Patna Court May 2005 Judgments
Ashutosh Kumar Vs. the State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: May-20-2005
Chandramauli Kumar Prasad, J.1. This application has been filed for quashing the order as contained in memo dated 30th December, 2002, (Annexure-2), whereby the service of the petitioner has been terminated on the ground that he was illegally appointed.2. According to the petitioner, a notice was published in the Notice Board inviting applications for appointment to the post of peon and in response thereto, he offered his candidature by submitting an application (Annexure-1) inter alia stating that he has been registered in Employment Exchange at Bhagalpur bearing Registration No. 7622 of 1986. Said application was addressed to the Headmaster of High School, Gouripur, hereinafter referred to as the school. The Headmaster of the School interestingly put a note on the application of the petitioner and recommended for his appointment on the ground that he has been found fit for appointment by the Selection Committee constituted at the school level. The District Education Officer, by lett...
Tag this Judgment!Minati Dutta and ors. Vs. Sushil Choudhary
Court: Patna
Decided on: May-19-2005
S.K. Katriar, J.1. Heard Mr. Amrendra Narayan for the appellants and Mr. Durga Nand Jha for the respondents. This appeal is directed against the order dated 14.10.1999, passed by the learned 4th Additional District Judge, Darbhanga, in Eviction Appeal No. 3 of 1993/4 of 1999 (Ranen Dutta v. Sushil Choudhary), whereby the appeal has been held to have abated on account of non-substitution of the heirs of the appellants before him.2. This litigation has a chequered history. Appellant No. 1 herein is the wife of the late Ranen Dutta, and appellant Nos. 2 to 8 are their sons and daughters. In other words, they claim to be the heirs and legal representatives of the deceased. One Satindra Natha Majumdar had alienated the suit property by a deed of absolute sale registered on 12.3.1981 in favour of the respondent Suhsil Choudhary. The said Ranen Dutta was a tenant in the suit property from before. Thereafter Ranen Dutta filed Title Suit No. 67 of 1981 for specific performance of contract aga...
Tag this Judgment!Yogendra Kumar Singh and anr. Vs. Mahendra Prasad @ Mahendra Lal and a ...
Court: Patna
Decided on: May-13-2005
S. Nayer Hussain, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.2. The petitioners are plaintiffs of Title Suit No. 479 of 1993 which they had filed for partition of their moiety share purchased from opposite party No. 2 who admittedly had half share in the suit property whereas the other half share belonged to opposite party No. 13. The petitioners are aggrieved by order dated 15.12.2000 passed in the aforesaid suit at the stage of preparation of Final Decree by which the petition filed by opposite party No. 1 under Section 4 of the Partition Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' for the sake of brevity) was allowed and opposite party No. 1 was held to entitled to purchase the said portion from of plaintiffs.4. The short fact of this case is that opposite party No. 1 is the son whereas opposite party No. 2 is another and both of them jointly purchased the entire suit property from the original owner by a registered sale deed dated 12.8.1955, Thereafter, one Hazari Sao (father of o...
Tag this Judgment!Mosaheb Sharma Vs. the State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: May-13-2005
Chandramauli Kumar Prasad, J.1. This application has been filed for quashing the order dated 22.12.1999 passed by the Director of.Primary Education, whereby the prayer made by the petitioner for extension of service by one year has been turned down.2. Short facts giving rise to the present application are that the petitioner at the relevant time was Headmaster of Government Middle School, Hajipur in the district of Vaishali and for meritorious service, he was conferred the State Award on the Teachers' Day i.e. 5th of September, 1992. Petitioner had attained the normal age of superannuation in March, 1996 and therefore, was to retire with effect from 1.4.1996.3. The State Government had come out with a policy to grant extension of service by one year to such teachers who are the recipient of the State Award. However, by resolution dated 23rd of May, 1996 (Annexure-13), the State Government modified its policy and resolved to give cash-award of Rs. 10.000/-to such teachers who have got ...
Tag this Judgment!Benita Tigga Vs. the Vice-chancellor and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: May-13-2005
Chandramauli Kumar Prasad, J.1. This application has been filed for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to appoint the petitioner to the post of Sweeper.2. It seems that the casual employees holding Class III and Class IV posts working in the Rajendra Agriculture University (hereinafter referred to as the University) filed applications for regularisation of their services. Ultimately, the matter travelled to the Supreme Court, giving rise the Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 18694 of 1994. The Supreme Court by its order dated 18.2.1998 gave the following direction : 'So far as Class IV posts are concerned regular appointment against available vacancies for regular sanctioned post under the Bihar State Agricultural Universities Act should be made by appointing the casual employees who have worked in the Rajendra Agricultural University for more then 15 years against 35% of available vacancies provided such employees have requisite qualification for...
Tag this Judgment!Rambahadur Sah and ors. Vs. State of Bihar
Court: Patna
Decided on: May-11-2005
Syed Mahfooz Alam, J.1. This criminal appeal has been preferred against the judgment dated 11th day of May, 2001, and the order dated 16th May, 2001, passed by Mr. Shyam Badan Singh, 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Sitamarhi, in Sessions Trial Nos. 332/90 and 4/91 whereby he has been pleased to convict all the four appellants under Sections 304B, 498A and 201 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment for the offence punishable under Section 304B of the Indian Penal Code. He has further been pleased to sentence all the appellants to undergo RI for three years under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code and to pay fine of rupees two thousand each and in default of payment to undergo RI for a period of three months and for the offence under Section 201 of the Indian Penal Code. He has further sentenced all the appellants to undergo RI for three years. He has further ordered that all the sentences shall run concurrently.2. The prosecution case as per the written r...
Tag this Judgment!Manoj Kumar Rajak Vs. the State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: May-11-2005
Navin Sinha, J.1. By the Court.--Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the State.2. The present writ application was preferred by the petitioner who was transferred as BDO from Sahebganj to Narkatiaganj on the recommendation of the Establishment Committee dated 30.12.2002. The petitioner made a grievance that the respondent No. 4, the BDO at Narkatiaganj who had likewise been posted outside Narkatiaganj, did not hand over charge to the petitioner who however submitted his joining in pursuance of the government instruction in that regard. The respondent No. 4 in the meantime, at me administrative level, pursued issuance of order staying his transfer from Narkatiaganj. Though the allegation of political interference etc. had been made and this Court had issued notices to the Minister concerned and others with regard to such allegation of political interference in what were routine matters for transfer and posting, the petitioners after the stay of transfer...
Tag this Judgment!Dr. Akshay Bat Choudhary Vs. the State of Bihar
Court: Patna
Decided on: May-11-2005
Chandramauli Kumar Prasad, J.1. This application has been filed for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing the order as contained in memo dated 6.7.2004 (Annexure-9), whereby the petitioner has been dismissed from service as a measure of punishment, after a departmental enquiry.2. Shorn of unnecessary details facts giving rise to the present application are that by order as contained in memo dated 2.1.1999 (Annexure-1) petitioner was put under suspension for the alleged misconduct committed by him in purchase of medicine from Medical Store Depot Kolkata, hereinafter referred to as the Depot, while posted as District Tuberculosis Officer. Thereafter a departmental proceeding was initiated against him and he was served with a memo of charge, which contained the following three charges :— (i) Although the petitioner was not .authorised to purchase medicine directly from Depot, still in violation of the Financial Rules, he placed the purchase order for supply of...
Tag this Judgment!Basudeo NaraIn Singh Vs. the State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: May-11-2005
Navin Sinha, J.1. Heard Learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Counsel for the State.2. The prayer in the present writ application is for quashing Annexure 1 dated 14.9.93 by which on charges of having accepted the supplies of sub standard Tiles contrary to the specification, from the Contractor, the petitioner, who was then posted as Assistant Engineer in the Gandak Development Division at Motihari has been visited with the twin punishments of withholding of promotion for ten years and that in the event that recovery of the amount so paid to the Contractor be not possible the petitioner would be liable to compensate the Government for the financial loss. This order would be dated 13.1.1993 while the petitioner is stated to have superannuated on 30.12.1996.3. By an IA No. 136 of 2000, a further prayer has been made to quash Annexure 7, dated 11.12.1999, by which orders have been passed to recover 1/4th of the amount of loss caused to the Government from his salary and pens...
Tag this Judgment!Jagdip Singh Vs. the State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: May-11-2005
Navin Sinha, J. 1. Heard Learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Counsel for the State.2. The claim in the present writ application is for grant of seniority as Assistant Sub-Inspector of Police from 1.5.1965 in place of 3.7.1970 as granted by the respondents. Consequently the petitioner would claim seniority on the basis of the officiating promotion given to him as a Sub Inspector on 21.6.1971 while the respondents would grant the benefit to him from 3.7.1975. In pursuance of such decision by the respondents the petitioner has been granted seniority as Inspector from 4.5.1990.3. Learned Counsel for the petitioner would submit that in pursuance of the order of this Court in CWJC No. 6548/93 on 18.8.1993 the respondents through the Director General of Police Board by a decision dated 25.2.994 at Annexure 4, held that the petitioner was entitled to the benefit of continuous officiation on the post of Sub Inspector from the date of the officiating promotion and his seniority w...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »