Patna Court September 2008 Judgments
Siya Ram Singh Vs. Bihar State Electricity Board and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Sep-18-2008
Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.Petitioner is aggrieved because his pension has been fixed in terms of annexure-15 at a much lower scale than at which he was entitled to by virtue of his pay fixation made earlier. Petitioner's case is that he was granted pay scale of Rs. 5,530-11,020/- based on a calculation and office order issued by the respondents Electricity Board in terms of annexure-10 dated 30.10.2003. The above position also came to be certified in the order dated 27.4.2006 issued by the concerned authority as would be evident from annexure-14. In terms of asnnexure-14 the last pay which the petitioner was allowed to draw was Rs. 11,020/-.2. The Court notes the submission of the petitioner that way back 30.6.1973 he was granted three advance increments by way of reward for honesty and dedication to the Board shown at a time in question. This benefit granted to the employee of the time was carried by the petitioner on all the subsequent post when...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Madhuri Devi Vs. the State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Sep-17-2008
Ramesh Kumar Datta, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Counsels for the State Election Commission and the State.2. The petitioner prays for quashing of the notification issued under Letter No. -Ni 50- 180/2007-02 dated 4.6.2007 (Annexure-3) by the State Election Commission Bihar by which the earlier notification No. 1 dated 25.5.2007 has been altered in connection with posts reserved for Scheduled Caste Women as Chief Councillors, Nagar Panchayats.3. The petitioner is a successful candidate in elections to the Nagar Panchayat, Jhajha on the post of Ward Councillor which was reserved for Scheduled Caste (Women). The same was the only post reserved for Scheduled Caste (Women) although there were two other posts reserved for Scheduled Caste candidates. By a notification dated 11.4.2007 various posts in Nagar Panchayat, Jhajha reserved for different categories were enumerated in which there was only one post reserved for Scheduled Caste Women. The said policy contai...
Tag this Judgment!Bhola Ram Vs. Bihar State Electricity Board and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Sep-17-2008
Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J.1. This is yet another writ application in which benefit of increment accruing out of passing of Hindi Noting & Drafting Examination granted to the petitioner years ago is now sought to be recovered by an order dated 21.10.2003 contained in annexure-1 to the I.A. No. 1986 of 2004 filed by the petitioner. The order indicates that a sum of Rs. 1,23,432.50paise is sought to be recovered from the gratuity of the petitioner. In the upper part of the order the said amount has been broken up in two parts i.e. Rs. 41,495/- on account of non-passing of Hindi Noting & Drafting Examination and Rs. 81,937.50 paise on account of wrong pay fixation. However the lower part of the order has interchanged the two figures. Petitioner protested against this decision of the respondents by filing his objection before the Secretary, Bihar State Electricity Board as would be evident from annexure-2.2. The primary contention of the petitioner is that in so far as the Hindi Noting & Draf...
Tag this Judgment!Union of India (Uoi) Thru. Crpf 61 B.N. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) Thru. ...
Court: Patna
Decided on: Sep-16-2008
Ghanshyam Prasad, J.1. This revision has been preferred against the order dated 12.6.2006 passed by Additional Sessions Judge-XII, Patna in Special Case No. 26 of 1995 thereby the prayer for release of the seized vehicle has been rejected.2. Heard the learned Counsel for both the parties.3. It appears from the record that on 11.8.1995, on secret information, the officials of Narcotic Cell, Central Excise Department, Patna intercepted two trucks of C.R.P.F. near Didarganj. On search, 430 packets of ganja weighing 3200 kgms. valued at Rs. 96 lakhs along with cache of arms and ammunition was recovered from the trucks. 12 personnels of C.R.P.F. were arrested at the spot. Ganja along with two trucks bearing No. DL-IO-6598 and DIL-1704 were seized by the Excise Department. After investigation, the Excise Department filed prosecution report against 32 persons of C.R.P.F. including I.G.P. Shri M.K. Tiwary. Arms and ammunitions were released in favour of the C.R.P.F.4. Before the trial court, ...
Tag this Judgment!Krishna Murari Mahton @ Krishna Murari Prasad and ors. Vs. the State o ...
Court: Patna
Decided on: Sep-16-2008
Sudhir Kumar Katriar, J.1. The six appellants have preferred the six appeals arising out of a common judgment dated 22.2.1988, passed by the learned 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Nalanda at Biharsharif, in Sessions Trial No. 258 of 1986/10 of 1987 (The State of Bihar v. Shailendra Mahton and five Ors.), whereby Arun Mahto alias Arun Kumar has been convicted under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. The remaining appellants, namely, Krishna Murari Mahton alias Krishna Murari Prasad, Shailendra Mahton alias Shailendra Prasad, Bahadur Mahto alias Interjit alias Inderjit Singh, Kaushlendra Prasad alias Kaushal Mahton, and Surendra Prasad alias Suli Mahton have been convicted under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the IPC. All the six appellants have been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life.2. The prosecution case is that on 7.3.1986, at 10.45 A.M., the informant Budhram Prasad (P.W.6), along with deceased Vijay Yadav got into a Rajya Transport bus bearing No. BHY 135...
Tag this Judgment!Nageshwar Rai @ Nageshwar Ram Vs. Smt. Sunaina Devi
Court: Patna
Decided on: Sep-16-2008
Ghanshyam Prasad, J.1. This prevision has been preferred against the order dated 15.12.2006 passed by Family Court, Biharsharif in Maintenance Case No. 31(M) of 2001 thereby the petitioner has been directed to pay maintenance of Rs. 500/- per month to the opposite party.2. Heard the learned Counsel for both the parties.3. It appears that the opposite party in her petition as well as in her evidence has claimed that she married with the petitioner in the year 1968 from whom a daughter was born. On the other hand, the petitioner in his evidence not only denied the marriage with opposite party but has also asserted that he was married in the year 1962 with one Vidyapati Devi from whom three sons and one daughter were born.4. The learned lower court after consideration of evidence held that the marriage of the petitioner with the opposite party took place in the year 1968 but not rejected the case of the petitioner regarding his first marriage in the year 1962 with Vidyapati Devi. Vide pa...
Tag this Judgment!Durga Devi and ors. Vs. Smt. Suman Devi and anr.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Sep-16-2008
Subash Chandra Jha, J.Heard.1. The order under challenge is dated 31.8.2001 and Award signed on 13.9.2001 passed by 7th Additional District Judge-cum-Motor Vehicle Accident Claims Tribunal VII, Muzaffarpur, in Claim Case No. 129/1999, wherein the respondent-United India Insurance Co. Ltd. was directed to make payment of Rs. l,17,000/-(One lac seventeen thousand) alongwith 9% interest per annum to the applicants Durga Devi from the date of filing of the claim till realisation within one month of the order through account payee cheque.2. The claimant Durga Devi has filed this appeal for enhancement of the awarded amount on the ground that income of her husband late Beni Mahto who was a Machine operator in Usha Telehoist Company Limited at Faridabad was not considered in right perspective.3. As per Annexure-1, the deceased Beni Mahto who met accident and died on 13.10.1998, was in receipt of monthly wages in gross @ Rs. 6126.05, the details of which has been given in the Annexure-1 itsel...
Tag this Judgment!Ram Chandra Mahaseth (Since Dead) Veena Devi @ Veena Mahaseth and ors. ...
Court: Patna
Decided on: Sep-15-2008
Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J.1. Interlocutory Application No. 1478 of 2005 has been filed for substitution of the sole petitioner who died on 15.12.2004 leaving behind three legal heirs who are indicated in paragraph-1 of the I.A. The interlocutory application is allowed. The persons indicated in paragraph -1 (i) to (iii) be substituted in place of the present petitioner.The writ application in question was filed challenging the order dated 22.8.1994. By virtue of this order in terms of the Rule 40(3) of the State Bank of India Service Rules the unauthorized absence of the petitioner was treated to be one of voluntary abandonment from service as would be apparent from the order contained in annexure-1. Petitioner was absent from duty unauthorizedly since 6.5.1994. Several notices thereafter came to be issued to him which were accepted and acknowledged by the then petitioner but he did not report for work nor did he furnish any information of his unwellness which could be considered by conce...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Tubex India (Pvt.) Limited
Court: Patna
Decided on: Sep-15-2008
Chandramauli Kumar Prasad and Ravi Ranjan, JJ. 1. M/s Tubex India (Pvt.) Limited manufactures Galvanized Flexible Metallic Hose Tube. It is not in dispute that the manufacturer had given correct description of the product in the return. It prayed for clearing the product under notification dated 20th of May, 1988 and it was so cleared by the Superintendent. However, show cause notice dated 7.7.1994 was issued raising demand of duty for the year 1991-92 and upto 24th of July, 1992 of the year 1992-93 on the ground that the manufacturer was not entitled to small scale exemption benefit of notification dated 20.5.1988.2. During the adjudication proceeding, the manufacturer contested the matter on merit as also on the point of limitation. The demand of duty was confirmed by the Commissioner of Central Excise vide its Order dated 2.9.1996. The manufacturer carried the matter in appeal before the Customs Excise & Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal, hereinafter referred to as the 'Tribunal'. ...
Tag this Judgment!Rajeshwar Prasad Sharma Vs. the State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Sep-12-2008
V.N. Sinha, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner, State and the counsel for Private Respondent Nos. 5 to 7.2. Petitioner filed this writ application for a direction to the State-respondents to make a reference under Section 30 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') in connection with Land Acquisition Case Nos. 9, 17 of 2001-02 with further direction to the State-respondents to deposit the award money in the court of Special Land Acquisition Judge, Barh who should adjudicate the claim of the parties and the compensation amount be disbursed between the parties in the light of the order passed by the Special Land Acquisition Judge, Barh. In this connection it is submitted that the petitioner is the owner of the lands which were the subject matter of acquisition in the aforesaid two land acquisition cases and was served with the notice dated 11.09.2002, as contained in Annexure-1 series to appear and satisfy the Land Acquisition Authorities on 25...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »