Patna Court November 2001 Judgments

Central Bihar Chamber of Commerce and ors. Vs. the State of Bihar and ...

Court: Patna

1. The order of 16 October 2001 had been written, let it be not misunderstood, on a consent by the State of Bihar and the State Election Commission to receive guidance as to from which date six months will be counted to return elected representatives to Nagar Panchayats and Municipalities upon elections. Prior to the writing of the order, and even today, it is acknowledged between learned Counsel for the State Government Messrs. S.K. Ghosh, AAG 2, R.K. Dutta, S.C. 4, and S.A. Hussain, S.C. 6, and learned Counsel for the State Election Commission, Mr. K.B. Nath that the two events which are contemplated in the Constitution of India to reckon six months, and hold elections to make municipalities in Bihar self-governing institutions are not available. Today is not the time to go into the circumstances which have brought such a state of affairs and a reflection on the causes, as at this juncture is would be a negative approach. The election to Municipalities is a commitment of the Constit...

Dasmat Soren and ors. Vs. Mr. Kumar Uday Singh

Court: Patna

Radha Mohan Prasad, J.1. On 3-5-2000, this Court issued notice to Respondents No, 1 to 12 to show-cause as to why this appeal be not disposed of at the stage of hearing under Order XLI, Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, and upon service of notice the matter has come up and has been heard for final disposal with the consent of the parties.2. This appeal is directed against the order dated 24-12-1998 passed in Title Suit No. 358/95 by the Sub-Ordinate Judge I, Purnea whereby the plaintiffs' petitioners for substitution and setting aside of abatement have been rejected and the Court has held that the suit stands abated as whole and dismissed the suit as abated. After filing of the suit, a petition was filed on behalf of defendants No. 1 and 2 on 2-9-1988 informing the Court that defendants Nos. 3,4 and 5 died long time back. A rejoinder was filed on behalf of the plaintiffs to the said petition on 10-9-1998 and thereafter on 29-10-1998, a petition for substitution was filed and la...

Surya Narayan Yadav Vs. State of Bihar and ors.

Court: Patna

R.S. Garg, J.1. The petitioner apprehending his dispossession and demolition in execution of the order passed by the Circle Officer, Andhrathari, has come to this Court making a complaint that the order passed by the Circle Officer is illegal as no reasonable opportunity of being heard has been given to the petitioner and that the authority concerned has been acting contrary to the earlier directions of this Court, In support of the submission the learned Counsel for the petitioner has relied upon as Judgment of this Court in the matter of Bechan Mandal v. State of Bihar andOrs. (C.W.J.C. No. 2997 of 1999) decided on 27-8-1999), to contend that the directions issued in the matter of Arun Mukherjee are not of universal application are to be read in reference to the context in which those have been made. He submits that two neighbours of the present petitioner had come to this Court and this Court directed the authorities not to take any action against the said petitioners contrary to ...

Mahabir Petro Products Private Ltd. Vs. Bihar State Electricity Board ...

Court: Patna

R.S. Garg, J.1. The petitioner claims to be consumer of High Tension of Bihar State Electricity Board. According to the petitioner, it has an Industry at industrial area, Tilrath, Barauni. The petitioner says and submits that the factory was set up in September 1994, engaged itself in manufacturing of Calcined Petroleum Coke and started production in September itself. For running the said Factory, the petitioner applied for and was granted an electricial connection as a High Tension Consumer with a Contract Demand of 75 KVA.2. The petitioner submits that in case of high tension, industrial consumers meter, reading is taken every month by team consisting of Electrical Executive Engineer and Assistant Electrical Engineer of the area concerned. The details of the readings of different components like KWH, KVAH & KVA are noted in the H.T. meter reading form by the said team with a copy to the consumer. He also submits that the Tariff for High Tension consumer is a two, tier tariff, i.e. ...

Baban Sharma Vs. State of Bihar and ors.

Court: Patna

Ravi S. Dhavan, C.J. 1. The most redeeming feature of the present case is that on behalf of the State it's counsel Mr. A. K. Singh, S. C. III made a candid statement that he cannot support the impugned order dated 17 May 2001 (Annexure 1 to the writ petition). Followed by this was a statement that regard being had to the legalities of the matter the proposition cannot be defended that the Minister could have interfered in this matter. 2. The facts are these : The petitioner appellant purchased the property, land and a building and a running business of a cinema. The property at which the business of cinema is being carried out is, known as Prabhat Talkies. It is khata No. 196, plot No. 16 area 0.4 decimals, khata No. 198, plot No. 17. area 0.7 decimal, plot No. 18, area 0.9 decimal situated at Jehanabad. The petitioner appellant along with others purchased the entire interest in the land and the building by a sale-deed executed in his favour. The sale was questioned in title suit No...

Om Metals and Minerals Ltd. Vs. State of Bihar

Court: Patna

1. This appeal under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent of the Patna High Court has been filed against the order dated 11-10-2001 passed in C.W.J.C. No. 1612 of 2001 by a learned Single Judge of this Court dismissing the writ application filed by the appellant for quashing the order dated 3-1 -2001, issued under the signature of the Joint Secretary, Water Resources Department (for short 'the Department'), Government of Bihar, communicating the order dated 23-12-2000 of the Commissioner-cum-Secretary of the said Department, by which the appellant-Company has been black-listed from the list of the contractors on the grounds mentioned therein. A copy of the order dated 3-1-2001 was appended as Annexure '1' to the writ petition. The appellant did not challenge the order dated 23-12-2000 on the ground that the same was not available but during the course of argument when the said document was brought by the State as Annexure 'B' to the counter-affidavit, the same was also challenged.The said ...

Kailash Prasad Yadav Vs. Arjun Prasad Yadav

Court: Patna

P.N. Yadav, J.1. The instant revision is directed against the order dated 20-1-2001, passed in title (Eviction Suit No. 34 of 1999) by Munsif, Patna City, Patna, whereby and whereunder he rejected the application under Section 10 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure filed by the petitioner praying therein for stayal of the suit till disposal of title Suit No. 35 of 1997.2. The relevant facts necessary for disposal of the present revision application may be stated in brief. The opposite party-plaintiff purchased the shop premises in dispute through registered sale-deed executed by Laxman Prasad Kesri on 27-7-1997. The petitioner-defendant had, according to the plaintiff, been tenant in respect of the premises. The plaintiff brought the suit referred to above for rejectment of the defendant-petitioner therefrom in accordance with the provisions of Bihar Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1982. The defendant-petitioner denied that he had been tenant of the...

Krishna Sao Vs. State of Bihar and anr.

Court: Patna

Reported in: 2002(1)BLJR155

1. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties.2. By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner seeks to challenge the correctness, validity and propriety of Memo No. 1519 dated 26th July, 1999 wherein, as alleged by the petitioner, the District Magistrate by non-speaking order has cancelled the retail trade-cum-public distribution shops licence of the petitioner.3. In support of the petition it is contended by the learned Counsel for the petitioner that the licence was issued in his favour by Special Officer Incharge, Rationing, Patna, therefore, the said authority being licensing authority can only issue notice, make an inquiry and pass final order in relation to the cancellation or termination of the licence. In support of the submission, the learned Counsel for the petitioner has relied upon the certain judgments of this Court.4. Learned Counsel for the State, on the other hand, submits that on receipt of the certain complaints an inquiry was directe...

Nageshwar Prasad and ors. Vs. State of Bihar and ors.

Court: Patna

Radha Mohan Prasad, J.1. In this writ petition, the petitioners who claim to be the voters of Sitamarhi AssemblyConstituency No. 67, have prayed for issuance of writ of quo warranto or any other writ or direction commanding Sahid Ali Khan (respondent No. 4) to vacate the seat of Bihar Legislative Assembly representing said Sitamarhi Assembly constitutency and have further prayed to declare the said seat of the Bihar Legislative Assembly as vacant and to award suitable punishment to respondent No. 4 for usurping the post of M.L.A. in flagrant disregard of the provisions of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 (hereinafter referred to as 'theR.P. Act')and the Constitution of India.2. The facts of the case lie in a very narrow compass. Respondent No. 4 contested the election in question and was declared elected by a margin of 35 votes as a member of Rastriya Janata Dal. It is stated that Patna Industrial Area Development Authority (hereinafter referred to as 'the PIADA') was const...

Sri Anirudh Prasad Singh Vs. District Board and ors.

Court: Patna

Reported in: 2002(1)BLJR152

1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner, opposite party Nos. 1 and 2 (the District Board, Begusarai), opposite party Nos. 3 and 4 (functionaries of the State Government), and opposite party Nos. 5 to8. The plaintiff is the petitioner. This Civil Revision Application is directed against the order dated 22-9-2000, passed by the Munsif-I Court, Begusarai, in Title Suit No. 112 of 1988 (Sri Anirudha Prasad Singh v. The District Board, Begusarai and others), whereby amendment of the plaint sought for by the plaintiff (petitioner) has been rejected, inter alia, on the ground that it is not a bona fide application.2. Proceedings were initiated against the present petitioner for removal of encroachment by him on the Government land which was part of a public road. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner had earlier preferred C.W.J.C. No. 3568 of 1987 which was disposed of by a Division Bench of this Court by dated 12-11-1987 (Annexure-R/I to the counter-affidavit of Opp. party Nos. 1 and 2, ...