Patna Court July 2008 Judgments
Javed Akhtar and anr. Vs. State of Bihar
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jul-22-2008
Sheema Ali Khan, J.1. The petitioners being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the order of the 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Gaya dated 1.5.2008 whereby the petition filed on behalf of the accused petitioners for issuing Dusti Summons to the Investigating Officer of the case, Sub-Inspector, Triloki Mandal has been rejected.2. A Criminal case being Civil Lines P.S. Case No. 114 of 2005 was instituted under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302 and 307 of the Indian Penal Code. The trial of the case was bifurcated and two sets of accused persons are facing Trial No. 11 of 2007 and 12 of 2007. The petitioners who are the accused in the aforesaid case had raised a defence that they were not present at the place of occurrence when the occurrence took place and they were at Bhagalpur at the time of occurrence thus raising a plea of alibi.3. The petitioners filed an application before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gaya raising the plea of alibi. The matter was referred to the D.I.G. and S.P., Gaya....
Tag this Judgment!Motilal Sharma Vs. the State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jul-22-2008
Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.2. Vide order dated 27.7.2004 the Managing Director of the respondent Corporation has dismissed the petitioner from service. The allegation against the petitioner was that he had obtained employment by furnishing a forged certificate of matriculation.3. Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that besides the merit of the matter he wants to make submission on the punishment itself. Petitioner was due for superannuation on 31.7.2004 after having rendered more than 32 years of service. Petitioner joined the organization in the year, 1972 as a daily rated worker and had climbed to the post of Salesman-Cum-Storekeeper when the impugned order came to be passed against him. He further contends that at no point of time any allegation of this kind was racked up or raised against the petitioner. Some kind of verification was started in the year, 2002 and after due enquiry the impugned order contained in annex...
Tag this Judgment!Shailendra Kumar Vs. Bihar State Pollution Control Board and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jul-22-2008
Barin Ghosh and C.M. Prasad, JJ.1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.2. The charges against the appellant are quite serious. Some of them stood proved at the enquiry. The Enquiry Officer gave benefit of doubt to the appellant in respect of some of the charges. The disciplinary authority, for the reasons recorded, did not accept the views of the Enquiry Officer pertaining to those charges for which the appellant had been given benefit of doubt. The appellant was given appropriate opportunity to deal with the opinion of the disciplinary authority as was expressed by him while dealing with the enquiry report.2. In the circumstances, having regard to the nature of allegations against the appellant and the outcome of the enquiry, there was hardly any scope of interference and, accordingly, when the order of discharge, as was passed while concluding the disciplinary proceedings, was assailed in the writ petition, a earned Judge of this Court for reasons well recorded dismissed the writ ...
Tag this Judgment!Karu Nonia Vs. Bihar Subay Shia Moglish and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jul-21-2008
Ghanshyam Prasad, J.1. This appeal by the plaintiff has been preferred against the judgment and decree dated 9.8.1988 passed by Ist Additional District Judge, Barh in Title Suit No. 75 of 1986 thereby he has dismissed the appeal and confirmed the judgment and decree dated 24.3.1986 passed by Additional Sub-Judge-II, Barh in Title Suit No. 55 of 1977.2. The plaintiff-appellant filed the suit in question for declaration that he is occupancy raiyat with respect to land detailed in Schedule-A to the plaint as well as for permanent injunction against the defendant-respondent from interfering with his possession.3. The case of the plaintiff, in brief, is that the suit land was originally belonged to one Usuf Kuli Khan, who created a waqf in favour of Hazarat Imam Hussain and appointed himself as its first motawalli. After his death, other persons one after the other succeeded as the motawalli. About 50 years back, the suit land was settled with the plaintiff for a period of three years who ...
Tag this Judgment!Narendra Kumar Vs. the State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jul-21-2008
1. The petitioner claims to be a public spirited citizen. He holds the post of State General Secretary, All India Confederation of SC/ST organization (Regd), Bihar State Committee, Patna. His prayer in the writ petition is for quashing the resolution dated 30th August, 2007 contained in memo No. 2950, whereby the State government has taken decision to constitute a 'Rajya Maha Dalit Aayog'. The petitioner has also prayed for quashing the consequential order/notification dated 20th September, 2007 appointing the Chairman and members of that Commission.2. The whole thrust of argument of the counsel for the petitioner is that sub-classification or micro-classification of the Scheduled Castes notified in the Presidential Order is impermissible. Reliance is placed upon the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of E.V. Chinnaiah v. State of Andhra Pradesh and Ors. : AIR2005SC162 .3. It needs no elaboration that Article 341 of the Constitution of India indicates that there can only be one...
Tag this Judgment!Dr. Girindra Nath Jha and ors. Vs. the Chancellor, L.N.M. University
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jul-18-2008
Navin Sinha, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioners, for the University and for Respondent No. 1, the Chancellor.In pursuance of an advertisement and selection, the petitioners were appointed as Lecturer in temporary capacity on sanctioned vacant post A Screening Committee constituted for the purpose recommended their absorption. Under the existing Statutes the Hon'ble Chancellor accepted the recommendation and approved absorption on 3.2.1998. Mere issuance of a formal notification for absorption remained, when it transpired that a person recommended at serial 20 had already been terminated. The Hon'ble Chancellor then directed cross-checking of the list of persons recommended to remove any more defects.2. While the matter rested at this stage a Division Bench of this Court in a judgment reported in 2001(2) PLJR 817 (Dr. Shiv Narain Yadav and Ors. v. The State of Bihar and Ors.) in the context of regularization of temporary lecturer under the existing Statutes on or before 28....
Tag this Judgment!Santosh Kumar Vs. the Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jul-18-2008
V.N. Sinha, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and the counsel for the Union of India.2. Petitioner at the relevant time served as Sepoy/GD, Force No. 981280059 with the 114 Battalion of the CRPF. He filed this writ application on 30.6.2005 praying, inter alia, to direct the authorities of the CRPF, including the Commandant of 114 Battalion to accept his joining which was not being accepted and for such relief, he had already represented before the Deputy Inspector General and the Inspector General, vide his representations dated 15.4.2005 and 25.4.2005, as contained in Aannexure-1 and 1/A to this application, but the representations were not being considered. By filing supplementary affidavit dated 21.4.2006 in the office of this Court on 15.5.2007, copy whereof was served on the office of the learned Assistant Solicitor General of India on 17.8.2006, as is evident from the receipt appended with the said supplementary affidavit, petitioner further submitted that he was gra...
Tag this Judgment!Shobhit Rai and ors. Vs. State of Bihar and anr.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jul-18-2008
Abhijit Sinha, J.1. This application for quashing is directed against order dated 14.3.2007 passed by the learned Presiding Judge, Fast Track Court No. 1, Vaishali at Hajipur, in Sessions Trial No. 51 of 2006 whereby he has dismissed the petition filed by the petitioners under Section 227 Cr.P.C. and has directed them to be physically present in court for framing of charges under Sections 147, 447,341,323,436 I.P.C.2. On the basis of a written report submitted by one Kamal Rai impleaded as O.P. No. 2, herein, Hajipur(Sadar) P.S. Case No. 232 of 2002 was registered against the petitioners under Sections 447, 341, 323, 436/34 I.P.C. on the allegation that his pattidar, Shobhit Rai(petitioner No. 1 herein) was always given to quarrelling over the informant not vacating the land allegedly encroached upon by him till such time that measurements thereof was done. It is said that on this score threats were extended by the said Shobhit Rai for which a sanah was lodged. It is alleged that at a...
Tag this Judgment!Ramesh Mandal Vs. State of Bihar and anr.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jul-18-2008
Abhijit Sinha, J.1. The petitioner through this application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has prayed for the quashing of the entire criminal prosecution arising out of Complaint Case No. 842(C) of 2006 including the order dated 19.2.2007 passed by the learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Munger, whereby and whereunder he has taken cognizance of offences under Sections 498A/323 I.P.C. and has directed for issuance of process.2. The complainant, Sushma Devi, O.P. No. 2 herein, filed the aforesaid complaint against the sole petitioner inter alia stating that her marriage with the accused was solemnized on 15.6.1980 and out of the said wedlock a daughter was born. It is alleged that the complainant being the only daughter of her father, the petitioner became greedy and in order to grab the property of the father-in-law he resorted to torturing the complainant. It is stated that even earlier the petitioner had assaulted the complainant for which Kotwali P.S. Case No. 159 of 1984 under S...
Tag this Judgment!Prof. (Dr.) Bidya Nath Jha Vs. the State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jul-17-2008
Navin Sinha, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioners, learned Counsel for the State and learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the University.The claim in this batch of writ applications is for certain arrears of salary, difference of U.G.C. pay scale etc.2. This Court in CWJC No. 14817 of 2006 by order dated 16.07.2008 in context of the Magadh University has already held that the issue of payment of salary was basically a administrative matter unless legal issues of entitlement, eligibility etc. arise. No such questions arise presently in this batch of writ applications also. Essentially the burden of the administrator is sought to be cast on the Court.3. The Respondent-University is stated to have created a grievance cell for examination of grievances such as the present. The petitioners are, therefore, granted liberty to submit their claims by representation to the grievance cell of the University. The University is then directed to examine the claims of the individuals with...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »