Patna Court January 2005 Judgments
Upendra Kumar Sahani Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jan-15-2005
Chandramauli Kumar Prasad, J.1. This application has been filed for quashing a portion of the notification dated 29.6.2004 (Annexure-1) whereby the petitioner, who happens to be a Medical Officer, has been transferred from Primary Health Centre, Ghanshyampur in the district of Darbhanga to Referral Hospital at Nabinagar in the district of Aurangabad.2. Short facts giving rise to the present application are that the petitioner is a Medical Officer posted at Ghanshyampur Block in the district of Darbhanga and working there since 2.12.1999. A Division Bench of this Court by its order dated 21.3.2002 passed in C.W.J.C. No. 4036 of 1999 impressed upon the Government of Bihar in the Department of Health to effect transfer of such Medical Officers who had completed three years of posting, at a particular place. Taking note of the same, the State Government by its notification dated 29th of June, 2004 (Annexure-1) transferred the petitioner as also a large number of Medical Officers. However,...
Tag this Judgment!Mahendra Lal Das Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jan-13-2005
Narayan Roy, J.1. Heard counsel for the parties.2. The petitioner seeks direction upon the respondents to consider his case for promotion to the post of Chief Engineer (Mechanical) in Public Health Engineering Department (hereinafter referred to as PHED) notionally.3. It is submitted by learned counsel that the petitioner was the senior most Superintending Engineer in PHED and he superannuated with effect from 31.1.2.1999 having legitimate expectation that by virtue of his seniority, he would be considered for the post of Chief Engineer (Mechanical) but some how or the other, till date the case of the petitioner has not been considered despite his representations. It is further submitted by learned counsel that admittedly the post of Chief Engineer (Mechanical) was lying vacant since 18th September, 1998 and the petitioner superannuated with effect from 31.12.1999 and in ordinary course, he could have been considered for the post aforesaid.4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the...
Tag this Judgment!Sanjay Kumar Singh and ors. Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jan-12-2005
Chandramauli Kumar Prasad, J.1. This application has been filed for quashing the order by which the salary of the petitioners has been directed to be stopped, metric trained scale granted has been directed to be rescinded and payment made on account thereof has been sought to be recovered on the ground that they had passed the B.Ed. examination from Millia Fakhruddin Ali Ahmad B.Ed. Teachers Training College, Rambagh, Purnea, hereinafter referred to as 'the College' the recognition whereof has been withdrawn from retrospective effect.2. Short facts giving rise to the present application are that the petitioners were appointed as Assistant Teachers taking into account the fact that they had passed B.Ed. examination from the College in question. It is not in dispute that at the time the petitioners passed the B.Ed. examination, the said College was duly recognised. Later-on, the recognition of the said College had been withdrawn and taking note of the said fact, by the impugned order, a...
Tag this Judgment!Sanjay Kumar Mahto and ors. Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jan-12-2005
Chandramauli Kumar Prasad, J.1. In both the writ applications, common questions of law and fact arise and as such, they are being disposed of by this common order.2. In both the writ applications, prayer of the petitioners is to quash the orders whereby the Matric Trained Scale granted to them has been rescinded and excess remuneration paid thereof, has been directed to be recovered.3. Facts lie in a narrow compass. Petitioners were granted Matric Trained Scale on the basis of B. Ed. degree obtained from Millia Fakhruddin Ali Ahamad Teachers Training (B. Ed.) College, Rambagh, Purnea, hereinafter referred to as the College, it is not in dispute that the petitioners passed the B. Ed. examination from the said College when it was duly recognised but its recognition has been withdrawn with retrospective effect. As the recognition of the College from where the petitioners had passed the B.Ed. examination, has been withdrawn with retrospective effect by the impugned order, the order granti...
Tag this Judgment!Amrendra Kumar Singh and ors. Vs. the State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jan-12-2005
Chandramauli Kumar Prasad, J.1. This writ application was initially filed for quashing the show cause notice issued to the petitioners to show cause as to why their services be not terminated. However, during the pendency of the application, the services of the petitioners have been terminated by orders dated 31.3.2004 (Annexures 8, 9 and 10) and accordingly, the prayer of the petitioners is to quash the aforesaid orders.2. Facts lie in a narrow compass. On the recommendation of the Bihar Public Service Commission, petitioners were appointed as Assistant Teachers. They had passed B.Ed. Examination from Millia Fakhruddin Ali Ahmad Teachers Training (B.Ed.) College, Rambagh, Purnea, hereinafter referred to as the College at the time when the said college was recognised. The recognition of the said college had been withdrawn with retrospective effect and taking into account the said fact, the appointment of the petitioners has been cancelled.3. Mr. Ganesh Prasad Singh, Senior Advocate, a...
Tag this Judgment!Deepa Raj Kumar Singh Vs. Deepak Kumar
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jan-12-2005
1. The matter has come for confirmation of judgment and decree dated 28.11.1998 passed by the 6th Additional District Judge, West Champaran, Bettiah in Divorce Case No. 13/93.2. The short facts of the case are that Divorce Case No. 13/93 was filed by Deepa Raj Kumar Singh, the wife of the respondent. The respondent appeared in this case and filed written statement. In the written statement it has been stated that a decree of dissolution of his marriage with the petitioner (wife) be passed. The Court below proceeded with the hearing of the case and witnesses were examined. After considering the evidence and the materials on record the Court passed the judgment and decree as indicated above and referred the matter for confirmation under Section 17 of the Indian Divorce Act, 1869. Thus, the case has been placed before us.3. Notices were issued to the parties but could not be served and as such, under the direction of the Court notices were published in two daily newspapers, namely, the T...
Tag this Judgment!Jagdish Chandra Sinha Vs. the State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jan-11-2005
S.K. Katriar, J.1. Mr. Satish Kumar Agarwal for the petitioner, Mr. P.K. Rajgrihar, learned junior counsel to Standing Counsel No. X for respondent Nos. 1 to 9, and Mr. J.P. Karn for respondent No. 10 [The Accountant General (Accounts and Entitlement) II, Bihar, Patna] are present.2. According to the writ petition, the petitioner had initially joined the services of the Bihar Government as a Draftsman on 21.7.1962. He was promoted to the post of Junior Engineer on 13.12.1973, and served as such in different offices. He had been given advance in instalments for completion of a civil work. The petitioner superannuated in the same capacity with effect from 31.12.1999, which functioning as Junior Engineer in the Office of the Building Construction Division, Bettiah. The petitioner raises a grievance before this Court that a sum of Rs. 4,58,919.40 p. is sought to be adjusted against his post-retirement benefit which is impermissible in law.3. Respondent Nos. 1 to 9 have filed their counter...
Tag this Judgment!Yogeshwar Prasad and ors. Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jan-11-2005
R.S. Garg, J.1. Heard Ms. Anupama Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioners, Mr. Indeshwari Prasad Mandal for the State, Shri Binod Kumar Kanth, Senior counsel for the then Registrar, Cooperative Societies Mr. Rajesh Agrawal, and Mr. Basant Kumar Choudhary, learned counsel for respondent No. 10 and some of the intervenors. None for the other parties.2. The petitioners being aggrieved by the order dated 18.4.2001, passed in Revision case No. 184 of 2000, by the Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Bihar, Patna, and before this court. The revision came to be filed before the Registrar, Co-operative Societies as the present petitioners were aggrieved by the orders passed by the District Co-operative Officer, Patna in Misc. Case No. 3 of 2000 on 23.6.2000 under which the District Co-operative Officer, Patna superseded the managing committee of Alaknanda Co-operative Housing Construction Society Ltd., under Section 41(1) of the Bihar Co-operative Societies Act, 1935.3. A detailed order run...
Tag this Judgment!Aniket Kumar Sahni and anr. Vs. the State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jan-11-2005
Mridula Mishra, J.1. Heard Mr. Pashupati Prasad Sinha, counsel for the petitioners, Mr. Jitendra Kumar Rai, J.C. to G.P. VI Mr. Yogendra Mishra, counsel for respondent No. 5.2. This writ application is directed against the order dated 14.2.2004 (Annexure-1) passed by the Anchal Adhikari, Manigachhi, by which he has cancelled the settlement of 51 Jalkars made in favour of petitioners' society without assigning any reason and without issuing any show cause notice. Subsequently the settlement of said Jalkars have been made in favour of respondent No. 5.3. Petitioners is a Fisherman co-operative society know as Manigachhi Anchal Matsyajivi Seva Swablambi Sahkjari Samiti Ltd. registered under the provisions of Bihar Self Supporting Co-operative Societies Act, 1996. It's area of operation is to the extent of entire Manigachhi Anchal. Manigachhi Bikas Prakahand Matsyajivi Sahyog Samiti Ltd. Manigachhi Ltd. (respondent No. 5) is another society registered under Co-operative Societies Act, 193...
Tag this Judgment!Bhaju Yadav Vs. Naresh Paswan and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jan-08-2005
S.N. Hussain, J.1. Heard the learned counsel for the parties.2. The petitioner is Defendant No. 2 in Title Suit No. 79/2000 and is aggrieved by order dated 19.8.2003 by which the learned Second Munsif, Gaya, has rejected his petition for recall of the earlier order dated 23.1.2003 and 21.5.2003 by which he was debarred from filing his written statement and the case was fixed for ex parte hearing.3. The aforesaid suit was filed by Opposite Party Nos. 1 to 8 for declaration of title etc. in which Defendant No. 2 (petitioner) appeared on 7.9.2002 and on his request time was granted by the learned Court below for filing his written statement by 5.10.2002. It transpires from record that Defendant No. 2 (Petitioner) did not file his written statement within the said period and by order dated 23.1.2003 the learned Court below posted the case for hearing under Order VIII, Rule 10, CPC and subsequently by order dated 21.5.2003 the case was fixed for ex parte hearing.4. The contention of the le...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »