Patna Court February 2008 Judgments
Krishna Kumar @ Munna Lal Vs. State of Bihar
Court: Patna
Decided on: Feb-08-2008
Dharnidhar Jha, J.1. The present application has been preferred by the informant of Bhagalpur Kotwali (Tilkamanjhi) Police Station Case No. 93 of 2007 which gave rise to the Sessions Trial No. 665 of 2007 so as to challenging the correctness of the order dated 20.7.2007. By the impugned order, the learned Sessions Judge, Bhagalpur, discharged the accused of the case holding that no offence under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code was made out and sent back the case to a Magistrate of the Ist Class at Bhagalpur for trying the same in the light of the provision of Section 228(1)(a) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr. P.C.).2. The prosecution case, in short, is that while the Bhabhi of the informant was closing the gate of her house, the accused entered inside it and assaulted her with fists. On being objected to it by the informant, the accused also assaulted him with brick and knife causing bleeding injury to his head. The accused also took away a gold chain of the Bhabhi of the i...
Tag this Judgment!State of Bihar and ors. Vs. Dinesh Prasad
Court: Patna
Decided on: Feb-07-2008
Sudhir Kumar Katriar and Kishore K. Mandal, JJ.1. The State of Bihar has preferred this appeal in terms of Clause 10 of the Letters Patent of the Patna High Court, and is aggrieved by the judgment and order dated 25.8.1999, passed in C.W.J.C. No. 11619 of 1998 (Dinesh Prasad v. The State of Bihar and Ors.), whereby the writ petition was allowed and the separate orders passed under Rules 43(b) and 139(a)(b) of the Bihar Pension Rules 1950 (hereinafter referred to as the '1950 Rules'), imposing punishment of deprivation of pension to the extent of 50% for a period of five years, have been set aside. We shall go by the description of the parties occurring in the writ petition.2. A brief statement of facts is essential for the disposal of this appeal. The writ petitioner (the respondent herein) was posted as an Executive Engineer in the Bagmati Nagar Project, Sitamarhi, which was then under the Irrigation Department, and has since 1988 been converted into the Department of Water Resources...
Tag this Judgment!State of Bihar and anr. Vs. Lucky Paper Industries
Court: Patna
Decided on: Feb-07-2008
Chandramauli Kr. Prasad and Jayanandan Singh, JJ.1. In exercise of the power conferred under Section 48(3) of the Bihar Finance Act, upon receipt of an application under Clause (b) of Sub-section (2) of Section 48 of the Act, this Court by order dated 28.8.1992 required the Commercial Taxes Tribunal Bihar, Patna to state a case and refer the following question of law for opinion:Whether relying on the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court reported in M/S Good year India Ltd. and others (1990) 76 S.T.C. 71, the Tribunal was right that since Section (9)(i)(b) of Haryana General Sales Tax Act, 1973 has been declared ultra vires, the levy of tax on estimated value of raw materials under Section 4 of the Act, the Act though still good law, is bad in law?2. In the light of the aforesaid order the Commercial Taxes Tribunal, Bihar, hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal, has submitted statement of the case.Assessee is a registered dealer under the Bihar Finance Act, 1981 and during the year 1983...
Tag this Judgment!Dr. Prabhat Kumar Nayak Vs. the State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Feb-06-2008
Navin Sinha, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Advocate General appearing on behalf of Respondents 1 to 4.2 The petitioner secured admission in 1997 to the M.B.B.S. course in Mahatma Gandhi Memorial College, Jamshedpur. The institution in question was at the relevant time located in the State of unified Bihar and after re-organization of the State in the year 2000; the institution is now situated in the State of Jharkhand. The petitioner was a resident of the State of Bihar and was admitted to the M.B.B.S. course against the seats reserved for allocation to the wards of defence personnel. He passed the final year M.B.B.S. exam in the year 2002.2.1 A prospectus was issued on 23.12.2006 for admission to the Postgraduate course in the Medical Colleges in the State of Bihar (PGMAT 2007) on basis of a competitive examination to be conducted by the Bihar Combined Entrance Competitive Examination Board. Rule 2 Sub-clauses (8) defines 'Bihar' to mean as existing after ...
Tag this Judgment!Manju Kumari and ors. Vs. the State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Feb-06-2008
Mridula Mishra, J.1. This writ application was heard with C.W.J.C.No. 6263 of 2007 and analogus cases, but is being decided by a separate order as case of present petitioner is different from case of petitioners in C.W.J.C.No. 6263 of 2007 and analogus cases.Petitioners have filed this application for consideration whether the Extension Officers (Industries and Commerce) and Statistical investigators who are admittedly government servant as per the resolution issued by the Rural Development Department under Memo No. 755 dated 20.1.1998 could have been absorbed in the same Rural Development Department through Memo No. 2828 dated 29.3.2007 without satisfying that they will get the benefit of continuity in government service since the date of their initial appointment. Further prayer is for a direction to give the petitioners benefit of continuity in service with due increment with all consequential benefits which have been given to the recommendies and appointees of 16 types of service ...
Tag this Judgment!Rupa Kumari Shrama and ors. Vs. the State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Feb-06-2008
Mridula Mishra, J.1. In all these writ applications the prayer of the petitioners are similar as such they have been heard together and are being disposed of by a common order.Prayer of the petitioners in all these writ applications is for quashing of Office order No. 126 dated 4.5.2007 issued by the Commissioner-cum-Secretary, Rural Development Department, Government of Bihar, Patna in pursuance of the order contained in Memo No. 1624 dated 22.2.2007, whereby the petitioners have been transferred to different blocks in the State of Bihar after being absorbed as government servant.2. All these writ applications were heard along with C.W.J.C.No. 6467 of 2007 as the petitioners have challenged their transfer order issued by the Commissioner-cum- Secretary, Rural Development Department, Government of Bihar contained in Office order No. 126 and 127 dated 4.5.2007 on the basis of the resolution contained in Memo No. 2828 dated 29.3.2007 erroneously absorbing the petitioners as government s...
Tag this Judgment!Jang Bahadur Singh @ Bijoy Singh Vs. the Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Feb-06-2008
Navaniti Pd. Singh, J.1. Petitioner had a policy of insurance with the New India Assurance Company Limited. His rice mill was gutted in a fire incident. Reports were made to the insurance company, who appointed surveyor as required under the Insurance Act. The surveyor having examined the matter recommended to the company that the claim must be repudiated for reasons given in his report. The Insurance Company then sent a formated letter merely stating that they were closing the case filed on account of the following reason. The reason was typed therein in last two lines being recommendation of the surveyor to repudiate the claim. The surveyor report or his findings were neither disclosed nor given to the petitioner. This action of the Insurance Company has been challenged.2. In the counter affidavit, the respondents have annexed the surveyor report and the letter of repudiation. The letter of repudiation as already indicated above, thus, to my mind, reflects indeed a very sorry state ...
Tag this Judgment!State of Bihar and ors. Vs. Bhawani Industries Ltd.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Feb-05-2008
1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.2. This appeal is directed against the order of the learned single Judge dated 25th September, 2006 allowing the writ petition filed by the petitioner and quashing the impugned orders contained in Annexure-10 series and Annexure-12 forfeiting the earnest money deposited by the petitioner.3. The Annexure-10 is dated 10th of April, 2006 by which the petitioner was informed that the earnest money deposited by him in respect of three tenders is forfeited and vide Annexure 12 he was informed that due to his failure U> execute the agreement in respect of the tenders awarded to him, he is blacklisted.4. The turn of events, which led to these orders, reveals that on 25th of November, 2005 the Engineer-in-Chief-cum-Special Secretary, Public Health Engineering Department, had issued three tender notices inviting tenders for procurement of Galvanized Steel Pipes of different diameters in respect of which the petitioner had submitted his tenders on 27th De...
Tag this Judgment!Vikramkant Kumar Vs. the State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Feb-05-2008
Navin Sinha, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioners and learned Counsel for the State.2.1 The controversy in both these writ applications relate to appointment on the post of Constable in the Bihar Police under advertisement No. 1 of 2004. The crux of the controversy in both the applications is with regard to grant of 5 extra marks to the petitioners for N.C.C. (B) certificate as provided for in the advertisement.2.2 An advertisement was issued on 8.2.2004 inviting applications for appointment on the post of Constable. The last date fixed under the advertisement for submission of applications was 25.8.2004. The advertisement required the applicants to enclose attested copy of necessary certificates. It further provided that all successful candidates at the time of their appointment shall produce the originals before the Selection Committee. It inter alia provided for a written examination. The selection process did not materialize in time for reasons not attributable to the pe...
Tag this Judgment!Devasharay Singh Vs. Saroj Kumar Alias Saroj Singh
Court: Patna
Decided on: Feb-05-2008
S.N. Hussain, J.1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. No one appears for the opposite parties, although notices had been sent and valldly served upon them and vakalatnama had also been filed on behalf of one of the opposite parties.2. This civil revision has been filed by the plaintiff-petitioner against order dated 18-7-2006 by which learned Subordinate Judge 3rd Nawada, directed the plaintiff to deposit ad valorem court-fee on the valuation of the suit, namely Title Suit No. 55 of 2005.3. The said suit was filed by the plaintiff-petitioner only for a declaration of his title over the suit land and for holding that the sale deed No. 4359 dated 25-4-2005 executed by Vijay Kumar Singh (defendant No. 2) in favour of Saroj Kumar (defendant No. 1) is fraudulent, forged, inoperative, showy, without consideration, void ab initio and not binding on the plaintiff. The valuation of the suit given in the plaint was 35,000.00 and in view of the' nature of the relief fixed court-fee Rs. 25...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »