Patna Court September 1996 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.
Smt. Subhadra Devi Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Sep-11-1996
Radha Mohan Prasad, J. 1. In this writ application the prayer of the petitioner is to quash the notice contained in Annexure-1 and the order contained in Annexure-5 issued/passed in Misc. Case No. 14/85-86 by the Anchal Adhikari. Jarmundi in the district of Santhal Parganas and also for quashing of the order dated 21-4-91 contained in Annexure 8, filed along with the amendment application. By the aforementioned order contained in Annexure-5 the Anchal Adhikari (respondent No. 2) passed the order for demolition of the structure put up by the petitioner and the order contained in Annexure 8 is for removing the encroachment allegedly made by the petitioner over the land in question. 2. This matter was admitted for hearing vide order dt. 22-4-86 and the interim order of status quo passed on 24-2-86 was continued during the pendency of this writ petition. Vide order dated 22-2-91 this Court on the application for amendment filed on behalf of the petitioner stayed the operation of the impu...
Mukhlal Mahto and anr. Vs. State of Bihar
Court: Patna
Decided on: Sep-09-1996
Prasanta Kumar Sarkar, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order of 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Hazaribagh, in S.T. No. 395 of 1990.2. Originally the appellants alongwith one Laxmi Devi were facing trial in this case for the charges under Section 302/34 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code, out of whom Laxmi Devi was found not guilty of the offence under Sections 302/34 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code and accordingly, she was acquitted. The two appellants, however, were found guilty for the offence under Sections 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code and accordingly they were sentenced to undergo RI for life under Sections 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code. However, these appellants were also not found guilty of the charges under Section 120B of the Indian Penal Code.3. Mathura Mahto son of Sri Bhuneshwa Mahto of village Barkagaon, district Hazaribagh, filed a written report in the Barkagaon police station. In the written report, the informant stated that his brother Murli...
Reserve Bank of India and ors. Vs. Rana Ramdeo Singh
Court: Patna
Decided on: Sep-09-1996
D.P. Wadhwa, C.J. and S.J. Mukhopadhaya, J.1. The appellant, reserve Bank of India has challenged the order passed by the learned Single Judge dated 14th of February, 1995 in C.W.J.C No. 12456 of 1993. By the impugned judgment the learned Single Judge allowed the petition filed by the respondent, Rana Ramdeo Singh (hereinafter referred to as 'the writ petitioner') and set aside the order dated 31st of January, 1992, by which it was ordered to recover a sum of Rs. 5,000/- from the post-retirement benefits of the writ petitioner, as well as the appellate order dated 31st of July, 1993.2. The writ petitioner was in the services of the Reserve Bank of India. He superannuated form the services of appellant-Bank on 19th of May, 1985. It was after his superannuation, a some sort of proceeding was initiated any by letter dated 11th of June, 1985 followed by letter dated 24th of January, 1987 the writ petitioner was asked to show cause with respect to certain incident said to have taken place ...
Umesh Sharma and ors. Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Sep-03-1996
M.Y. Iqbal, J.1. Altogether 11 writ petitioners have come to this Court by filling the instant writ application seeking a relief for quashing the order of termination of their Services by the respondents as contained in letter No. 88 dated 12th September, 1995. The petitioners further prayed for their absorption in the regular establishment of the Department.2. The facts as narrated by the petitioners are as follows:In the year 1978 few posts of Vaccinator were advertised by the respondents. Pursuant thereto, the petitioner No. 1 made an application. By an order of the then respondent No. 5. Civil Surgeon-cum-chief Medical Officer, petitioner No. 1 was appointed as Vaccinator on temporary basis. He joined on 1st May, 1978. After having worked for about 2 years, a service book of the petitioner was opened and deduction of Provident Fund was started. The petitioners alleged to have got increments and since the petitioners has been working as Vaccinator. The petitioner No. 1 also claimed...
Sunbeam Pharmaceuticals Industries Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Sep-03-1996
Asok Kumar Ganguly, J. 1. In this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for quashing the order dated 11th Jan. 1992 passed by respondent No.2, whereby, the petitioner's licence for manufacturing the Sterile water for injection was cancelled. The petitioner has also prayed for quashing the order dated 8th May, 1993 passed by the appellate authority (respondent No. 3) whereby the appeal against the said order was dismissed. 2. The facts of the case shortly put are as follows;-- The petitioner claims to have obtained Drugs licence in Form 27 in terms of Rule 75 of the Drugs and Cosmetics Rules 1945 (hereinafter referred to as the said rule). According to the petitioner the said licence was granted and renewed from time to time since 1975. It is further stated that the licence granted in 1975 contains the list of 18 manufacturing products including water for injunction 5 ml. I.P. sample. It is further stated that on 7-12-1988 at the time of renewal of the licence No. 280/75 the petiti...
Sk. NasruddIn Biri Merchant Ltd. Vs. Assistant Collr., C. Ex.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Sep-03-1996
M.Y. Ekbal, J.1. This writ petition is directed for quashing the order dated 7-12-1984 passed by the Appellate Tribunal, Custom, Excise and Gold (Control), New Delhi, in Appeal Nos. 1656-57/84-D by which the said Tribunal confirmed the order of the Collector, Central Excise (Appeals), Calcutta, passed in Appeal No. 305/307/B.R. 80, dated 24-9-1980 refusing the prayer of the petitioner for refund of the excess amount of duty on the sole ground that the application for refund was beyond the period of six months. The aforesaid orders are Annexures 4 and 5 to the writ petition.2. The brief facts of the case as set up by the petitioner are as follows : The petitioner, a Public Limited Company, arrying on business of dealing in and selling of Biris. The warehousing is being done of the unmanufactured Biris tobacco received from time to time. The warehouses are at Biharsharif and Jhajha where the company received unmanufactured Biris and the same were being done in the warehouses. The compan...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next ›