Patna Court July 1994 Judgments
Dr. Indiwar Kumari Vs. State of Bihar and anr.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jul-27-1994
V. Vakataswami C.J.1. The petitioner herein has filed this application under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India by way of public interest litigation to direct the respondents to hold interview for selection of Lecturers for Plus Two System (Intermediate Standard) as promised in the advertisement in accordance with the advertisement published in local newspaper of Patna on 26-1-1991.2. It is an admitted fact that an advertisement as mentioned above was published for he appointment of Lecturers in Government High Schools for plus Two System for the subjects mentioned in the advertisement. The grievance of the petitioner is that though the advertisement was published and in respondent that thousands of candidates applied by spending not less than Rs. 120/- each, the respondents have not taken steps to conduct interviews for selecting the candidates. It is again an admitted fact that it is the second respondent who has published the advertisement in question calling for the...
Tag this Judgment!Controller of Estate Duty Vs. Sri Durganand Jha
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jul-26-1994
K. Venkataswami, C.J. 1. The following five common questions of law are referred for the opinion of this court under Section 64(1) of the Estate Duty Act, 1953, by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, 'A' Bench, Patna, arising out of common order in R.A. No. 37/(Pat), R.A. No. 41/(Pat), R. A. No. 38/(Pat), R. A. No. 42/(Pat), R. A. No. 36/(Pat), R. A. No. 40/(Pat), R. A. No. 39/(Pat) and R. A. No. 43/(Pat) of 1977-78 dated January 29, 1978 : '(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal has rightly held that the proportion of the property required to produce the annuity of Rs. 1,44,000 per annum payable to the Maharani Rameshwarlata Saheba is not excludible from the principal value of the estate of Maharaja Kameshwar Singh ?(2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal has rightly held that the sum of Rs. 50 lakhs bequeathed by the Maharaja Kameshwar Singh in favour of his Maharanis--vide his will dated July 5, 1961, is not ...
Tag this Judgment!Rajeshwari Devi and ors. Vs. the State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jul-21-1994
1. In these writ applications the petitioners have prayed for quashing different resolutions of Darbhanga Regional Transport Authority, whereby and whereunder, numbers of permanent and temporary stage carriage permits were granted to the private respondents on their suo motu applications. Although these writ applications are on behalf of different petitioners, but points involved, are common, therefore, for sake of convenience, they are being disposed of by this common judgment. 2. The petitioners are the existing stage carriage operators on different routes. They held permits, granted by the Regional Transport Authorities of the concerned area. They were plying their vehicles on the routes, assigned to them under such permits. Their grievance is that the decisions of the Regional Transport Authority (hereinafter to be referred as 'the authority') to grant stage carriage permits on suo motu applications, is in clear violation of the constitutional provisions, contained in Articles 14...
Tag this Judgment!Jaidhari Roy and ors. Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jul-21-1994
Bisheshwar Prasad Singh, J.1.Petitioner NO. 1 herein was appointed as a Public Prosecutor of Vaishali district in the year 1990 for a term of three years under Section 24 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Other petitioners were similarly appointed as Additional Public Prosecutor of different districts of the State. Respondent Nos. 4 to 15 were appointed as Assistant Public Prosecutor. The move of the Government to appoint Public Prosecutors/Additional Public Prosecutors from amongst the Assistant Public Prosecutors in the State of Bihar under Section 24(6) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (as amended by Bihar Act 16 of 1984) has led to the filing of this writ petition. The petitioners contend that in terms' of Section 24(6) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, as amended, there does not exist a regular cadre of prosecuting Officers in the State of Bihar, and consequently the State Government cannot appoint a Public Prosecutor or Additional Public Prosecutor from amongst the Assistant ...
Tag this Judgment!Ganesh Ram and ors. Vs. the State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jul-19-1994
B.P. Singh, J.1. The petitioners herein, 18 in number, have prayed for quashing of the order No. 11 dated 13-1-1994, the (Annexure-7) whereby the head-quarters of the petitioners have been changed during the period of their suspension. They have also prayed for a direction or order to the respondents not to compel the petitioners to sign the attendance register at their respective head-quarters during the period of suspension.2. The facts as appear from the writ petition are as follows:Petitioners 1 and 2 were working as Forester, petitioner No. 18 as Tractor Khalasi and the other petitioners as Forest Guard, and were posted at various stations in the Champaran Forest Project Division-2, Bettiah. The different stations at which the petitioners were posted fall within the jurisdiction of four police stations. The petitioners have been placed under suspension in connection with criminal cases and disciplinary proceedings initiated against them. The case against them is that rather than ...
Tag this Judgment!Marwari Hotel Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jul-14-1994
1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, 'B' Bench, Patna, has referred the following question of law for the decision of this court under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'): 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the assessee was entitled to Rs. 98,434 under Section 32(1)(iii) of the Act ?' 2. The brief facts are the following : The assessment year in question is 1972-73. The assessee in its return claimed a loss of Rs. 98,434 as allowable under Section 32(1)(iii) of the Act, though no such loss was claimed in the profit and loss account. That was explained before the Income-tax Officer saying that the assessee took a building for the purpose of its business on a leasehold land and the terms of the lease came to an end on March 31, 1972. It appears from the lease deed that the assessee took only the site and by spending a huge amount, put up a small structure. According to the lease deed, on the expiry of the term of ...
Tag this Judgment!Surendra Prasad Vs. Member, Board of Revenue, Bihar, Patna and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jul-13-1994
A.K. Ganguly, J. 1. The application of Section 12 of the Bihar Money-Lenders Act(hereinafter referred to as the said Act) to the mortgage deed dated 21-6-1952 is the issue raised in this case. 2. The facts of the case are that one Bandhu Chamar, owner of Plot No. 1139 under Khata No. 18 measuring 11 kathas 14 dhurs in village Kharauni, District Gopalganj executed adeed of mortgage dated 21-6-1952 wherein the father of the petitioner as the mortgagee got the possession of the plot in question. After the death of the father of the petitioner, the petitioner and other members of the family of which the petitioner is the Karta came into possession and is still in possession of the plot in question. Respondent No. 5 Bhagwati Ram who is the successor-in-interest of Bandhu Chamar filed a petition under Section 12 of the said Act for recovery of possession of the said plot before the Deputy Collector, Land Reforms. The said petition filed by the respondent No. 5 was numbered as M. L. Case N...
Tag this Judgment!Krishna Mohan Prasad Sah and ors. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jul-12-1994
K. Venkataswami, C.J. 1. The question that has been referred to this court under Section 64(1) of the Estate Duty Act, 1953, reads as follows : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in not, granting exemption of Rs. 1,00,000 for the residential house under Section 33(1)(n) of the Estate Duty. Act, 1953, and limiting it only to the extent of the share of the deceased ?'2. Before narrating the facts, we would like to point out that this question appears to be no longer res integra. 3. Brief facts are the following : The Assistant Controller of Estate Duty estimated the value of the residential house belonging to the Hindu undivided family of the assessee after allowing depreciation at Rs. 2,05,957. He granted exemption, of Rs. 25,725 in respect of one-eighth share, of the deceased in the, house under Section 33(1)(n) of the Estate Duty Act, 1953 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), and added a sum of Rs. 1,54,458, being the val...
Tag this Judgment!Secretary, Bihar State Electrical Supply Workers' Union and Ors. Vs. P ...
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jul-12-1994
S.K. Chattopadhyaya, J. 1. In C.W.J.C. No. 1101 of 1989, the Secretary, Bihar State Electricity Supply Workers Union is the petitioner which has challenged the order dated November 17, 1989, as contained in Annexure - 1, passed by respondent No. 1 the Presiding Officer, Industrial Tribunal, Patna, by reason of which respondent No. 1 has retained, deleted and modified some of the clauses in the Standing Order. In C.W.J.C. No. 3396 of 1989, on the other hand, the Bihar State Electricity Board through its Secretary as petitioner has challenged the order dated August 21, 1987, passed by the Certifying Officer under the Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946, respondent No. 2 as well as the judgment of the appellate authority dated November 17, 1988 as contained in Annexure to this application whereas Bihar Pradesh Vidyut Shramik Sangh through its Secretary has been made as respondent No. 5 in both the writ applications. 2. As facts in both the cases are common, it is desirabl...
Tag this Judgment!Shiv Nath Tiwary Vs. Jai Narayan Rai
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jul-12-1994
P.K. Sarin, J.1. This Civil Revision Petition has been directed against the order dated 12.7.1994 passed by the 4th Subordinate Judge, Bettiah in Rent Suit No. 17 of 1993, rejecting the application for amendment of written statement moved by the petitioner defendant.2. It appears that Rent Suit No. 17 of 1993 is pending in the Court of the Subordinate Judge, Bettiah. The suit was filed for recovery of arrears of rent and it was alleged that the agreed rent was Rs. 1500/- per month. It was alleged that although the petitioner defendant vacated the premises in question in September 1992, no payment of rent was made for the period from April 1991, Onward. The copy of the written statement filed as Annexure 2 by the petitioner shows that the petitioner defendant admitted himself to be a tenant oh monthly not stated in paragraph 10 of the written statement that the petitioner-defendant always paid monthly rent in every first week of ensuing month to the plaintiff regularly till November, 1...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »