Patna Court August 2008 Judgments
Kabir Mahto Vs. the State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Aug-08-2008
Navin Sinha, J.1. Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Counsel for the State.The petitioner was appointed as an Assistant Teacher in a Government Primary School in the Sheikhpura Block known as Uchya Prathmic Vidyalaya, Kare on 23.2.1972 on the post of Trained Teacher. He continued to impart education to the students of the School and was being paid his salary till the same was suddenly stopped in the year 1999. The petitioner came to this Court in CWJC No. 1228 of 2003 aggrieved by the order of stoppage of his salary when a defence was taken on behalf of the Sate that his appointment was suspected to be fake. A Bench of this Court relying on a Division Bench of this Court held that salary could not be denied unless and until an employee is placed under suspension or fails to respond to notice in a finding of illegality in appointment. It was further noticed that by order of stoppage of salary the persons concerned had been directed to submit their mark sheet, ...
Tag this Judgment!Ram Sagar Devi Vs. Most Ghutru Devi @ Mahabati Devi and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Aug-08-2008
S.N. Hussain, J.1. The instant second appeal has been filed by plaintiff-respondent-appellant against the judgment of reversal passed by the learned court of appeal below.2. This matter arises out of Title Suit No. 24 of 1981 which was filed by the sole plaintiff for declaration that she was entitled to get a sale deed executed by the defendant in her favour for schedule-I land, after receiving Rs. 1,800.00 as per agreement of reconveyance dated 21.07.1978 on which date plaintiff had executed a sale deed in favour of the original defendant-appellant-respondent, namely, Brahmadeo Mishra, regarding the said Schedule-I land measuring 10 Kathas 05 Dhurs appertaining to S.P. No. 1125, Khata No. 304 of village Suza under the district of Begusarai.3. The claim of the plaintiff was that there was a registered deed of sale dated 21.07.1978 (Ext. A) executed by the plaintiff in favour of the defendant for Schedule-I land and on the same date i.e. 21.07.1978 there was a deed of agreement for rec...
Tag this Judgment!Gautam Kumar Chaudhary Vs. the State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Aug-08-2008
1. The counsel for the appellant admitted that the date of birth of the appellant is 15th February, 1979. He did not dispute that as per the advertisement dated 5th May, 1997, the appellant did not fulfill the age eligibility as he was seventeen years ten months and fourteen days while the minimum age prescribed was eighteen years as on 31st December, 1996.2. He, however, raised three fold submission viz; (i) that the cut off date 31st December, 1996 suffers from arbitrariness and has no nexus to the object sought to be achieved; (ii) that the appellant having been given appointment in the year 2005, equity demanded that even if his appointment suffered from illegality, the appointment ought not to have been cancelled and (iii) that the appellant was entitled to the payment of salary for the period he worked.3. That the recruitment in the government service has to be made in accord with the Service Rules and not de hors is a settled legal position. If the age eligibility is prescribed...
Tag this Judgment!The State Bank of India and ors. Vs. Smt. Vindhwashini Devi and anr.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Aug-08-2008
Dr. Ravi Ranjan, J.1. Letters patent appeal is admitted.2. Mr. Awadhesh Kumar Mishra waives service for respondent Nos. 1 & 2 (original petitioners).3. Keeping in view the controversy that has been raised in the appeal, we are satisfied that the appeal deserves to be heard and disposed of at this stage itself.4. We proceed accordingly.5. Brajendra Tiwary was an employee in the State Bank of India (for short, 'the Bank'). He died on 24thDecember, 2002. He is survived by his wife and son, who are presently respondent Nos. 1 & 2 (for short, 'the petitioners'). The petitioners made an application for appointment of petitioner No. 2 (son) in the Bank on compassionate ground. In the application, it was stated that after the death of the employee, the family members have been put in condition of penury.6. That at the time of death of Brajendra Tiwary, the Bank had a Scheme of appointment on compassionate ground is not in dispute. It is also not in dispute that the Bank had superseded its Sch...
Tag this Judgment!Shashi Ranjan Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Aug-07-2008
Navaniti Prasad Singh, J.1. The petitioner is a registered owner of two commercial vehicles (Public carrier bus) bearing Registration Nos. BR-11A-6572 and BR-11A-9198. As required under the provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act and the Central and Bihar Rules framed thereunder, he had been issued registration certificates in respect of both the vehicles with address of Purnea by the District Transport Officer, Purnea. He shifted the place of business/residence to Bhagalpur, and as such applied to the District Transport Officer, Bhagalpur for change of address in the registration book of the two vehicles. This application was made by the petitioner in early 2002. He tried to persuade the District Transport Officer, Bhagalpur to make necessary changes in the registration book, but, the same was not being done, which was causing immense loss to the petitioner, inasmuch as for all subsequent documentation that is permit etc. and deposit all taxes, this address was important without change ...
Tag this Judgment!Radha Flour Mills Pvt. Ltd. and anr. Vs. Bihar State Financial Corpn. ...
Court: Patna
Decided on: Aug-06-2008
Navaniti Prasad Singh, J.1. Heard.2. This case exemplifies how statutory authorities act unmindful of law and in total disregard thereof.3. The petitioner company was sanctioned a loan of Rs. 54 lakhs for setting modern roller flour mill in 1987. Though, the total disbursement was of Rs. 37,75,889.66 paisa. The petitioner appears to be one of those units which had decided to liquidate its liability without any coercive measures being taken against it. It appears that on 24-5-2005 from the Branch Office at Motihari of the respondent-Corporation from which loan had been originally disbursed, petitioner received statements of account showing a total outstanding of Rs. 6,12,361.70 paisa. The petitioner on the same very day paid the entire amount and thereafter requested for being granted a no-dues certificate. After two months, the petitioner was informed that after meticulously recalculating the dues of the petitioner, it is found that an amount of Rs. 1,54,966.95 paisa is still due and ...
Tag this Judgment!Jang Bahadur Singh Vs. the State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Aug-06-2008
1. The appeal is from the order dated 23rd April, 2008, whereby the writ petition filed by the present appellant for quashing the suspension dated 7th June, 2007 has been dismissed.2. That the order of suspension came to be issued on 7th June, 2007 is not in dispute. That on 27th September, 2007, the appellant (petitioner) was served with the memo of charges is also not in dispute. That the memo of charges was not served within three months from the date of issue of suspension order is an admitted position.3. The question that falls for our determination is: whether on expiry of three months from the date of issue of suspension order, in the absence of the charge-sheet being served upon the appellant, the order of suspension dated 7th June, 2007 automatically came to an end ?4. Rule 9(7) of the Bihar Government Servants (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 2005 reads thus:(7) Charge-sheet must be framed within three months from the date of issue of suspension order failing whic...
Tag this Judgment!Ras Bihari Singh Vs. the State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Aug-06-2008
R.M. Lodha, C.J. and Kishore K. Mandal, J.1. The appeal is from the order dated 23rd April, 2008, whereby the writ petition filed by the present appellant for quashing the suspension dated 7th June, 2007 has been dismissed.2. That the order of suspension came to be issued on 7th June, 2007 is not in dispute. That on 27th September, 2007, the appellant (petitioner) was served with the memo of charges is also not in dispute. That the memo of charges was not served within three months from the date of issue of suspension order is an admitted position.3. The question that falls for our determination is: whether on expiry of three months from the date of issue of suspension order, in the absence of the charge-sheet being served upon the appellant, the order of suspension dated 7th June, 2007 automatically came to an end?4. Rule 9(7) of the Bihar Government Servants (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 2005 reads thus:(7) Charge-sheet must be framed within three months from the date ...
Tag this Judgment!Rakesh Singh and anr. Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Aug-06-2008
Samarendra Pratap Singh, J.1. Heard counsel for the petitioner and the State as well as learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Informant.In the instant writ petition the petitioners pray for quashing the order dated 28.8.2006 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Saran at Chapra in U.T. Case No. 459 of 2008 whereby the learned Magistrate was pleased to take cognizance and summon the accused petitioners to face trial, (b) and further for a declaration that the impugned order dated 28.8.2006 passed by the learned Magistrate, is in violation of the mandatory provisions contained in proviso of Sub-section (2) of Section 202 of the Cr.P.C., as all witnesses mentioned in complaint petition have not been examined by the complainant.2. The facts of the case in short are as follows; on the statement of respondent No. 5, a F.I.R. was lodged bearing Mashrak P.S. Case No. 191 of 1995, under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code, and under the Arms Act, dated 15.8.1995. While the in...
Tag this Judgment!Archana Devi and ors. Vs. the State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Aug-06-2008
Navin Sinha, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioners and the State.2. The petitioners are aggrieved by the termination of their services from the post of Anganbari Sevika by order dated 12.11.2007.3. It is the case of the petitioners that under the Rules and guidelines famed for appointment and service conditions of Anganbari Sevika, it is the District Magistrate alone, who is competent to take action for such termination after granting an opportunity for hearing to the concerned individual. In the present case, the order has been passed by the District Magistrate without affording opportunity to the petitioners at the behest of the Director, ICDS.4. Clause II (kha) vests power in the Director, ICDS to also order termination after enquiry when formal orders to that effect shall be issued by the District Magistrate. Statement has specifically been made in paragraph 20 of the writ application that the order has been passed in violation of the principles of natural justice. Readin...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »