Patna Court September 2004 Judgments
Deo Prasad Sharma Vs. the State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Sep-22-2004
Mridula Mishra, J.1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the counsel appearing for the respondents.2. The petitioner has retired from the post of Headmaster on 31.3.2000. He is aggrieved by the order issued by the office of the Accountant General, Bihar, Patna contained in letter No. 10/20613 dated 8.2.2001 (Annexure-7) and letter No. 10/GPO/30616 dated 8.2.2001 (Annexure-8). By these two orders the Accountant General has fixed the pension and gratuity payable to the petitioner at a lower scale than the last pay drawn by him on the date of his retirement. It has also been directed that Rs. 56,831/- should be recovered from the pension of the petitioner, paid as excess salary to the petitioner during the period 1.1.1986 to the date of retirement of the i.e. 31.3.2000.3. The petitioner was initially appointed as an Assistant Teacher on 13.4.1961 in the lower primary school, Barkiparhi. While working as an Assistant Teacher in the Upper Primary School, Nonar, Daudnagar he was pr...
Tag this Judgment!Paramhans Rai @ Prabhans Rai and ors. Vs. the State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Sep-22-2004
Radha Mohan Prasad, J.1. In this miscellaneous application, prayer is for quashing the order dated 17.1,2002 passed by the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Siwan in complaint case, bearing No. C 1137/2001, whereby and whereunder cognizance has been taken against the petitioners under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323. 379 and 427, IPC and Section 25 of the Arms Act and summonses have been directed to be issued.2. The short facts giving rise to the present case are that opposite party No. 2 is the complainant, who alleged in the complaint petition that his father had purchased 3 kathas 5 dhurs of land appertaining to khata No. 229, plot No. 44 by a registered sale deed. On the same plot, some trees were standing which were being utilized by him. it is alleged that on 20th August, 2001, the petitioners variously armed went over the land and cut green mango tree, one dry mango tree and one mahua dry tree to which the complainant objected, whereunder the petitioner No. 1 tried to assault him w...
Tag this Judgment!Rajesh Ranjan Alias Pappu Yadav Vs. State of Bihar
Court: Patna
Decided on: Sep-21-2004
R.S. Garg, J.1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the CBI and learned counsel for the informant.2. The present is an application under Section 439, Cr.P.G. on behalf of the applicant Rajesh Ranjan alias Pappu Yadav.3. The applicant is in jail in connection with K. Hat P. S. Case No. 230/98, Cr.C. Case No. 12(S)/98 pending in Sessions Trial No. 976/99 before the CBI Court. He has made this application for grant of bail.4. The facts material for deciding the matter in short are that one Kalyan Chandra Sarkar lodged a first information report that his brother and other two were murdered while the fourth man suffered serious injuries in an attack opened by one Rajan Tiwary and his associates. From the records it would appear that the police after completing investigation filed a charge-sheet on 20-9-1998 and nothing was reported against the applicant. Thereafter the cognizance was taken by the concerned Magistrate on 23-9-1998 but no cognizance was taken agains...
Tag this Judgment!Snowtemp Commercial (P) Ltd. Vs. the State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Sep-18-2004
R.N. Prasad and S.N. Hussain, JJ.1. The petitioner is a company. It is manufacturing soft coke from coal by adopting the technology of Central Fuel Research Institute and has been granted permanent registration as a small scale Industry. In terms of the government notification No. S.O. 478 dated 22.12.95 it has been granted exemption from payment of sales tax on purchase of raw materials vide exemption certificate dated 27.1.99, Annexure-1. It used to purchase coal from the Central Coalfields Ltd. without payment of sales tax. This procedure continued prior to 15.11.2000, the date on which the State of Bihar was bifurcated and a new State of Jharkhand was created. Since the petitioner was in regular need of coal it continued to purchase the same but it was coerced to pay sales tax with effect from 15.11.2000 though it had been granted exemption certificate.2. The petitioner challenged the said action of the respondents in CWJC No. 15830/2001 which was heard along with CWJC No. 13697/2...
Tag this Judgment!Dr. Pran Nath Kapoor Vs. the Chairman-cum-managing Director Sbi and or ...
Court: Patna
Decided on: Sep-16-2004
P.M. Prasad, J.1. The petitioner, who retired from the service of the respondent State Bank of India on 30th September, 1992, is aggrieved by denial of his pensionary benefits on the ground that his retirement is before cut-off date and in order to qualify for pension he is short of 4 months 18 days in 20 years of service.2. In short the relevant facts are that the petitioner before his appointment in the State Bank of India was an Officer in Emergency Army Service between 13.10.1963 to 30.6.1968 and thus completed 4 years 8 months 18 days in Army Service plus Pre- Commission Training of 6 months and 11 days. Later pursuant to the advertisement he was appointed as Technical Officer by relaxing the maximum age in the Bank and he served there for 19 years 7 months 12 days and he is short of only 4 months 18 days for minimum qualifying period for grant of pension. According to the petitioner, he was appointed by giving relaxation of age by more than 3 years and, further, the Bank also c...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Chandrakanti Devi Vs. Kailash Prasad Tiwary and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Sep-16-2004
S.N. Hussain, J.1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.2. The petitioner is applicant in probate case No. 23/1995 which she had filed for probate of the Will dated 11.9.1972 claimed to have been executed by her father-in-law namely, Ramsurat Tiwary in the said case OP Nos. 10 to 12 appeared and contested claiming that no such Will was executed by Ramsurat Tiwary, who is fact, executed sale-deed dated 21.1.1971 in favour of Uma Shankar Prasad and others.3. While the said case was pending, on the direction of the Court, Uma Shankar Prasad produced a photo-copy of the original sale-deed dated 21.1.1971 said to have been attested by Sub- Registrar, Shikarpur, Sub-Registry Office, whereafter OP Nos. 10 to 12 filed a petition in the trial Court for taking photograph of the signature of Ramsurat Tiwary over the Will dated 11.9.1972 filed by the plaintiff for comparing it with the signature of Ramsurat Tiwary in the photo-copy of the sale-deed dated 21.1.1971. The applicant objected to the ...
Tag this Judgment!Vinod Kumar Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Sep-16-2004
Aftab Alam, J.1. The petitioner seeks to challenge the panel of short-listed candidates, dated November 7-8, 2001 (Annexure-9) prepared by the Dealer Selection Board for grant of retail out- let dealership of Indian Oil Corporation Limited at Turkauliya in the district of East Champaran, The challenge to the Panel of short listed candidates is in so far as it places respondent No. 6 at serial No. 1 above the petitioner who is put at serial No. 2. The selection of respondent No. 6 as the first candidate is challenged on the ground that he did not fulfill the eligibility criterion of age as laid down in the tender notice and was, therefore, disqualified at the outset.2. As the facts of the case unfold it becomes clear that respondent No. 6, in fact, did not satisfy the condition relating to age; what is worse is that he himself appears to be fully aware of this position from the beginning and he seems to have tried to cover-up his disqualification by producing before the selection Board...
Tag this Judgment!Shri Gupteshwar Nath Upadhyay Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Sep-15-2004
Mridula Mishra, J.1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the counsel appearing for the respondents.2. The petitioner has filed this application for a direction to the respondents to make payment of his pre-retiral as well as post-retiral dues and also for quashing the office order contained in Memo No. 756, dated 15.9.1999 issued by the Additional Secretary to the Government of Bihar, Department of Personnel and Administrative Reforms by which the claim of the petitioner for first and second time bound promotion and all consequential benefits relating to the promotion has been rejected.3. The petitioner was appointed as temporary assistant in the Directorate of Land Acquisition, Bihar, Patna on 2.5.1960 and he was placed on probation on 8.2.1973 for two years. On completion of two years of probation on 8.2.1975 he should have been confirmed as provided under Rule 10 of the Rules Regulating Recruitment of Assistants to the Lower Division of the Bihar Secretariat and some other...
Tag this Judgment!Mostt. Kanti Devi and anr. Vs. Surendra Prasad Singh and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Sep-14-2004
R.N. Prasad, J.1. The revision has been filed against the order dated 28.1.2003 passed in title suit No. 420/1990 whereby the petition filed by the petitioners on 23.8.2001 for permission to incorporate the amendment allowed on 31.7.1992 has been rejected.2. The petitioners are defendants in the suit. The petition was filed by the defendant-petitioners for amendment of the written statement. Vide order dated 31.7.1992 the amendment was allowed. However, it was not incorporated. The evidence of the plaintiffs has been closed and the evidence of the defendants is going on. The petition for permission to incorporate the amendment was filed on 23.8.2001 i.e. after about 9 years of the order of amendment dated 31.7.1992. The Court below has rejected the said petition by the impugned order on the ground of delay.3. Learned counsel for the petitioners filed a supplementary affidavit today in the Court stating that though the amendment was not incorporated yet the evidence was led on the amen...
Tag this Judgment!Ratan Kumar Lal Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Sep-13-2004
Narayan Roy, J.1. Heard counsel for the parties and consider the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondents.2. The petitioner seeks direction upon the respondents to regularise his services in the regular establishment in Class III post.3. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is working on Class IV post since long in Work Charged Establishment, but his case has not been considered, though many juniors to him have been regularised on Class III posts.4. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondents, wherein precisely it is stated that since the petitioner is not matriculate his claim for regularisation on Class III post is not justified.5. Learned counsel for the petitioner however, submits that the petitioner is already matriculate and he is having his certificate etc.6. In the main writ application, there is no averment about the educational qualification of the petitioner.7. Considering the facts and circumstances of th...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »