications of the petitioner are first considered and disposed of by according priority or preferential right based on the petitioner being a first day applicant having applied for the concerned Mineral Concessions set out in the petition on the first date of a...

M/S. Tulasidas Modi and ors. Vs. Union of India and ors.

Court: Orissa

1. These writ petitions have been filed for quashing of the Orissa Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2008 issued on 13th of March, 2008 by the Food and Supplies and Consumer Welfare Department and also for a declaration that the clauses there under are not applicable to those petitioners who are operating as wholesaler/sub-wholesaler in the State. Therefore, they were heard together and are disposed of by this common order. Since the facts and the relief claimed in all these writ petitions are similar, it is not necessary to discuss the facts of all the cases. Therefore, we refer to the facts as mentioned in W.P.(C) No.6037 of 2008.2. The brief facts of the case are that the Food Supplies and Consumer Welfare Department of the Government of Orissa issued a notification on 13.3.2008 in exercise of powers conferred under Section 3 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 (10 of 1955) read with paragraph 5 of the Annexure to the Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2001 pub...

M/S.Gulf Oil Corporation Ltd. and anr. Vs. State of Orissa and Sixteen ...

Court: Orissa

1. These review petitions arise out of common order dated 07.10.2009 passed in writ petitions bearing W.P.(C) Nos. 11866 of 2009 to 11873 of 2009,(covering eight assessment years from 1976-77 to 1983-84).2. As all the aforesaid matters are between the same parties involving similar facts and questions of law, they are taken up for disposal by this common order.3. Admittedly, on the self-same cause of action and similar grounds the petitioners had filed writ petitions bearing W.P. (C) Nos. 2503 of 2008 to 2510 of 2008 covering the self- same assessment years from 1976-77 to 1983-84. Those writ petitions were dismissed as withdrawn by common order dated 10.04.2008 passed by this Court, which reads as follows:-"On the prayer of the leaned counsel for petitioner this writ petition is allowed to be withdrawn without any determination on the merits of the case and all the questions are left open. The Writ Petition is dismissed as withdrawn. This will not in any way prevent the petitioner fro...

Hrusikes Sethi and ors. Vs. State of Orissa and ors.

Court: Orissa

1. The controversy in both these writ petitions centers round recruitment on contractual basis in different departments of the State Government.2. At the out-set, learned counsel for the opposite parties-State raised a preliminary objection with regard to maintainability of the writ petitions in view of Section 15 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985. The said section deals with jurisdiction, powers and authority of State Administrative Tribunals and stipulates that Administrative Tribunals alone shall exercise, on and from the appointed day, all the jurisdiction, powers and authority exercisable immediately before that day by all Courts except Supreme Court in relation to recruitment and matters concerning to any civil service of the State or to any civil post under the State. According to learned counsel as the appointments are against "civil services", the writ petition is not maintainable.3. For the sake of brevity and better understanding, Section 15 of the Administrative Tri...

ijak @ Kalia Mallik. Vs. State of OrissA.

Court: Orissa

1. This Jail Criminal Appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 21.10.2000 passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Parlakhemundi in S.C. No.16 of 1998/S.C. No.145 of 1998 (GDC) convicting the appellant under Section 302/307, IPC and sentencing him to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/- in default to undergo R.I. for a further period of two years for the offence under Section 302, IPC. No separate sentence has been imposed for the offence under Section 307, IPC, since the punishment imposed under Section 302, IPC will meet the ends of justice.2. The case of the prosecution in a nutshell is that on 17.08.1997 at 2.00 P.M. the accused-appellant along with his wife and baby son Sanju and daughter Franchiska were sitting on the verandah of P.W.3-Sankia Naik of village Merama. At that time, the accused-appellant started quarrelling with his wife and all of a sudden stabbed his baby son on his chest/neck and also stabbed his daughter on her back. H...

Manoj Kumar Tripathy Vs. Mayarani Praharaj

Court: Orissa

Reported in: 109(2010)CLT529

B.K. Patel, J.1. Aggrieved by dismissal of his application for dissolution of marriage by decree of divorce under Section 13(1)(i-a) of Hindu Marriage Act (for short 'the Act') in Civil Proceeding No. 198 of 1999 by Learned Judge, Family Court, Cuttack, husband-Appellant has preferred this appeal against wife-Respondent.2. Parties are Hindus. Appellant is a native of village Bodar in the district of Cuttack. Their marriage was solemnized in Danda Bibha form on 5.1.1998. Appellant is a doctor employed under the State Government whereas Respondent is working as Senior Technical Assistant in the Department of Architect under O.U.A.T., Bhubaneswar. Appellant's father was a Government servant & working as a Health Educator prior to his retirement. It is also not disputed that parties are living in separation since 2.10.1998.3. It is asserted by the Appellant that his marriage with Respondent was solemnized in village Bodar. After the marriage the parties resided in village Bodar till the 5t...