Patna Court May 2006 Judgments
Md. Sattar Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: May-12-2006
Aftab Alam, J.1. The petitioner seeks quashing of the proceedings of Misc. Case No. 4 of 2003-04 instituted before the Certificate Officer, Paliganj for recovery of the amounts of pension (Rs. 1,68,786/-) and medical allowance (Rs. 16,301.60/-) fraudulently received by him under the Freedom Fighters' Pension scheme.2. Taking judicial notice of the rampant abuse of the Freedom Fighters' Pension Scheme, a bench of this Court suo motu got instituted a writ petition being C.W.J.C. No. 10638 of 2001. In pursuance of the directions given in that case, inquiries were made and it came to light that a number of people were in fact fraudulently receiving pension and other facilities under the Scheme. Here, it may be noted that pension and other facilities under the Scheme are granted by the Central Government on the recommendation made by the State Level Advisory Committee that examines at the first instance the claims of individuals and verifies the documents submitted in support of the claim....
Tag this Judgment!Sunita Roy Choudhary and ors. Vs. Jageshwar Choudhary and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: May-11-2006
Navaniti Prasad Singh, J.1. Heard.2. The present application is directed against the order dated 26.07.2005 passed by the learned Additional District Judge I. Vaishali at Hajipur in Succession Certificate Case No. 20 of 2003. By the impugned order, the learned Court below has directed the parties to get the civil death of the husband of the applicant declared by competent Court in absence whereof he was unable to grant succession certificate.3. It appears that the husband of the applicant was an employee in Punjab National Bank. He disappeared and became traceless on 16.10.1996 on way to Bank. Under such circumstances after seven years of his disappearance in order to receive payments due under Employees Provident Fund Scheme on the event of death, the present application for grant of succession certificate as contemplated under Section 370 of the Indian Succession Act was filed before the District Judge, taking a plea that as the husband had been traceless for over seven years so in ...
Tag this Judgment!The Union of India (Uoi) Through the Director General, Prasar Bharti a ...
Court: Patna
Decided on: May-11-2006
1. Heard Mr. Ajay Tripathi, counsel for the petitioners (Union of India and its Agencies) and Mr. Gautam Bose, counsel appearing on behalf of Respondent No. 1.2. The writ petition is filed against the order dated 6.8.2004 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Patna Bench, in O.A.No. 447 of 2002 filed at the instance of Respondent No. 1. By the impugned order respondent No. 1 who worked as casual typist in the All India Radio, Patna, before his removal from service on 1.10.2000 by a verbal order is directed to be re-engaged as casual typist and then to be accorded temporary status under the scheme framed by the Department of Personnel and Training on 10.9.1993 for regularisation of casual labour. According to the respondent, he was engaged to work as casual typist on 16.6.1992. Admittedly, the engagement was made without issuing any advertisement or following any known procedure for appointment of a Government employee. He does not possess even an appointment letter. However, ...
Tag this Judgment!Md. Naimul Haque Ansari @ Naimul Haque Ansari Vs. the State of Bihar
Court: Patna
Decided on: May-11-2006
Navin Sinha, J.1. Heard learned Counsels for the petitioners and the learned APP for the State.2. The petitioners in these three applications are the husbands of the respective complainants, in custody, in complaint cases instituted under Sections 498A and 323, 379 and 406 of the Penal Code variously and Sections 3 & 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.3. The allegations in the first case is that dowry was paid during marriage. From day one the complainant was harassed in various ways. She was beaten up and denied food. The accused did not behave properly with her and subjected her to harassment both physically and mentally for dowry. She was left alone at the bus stand. The allegation in the second case is that after the marriage dowry was demanded and paid. Further demands were made. The complainant was beaten and chased away from the matrimonial home. Her father was abused and they were pushed around. The accusation in the third case is that dowry was paid during the marriage. Demands f...
Tag this Judgment!Manti Devi and ors. Vs. the State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: May-11-2006
Sudhir Kumar Katriar, J.1. This batch of eight writ petitions at the instance of the purchasers arise out of eight applications under Section 16(3) of the Bihar Land Reforms (Fixation of Celling Area and Acquisition of Surplus Land) Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). The eight applications and the subsequent proceedings have at all stages been disposed of by common orders. It is rather difficult to dispose of the writ petitions by separate orders and I have, therefore, equally chosen to dispose them of by a common judgment.2. These writ petitions are directed against the order dated 23.10.2000 (Annexure 1), passed by the learned Additional Member, Board of Revenue, Bihar, Patna, whereby he allowed the eight revision applications of the pre-emptors, set aside the appellate order dated 26.4.1990 (Annexure 4), passed by the learned Additional Collector, Saran. The learned appellate authority had allowed the eight appeals on behalf of the purchasers, set aside the order dat...
Tag this Judgment!Bharat Prajapat Vs. State of Bihar
Court: Patna
Decided on: May-10-2006
Mridula Mishra, J.1. This application has been filed by the petitioner under Section 53 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 (hereinafter referred to as the Act).2. The petitioner's prayer for bail has been rejected by the Juvenile Justice Board, Gaya in G.R. Case No. 2559 of 1998 Trial No. 4(G)/2005 as well as by the Sessions Judge, Gaya under Section 52 of the Juvenile Justice Act in Cr. Appeal No. 37 of 2005, petitioner's prayer for bail had earlier been rejected by the High Court on four occasions on the ground that he is the main assailant and the offence alleged is of serious nature.3. As per the prosecution case in the night of 1.12.1998 the son of the informant Rajesh Kumar was shot by Bharat Prajapati (petitioner) simply because he refused to accede to the commands of accused persons not to run the video shop of Krishna. The petitioner was taken into custody on 7.12.1998. He was produced before the court, at that time neither the court assessed ...
Tag this Judgment!Rajendra Kamti and anr. Vs. Lalit Narayan Mishra University and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: May-10-2006
J.N. Bhatt, C.J.1. By invocation of Constitutional writ remedied under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners in this group of 18 petitions who have been working as Class III and IV employees in the employment of the respondent University, namely, Lalit Narayan Mithila University have assailed the office order contained in memo No. 3879-3982/01 issued by the Registrar of the respondent University, on 28.2.2001, whereby, the services of the employees working on daily wage-basis in different departments and different colleges affiliated to the respondent Lalit Narayan Mithila University came to be discharged with effect from 1.3.2001, inter alia, contending that such an order dispensing with the services of the petitioners is illegal, unjust, unfair service practice and contrary to the resolution of the Syndicate dated 13.7.1985, Since there is a common question involved in these petitions they are being disposed of by this common order as they have been heard togethe...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Bhikhani Devi and ors. Vs. Amar Lal
Court: Patna
Decided on: May-10-2006
Navaniti Prasad Singh, J.1. The three defendants are the petitioners before this Court and this revision application has been filed against the appellate order by which the order of the trial Court has been reversed in an injunction matter. The trial Court had refused interim injunction. The appellate Court has granted injunction in a very peculiar form. The opposite party is the plaintiff who had appealed against refusal of injunction. Shri S.S. Dwivedi, learned Senior Counsel appears on behalf of defendants-petitioners and Shri S.K. Majumdar, learned Senior Counsel appears on behalf of plaintiff-opposite party. Heard the parties.2. The plaintiff filed Title Suit No. 487 of 1999 in the Court of Sub Judge I, the plaint whereof is Annexure-1. The relief claimed was for a direction to the defendants to repair the shop failing which permit the plaintiff to repair the shop and further to injunct the defendants from letting out the shop to another. On the face of it, there was apparent con...
Tag this Judgment!Kapildeo Sharma Vs. State of Bihar
Court: Patna
Decided on: May-10-2006
Rekha Kumari, J.1. This is an application filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as the Code) for quashing the order dated 6.5.2004 passed by the 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Sitamarhi in Sessions Trial No. 309 of 1995 arising out of Runi Saidpur P.S. Case No. 33/94 by which he has rejected the prayer of the petitioner to discharge him under the provisions of Section 227 of the Code and has decided to frame charge under Section 304 of the Indian Penal Code.2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that the informant was a private electrician. The petitioner is a Junior Engineer of the Bihar State Electricity Board. He was posted at Belsand Block. On the date of occurrence, he met the informant and another persons and informed them that the fuse of the pole of Athari Depot had been blown off and requested them to repair. All the three persons then reached there. The petitioner asked the informant to climb the pole to repair the fuse. He a...
Tag this Judgment!Jagdish Thakur Vs. the Rajendra Agricultural University and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: May-09-2006
Narayan Roy, J.1. Heard counsel for the petitioner, counsel for Rajendra Agricultural University and also JC to SC 4 for the State.2. The petitioner is making a grievance against the resolution No. 4578 dated 14.10.2003, issued by the Agricultural Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna and also against the fixation of his pay by the University as contained in memo No. 3119, dated 13.11.2003.3. Learned Counsel for the petitioner has tried to impress upon the Court that by these orders pay scale of the petitioner virtually has been downgraded in most arbitrary manner. It is submitted that by virtue of the annexure-4 the pay of the petitioner was fixed as Rs. 2650-4000/- as per the 6th Pay Revision Committee Report as far back as in the month of February, 1999 and now in 2003 the same is being down-graded to a scale of Rs. 2650-3540/-. By annexure-4 the pay of the petitioner is said to have been fixed by the University as per the 6th Pay Revision Committee Report, but the same was never given...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »