Court : Orissa
Reported in : 2002(II)OLR674
A.K. Patnaik, J.1. These two writ petitions relate to admission to seats in Medical Colleges in the State of Orissa reserved for the children of green card holders for the academic session, 2001.2. The facts briefly are that an Information Brochure for Joint Entrance Examination (for short, 'the J.E.E.') Engineering and Medical-2001, Orissa was published by the J.E.E. authorities. Clause 2.3.2 of the Information Brochure provided for reservation of seats for the children of green card holders and reads, as follows :'2.3.2. 5% of total seats in all Govt. colleges, free seats of all private Colleges and Orissa quota seats in REC, Rourkela are reserved for children of Green Card holders. Candidates applying for this category shall furnish along with the application form, a photocopy of page 5 of the Green Card. Note : The Green Card must have been issued by Family Welfare Department, Government of Orissa and should not have been used more than once prior to claiming admission under this r...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Reported in : 105(2008)CLT570; 2008(I)OLR98; (2008)16VST472(Orissa)
B.N. Mahapatra, J.1. Petitioners 35 in number who are the truck owners have filed this writ petition being aggrieved by the action of the opposite party No. 2-Sales Tax Officer, Unified Check Gate, Girisola, Ganjam (hereinafter called 'the S.T.O.') for collecting sales tax from them on the fish transported by their trucks from the State of Andhra Pradesh to the States of West Bengal or Bihar. The reliefs sought in this writ petition are as follows:(i) The action of the S.T.O. in collecting tax on fish carried by the trucks of the petitioners from the State of Andhra Pradesh to the States of West Bengal or Bihar is contrary to law and not sustainable. Hence the sales tax so collected vide Annexure-1 series, 2 series, 3 series and 4 series should be refunded to them;(ii) Direction should be given to the opposite parties not to realize any amount from the petitioners in respect of fish carried by them from the consignors in Andhra Pradesh to the consignees in West Bengal and other States;...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Reported in : 105(2008)CLT17; 2008(1)OLR84
1. Heard.This Writ Petition is as against Judgment of the State Education Tribunal, Orissa in Appeal No, 19 of 2000. Petitioner was the Appellant and the Governing Body of Sri Satya Sai Womens College, Bhubaneswar with its officials and the Director of Higher Education, Orissa were the Respondents in that appeal. Petitioner's service was terminated on 20.10.2000. That order of termination was challenged before the State Education Tribunal under Section 10-A of the Orissa Education Act, 1969 (in short, 'the Act'). The dispute before the Tribunal centered round, if the Petitioner was the junior-most surplus staff and whether his termination is regulated by the provisions in Section 10-A(1)(a) of the Act.2. At the outset, Learned Counsel for the Governing Body raises the issue on maintainability of the Writ Petition on the ground that the impugned order is appealable under Section 24-C of the Act. According to Mr. Pattnaik, Learned Counsel for the Governing Body, provision in Section 24-B...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Reported in : 105(2008)CLT839; 2008(I)OLR137
A.K. Samantaray, J. 1. The petitioner, who was appointed as Vice-Chancellor of the Utkal University of Culture has filed this Writ Petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India seeking a direction to the opposite parties to fix his scale of pay maintaining parity with the scale of the Vice-Chancellors of the other Universities in accordance with the University Grants Commission (hereinafter referred to as 'UGC) Notification.2. The case of the petitioner in this writ petition is that he was appointed Vice-Chancellor of the Utkal University of Culture (hereinafter referred to as 'UUC') after due process of selection and in accordance with decision of the Selection Committee his appointment order was issued by order of the Hon'ble Chancellor under Annexure-3 vide Notification No. 14023 dated 9th November, 2001. The petitioner's appointment was for a term of three years. The petitioner assumed office on 26.11.2001 and retired from Vice-Chancellorship on 26.11.2004 after ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Reported in : 104(2007)CLT103
I.M. Quddusi, J.1. These are three Writ Petitions filed against the three Judgment and orders passed by the Orissa Administrative Tribunal, Bhubaneswar and its Cuttack Bench in three different O.As. Since in all these Writ Petitions, the matter relates to seniority, promotion and reservation of Head Masters of Government M.E./UGME Schools, they were heard together and are disposed of by this Judgment.2. The first impugned order was passed by the Orissa Administrative Tribunal, Cuttack Bench, on 21.8.1997 which is under challenge in O.J.C. No. 13377 of 1997. The second impugned Order dated 04.10.1997 was passed by the Orissa Administrative Tribunal, Bhubaneswar which is under challenge in O.J.C. No. 1153 of 1998 and the last impugned order was passed by the Orissa Administrative Tribunal, Bhubaneswar, on 07.11.1998 which is under challenge in O.J.C. No. 4193 of 1999. The first and second Judgment of the Tribunal dated 21.08.1997 and 04.10.1997 were passed by the then Chairman of the Tri...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Reported in : 2008(I)OLR311
ORDERM.M. Das, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioners and the learned Counsel for the State.This is an application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.Allegation of commission of offence under Sections 498A/34 I.P.C. read with Section 4 of the D.P. Act has been made against the petitioners and other co-accused persons. The petitioners are in laws of the informant.2. This Court in BLAPL No. 7953 of 2007 by order 310 dated 19.11.2007 has granted anticipatory bail to the husband of the informant-wife.Considering the nature of allegations made against the petitioners, though I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to them, I direct that on their surrendering before the learned J.M.F.C., Soro in Crl. Trl. (G.R. Case) No. 284 of 2007 arising out of Soro P.S. Case No. 144 of 2007 by 7.12.2007 and moving for bail, they shall be released on bail on such terms and conditions as the learned J.M.F.C. may deem just and proper.3. The BLAPL is acco...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Reported in : 105(2008)CLT50; 2008(1)OLR65
ORDERN. Prusty, J.1. The Petitioner, response to the notification dated 10.04.2006 (Annexure-1), had applied for her engagement as Anganwadi Worker in respect of Gauriprasad Anganwadi Centre under Chandbali I.C.D.S. Project in the District of Bhadrak. The above said advertisement was made while the old guidelines, with regard to engagement of Anganwadi worker, was in vogue.2. It is submitted that after submission of applications, the process of selection commenced and while the same was almost at the stage of completion, another 'guidelines with regard to engagement of Anganwadi Worker' was issued by the Government on 02.05.2007 in supersession of earlier guidelines. There was no clause in the new guidelines stipulating anything as to whether the same would have prospective on retrospective effect. But in the forwarding letter of the Commissioner-cum-Secretary it has been mentioned that:Wherever the Anganwadi Workers have not been selected and engaged as per the earlier guidelines, the...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Reported in : 2010(I)OLR16
ORDER1. Heard Sri B. Das, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Sri C.A. Rao, learned Standing Counsel for the Forest Department.2. By means of this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for setting aside the order vide Annexure-6 or to assess the value of the vehicle by the opposite party No. 3 in his presence and to deliver the vehicle on depositing cost as assessed.3. The brief fact of the case is that the petitioner had purchased the vehicle bearing Registration No. OR-15-D-1955 by availing loan from SREI Infrastructure Finance Limited. Thereafter, the petitioner entered into an agreement on 26.9.2005 with one Sayed Roshan, Son of Sayed Papa having transport business to manage the vehicle and paid Rs. 70,000/-in advance. It was an understanding that Sayed Roshan will pay Rs. 5,000/-per month to the petitioner and on 26.9.2005 as per the agreement Sayed Roshan took possession of the vehicle and managed the same. As per the agreement the said Sayed was responsible for any acciden...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Reported in : 105(2008)CLT440; 2008(I)OLR438
ORDER1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.This Public Interest Litigation was filed in 1994 by one Kasinath Sahoo with a prayer to issue a direction upon the State Government to bring into effect the provisions of the Orissa Hindu Religious Endowments Act, 1969.2. The facts of the case are that Orissa Hindu Religious Endowments Act, 1969 has been enacted after it received the assent of the President of India on 22nd January, 1970 and the same was published in an Extraordinary issue of the Orissa Gazette on 4th February, 1970. Under Sub-section (3) of Section 1 of the said Act it has been provided that it shall come into force on such date as the State Government may, by notification, appoint in that behalf. This PIL has been filed with a prayer that though the said Act has been enacted and assented in 1970, the said Act has not been brought into effect by the State Government by notification in that behalf in terms of Sub-section (3) of Section 1 of the said Act.3. In this matter, ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Reported in : (2009)20VST475(Orissa)
I. Mahanty, J.1. The petitioner, M/s. Bansi Tyres Services has filed this revision under Section 24(2)(b) of the Orissa Sales Tax Act, 1947, inter alia, seeking to raise certain questions of law arising out of the order dated May 20, 1993, passed by the Orissa Sales Tax Tribunal, Cuttack. By the order dated July 14, 1997, this Court was pleased to admit the revision application on the following questions of law:(i) Whether on facts and in the circumstances of the case, any nexus exists between the alleged suppression and enhancement made by the authorities ?(ii) Whether on facts and in the circumstances of the case, levy of penalty under Section 12(8) of the Orissa Sales Tax Act, 1947 (in short, 'the Act') to the extent of Rs. 10,000 was justified ?2. Mr. J. Sahoo, learned Counsel for the petitioner, inter alia, submitted, that the Vigilance Inspector of Sales Tax Department inspected the premises of the petitioner-assessee on April 3, 1985 and submitted a report. It is alleged that al...
Tag this Judgment!