Patna Court February 2003 Judgments
Raj Narayan Ray and anr. Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Feb-10-2003
Ravi S. Dhawan, C.J. and R.N. Prasad, J.1. The most significant aspect of the case is best noticed in a paragraph of the order of the learned Judge, which this Court reproduces :'Counsel for the petitioners placed reliance on the minutes of the Minister Incharge and the Chief Minister as contained in Annexure-6. It was pointed out that the Minister has suggested that the services of the petitioners may be recognised from the date they attained the age of 18 years which was accepted by the Chief Minister.'2. It is not understood why the petitioners filed the writ petition as they had rested and bided their peace. Perhaps, they would have been above to get away with a regularjsed appointment. But, temptation to add two and half year so far as one petitioner is concerned and six months in so far as the other is concerned, let them into a trap which the serenity of law did not let them get away with. Bad situations and bad practices do not make good law.3. The facts in the case are glarin...
Tag this Judgment!Ranjan Kumar Vs. Nalanda GramIn Bank and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Feb-10-2003
Chandramauli Kumar Prasad, J. 1. This application has been filed for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorary for quashing the order dated 2-6-1999 (Annexure 1) passed by the disciplinary authority whereby the petitioner has been visited with the penalty of withholding one annual increment without cumulative effect and it has also been directed that the period of suspension shall not be treated as the period spent on duty. Further prayer of the petitioner is to quash the order 12-5-2000 (Annexure 2) whereby the appellate authority had affirmed the order of the disciplinary authority.2. Shorn of unnecessary details, facts giving rise to the present application are that at the relevant time, petitioner was working as Clerk-cum-cashier of Nalanda Gramin Bank, hereinafter referred to as the Bank. By order dated 3-12-1993 (Annexure 4), he was put under suspension for the purported misconduct committed by him on 2-12-1993 allegedly for not following the rules of the Bank and disobedi...
Tag this Judgment!Barmeshwar Nath Singh @ Mukhiya Jee Vs. the State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Feb-10-2003
Narayan Roy, J.1. Heard Counsel for the parties.2. This writ application under Article 226 of the Constitution is directed against the order as contained in Annexure-6 dated 21-11-2002 whereby an whereunder the petitioner is being transferred from Beur Central Jail, Patna to Central Jail, Bhagalpur in purported exercise of power under Section 29(2) of the Prisoners Act, 1900 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) read with Section 417 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as the Code) and at the same time the State Government has also exercised its power under Section 268 of the Code.3. Learned Counsel for the petitioner questions the correctness and propriety of the order impugned on the ground that the order of transfer of the petitioner from Beur Central Jail to Central Jail, Bhagalpur in purported exercise of powers of the State Government under Section 29(2) of the Act and Section 417 of the Code is wholly without jurisdiction as the powers.under Section 29(2) ...
Tag this Judgment!Jai Ballabh Mullic Vs. Bihar State Electricity Board and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Feb-10-2003
Chandramuli Kr. Prasad, J. 1. This application has been filed for quashing the order dated 13-3-1999 (Annexure-1) whereby the petitioner has been visited with the penalty of compulsory retirement from the Board's service and recovery of 20% amount from the retiral benefits. By the said order, it has also been decided that the petitioner shall not be entitled for any other monetary benefits other than the subsistence allowance but the period of suspension shall be treated as service spent on duty for the purpose of retiral benefits. Further prayer of the petitioner is to quash the enquiry report dated 4-2-1999. 2. Facts which are necessary for the decision of the present writ application are that during the relevant time petitioner was posted as Accounts Assistant in the Rural Electrical Division, Darbhanga. Consequent upon the reorganisation of Rural Electrical Circle/Division/Sub-Division, the petitioner by order dated 24-5-1988 (Annexure-4), was transferred to Darbhanga Electrical ...
Tag this Judgment!Md. KalimuddIn Ansari Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Feb-07-2003
1. The petitioner belong to village Dusadhi Pakhi, Police StationKankarbagh, District Patna. He desires that a certain sector of road falling within village Manjhaul, District Begusarai be repaired. His contention is that unless the High Court issues a direction the funds will lapse. 2. If the petitioner is truly interested thatthe funds must not lapse then he shouldraise this issue before his Panchayat not asa public interest litigation straightway before the High Court. 3. Dismissed....
Tag this Judgment!Rabindra Nath Mishra and ors. Vs. the State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Feb-05-2003
Shashank Kumar Singh, J. 1. Petitioners are aggrieved by Annexure-5 which is an office order dated 18-7-2002, by which in view of Screening Committee report services of the petitioners and others, total 13 in number were not found fit for absorption as their appointment letter has been found forged and babricated.2. Learned Counsel for the petitioners has drawn attention of the Court towards the fact that the Screening Committee report itself would go to show that the appointment letters of these petitioners which were called for were not produced. Similarly it has been contended that as the appointment letter and service book was not available, the Screening Committee has raised doubt about their appointments. Relying on the said report, the impugned order as contained in Annexure-5 has been passed. A reply to the counter-affidavit had been filed yesterday in Court to show that service book of all the petitioners had been opened and were available and copies thereof have been brough...
Tag this Judgment!Biswanath Gope Vs. State of Bihar
Court: Patna
Decided on: Feb-05-2003
B.N.P. Singh, J. 1. Though as many as eight number of accused-persons were put on trial, rest having been acquitted of the charges, Bishwanath Gope alone (hereinafter referred to as the appellant) suffered conviction under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and Section 27 of the Arms Act, in which, .while he was sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for life on the first count, no sentence was awarded on the second count. 2. Factual matrix appearing from the fardbayan of Ajab Lal Yadav and also narrations made by the witnesses at trial can be recapitulated with brief narration of them. At about 11 a.m. on 23rd July, 1984, while Rajendra Gope (hereinafter referred to as the deceased), was working along with his nephew Ajab Lal Gope in the field, which situated in Jagwa Khanda of village Kharaura for transplanation of paddy crops, the appellant came along with other accused-persons (since acquitted) and on exhortation made by Ram Prit Gope for executing killing of the dece...
Tag this Judgment!Motilal Khaitan Vs. Regional Manager/Branch Manager, United India Insu ...
Court: Bihar State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Patna
Decided on: Feb-05-2003
D.P.S. Choudhary, President: 1. Complainant has filed the complaint petition against the O.P. with a prayer for settling the insurance claim of the complainant as quantified at Rs. 5,33,371.75 paise besides interest. 2. The brief fact of the case is that the complainant firm M/s. Khaitan Enterprises which dealt with the distribution of surgical manufacturing companies having its office at Frazer Road, Patna-1, was insured with the O.P. Nos. 1 to 4. O.P. No. 5, the Union Bank of India is the banker of the Firm. It is alleged that on 29.7.1994, the complainant learnt that a theft was committed in the premises of the firm and an FIR was lodged with the Kotwali Police Station on the same day. A case under Section 379/461, I.P.C. bearing Kotwali Police Case No. 281/1994 was registered against unknown. The police submitted final report on 31.8.1994 stating case true against the unknown, which was accepted by the C.J.M., Patna. It is also alleged that the period of Insurance was from 10.9.199...
Tag this Judgment!Union of India (Uoi) and ors. Vs. Manoj Kumar Pathak and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Feb-04-2003
Ravi S. Dhavan, C.J. and R.N. Prasad, J. 1. The Court has before it two writ petitions. Both the writ petitions have been filed by the Union of India, Ministry of Information and Broadcasting. The writ petitions are against two different orders of the Central Administrative Tribunal. 2. CWJC No. 1368 of 2001 : Union of India v. The Central Administrative TribunalPatna, arises out of an order of the Tribunal dated 28 July 2000 which itself arose out of the Original Application No. 606 of 1998 between Sweta Ghosh and eight others v. The Union of India. These applications before the Tribunal were working as casual artists engaged by Broadcasting Division of Ministry of Information and Broadcasting at Patna since 1993. The Tribunal has directed the Union of India that it ought to draw up a scheme in terms of its earlier order and the applicants before the Tribunal should be considered within the scheme for the regularisation of their services against appropriate vacant posts as per quali...
Tag this Judgment!Nand Lal Singh Vs. the State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Feb-03-2003
S.N. Jha and P.M. Yadav, JJ. 1. This writ petition coming on reference by a learned Single Judge of this Court involves interpretation of Section 9 (4)(i) of the Bihar Agriculture Produce Market Committee Act, 1960 (in short 'the Act'). Section 9 (4)(i) of the Act runs as under : 'An Officer, nominated by the State Government shall be the Chairman of the Market Committee for 2 terms or 6 years after the passing of this Act, thereafter, the State Government shall appoint the Chairman from amongst the members of the Market Committee.'2. The dispute relates to appointment of Chairman of the Agriculture Produce Market Committee, Motihari (hereinafter referred to as 'the Market Committee') and the precise question for consideration is whether the Sub-Divisional Officer can be appointed as Chairman of the third or the subsequent Market Committees. The present Market Committee i.e. Motihari Market Committee is the sixth one. The facts giving rise to the dispute are as follows.3. The constit...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »