Patna Court February 2003 Judgments
Neeam Jha Vs. Manju Devi and anr.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Feb-28-2003
P.K. Deb, J. 1. This appeal has been preferred by the above-named appellant, who happens to be owner of the alleged offending vehicle bearing No. BR 30-P 3697 in the name and style Mukund Coach, against the judgment and award passed by the 3rd Addl. District Judge, M.A.C.T. in Claim Case No. 2 of 1997 (4 of 1999) granting compensation to the claimants-respondents to the tune of Rs. 1,00,000 with interest at the rate of 12 per cent per annum.2. Claimants are the parents of Dablu who was a boy of 10/11 years met with an accident on 6.12.1996 by bus bearing No. BR 30-P 3697. According to the claimants, the bus was being driven negligently in a rash and high speed as a result of which accident occurred and the deceased died almost instantaneously. The bus in accident was running having route permit under RTA, but very peculiarly it had no insurance which was a must for running a bus on the road. Be it what it may the claim case was contested from the side of the appellant by filing writte...
Tag this Judgment!St. Paul's Anglo Indian Educational Society Vs. Income-tax Appellate T ...
Court: Patna
Decided on: Feb-26-2003
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.2. This writ application has been filed to quash the order dated October 31, 2000, passed by the Commissioner of Income-tax under Section 12AA of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'), as contained in annexure 4, as well as the order dated December 12, 2002, passed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, as contained in annexure 5, dismissing the appeal filed against the said order.3. The learned Commissioner of Income-tax by the aforesaid order has rejected the application filed by the petitioner for registration as charitable trust for the purpose of tax benefits. The said order has been upheld in appeal.4. In view of the nature of submission as well as the nature of the order which we propose to pass, it is not necessary to state the facts in detail. Suffice it to say that an application under Section 12A of the Act was filed by the petitioner on April 20, 2001, for registration of the trust. The said application had...
Tag this Judgment!Anil Kumar Prasad Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Feb-25-2003
Ravi S. Dhavan, C.J. and Shashank Kr. Singh, J. 1. The present writ application has been filed for quashing the order dated 11-2-2003 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Patna Bench, Patna in O.A. No. 294 of 2002, whereunder the relief prayed for by the petitioner challenging his suspension order dated 29-12-2000 has not been granted and it has been held that in view of the development since the filing of the original application (O.A.) before the Central Administrative Tribunal, the proper course of action in such circumstances would be to give a directing to the State Government to pass necessary orders in the background of the minutes of the Review Committee meeting held on 24-12-2002 and this exercise be completed within one month from the date of receipt/production of the order by passing a speaking order. The impugned order of the Administrative Tribunal further goes to show that for the same cause of action, O.A. No. 902 of 2000 had been preferred, which had been de...
Tag this Judgment!Amlawati Devi Vs. the State of Bihar and anr.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Feb-25-2003
Nagendra Rai and Rajendra Prasad, JJ. 1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties. 2. This appeal is directed against the order dated 8-1-2002 passed by the learned single Judge in CWJC No. 5864 of 2000, whereby he has held that the second wife is not entitled to family pension. 3. Law on this point is well settled. According to the Government instruction vide Memo No. Pen-103/64-9505-F dated 3-10-1964 as amended upto 1967, when a Government employee is survived by more than one widow, the pension will be paid to them in equal where and on the death of a widow her share of the pension will become payable to her eligible minor child and if at the time of her death, a widow leaves no eligible minor child, the payment of her share of the pension will cases. 4. The said provision has been amended in 1996 by Memo No. PC -1-Misc. 41/ 92/10056 dated 6-9-1996 on the pattern of the provisions made applicable in the base of the employees of the Central Government, according to which, if a Governm...
Tag this Judgment!The Vice-chancellor, Rajendra Agricultural University and ors. Vs. Sha ...
Court: Patna
Decided on: Feb-25-2003
Shashank Kumar Singh, J. 1. The present Letters Patent Appeal has been preferred challenging the order dated 1-11 -2002 passed in CWJC No. 9623 of 2002. 2. The appellants are the respondents in the writ application and are functionaries of Rajendra Agricultural University, Pusa. The writ application had been initiated by the two employees of the State Government who were on deputation in Rajendra Agricultural University and had superannuated but were not being paid their admitted Genera! Provident Fund dues, leave encashment and arrears of revised pay of their scale with effect from 1-1-1996. 3. It may not be out of place to mention that during pendency of the writ petition itself the liability had been accepted by the respondent University inasmuch as certain amounts were paid by producing demand draft of Rs. 16,053/- issued in favour of Shambhu Nath, Petitioner No. 1 for payment of his provident fund amount. A further undertaking was given by the appellants before the writ Court to...
Tag this Judgment!State of Bihar and ors. Vs. Rajendra Prasad Singh and anr.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Feb-24-2003
Ravi S. Dhavan, C.J. and R.N. Prasad, J. 1. The delay in filing the appeal iscondoned. 2. This letters patent appeal has been filed against the order of 25 November, 2002 on Civil Revision No. 47 of 2002 : State of Bihar and Ors. v. Rajendra Prasad Singh and Anr.. The review was being sought on an order dated 15 January, 2002. 3. The learned Judge has given certain findings based on the record, on the basis of which he was declined to review the order. These findings are very serious. The learned Judge observed that 'all those notings were done and verified after the writ petition was filed.......' 'Even some notings were made during the pendency ofthe writ petition. Those modifications could have been brought to the notice of the Court while hearing the writ petition itself but that has not been done.' 4. Who exactly was seeking the review of the order? The review was being sought by a Block Development Officer. Clearly, there was a collusion between some officials of the Government...
Tag this Judgment!Yugeshwar Kumar (Y. Kumar) Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Feb-24-2003
Ravi S. Dhavan, C.J. and R.N. Prasad, J. 1. This Letters Patent Appeal is against the order dated 22nd August, 1995 on CWJC No. 10665 of 1994; Yogeshwar Kumar (Y. Kumar) v. Union of India and Ors. 2. In the writ petition, the petitioner was resisting action of his employer, Hindustan Fertiliser Limited, in accenting his request to voluntarily retire him under the scheme framed for this purpose on payment of all the dues in accordance with the scheme. He took voluntary retirement as also monetary benefits payable to him under the scheme. In the circumstances the learned Judge declined to interfere on the writ petition. 3. The petitioner has assailed the decision on the writ petition in the present Letters Patent Appeal. 4. The Court has heard learned Counsel for the petitioner-appellant and the contesting respondent i.e. Hindustan Fertiliser Limited. 5. After having examined the records of the writ petition as also Letters Patent Appeal, this Court is of the opinion that the intention...
Tag this Judgment!Sanjay Kumar Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Feb-24-2003
1. The petitioner has challenged three different orders with regard to three different circles. In our view, the petitioner is liable to pay three sets of court fee. Two sets of court fee should be paid by tomorrow failing which the writ application shall stand rejected without further reference to a Bench.2. The petitioner is engaged in the business of manufacture and wholesale supply of country liquor. He is aggrieved by the order dated September 28, 2002 issued by the Assistant Commissioner, Commercial Taxes, Biharsharif, contained in annexure 1 to the writ application, order dated November 22, 2002 issued by the Assistant Commissioner, Commercial Taxes, Darbhanga contained in annexure 8 to the writ application and the order dated November 28, 2002 passed by the Assistant Commissioner, Commercial Taxes, Samastipur contained in annexure 10 to the writ application wherein the authorities have directed him to make payment of the amount of the sales tax mentioned in the orders on the g...
Tag this Judgment!Bishwanath Dubey and ors. Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Feb-24-2003
Ravi Dhavan, C.J. 1. This Letters Patent Appeal is against an order dated 11 September, 1995 on C.W.J.C. No. 4900 of 1995: Bishwanath Dubey and Ors. v. The State of Bihar and Ors. 2. On facts taken in the petition, on record, there is no issue. The petitioners were admittedly senior to the respondents and prayed that they be given their seniority over the respondents at the rightful place in a combined cadre of the departments concerned. The relief as prayed was denied. The learned Judge was of the opinion that the petitioners had approached the High Court belatedly. Limitation defeated the cause. Thus, the present Letters Patent Appeal. 3. While the matter was being debated, gradually the Court had to examine 11 sets of records (and many cases within these 11 sets of records) so that substantial justice is done that a person otherwise a senior is not left down the ladder; to inquire the reasons why seniors were left out and juniors promoted over them. This circumstance is an aspect o...
Tag this Judgment!Sri Sarjoo Prasad and ors. Vs. the State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Feb-21-2003
S.N. Jha, J. 1. This review petition has been filed in the light of the order of the Supreme Court dated 26-2-1999 in SLP (Civil) CC No. 8140/98. The order runs as under.'Learned Counsel for the petitioners relies on material & submit that the discipline of occupational Therapy/Physiotherapy is a recognised discipline and that the High Court Court was in error in assuming to the contrary. We think it is appropriate that, in the circumstances, such material should be presented to the High Court itself to enable it to consider whether the order under challenge should be reviewed. The SLP is dismissed. If the petitioners present a review petition before the High Court within two weeks, the same shall be duly considered.' 2. The above mentioned SLP had arisen from the order dated 9-10-1998 on an interlocutory application (IA No. 8296/97) in CWJC No. 8444 of 1997. The writ Petition was filed as a public interest litigation highlighting the mismanagement in the Patna Medical College & Hos...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »