Court : Patna
1. letters patent appeal no. 471 of 2000 filed on behalf of hardeo yadav and others and letters patent appeal no. 569 of 2000 filed on behalf of dlnanath yadav and others arise out of one and the same judgment dated 21-1-2000 passed by the learned single judge in first appeal no. 562 of 1993* whereby and whereunder he decreed title suit no. 128 of 1971 in part setting aside the judgment and order of dismissal of the suit recorded by subordinate judge ii. danapur and as identical questions of law and facts are involved in both the appeals they have been heard together and are going to be disposed of by this common order. 2. dinanath yadav and others in the capacity of the plaintiffs brought title suit no. 128 of 1971 in the court of the subordinate judge ii, danapur against defendants kusum devi and others seeking relief for a decree of partition and allotment of half share to them in the joint family property morefuliy described in schedule i and ii of the plaint and also for carving out a separate takhta for them. 3. it would be relevant and convenient to reproduce, in brief, the facts of the case. according to the plaintiffs tulsi yadav and gopi yadav were the sons of one kauri yadav of village sahar rampur under p. s. naubatpur in the district of patna. tulsi yadav died leaving behind his son faujdar yadav. gopi yadav died leaving behind his son ramlal. faujdar subsequently died leaving behind his sons, namely, hawaldar (plaintiff no. 1). radha (plaintiff no. 2) and .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Patna
s.n. jha, j. 1. article 16 of the constitution of india provides for equality of opportunity for all citizensin matters relating to employment or appointment to any office under the state and prohibits discrimination on grounds of religion, race, caste, sex, descent, place of birth, residence or any of them except in cases falling in exceptions enumerated under clauses (3) and (5) of the article. any preferential right to appointment to the person or class of persons born to particular parents would, thus strictly speaking, be contrary to the constitutional mandate of article 16. appointment of dependent member of government servants dying in harness on compassionate ground has nevertheless been upheld by this court in bijoy kumar singh v. the state of bihar 1991 (1) pljr 316 stating: 'the impugned circular, however, is not a bald preference to the dependents of employees of the state government. it has not gone to the descent of the person preferred for appointment. it has taken notice of a sudden demise resulting in cessation of source which earned bread for them, it has emphasised that those who fall in an income group below rs. 6,000/- per year and lost their bread earner should be preferred. it is not a general concession to all the dependents of the deceased employees. it is confined to the selection to one to compensate the loss by giving employment to him. if one bread earner is there, another is not allowed to enter in the preference. the circular is, thus, one .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Patna
ashok kumar ganguly, j.1. the question which has fallen for determination in this case is whether or not the respondent bihar state electricity board (hereinafter called the said board) is entitled in the facts of this case to initiate an enquiry on the self same charges on which previously an enquiry was held and the enquiry officer exonerated the petitioners. thereupon the disciplinary authority accepted the findings and also exonerated the petitioners and gave effect to the said findings of exoneration by promoting the petitioner no. 1 and also by allowing the petitioner no. 2 to retire.2. it is common ground that in the matter of holding enquiry, the board is guided by the rules which govern the disciplinary proceeding against the government servant of the state of bihar, namely, civil services (classification, control and appeal) rules, 1930 and under the said rules there is no power of review.3. the aforesaid question arises in facts and circumstances of the case which are narrated hereinafter.4. at the material time petitioner no. 1 was working as an administrative officer and petitioner no. 2 was working as issue superintendent under the said board. the said board wanted to hold a competitive examination for the recruitment of electrical assistant/executive engineer. such examination was scheduled to be held at two centres, one at patna college and another at st. michael school. in respect of the said examination held on 7.10.1990 both the petitioners were deputed in .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Patna
s.n. jha, j. 1. this review petition has been filed in the light of the order of the supreme court dated 26-2-1999 in slp (civil) cc no. 8140/98. the order runs as under.'learned counsel for the petitioners relies on material & submit that the discipline of occupational therapy/physiotherapy is a recognised discipline and that the high court court was in error in assuming to the contrary. we think it is appropriate that, in the circumstances, such material should be presented to the high court itself to enable it to consider whether the order under challenge should be reviewed. the slp is dismissed. if the petitioners present a review petition before the high court within two weeks, the same shall be duly considered.' 2. the above mentioned slp had arisen from the order dated 9-10-1998 on an interlocutory application (ia no. 8296/97) in cwjc no. 8444 of 1997. the writ petition was filed as a public interest litigation highlighting the mismanagement in the patna medical college & hospital, a premier teaching hospital in the state of bihar. the said interlocutory application related to vikalang bhawan, which was then part and parcel of the patna medical college & hospital. it was inter alia, alleged that the para medical staff posted there had been prescribing allopathic medicines to patients, describing themselves as 'doctors'. notice was issued to the persons concerned, namely, shri sarjoo prasad and others. they did not deny that they had signed opd slips, issued .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Patna
mihir kumar jha, j.1. heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the state as well as learned counsel for respondent no. 6.in this writ application a prayer has been made by the petitioner to the following effect: (i) an appropriate writ order or direction quashing the settlement of ghats mentioned in para 8 below within the area of operation of the petitioner society, made with the respondent no. 6 be issued(ii) an appropriate writ order or direction commanding the respondent 1st party to make settlement of the three ghats falling within the area of operation of the petitioner society with the petitioner within a time frame, be issued.mr. yogendra mishra, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has firstly submitted that in view of the fact that the impugned settlement with the respondent no. 6 was only for the year 2007-08 which period was to be completed in a month i.e. on 31.3.2008, he no longer intended to assail the order of settlement in favour of respondent no. 6 and that he would be satisfied if only a direction would be given to the authorities to settle the ghat in question for the year 2008-09 onwards by treating the petitioner society to be only society entitled for such settlement in view of the fact that respondent no. 6 no longer remained to be in the society for the area in question. explaining his aforementioned submission mr. mishra had submitted that respondent no. 6 was a society registered for old muraul prakhand which got .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Patna
v.n. sinha, j. 1. this is an application under sub-section (6) of section 11 of the arbitration and conciliation act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as the act) for appointment of an arbitrator under the arbitration clause 30 of the development agreement dated 2.9.2002, annexure-1 and it has been placed before me as the nominee of hon'ble the chief justice to consider the request of the applicant (builder) to appoint an arbitrator as the other party to the agreement, dated 2.9.2002, annexure-1, namely, the land owner (mutwalli) declined to refer the dispute for arbitration in response to notice dated 6.9.2005, annexure-3 vide his reply dated 10.9.2005, annexure-a to the supplementary affidavit on the ground that agreement dated 2.9.2002 does not exist and has been superseded by another agreement signed between the parties dated 9.9.2002, annexure-2.2. before considering the prayer made in the application it is necessary to advert to a few facts leading to the dispute between the parties and filing of the present case as has been submitted by them.3. there is a wakf property measuring 34 kathas of land bearing plot no. 65, holding no. 539/345 (old) 1067 (new), circle no. 6, ward no. 5, situate adjacent to frazer road, patna. mutwalli begam saiyeda mehdi imam under letter dated 01.06.2000, annexure-15 requested the chairman of the bihar state shia wakf board (hereinafter referred to as the board) to permit the wakf estate during her life time to raise a memorial in the name of .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Patna
gurusharan sharma, j.1. murat mahto of village chaakwai, tola baghi at present within nawadah district, died leaving his three sons, meghan mahto, baijnath mahto, the defendant no. 1 and nanhku mahto, the original plaintiff.baijnath mahto got two sons, namely, devi prasad, the defendant no. , 9, who was given in adoption to one daroga mahto of village amar singh bigha and nand prasad nand kishore prasad, the defendant no. 2, meghan mahto left behind two sons, harslal mahto and ramjee mahto. lakhan mahto son of harslal mahto died leaving behind his widow, kaushalya devi, the original defendant no. 3 and two sons, vijay mahto and mukhlal mahto, the original defendants and 5, ramjee mahto died leaving behind his widow,lakshmi devi the original defendant no. 6 and two sons, awadhesh mahto and dinesh mahto, the original defendants 7 and 8.2. on 14.11.1972 nanhku mahto filed title (partition) suit no. 266 of 1972 in the court of the second subordinate judge, gaya for partition of his 1/3rd share in the joint family property detailed in schedule a to the plaint.3. during the pendency of the suit, on 21.2.1973 nanhku mahto executed a registered deed of gift (ext.5) in favour of the defendants 4, 5, 7 and 8 in respect of his 1/3rd share in schedule a properties and thereafter on 17.5.1973 he died unmarried on 7.8.1973 the defendants 3 to 8 appeared and filed a petition under order 1, rule 10 of the code of civil procedure to be transposed as plaintiffs on the basis of ext. 5 in place .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Patna
navaniti prasad singh, j.1. the petitioner by this writ application has challenged the orders issued from the board of revenue under the signature of the secretary, board of revenue whereby purporting to act in pursuance to the amendment to section 16(3) of bihar land reforms (fixation of ceiling area and acquisition of surplus land) act, 1961, as made by the bihar land reforms (fixation of ceiling area and acquisition of surplus land) (amendment) act, 2006 [bihar act 10, 2006] as published in the bihar gazette (extra ordinary) dated 4.5.2006, all revision applications pending before the board of revenue which had been filed in matters arising from section 16(3) of the act under section 32 thereof to be transferred to the divisional commissioners. in other words, all revision applications before the board of revenue in relation to pre-emption matters have been directed to be transferred to the divisional commissioners for final disposal.2. the matter was heard and on behalf of the state. sri lalit kishor, sr. advocate learned addl. advocate general iii appeared. with consent of parties, this application is being disposed of at the stage of admission itself.3. section 16(3) to the act is a special provision in the act. the act primarily deals with imposition of ceiling in respect of agricultural holdings and necessary provisions in respect thereof. section 16(3) of the act has nothing to do with the ceiling proceedings or ceiling law. it is a law with regard to the right of .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Patna
aftab alam, j. 1. these two cases came to be heard before a bench of three judges on a reference made by me. earlier while hearing these cases, sitting singly, i found it difficult to reconcile the views taken in two division bench decisions of this court, one cited in support of the case of the petitioners and the other relied upon by the respondents. i accordingly, made an order of reference indicating the points of deviation in the two decisions. 2. the two petitioners, one in each of these two writ petitions were removed from service of the bihar co-operative marketing union, ltd. (the biscomaun, for short) by orders passed by its administrator on the ground that their appointment was irregular and illegal. at the time of their removal they were given one month's wages in lieu of one month's notice (evidently to satisfy the requirements of the bihar shops and establishments act) but admittedly no show cause notice or an opportunity of hearing was given to the petitioners before passing the order of their removal from service. 3. the petitioners filed, separate writ petitions submitting that their removal from service, without giving them any notice to show cause or an opportunity of hearing was violative of the principles of natural justice. in support of the submission reliance was placed on an unreported division bench decision of this court in c.w.j.c. no. 8642 of 1988, sri biresh tripathi v. state of bihar and ors.. in that case also an order of removal from service .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Patna
s.n. jha, j. 1. section 446 of the companies act, 1956 (in short, 'the act'), provides that after a winding-up order with respect to a company has been made or the official liquidator has been appointed as provisional liquidator, no suit or other legal proceeding shall be commenced, or if pending at the date of winding-up order, shall be proceeded with, against the company, except by leave of the court and subject to such terms as the court may impose. in view of that provision, canara bank, the bihar state credit investment corporation limited (in short, biscico) and the ex-managing director of the company have filed applications seeking, in the case of canara bank and the ex-managing director, leave to prosecute suits (title suits nos. 104 and 106 of 1991, before the subordinate judge, patna), and in the case of biscico, leave to file the suit for recovery of the money against the company. this order will dispose of the said applications.2. both the canara bank and the biscico are secured creditors. it is well settled that the secured creditors stand outside the liquidation proceeding and can realise their respective security without leave of the court but if they file the suit or take up other legal proceeding for realisation of the security, by reason of section 446(1) of the act, they are bound to obtain leave of the winding-up court. the biscico has further pressed into service the provisions of section 29 of the state financial corporations act, 1951 (in short, 'the .....
Tag this Judgment!