Orissa Court September 2010 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.
K.Rajendramany. Vs. Union of India and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Sep-17-2010
1. This writ application has been filed under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India assailing the order dated 9.7.2004 passed by the Commerce Secretary & Appellate Authority, Government of India, Ministry of Commerce & Industr6y confirming the order of punishment dated 27.8.2003 passed by the Disciplinary Authority in a disciplinary proceeding initiated the petitioner.2. The case of the petitioner in brief is that while petitioner was working as Assistant Director in Marine Products Export Development Authority, a disciplinary proceeding was initiated against the petitioner by issuing a memorandum of charges dated 24.9.1999. Though the memorandum of charges contained six charges, the petitioner was found guilty in respect of four charges. On the basis of such finding recorded by the Enquiry Officer the petitioner was found guilty in respect of charge Nos. 1,2,5 and 6. The Disciplinary Authority-opp. party No.2 by the impugned order under Annexure-1 dated 27.8.2003 imposed pun...
Balaram Rout. Vs. State of Orissa Rep.Principal and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Sep-16-2010
1. In these writ petitions, the petitioners have challenged the constitutional validity of the Orissa Special Courts Act, 2006 and the Rules framed thereunder urging various facts and legal grounds.2. Brief facts in nutshell are stated as under: The petitioner in each of the writ petitions is accused of offence punishable under section 13(2) read with Section 13 (1)(e) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. Originally each one of the petitioners case was pending either in the Court of Special Judge, Vigilance at Bhubaneswar or Cuttack or other places in the State. After establishment of the Special Courts pursuant to the notification issued by the State Government establishing Special Courts, the case of the petitioners were transferred to the respective Special Judge of the Special Courts established under the Orissa Special Courts Act.3. The Orissa Special Courts Act has been passed by the Orissa Legislative Assembly and the same has been assented to by the President of India on ...
Prava SinhA. Vs. Bhabatosh Sinha and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Sep-16-2010
1. In this writ petition, the petitioner calls in question the order dated 26.9.2008 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division) Ist Court, Cuttack in C.S.No.375/2002 rejecting the petition filed by the petitioner under Order XV, Rules 1 and 2 read with Section 151 of C.P.C.2. Shorn of unnecessary details the facts leading to filing of this writ petition is that the petitioner as plaintiff filed C.S.No.375/2002 before learned Civil Judge (Senior Division) Ist Court, Cuttack for declaration of her title and interest over the suit property as described in the plaint, wherein Opp.Parties 3 to 7 were arraigned as proforma defendants. On being noticed, all the defendants appeared before the court below and filed their respective written statements. Except defendant nos.1 and 6, all the defendants pleaded that they had no objection for passing a decree in favour of the plaintiff-petitioner Though defendant no.2 raised a counter claim in his written statement, he did not press the sam...
Indian Institute of Advance. Vs. State of Orissa and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Sep-16-2010
1. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner institution seeking a direction to the opp. parties, particularly, opp. party no. 3 to publish the result of All India Trade Test, 2009 in respect of six numbers of students of the petitioner institution of Electrician Trade, whose results have not been declared, within a reasonable time.2. It is the case of the petitioner that he petitioner-institution was granted affiliation by the National Council of Vocational Training (for short, 'the N.C.V.T.') in respect of four units (2 + 2) of Electrician trade and two units (1 + 1 ) in respect of Fitter trade with effect from the academic session 2007-08 onwards. On the students being given admission in both the Electrician and Fitter trades, the Principal of the petitioner institution submitted registration proposal along with the registration fees in shape of a demand draft in respect of the 38 students in Electrician trade and 19 students in respect of Fitter trade which was received b...
Nutan Kumar Rout. Vs. State of Orissa and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Sep-16-2010
1. M.M. Das, J. The petitioner contested the election to the office of the Sarpanch of Dorada Grama Panchayat under Athagarh Block in the district of Cuttack and was declared elected having polled majority of valid votes in his favour. It is alleged by the petitioner that a false allegation was leveled against him about demand of bribe of Rs. 3500/- from one Akhaya Kumar Lenka, who with a pre-plan came with the vigilance officials to the petitioner on 23.1.2008 along with the amount of Rs. 3500/- and the vigilance officials prepared a detection report with the allegation that the petitioner accepted the said amount on demand from Shri Lenka for passing his bill for a contract work. According to the petitioner, the said Akhaya Kumar Lenka is a supporter of the local M.L.A., who belongs to the rival political group of the petitioner. It has been further averred that by the date when such allegation was leveled against the petitioner, all the bills of the said Shri Lenka were already pass...
Bibhuti Bhusan JenA. Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Sep-15-2010
1. Ministry of information and Broadcasting No. S.O 9(E), dated the 79* January, 1978 stipulating the guidelines for A certification of film for public exhibition. In the said guidelines, it is important to take note of Clause-3 which is quoted hereinbelow: "{3) The Board of Film Certyication shall ' also ensure that the film-(i) is judged in its entirety from the point of view of its overall impacts; and(ii) is examined in the light of the period depicted in the film and the contemporary standards of the country and the people to which the film relates, provided that the film does not deprave the morality of the audience."2. We had, by way of an interim order dated 10.8.2010, directed the Commissioner of Police, Bhubaneswar-Cuttack to . witness the movie on the date of its release and the report submitted by him is quoted hereunder:4 "In pursuance of Order No.2 dated.10.8.1O and Order No.3 dated 11.08.10 of the Hon'ble High Court in WP.(C) No.13623/ 10, the undersigned witnessed the O...
Mrs.Rutuparna Mohanty and ors. Vs. State of Orissa and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Sep-15-2010
1. These two petitions were heard together by consent of the learned counsel for the parties and are disposed of by the following order.2. On 6.7.2010 one Mrs. Rutupurna Mohanty on behalf of Sanjibani Maa Ghar submitted a petition signed by number of persons who claimed to have been evicted from the premises of S.C.B.Medical College and Hospital campus in open Court which was treated as a Public Interest Litigation and Mr.K.K.Jena, learned counsel was appointed as amicus curiae to appear on behalf of the petitioner and the evictees with a direction to the High Court Legal Service Committee to provide all necessary assistance including financial to him as may be permissible under the rules. This Court also directed the District Administration represented through the Collector to make temporary arrangement for their shelter by erecting tents at any place which is available within his jurisdiction and supply the food to them. Thereafter, the amicus curiae counsel filed a detailed petition...
M/S.Bajrang Steel and Alloys Ltd and ors. Vs. State of Orissa and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Sep-06-2010
This batch of writ petitions have been filed by the registered dealers urging common facts and grounds praying to grant certain reliefs which will be extracted in the later part of the judgment. By consent of learned counsel for parties, we have heard these matters together and pass the common order.2. Certain relevant facts are stated for the purpose of examining the rival legal contentions urged in these writ petitions with a view to find out as to whether the petitioners are entitled for the reliefs sought for by them. They have prayed to hold that the conferment of power upon the State Government under section 94 of the Orissa Value Added Tax Act, 2004 (hereinafter called as 'the OVAT Act') be declared as excessive, unfettered and, therefore, unconstitutional and ultravires. A further prayer has been made seeking for a declaration that sub-rule (3) of rule 11 of the OVAT Rules is ultra vires the provision of section 20 of the OVAT Act read with the definition of "input tax" and "in...
M/S. Sterlite Energy Ltd. Vs. State of Orissa and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Sep-04-2010
1. The sole question which falls for consideration in this writ petition is whether a factory under construction and in the process of being established, is excluded from the purview of Building and Other Construction Workers (Regulation of Employment and Conditions of Service) Act, 1996, ("BOCW Act" for short).2. Shri L.Nageswar Rao, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner company is engaged in construction of an Independent Power Plant for generation of 2400 M.W. of Thermal Power at Bhurkamunda in the district of Jharsuguda, for which it has obtained necessary approval of the layout plans and specifications and requisite permission from the concerned authority to carry out such constructions, as provided under Section 6 of the Factories Act, 1948, read with Rule 3 of the Orissa Factories Rules, 1950. Accordingly, it is submitted that as the construction activities carried on by the petitioner are for the purpose of establishment of its Independ...
Govinda Chandra Panigrahi. Vs. State of OrissA.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Sep-03-2010
1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 23.11.2004 passed by the learned Special Judge (Vigilance), Bhubaneswar in T.R. Case No. 36 of 1991 convicting the appellant under Section 161 of the I.P.C. and Section 5(2) read with Section 5(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 (for short 'the P.C.Act') and sentencing him to undergo R.I. for six months and to pay fine of Rs.1000/-, in default to undergo R.I. for one month, on each count.2. The appellant was working as Medical Officer of Adaspur Primary Health Centre during the period of occurrence. On 21.4.1987 2 P.W.1 the informant-decoy had admitted his wife in the Health Centre and in the same night she delivered a child.The prosecution case is that the appellant demanded bribe of Rs.200/- to relieve P.W.1's wife from the hospital. As P.W. 1 expressed inability to pay Rs.200/-, the appellant finally agreed to accept Rs.100/- from him. P.W. 1 paid Rs.70/- and promised to pay Rs.30/- later on at the time of ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »