Patna Court November 2003 Judgments
Kedar Mahto Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Nov-19-2003
Narayan Roy, J.1. Heard counsel for the parties.2. By this writ application, the petitioner has called upon this court under Article 226 of the Constitution to decide his date of birth.3. According to the petitioner, his date of birth is 1.3.1948, whereas, according to the respondents, his date of birth as entered in the service book is 1.3.1945 and the petitioner by now has superannuated.4. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner that the date of birth of the petitioner was changed in the service book from 1.3.1948 to 1.3.1945 even without notice to him and the respondents, accordingly, issued Annexure 3 saying that the petitioner stood superannuated from 28.2.2003.5. According to the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondents, it appears that the authorities having found certain tampering marks in the date of birth of the petitioner in the service book made the same as 1.3.1945 with reference to leave account chart, where his date of birth ...
Tag this Judgment!Braj Kishore Paswan Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Nov-19-2003
Narayan Roy, J. 1. Heard counsel for the parties and considered the counter affidavit for the respondents. 2. The petitioner challenges the orders, as contained in Annexures 1 and 2. 3. Vide order, as contained in Annexure 1, the petitioner is being repatriated to his parent place and vide order, as contained in Annexure 2 he was put under suspension pending a departmental inquiry. The order, as contained in Annexure 1, is being assailed on the ground that after coming into force of the Bihar Re-organisation Act, 2000 (hereinafter to be referred to as 'Act'). The authorities of the State of Bihar in view of Section 72 of the Act had no jurisdiction to repatriate the petitioner to the District Police Force at Godda, which now falls in the State Jharkhand. 4. From Annexure 1, it appears that the petitioner was repatriated in the District of Godda in the State of Jharkhand vide order dated 22.5.2003, much after coming into force of the Act. 5. Ex facie, it appears that this power has b...
Tag this Judgment!Pramod Kumar Sinha Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Nov-19-2003
Narayan Roy, J.1. Heard counsel for the parties.2. The main grievances of the petitioner is that in grant of promotion, the petitioner has been discriminated, inasmuch as that he has not been given promotion with effect from the date he passed the departmental examination, that is, with effect from 17.3.1974 and not in the same manner as it has been given to respondent No. 6 with effect from 7.4.1976.3. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner has passed his departmental examination on 17.3.1974, whereas respondent No. 6 passed the same on 7.4.1976. So far as respondent No. 6 is concerned, he was promoted with effect from 7.4.1976, but the petitioner though passed the departmental examination on 17.3.1974 and now they are giving promotion to him with effect from 7.4.1976.4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, ultimately, submits that the respondents may be directed to give promotion to the petitioner with effect fr...
Tag this Judgment!Rajeev Sinha Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Nov-18-2003
Narayan Roy, J. 1. Heard counsel for the parties.2. The petitioner has prayed for issuance of a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to pay the scale of Rs. 1200-1800 with effect from 1993 at par with the notification, as contained in Annexure 2, issued by the Personnel and Administrative Reforms Department, Government of Bihar.3. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner was appointed in the year 1991 on compassionate ground on the post of Bill Clerk in the Sitamarhi District Industry Centre in the scale of Rs. 975-1150 and while he was continuing in service, a notification, as contained in Annexure 2, was issued giving a scale of Rs. 1200-1800 to Class III employees, who were appointed on compassionate ground, but the same was not made available to the petitioner and, therefore, the petitioner filed a representation before the competent authority, which remained pending even till date and the petitioner thereafter filed this...
Tag this Judgment!Md. Saleem Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Nov-18-2003
Chandramauli Kr. Prasad, J. 1. This application has been filed for quashing the order dated 21-2-2003 (Annexure-1) whereby the food grains meant for distribution under the Antyoday Scheme has been directed to be withdrawn from the petitioner and allotted to respondent No. 4 Suresh Yadav, another dealer under the Public Distribution System.2. Shorts facts giving rise to the present application are that the petitioner possesses a licence under the Bihar Trade Articles (Licences & Unification) Order, hereinafter referred to as 'the Unification Order' and was also appointed as a dealer under the Public Distribution System, for short 'PDS'. It seems that one Shri Rahmatullah was a dealer under the PDS who died and after his death, by order dated 28-6-2002, the allotment made in his favour was assigned to the petitioner. The Panchayat Samiti of Raghunathpur, in its meeting held on 17-2-2002, resolved to allot the food grains under the Antyodai Scheme to respondent No. 4 and the allotment m...
Tag this Judgment!Paras Nath Gupta Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Nov-18-2003
Narayan Roy, J. 1. Heard counsel for the parties.2. The writ petitioner is aggrieved by the order, as contained in Annexure 1 dated 3-1-2003, whereby and whereunder the authorities have rejected the prayer of the petitioner for giving him notional promotion in the scale of Rs. 5000-15-8000.3. The order impugned is being assailed mainly on the ground that the same is discriminatory inasmuch as that similarly situated Store Keeper, namely, Sushant Kumar Ghose Mallick, was placed in scale of Rs. 5000-8000.4. It is submitted by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner that though the petitioner superannuated yet he is entitled for the notional promotion in the scale of Rs. 5000-8000 with due annual increment at par with the similarly situated persons.5. A counter-affidavit has been filed on behalf of respondent Nos. 1 to 3 stating therein, inter alia, that the petitioner was placed in the scale of Rs. 730-1080, as he was an appointee prior to 1-4-1981 according to the letter of t...
Tag this Judgment!indexport Limited and anr. Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Nov-17-2003
1. The petitioners, a company registered under the Companies Act, 1956 have filed the present writ application challenging the Notification No. S.O. 88 dated 31st March, 2003 putting the product marketed by them, namely, coconut oil, from entry No. 63 having sales tax at the rate of nine per cent to the category of hair oil under entry No. 245 having sales tax at the rate of twelve per cent.2. The petitioners have challenged the notification on four grounds.(i) Entry No. 245 deals with hair oil only and it cannot take under its sweep any oil not exclusively used as hair oil.(ii) Coconut oil has always been treated as an edible oil and included as such under entry No. 63 and, accordingly, its inclusion under entry No. 245 is impermissible in law.(iii) Coconut oil is used for two purposes, namely, edible oil and hair oil, and once it is used as edible oil it cannot be treated as a hair oil and, accordingly, its inclusion under entry No. 245 is bad in law.(iv) Coconut oil is edible oil a...
Tag this Judgment!Ram Badan Singh Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Nov-17-2003
Narayan Roy, J.1. Heard counsel for the parties.2. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner that in order, as contained in Annexure 2, the Director General of Police, Government of Bihar, directed for making correction in the date of birth of the petitioner in his service book from 3-2-1940 to 3-2-1942, and, accordingly, direction was given to enter the corrected date of birth, in the service book of the petitioner.3. The order, as contained in Annexure 2, however, was not given effect to and in the meantime, the petitioner retired on 1-5-1998, whereas as per Annexure 2 he could have retired on 28-2-2000.4. It is further submitted that the petitioner again moved the Director General of Police, Government of Bihar and the Director General of Police vide order, as contained in Annexure 2, directed that since the petitioner has already superannuated, no useful purpose will be served in keeping the petitioner back in service.5. Learned counsel appearing on...
Tag this Judgment!Most Ramshila Devi Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Nov-14-2003
Chandramauli Kr. Prasad, J. 1. This application has been filed for quashing the order dated 12-10-2002 passed by the Sub-Divisional Officer, Chakia, whereby the petitioner's appointment as dealer under the Public Distribution System, has been cancelled.2. Short facts giving rise to the present application are that the petitioner holds a licence under the provision of Bihar Trade Articles (Licences Unification) Order, 1984, hereinafter referred to as the 'Unification Order'. He was also appointed as the dealer under the Public Distribution System, hereinafter referred to as 'PDS'. On the allegation of misappropriation of grains meant for the people, covered under the Annapurna Yojna, his appointment (Anugyapti) under the PDS has been cancelled.3. Mr. Yogesh Chandra Verma, appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the impugned order in sum and substance cancels the petitioner's licence under the Unification Order and the same having been done at the instance of the Collector, ...
Tag this Judgment!Subhash Roy Choudhary Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Nov-14-2003
Chandramauli Kr. Prasad, J.1. Whether a major unmarried Hindu daughter shall be entitled for maintenance in a proceeding under Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code is the question which falls for determination in the present case under the following circumstances?.2. Opposite party Nos. 2 and 3 who happen to be the mother and daughter, failed application for grant of maintenance under Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code (hereinafter referred to as the Code). The claim was laid against the husband and father respectively. According to the wife she was in the employment of the State Government but after her retirement she has not got any pensionary benefit and as such unable to maintain herself and her daughter. The petitioner who happens to be the husband of opposite party No. 2 and father of opposite party No. 3 (hereinafter referred to as the father) resisted their prayer on the ground that the wife had sufficient means to maintain herself from the retirement benefits, ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »