Patna Court August 2010 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Core Projects and Technologies. Vs. State of Bihar, and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Aug-18-2010
1. This Letters Patent Appeal is directed against order dated 03.05.2010 whereby learned Single Judge dismissed the writ application bearing CWJC No. 5669 of 2010 preferred by the appellant/writ petitioner on the ground that the official respondents were not obliged either under law or under the terms of E-tender notice inviting request for proposal (RFP for brevity) to consider the experience of a Subsidiary Company of the appellant for the purpose of eligibility so as to open and consider the technical and commercial bid of the appellant for supply, installation, maintenance of IT infrastructure (Establishment of Computer Lab, Hardware, Networking Software, Uninterrupted Power Supply etc.) and Computer Education Services (Faculty, Curriculum, Courseware, Testing and Certification, Teachers Training etc.) in 600 schools in the Rural and Urban areas of the State of Bihar on Build Own Operate and Transfer (BOOT) basis.2. In substance, the writ Court found no good ground to interfere wit...
Shreenet Rai. Vs. State of Bihar, and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Aug-17-2010
1. Shorn of all other details and the submissions which have been made at the bar by the learned senior counsel representing the petitioner, one aspect does merit consideration, in view of the well settled proposition in this regard by several decisions rendered not only by this Court but even the apex Court.2. Respondent authorities in exercise of power under Rule 43(b) as well as Rule 139(a) and (b) of the Bihar Pension Rules have decided to withhold 100 per cent pension of the petitioner on the basis of a departmental enquiry conducted against him twice over. According to the petitioner, neither in the first enquiry report nor in the second enquiry report the enquiry officer found the petitioner guilty of any of the charges framed against him. This would be borne out from the enquiry reports which have been brought on record by the petitioner. But despite such a finding of innocence, the respondent disciplinary authority issued a second show-cause and decided to impose punishment. P...
Chandra Bhal Tiwary, and ors. Vs. State of Bihar, and anr.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Aug-17-2010
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State and learned counsel for opposite party no.2.2. This is an application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking quashing of the complaint case including the order dated 26th September, 2003 passed in Complaint Case no.C 1239 of 2001 taking cognizance on protest complaint for the offences under Sections 304B, 498A and 201/34 of the Indian Penal Code.3. Undisputed relevant facts of this case is that on the complaint petition bearing no. 1502 of 2000 filed by opposite party no.2, Bhagwanpur P.S. Case no.103 of 2000 was instituted under Sections 498A, 304B and 201/34 of the Indian Penal Code against the petitioners, who are husband and in-laws of daughter of the complainant-informant, who died within two years of her marriage under some suspicious circumstances after suffering, as alleged, demand of dowry, torture etc. However, Police, after investigation, submitted final form...
The State of Bihar, and ors. Vs. Jagdish Prasad.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Aug-17-2010
1. Heard learned counsel for the appellants and learned counsel for the sole respondent.2. Some daily wage workers working in a Plant belonging to Industry Department of the State of Bihar preferred a writ petition bearing CWJC No. 7249 of 1991 raising a grievance that they had been working on daily wages in the Central Processing Plant at Biharsharif since years 1969, 1970 and up to 1984 respectively and therefore they should be treated as permanent employees and the State was at fault in continuing them as daily wage workers. That writ petition was allowed on 16th October 1996 in spite of objection by the State that there was no sanctioned post for permanent absorption of the concerned employees. A direction was issued to frame a scheme so that if necessary required number of posts may be created for absorption of those writ petitioners. Admittedly, Letters Patent Appeal preferred by State against that judgment and order was dismissed on the ground of limitation and the Apex Court al...
The State of Bihar, and ors. Vs. Md.Ainul Heque.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Aug-17-2010
1. Heard learned counsel for the appellants. Nobody appears on behalf of the sole respondent although name of his counsel, Mr Vikas Mohan appears in the daily cause list.2. The appellants were respondents in a contempt petition bearing MJC No.2352 of 2005. By the order under appeal dated 27.6.2006, the learned Single Judge proceeded to examine the legality and propriety of an order dated 18.5.2006, contained in Annexure C to the supplementary show cause of the respondents (appellants herein). The learned Single Judge held that denial of promotion on the post of Joint Director was not legally correct because the denial was on the ground of not having completed the requisite experience on the lower post of Deputy Director. For this proposition, reliance was placed upon observations made in an order dated 19.6.2006 in another case of one K. D. Prasad belonging to the same directorate i.e. Directorate of Agriculture. The learned Single Judge thus found denial of promotion to the respondent...
Lloyds Finance Ltd, and anr. Vs. State of Bihar, and anr.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Aug-17-2010
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. None appeared on behalf of the opposite party no. 2.2. This is an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of order dated 05th January 2004 taking cognizance, in Complaint Case No. 921 (C) of 20033. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioners that principal amount of investment worth Rs. 19,000/- (Nineteen Thousand) made by the complainant-opposite party no. 2 with the company. Company and the petitioners has already been paid to the opposite party no. 2, through three Demand Draft Nos. 980442-41-43 dated 03.08.2010, in lieu thereof the opposite party no. 2 has already issued receipt, further stating that with respect to her claim for payment of interest, the party shall abide by the decision of Bombay High Court in Company Petition No. 1017 of 2002 to this effect supplementary affidavit has been filed on behalf of the petitioners, serving copy to learned counsel for the opposite...
Jai Prakash Narayan. Vs. National Textile Corporation Ltd., and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Aug-17-2010
1. By virtue of Annexure-11 dated 20.6.1990 the General Manager of the respondent Gaya Cotton and Jute Mills, a Unit of the National Textile Corporation Limited, has dismissed the present petitioner from service for certain charges of omission and commission, which is the subject matter of challenge in the present writ application. Petitioner is seeking not only quashing of the said order but also reinstatement with full back wages.2. Some facts which have been narrated in the writ application are that the petitioner was employed as a driller under the respondents and was working in the mill located at Gaya. Occurrence took place on 24.3.1986 where the workmen of the Jute Mill indulged in violence, sabotage and manhandling of staff and officers. The Deputy Manager, Industrial Relation, suspended 19 workmen for the alleged occurrence and proceedings were initiated. This petitioner was one of the persons who were issued a charge-sheet on 16.6.1986. Details of the charges are available in...
Surendra Prasad Singh, and ors. Vs. State of Bihar, and anr.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Aug-16-2010
1. Three petitioners, who are officers of a Government of India Undertaking namely, Pyrites Phosphates and Chemicals Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as P.P.C.L.) are before this Court, while invoking inherent jurisdiction with a prayer to quash of an order dated 14.12.2000 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rohtas at Sasaram. By the said order, the learned Magistrate has taken cognizance of offence under Sections 33, 41 and 42 of the Forest Act.2. Short fact of the case is that a written report was submitted by one Sri Ravi Shankar Rai, Forest Guard to the Forest Range Officer, Tilouthu disclosing therein that on 29.8.1998 at about 5.00 P.M., while he was moving in Kachchawar restricted forest, he witnessed that some labourers were un-loading waste minerals from Truck and Tractor. He tried to restrain them. However, they disclosed that they were working as Labourers in P.P.C.L. and they un-loaded the waste minerals. It was disclosed that due to such un-loading, about four acres lan...
Tugneshwar Nath Kedia, and anr. Vs. State of Bihar, and anr.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Aug-16-2010
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. None turned up on behalf of the opposite party no.2 the complainant before the court below.2. By filing supplementary affidavit, the petitioners have produced copy of plaint of Title Suit No. 338/2004 filed in the court of 3rd Sub-Judge, Motihari on behalf of complainant against the some of the petitioners.3. This application under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code has been filed seeking quashing of the order dated 28.09.2004 passed by Sri S.K. Singh, Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Sadar Motihari, in Complaint Case No. 170/2004 bearing Trial No. 1912/2004 by which cognizance has been taken for the offences under Sections 147, 148, 380 and 427 of the Indian Penal Code.4. The opposite party no.2 filed a complaint petition bearing case no. 170/2004 on 29.01.2004 against 7 persons alleging therein that the subject matter of the proceeding of an old building containing eight rooms ...
A.K.Ram Kumar, and ors. Vs. the State of Bihar.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Aug-16-2010
1. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioners, Additional Public Prosecutor for the State & Sri Satish Chandra Mishra counsel for the Opposite Party No. 2.2. This an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of order dated 26.06.2003 passed by Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Patna in Complaint Case No. 1374 (C) of 2003 and transferring the case to the Court of Sri Ashok Kumar Singh, Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Patna, where cognizance has been taken under Section 406 of the Indian Penal Code.3. Admittedly, opposite party no. 2 was an employee of petitioner no. 5, which is represented by rest of the petitioners. The only grievance against company of the opposite party-complainant is that for the period of employment under them, the amount due as gratuity and general provident fund has not been released.4. During course of argument, the learned counsels are in agreement that taking into consideration period of one year of service of opposite party no. 2, he is not entitled for...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- Next ›
- Last »