Skip to content

Patna Court September 1993 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.

Sep 04 1993

Harbhajan Singh Dhillon Vs. Pharat Coking Coal Ltd. and ors.

Court: Patna

Decided on: Sep-04-1993

S.B. Sinha, J.1. The petitioner, in this application has prayed for issuance of a writ of or in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to stay the departmental proceedings till conclusion of the trial in the criminal case pending against the petitioner in the Court of the Special Judge, CBI, Ranchi.2. The fact of the matter lies in a very narrow compass.3. A charge-sheet was issued against the petitioner by the respondent No. 2 on 30-11-1989. The said charge-sheet is contained in Annexure-1 to this writ application. On 16-9-1991, an inquiry officer was appointed by the disciplinary authority. The petitioner filed a title suit being No. 46 of 1992 in the Court of the Munsif, Dhanbad and also filed a petition for injunction which was rejected by an order dated 22-12-1992. Against the aforesaid order, the petitioner filed an appeal being an Misc. Appeal No. 8 of 1993 in the Court of the District Judge, Dhanbad. By order dated 10-6-1993, the District Judge also rejected the pra...


Sep 04 1993

G.C. Mrig Vs. State of Bihar and anr.

Court: Patna

Decided on: Sep-04-1993

S.B. Sinha, J.1. These two applications involving common questions of fact and law were heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.2. The petitioner, in both these cases, is the Chariman-cum-Managing Director the Bharat Cooking Coal Limited (BCCL). He was prosecuted for alleged commission of an offence under Section 29 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. Admittedly, prior to initiation of the aforementioned prosecution against the petitioner, sanction in terms of Section 38 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 had been obtained.3. The short question when arises for consideration in these application is as to whether order taking cognizance as against the petitioner could have been passed without obtaining sanction in terms of Section 197 of the Code of Criminal Procedure,4. Mr. Banerjee, learned Counsel, appearing on behalf of the petitioner, submitted that as the petitioner was appointed by the President of India, he being removable by the Central Government, ...


Sep 04 1993

Nirmal Kumar Pradeep Kumar Vs. the State of Bihar and ors.

Court: Patna

Decided on: Sep-04-1993

S.B. Sinha, J.1. Whether statutory extension of tease for a period of one year in terms of Sub-rule (6) of Rule 24-A of the Mineral Concession Rules, 1960 is applicable in relation to a mining lease granted within the reserved forest or not, is the question involved in this writ application.2. The fact of the matter lies in a narrow compass. A mining lease over an area of 149.73430 hectares of land situated in village Tatiba in the Karapampda Reserve Forest within Saranda Forest Division was originally granted to M/s. Ratan Lal Surajmal by a deed of lease dated 28-7-1953 for a period of 20 years. The said lease was transferred in favour of M/s. Ratan Lai Tarachand by a registered deed dated 16-2-1970.The aforementioned lease was renewed for a period of ten years by the State Government in terms of its letter dated 10-8-1978. The said period was again extended for a further period of 10 years by the State Government in term of its letter dated 16-11-1979.3. The petitioner purchased the...


Sep 04 1993

Khanna Construction Through Its Proprietor Santosh Khanna Vs. the Stat ...

Court: Patna

Decided on: Sep-04-1993

S.B. Sinha, J.1. This application is directed against a demand dated 3-6-1993 (Annexure-3) whereby the petitioner has been directed to deposit a sum of Rs 2,44,600 by the respondent No. 2 in purported exercise of his powers conferred upon him under the provisions of the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 (hereinafter referred to for the sake of brevity as 'the said Act').2. The fact of the matter is not in dispute. The petitioner was granted a mining lease on 15-10-1976 in plot No. 1605 for a period of four years. The said deed of lease is contained in Annexure-1 to this application. The petitioner's lease was renewed on 3-7-1980.3. According to the petitioner, by a letter dated 1-12-1984, the petitioner's lease was further renewed for four years with effect from 3-7-1984. The petitioner allegedly upon execution of the said lease, started working the lease-hold and paid all cases, royalty and other statutory dues.After expiry of the period of the said lease, he prayed for further renewal...


Sep 04 1993

R.D. Enterprises (Pvt) Ltd. Vs. Coal India Ltd. and ors.

Court: Patna

Decided on: Sep-04-1993

S.B. Sinha, J.1. The prayer of the petitioner in this application is for a direction upon the respondents to supply coal (Grade E and F), as also for quashing a notice dated 31-5-1993 (Annexure-8) issued by the respondent No. 4 in terms whereof the briquetting units, inter alia, have been directed to deposit coal value for Giddi middlings, despite the fact that although the petitioner's industries on coal-based ones.2. Petitioner No. 1 allegedly manufactures smokeless coal briquettes and petitioner No. 2 manufactures only coal briquettes. Applications were filed by the petitioners for allotment of coal under the Linkage Scheme from different collieries. The petitioners have contended that coal has been de-controlled by the State of Bihar. However, according to the petitioners, coal was to be supplied on linkage quantity basis for which representations were made by the petitioners before the respondent No. 2. According to the petitioners, respondent No. 4 by a letter dated 24-3-1993 ma...


Sep 04 1993

Divisional Railway Manager Vs. Umesh Prasad Singh, Advocate.

Court: Bihar State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Patna

Decided on: Sep-04-1993

B.N. Sinha, President: 1. This appeal is directed against order dated 24th April, 1992 passed by the District Forum, Vaishali at Hajipur in complaint case No. 9 of 1991 in which the appellants were the opposite party and respondent before this Commission was the complainant. 2. The complainant had filed this case before the District Forum claiming compensation on account of the inconvenience and loss caused to him due to perpetual late running of passenger train No. 524 DN from Sonepur Railway Station of Muzaffarpur Railway Station. The complainant claimed to be a monthly season ticket holder of that train who daily avails the services of that train. The complainant filed the case before the District Forum claiming the following reliefs: (a) To pay a compensatory amount of Rs. 10/- per day to the complainant and to all M.S.T. holders from 1.9.91 till the running of the train becomes normal. (b) Regular and timely running of the train be maintained at once. (c) Any other relie...


Sep 03 1993

Jyotish and ors. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court: Patna

Decided on: Sep-03-1993

S.B. Sinha, J.1. Both these applications involving common questions of law and fact were taken up for hearing together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.2. In both the applications, petitioners have prayed for issuance of writ of or in the nature of mandamus directing Respondent Nos. 1 to 25 to declare the petitioners as permanent disabled persons in accordance with the opinion of the Medical Board and to enforce para 9.4.3 of the National Coal Wage Agreement No. IV.3. In C.W.J.C. No. 1720 of 1993(R) there are nine petitioners whereas in C.W.J.C. No. 1719 of 1993(R) there are 47 petitioners. All the petitioners allegedly were examined by the Medical Board. The contention of the petitioners is that a Joint Bipartite Committee for the coal industry has been constituted and a tripartite settlement within the meaning of Section 2C of the Industrial Disputes Act was arrived at which is binding on the Employers.4. Paragraph 9.4.3. of the said settlement reads as follows: ''E...


Sep 03 1993

Bikram Purti and anr. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court: Patna

Decided on: Sep-03-1993

S.B. sinha, J. 1. Prayer of the petitioners in this application is that the departmental proceedings pending against them be quashed and/or stayed pending trial in criminal case. Petitioner No. 1 is a Head Constable and petitioner No. 2 is a Nayak in the Railway Protection Force and posted at Chakradharpur. A first information report (F.I.R) as contained in Annexure -1 to the writ application was lodged alleging, inter alia, that a theft of heavy iron materials of the railway was detected and 16 persons were arrested. During inquiry, the complicity of the petitioners also came to light and it was alleged that the petitioners had taken Rs. 50Q/- from the said thieves so as to enable them to stealthily take away the railway property. They were found covered with blankets in a second-class waiting room and a sum of Rs. 778/- was recovered from petitioner No. 1. Petitioner No. 2 also confessed his guilt that he had taken Rs. 500/- from an outsider, 2. On the basis of the said allegation...


Sep 01 1993

Arvind Kumar Lall Vs. Ram Tahal Choudhary and ors.

Court: Patna

Decided on: Sep-01-1993

R.N. Sahay, J.1. By means of this petitions 8O and 81 of the Representation of People Act, 1951, the petitioner who is a practicing Advocate of this Court, has questioned the election of respondent No. 1, Sri Ram Tahal Choudhary from 49, Ranchi Lok Sabha General Parliamentary Constituency held in the month of May, 1991. The petitioner has also prayed that he be declared to be duly elected from the aforesaid Constituency.2. The petitioner along with respondent Nos. 1 to 45 filed nomination for contesting the election. Respondent No. 1 was declared elected on 17-6-1991 as he secured highest number of votes.3. The facts of the case are not in dispute and hence the petition is being disposed of without taking any evidence.4. The petitioner in paragraphs 4 to 17 of the election petition has setout the grounds on , which the election of respondent No. 1 has been challenged and it will be convenient to quote the said paragraphs as here-under:That at the time of delivery of their respective n...


  • Next ›

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial