Court : Orissa
Decided on : Sep-04-2007
Reported in : 2007(II)OLR648
M.M. Das, J.1. Though this is an application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. filed by the petitioner for grant of bail, the facts on which the case evolved not only has created sensation throughout the State as well as the country, but also involves interesting and important question to be dealt with.2. A few weeks ago, large numbers of aborted foetus were found from various places in the district of Nayagarh. This gave rise to a suspicion in the mind of the general public that probably after sex determination, finding the sex of the foetus to be female, the mothers have chosen for aborting the child.3. It is well known that even after 60 years of independence, in our country, boys and girls are still not given equal preference. Poor families in the society or for that matter, the conservative and old fashioned parents prefer boys and girls are seen as a burden and inferior to boys. This is more fortified due to the social stigma of dowry. On account of the above, in spite of enactments made...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Decided on : Aug-31-2007
Reported in : 104(2007)CLT763; (2008)ILLJ452Ori
A.K. Ganguly, C.J.1. This appeal has been filed by the Management of Paradip Port-Trust (hereinafter referred to as 'PPT') challenging the Judgment dated 23.7.2004 passed by a Learned Judge of the writ Court in W.P. (C) No. 6393 of 2003. By the said Judgment the Learned Judge has dismissed the Writ Petition filed by PPT challenging the award of the Industrial Tribunal.An the Writ Petition PPT challenged the award passed by the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Bhubaneswar in Tr. Industrial Dispute Case No. 112 of 2001. Though three items of dispute were involved in the reference, PPT's challenge was confined to one item. The said item of dispute is as follows:Whether, the claim of the Union regarding 40 workers as per list enclosed should be treated as regular workers of Paradip Port Trust and paid regular wages at par with the similar worker of Paradip Port Trust Management. If so, to what relief the workers are entitled and from which date2. The Learned Judge h...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Decided on : May-18-2007
Reported in : AIR2007Ori120; 104(2007)CLT310
A.K. Ganguly, C.J.1. Four writ petitions have been filed challenging constitutional validity of the Orissa Professional Educational Institutions (Regulation of Admission and Fixation of Fee) Ordinance, 2007 (hereinafter referred to as the 'said Ordinance'). During the course of hearing of the matter before the Court, the said Ordinance was replaced by an Act and came to be known as Orissa Professional Educational Institutions (Regulation of Admission and Fixation of Fee) Act, 2007 (hereinafter referred to as the 'said Act'). Out of the four writ petitions, in W.P. (C) No. 4073 of 2007 Article 15(5) of the Constitution which has come by way of 93rd Amendment to the Constitution has also been challenged. Learned Counsel for the petitioner, however later on gave up the said challenge.2. But. in all these writ petitions the constitutional validity of the said Ordinance as replaced by the said Act was challenged.3. First of these four writ petitions was registered as W.P. (C) No. 2446 of 20...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Decided on : May-11-2007
Reported in : 104(2007)CLT154; 2007(II)OLR24
ORDER1. Heard.2. This writ petition has been filed challenging the order Annexure-4 passed by the Collector, Bargarh in Lease Revision Case No. 1 of 1997.3. Undisputed facts situation is that on 31.10.1985 Tahasildar settled Ac. 0.04 decimals of lands in favour of each of the opp. parties describing them to be homesteadless persons and belonging to tribal communities. Such land was allotted to them from Plot No. 1192(P) out of Khata No. 179 of Mouza Jhankarpali under Bargarh Police Station. Ten years after that settlement writ petitioner as member of the Managing Committee of Chakarkend M. E. School filed appeal before the Sub-Divisional Officer-Sub-Collector, Bargarh challenging to the order granting lease inter alia on the ground that, that premises is in possessions of the said school and being utilized as play ground of the children. Application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act filed by the petitioner was rejected on the ground of abnormal delay. Petitioner filed aforesaid Rev...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Decided on : Apr-26-2007
Reported in : AIR2007Ori162; 2007(4)ARBLR40(Orissa); 104(2007)CLT15
A.K. Ganguly, C.J.1. This is an application under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as the 'said Act') for appointment of an Arbitrator to resolve the disputes and differences that have arisen between the parties in terms of the agreement dated 22.7.2001.2. The case has a chequered history as would appear from the following facts:A work Order dated 14.7.2001 was issued to the Petitioner by the sole Opposite Party, which is a Government of India Undertaking, in respect of design, supply, erection, testing and commissioning of dry feed system in its mineral separation plant. Clause 22 of the work order, inter alia, provides that general conditions of contract shall form and construe a part of the contract. Clause 12(3) of the general conditions of contract is as follows:12.3. All disputes and differences of any kind whatsoever arising out of or in connection with the contract or carrying out of the works (whether during the course of work o...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Decided on : Apr-12-2007
Reported in : AIR2007Ori109; 103(2007)CLT724; 2007(I)OLR750
ORDER1. Heard further argument from the Learned Counsel for the Petitioners in each of the Writ Petitions and also reply submitted by Learned Advocate General on behalf of the State, reply by Mr. R.C. Mohanty Learned Counsel on behalf of the Medical Council of India, reply by Mr. Rabi Narayan Acharya, Learned advocate on behalf of the Post-Graduate (Medical) Selection Committee and argument by Sri Rajat Kumar Rath, Learned Senior Advocate representing the interest of the interveners and reply from Learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioners, and all the Writ Petitions are disposed of in the following manner.2. On consent of the parties, analogous hearing of all the cases is made, because the dispute is relating to different norms fixed by the Government in the Prospectus in respect of the admission to the Post-Graduate (Medical) Course and this common Judgment shall abide the result in all the cases.3. Petitioner, in W.P.(C) No. 978 of 2007, is working under Swami Bibekananda Nationa...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Decided on : Apr-11-2007
Reported in : 104(2007)CLT477
M.M. Das, J.1. This Writ Petition has been filed in the nature of Public Interest Litigation challenging the action of the Government in transferring/allotting a piece of Government land situated in Cuttack City in favour of the S.C.B. Medical Public School- Opp. Party No. 5.2. The Petitioners have filed this Writ Petition claiming themselves to be fishermen by profession and members of different Fishery Co-operative Societies and also as members of the public. The question with regard to the locus standi of the Petitioners to maintain the present Writ Petition as a Public Interest Litigation would be dealt with at a later stage of this Judgment.3. As per the averments made in the Writ Petition, the land proposed to be transferred to the Opp. Party No. 5 constitutes an area of Ac. 5.715 decimals covering several plots under khata No. 136 in mouza - Cuttack Town, Unit No. 20, Mangalabag. The Record of Rights of the said land which has been annexed as Annexure-2 to the Writ Petition. Fro...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Decided on : Jan-18-2007
Reported in : 2007(4)ARBLR490(Orissa); 104(2007)CLT140
A.S. Naidu, J.1. This is an appeal under Section 39, of the Arbitration Act, 1940. The Appellant-Contractor inter alia challenges the Order dated 05.12.2000 passed in Misc. Case No. 249 of 1999 arising out of T.S No. 225 of 1999 by the Learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Bhubaneswar.2. The Appellant entered into a contract with the Respondent-Railways on 28.3.1990 for supply of 12000-cum, of hard broken stone ballest of 50 mm size and to spread the same on the railway track in between Gorakha Nath-Rahama Station of Cuttack-Paradeep Section. It is submitted that soon after execution of the agreement the Appellant-Contractor commenced the work. He made necessary arrangements for collection and supply of hard broken ballest of the required size. It is alleged that though the Contractor was always ready and willing to execute the work but due to non-cooperation of the concerned Engineer of the Railways he could not proceed with the work, nor could complete the same within the time stipu...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Decided on : May-04-2007
Reported in : 104(2007)CLT1; 2007(1)OLR743
Sanju Panda, J.1. In the present writ application petitioner has prayed for determining the remuneration in accordance with Clause-19 of Joint Sector Agreement dated 01.09.1982 signed between Industrial Promotion and Investment Corporation of Orissa Limited (in short, 'IPICOL') and the Orissa Handloom Weavers Cooperative Society Limited (in short, 'OSHCSL') who are opposite party Nos. 3 and 4 in the present application.2. Fact in brief is as follows;Petitioner joined as a Member of Orissa Finance Service in the year 1964 after completing training of 14 months. In various capacities he served under the Finance Department. He was selected for one year course post graduate diploma in the year 1970 in Indian Institute of Foreign Trade, New Delhi with permission of the State Government. He joined and completed the course in 1970-1971. While continuing in service in 1982, petitioner was considered suitable by IPICOL for implementation of a garment export project in joint sector. Initially pe...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Decided on : Apr-18-2007
Reported in : 103(2007)CLT703; [2007(114)FLR1030]
N. Prusty, J.1. In this Writ Petition, the Petitioner has challenged the Order dated 17.06.1996 passed by the Orissa Administrative Tribunal, Bhubaneswar (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal') in Original Application No. 2161 of 1995 and also the Order dated 09.12.1998 passed in Review Petition No. 24 of 1996 confirming the above Order dated 17.06.1996 passed in the Original Application, in rejecting the Petitioner's claim for special pay attached to the post of O.A.S. Class-I Senior Branch (Deputy Secretary) Super Time Senior Branch (Joint Secretary) along with interest @ 18 % per annum on delayed payment of arrear, arrear dues relating to commuted value of pension along with interest @ 18 % per annum and compensation of Rs. 3,00,000/- for harassment and allowing the prayer for payment of interest for the delayed payment of D.C.R.G., if the delay is unreasonable.2. Even though no counter affidavit has been filed by the State in this case, on a detailed discussion relating to the ...
Tag this Judgment!