Patna Court April 2003 Judgments
Kanhaiya Singh Vs. the State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Apr-03-2003
R.S. Garg, J. 1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties. 2. The petitioner holding the office of Pramukh was served with a no confidence motion and was requested to convene the meeting. The petitioner did not convene the meeting within 15 days as provided under Section 44(3) of Bihar Panchayat Raj Act, 1993, therefore, the Block Development Officer sought for some clarification from the higher authorities and after receiving the explanations directed that the meeting can be convened. The meeting was accordingly convened. The motion was put to test and the petitioner lost 16/5. Being aggrieved by the requisition of the meeting and carrying of the motion the petitioner has come to this Court. 3. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that in accordance with the provisions of Section 44(3) on refusal of the Pramukh to convene the meeting the one-third members are entitled to requisition the meeting but that can not do so after period of 15 days is over. He submits that the meeting in...
Tag this Judgment!Barauni Carbons Pvt. Ltd. Vs. the Bihar State Electricity Board and or ...
Court: Patna
Decided on: Apr-02-2003
R.S. Garg, J. 1. This order shall dispose of all the three Writ Petitions (C.W.J.C. Nos. 13933, 13986 and 14019 of 2002). 2. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner. Also heard learned Counsel for the Bihar State Electricity Board (hereinafter referred to as 'the Board'). 3. By these petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, each of the petitioners seeks to challenged the rejection of their claim submitted under Clause 13 of the H.T. Agreement. 4. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the notification i. e., Clause 4 (c) is in relation to avoidance of disconnection and in any case shall not interfere with the petitioner's right to make a representation under Clause 13 of the Agreement nor the authority misinterpreting Clause 4 (c) can reject the representation observing that in accordance with the said Clause 4 (c), 50% of the disputed amount was not deposited within due date and information of intention of filing the claims was also not supplied. Learned ...
Tag this Judgment!The Managing Committee and ors. Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Apr-02-2003
R.S. Garg, J. 1. By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India the petitioners seek to challenge the correctness, Validity and propriety of Memo No. 537 dated 8-4-2002, issued by the District Collector, Katihar whereunder he has cancelled the registration of gift deed No. 14743 dated 21-9-2001 in exercise of the powers vested upon him under Section 68(2) of the Indian Registration Act, 1908.2. The facts in brief are that certain land was gifted by late Mannalal Sah to the Government of Bihar for establishing a school. The land came in possession of the school & Managing Committee and school was ultimately established. The petitioners claim to be the existing Managing Committee of the said Mannalal San Harijan Uchcha Vidyalay, Sakraili. The said Managing Committee executed the gift deed of the some land on 21-9-2001 in favour of the petitioner No. 2, namely Foundation life for All, which is registered public charitable trust. The State Government took an exception to ...
Tag this Judgment!Vijay Shankar Shrivastava Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Apr-01-2003
Narayan Roy, J. 1. Heard Counsel for the parties and considered the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the State. 2. This writ application is directed against the order of punishment imposed upon the petitioner by annexure 12 dated 7-12-1998, whereby and whereunder the petitioner has been punished with reduction in rank to his basic scale with adverse effects to salary increments and future promotions and direction has already been issued to recover the excess amount paid to the petitioner. 3. Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner assails the order impugned mainly on the ground that though the punishment imposed upon the petitioner was major in nature, no opportunity, whatsoever, was given to him to defend himself. It is submitted by learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner that initially preliminary show-cause notice was given to the petitioner in the departmental proceeding to explain his conduct and on submission of the show-cause by the petitioner,...
Tag this Judgment!Nand Lal Thakur Vs. the Registrar, Cat
Court: Patna
Decided on: Apr-01-2003
Ravi S. Dhawan, C.J. and R.N. Prasad, J. 1. The petitioner is up against theorder dated 31st July 2002 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Patna Bench, Patna, in O.A. No. 175 of 2001, declining to grant a relief that he be given a job. This is not a job in which the petitioner has participated in a selection process and may have been eliminated arbitrarily, irregularly or illegally. 2. It is contended that in 1974, an Hon'ble Minister of the Railways had made a promise that all those railway personnel who did not join the general strike, their wards would be guaranteed a job. No sooner the assurance was given in public, two years later the Government of India withdrew the assurance. It needs to be noticed also and it is acknowledged by learned Counsel for the petitioner that at the time when the assurance was given in 1974, the petitioner was about 2 years old. When the circular was withdrawn, the petitioner was at best 4 years old. The petitioner desires that the assuranc...
Tag this Judgment!Justice Devendra Prasad Singh Choudhary Vs. the State of Bihar and ors ...
Court: Patna
Decided on: Apr-01-2003
Narayan, Roy, J. 1. Heard Counsel for the parties.2. The writ petitioner, retired High Court Judge, and, at present, functioning as President of the Bihar State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Patna (hereinafter to be referred to as 'Commission') has approached this Court for issuance of direction upon the respondents to maintain parity in payment of salary, clearness allowance, house rent allowance, sumptuary, allowance and other perquisites like LTC, medical facility, etc. to him, as is paid to a sitting Judge of a High Court and as was being paid to the petitioner as Judge of Patna High Court minus pension from the date of his appointment as President of the Commission.3. The petitioner retired as Judge of Patna High Court on 28-3-2002 and and thereafter he was appointed as a President of the Commission vide notification, as contained in memo No. 1738 date 18-4-2002, issued under the signature of respondent No. 4. At the time of his retirement, the petitioner was receiving ...
Tag this Judgment!Swarnamoyee Singh and ors. Vs. Nomita Singh and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Apr-01-2003
R.N. Prasad, J. 1. The Letters Patent Appeal has been filed against the judgment and order dated 1-2-1994 passed in C.W.J.C. No. 2866/83. 2. The relevant facts of the case are that one Kali Prasad Singh had three sons, namely, Benga Lal Singh, Jai Govind Singh and Atul Chandra Singh. There was a partition amongst the brothers by registered deed and Benga Lal Singh got 21.98 acres of land. He had four sons, namely, Shyama Pado Singh, Shanti Pado Singh, Barin Kumar Singh and Asim Kumar Singh. Shyama Pado Singh died during the pendency of writ petition leaving behind his widow Namita Singh, two sons, namely, Dilip Kumar Singh and Vidyut Kumar Singh and three daughters, namely, Shivani Rai, Bansani Singh and Indrani Singh. For better appreciation of the facts genealogical table is given here-in-blew:- Kali Prasad Singh (Jagirholder) | __________________________|________________________________ | | | | Baga Lal Singh Jai Govind Singh Atual Chandra Singh (Jagirholder) | ____|____________...
Tag this Judgment!Deepnarayan Choudhary and ors. Vs. the State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Apr-01-2003
R.S. Garg, J. 1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties. 2. Despite opportunities neither the Collector, nor the Municipality have filed their counters. Their right to file the counter is closed. 3. The complaint of the petitioners simply is that in pursuance of the notice published in the local newspaper the petitioners and likes made application for allotment of the shops after observing the rules of the advertisement the shops were allotted in favour of the petitioners but thereafter the Collector for the reasons best known to him simply observed that transparent procedure was not followed in making the allotments, therefore, the allotments should be cancelled. Taking the observations of the Collector to be a mandatory nature without application of mind or without looking into what was required to be done and even without issuing any notice to show-cause the municipality like a humble slave of the District Magistrate cancelled the allotments. 4. The Counsel for the Municipality sub...
Tag this Judgment!Dr. Sarvesh Chandra Prabhakar and ors. Vs. the State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Apr-01-2003
R.N. Prasad, J. 1. Respondent No. 6 was appointed in Rashtra Bhasha Parishad vide letter dated 13-11-1975. He joined on 1-12-1975. He was given selection grade vide order dated 1-2-1986 and senior selection grade scale vide order dated 1-2-1989. The appellants came in service of Rashtra Bhasha Parishad later than respondent No. 6. A seniority list was prepared in the cadre of Subordiate Educational Service (upper division) in the Bihar Rashtra Bhasha Parishad. In the seniority list respondent No. 6 was placed at serial No. 1 and the appellants were placed at Serial Nos. 2 to 4. The appellants were promoted vide notification dated 10-3-1995 to the Bihar Educational Service class II. Respondent No. 6 aggrieved by the said notification dated 10-3-1995 filed CWJC No. 2862/95 making prayer therein to quash the said notification on the ground that his case was not considered for promotion though he was at serial No. 1 in the gradation list in the cadre of Subordinate Educational Service. T...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›