Patna Court March 1995 Judgments
Krishna Kumar Agrawal and ors. Vs. Jai Kumar JaIn and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Mar-02-1995
B.L. Yadav, J.1. This is defendants' Second Appeal filed under Section 100 of the Civil Procedure Code (for short 'the Code') in a suit filed by the plaintiff-respondents, praying therein that it be declared and decreed that the defendants have got no right to close the windows and ventilators and other openings in the north-eastern wall of the plaintiffs' house and the defendants be further restrained from causing diminution in the light and air, to which the plaintiffs are entitled. The plaintiffs have been enjoying the same right for the last more than 12 years. The relief further was for removal of the wall or any other structure made by the defendants adjacent to the wall of the house of the plaintiffs.2. The plaintiffs-respondents brought this suit with the averment that their grand father has purchased Holding No. 32 in Ward No. 2 in Mohalla Chowk Road under a registered deed of sale dated 19.5.1921 executed by Ram Charan Lal alias Bachu Babu who was the common ancestor of the ...
Tag this Judgment!Sadanand Singh and ors. Vs. State of Bihar
Court: Patna
Decided on: Mar-02-1995
Surinder Sarup, J.1. This appeal is against the judgment of the court of Sri S.N. Mandal, Assistant Sessions Judge, Koderma, dated 5th March, 1994, whereby the appellants, namely, Sadanand Singh, Kameshwar Singh, Dashrath Singh, Mahadeo Singh, Raj Kishore Singh and Kishun Yadav have been convicted under Section 395, IPC. Appellant Dashrath Singh has further been convicted under Section 412, IPC. They have been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 10 years each and to pay a fine of Rs. 100 each and in default to undergo R.I. for one month under Section 395, IPC. However, no separate sentence has been awarded against appellant Dashrath Singh, under Section 412, IPC.2. The prosecution case against the appellants is that at about 11.30 p.m. on 24th November, 1992, while the informant Jagdish Yadav was sleeping in his house along with his family members, 3-4 dacoits armed with pistol entered inside the house by scaling the tiled roof and threatened the informant to open the door ...
Tag this Judgment!Mecon Employees Union and ors. Vs. Election Commission of India and or ...
Court: Patna
Decided on: Mar-02-1995
Prasun Kumar Deb, J.1. This case is taken up along with C.W.J.C. Nos. 385, 482, 480, 486 and 464 of 1995 (R) as common question of law and facts are involved in all the cases.2. The crux of dispute is with regard to the engagement of employees and officers of the various Undertakings, Corporations and Companies in the election duty as contemplated under Article 342(6) of the Constitution of India read with Section 159 of the Representation of People Act, 1951 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act')3. The petitioners, in the present case, are the MECON Employees Union, MECON Executive Association and some officers of MECON in their individual capacity who were requisitioned to perform election duly in the ensuing Vidhan Sabha election 1995 in the State of Bihar issued by respondent No.3, the Chief Personnel Manager, MECON, consequent to the order of the Deputy Commissioner, Ranchi-cum-Returning Officer of the district of Ranchi4. Similarly in C.W.J.C. No, 385 of 1994 (R), the petitioner...
Tag this Judgment!Sheo Nandan Prasad, Executive Magistrate Cum Dist. Panchayat Raj Offic ...
Court: Patna
Decided on: Mar-01-1995
R.N. Sahay, J.1. The petitioner belongs to cadre of Deputy Collector and at present posted as District Panchayat Raj Officer, at Ranchi. He has moved this Court with two fold grievances. His first grievance is that he has not been given time bound promotion within the due time. His second grievance is that the date of his confirmation is wrong. He has, therefore, prayed for quashing the notification dated 11.3.1991 (Annexure-11) by which he has been confirmed w.e.f. 13-2-1991 and notification dated 14-5-1992 (Annexure-12) by which he has been given time bound promotion to the Junior Selection Grade w.e.f. 1-1-1992.2. In order to appreciate the case of the petitioner it would be necessary to state the relevant facts in brief which are as follows:--The petitioner joined as Sub-Deputy Collector on 2.9.1974..He became Deputy Collector w.e.f. 1.4.1976. He is a member of Schedule caste. He had earlier come to this Court for the reliefs claimed in this application. The Writ Application (CWJC...
Tag this Judgment!Nandji Upadhaya Vs. Bihar State Mineral Development Corporation Ltd. a ...
Court: Patna
Decided on: Mar-01-1995
R.N. Sahay, J.1. The main grievance of the petitioner is that he was entitled to be designated as Chemist w.e.f. 8.2.1985 and that Respondent Nos. 5 and 6 were illegally designated as Chemist by superseding the claim of the petitioner.2. The short facts for the disposal of this application are as follows:--The petitioner was initially appointed as Lower Division Clerk and subsequently he was appointed as Mining Mate since he possesses a certificate in mining. It appears that respondent-Corporation made an offer to the petitioner and two others to undertake training as Chemist. The petitioner and two others, namely, Deobarat Mahto and Sushil Kumar Singh, were sent for training as Chemist. This was done in view of the fact that the respondents had decided to establish laboratory for testing sample. The petitioner having obtained necessary training was posted as Laboratory In-charge, Pathratu vide Annexure-3 dated 4.2.1985. The petitioner was relieved vide Annexure-4 as sequel to the Ann...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next ›