Court : Patna
D.P. Wadhwa, C.J.1. In this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, the petitioner, a convenor of certain social, cultural and literary organisation of Santhal Paraganas and Chotonagpur divisions, has claimed a declaration that the Bihar Panchayat Raj Act, 1993 (in short the Act) is not applicable to the Scheduled Areas in the State of Bihar, and consequently to restrain the State Election Commission and the State of Bihar from holding any election under the Act in that area.2. Field of controversy is quite small but arguments some what extensive. Part IX of the constitution deals with the Scheduled and Tribal Areas. Under Article 244 falling in that part the provisions of the Fifth Schedule to the Constitution shall apply to the administration and control of the Scheduled Areas and Scheduled Tribes in any State, the State of Bihar being one of such States. If we now refer to the Fifth Schedule, Part C thereof defines the 'Scheduled Areas'. The expression 'Scheduled Areas' me...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Patna
R.A. Sharma, J. 1. I have gone through the two Judgments prepared by my two learned brothers (S.J. Mukhopadhaya and M,Y. Eqbal, JJ.) who along with me were the members of the Full Bench, which was constituted to answer the questions referred, which have been reproduced on the 2nd page of the judgment of Hon'ble S.J. Mukhopadhaya, J. 2. Hon'ble S.J. Mukhopadhaya. J. has held that Wilkinson's Rules have not been framed by the Governor General in the Council, who was the only competent authority at the relevant time to frame such Rules and, therefore, they lack statutory force and the law laid down by the Division Bench earlier In the case of Dulichand Khirwal, AIR 1958 Pat 366 and Mahendra Singh's case, AIR 1958 Patna 603, does not represent the correct legal position. Hon'ble M.Y. Eqbal, J. on the other hand has taken a contrary view holding the said Rules to be statutory in nature. The decisions of the Division Bench of this Court in Dulichand Khirwal. AIR 1958 Patna 366 and Mahend...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Patna
R.N. Sahay, J.1. this application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners, who are traders in betelnuts, seek appropriate writ for release of 40 bags of betelnuts which were seized from Brake Van of Brahmputra Mail at Patna Junction on 28.4.1999 by the officers of Customs, Headquarter Patna. One of the grounds for release of the betelnuts is failure on the part of the Custom authorities to comply with Section 110(2) of the Customs Act, 1962.2. The first petitioner asserts that he had purchased 10 bags of Assam Kata Dry Supari weighting 800 kg. from M/s. Amal Chandra Sana, Barpeta Road, Assam on 24.4.1999 on which Assam General Sales Tax was paid. Petitioner No. 2 purchased 10 bags of Assam Kata Dry Supari from Paresh Chandra Saha, Barpeta Road, Assam on the same day and 10 bags from Dhirendra Mohan Saha, Barpeta Road, Assam on 25.4.1999. Petitioner No. 3 purchased 10 bags of Assam Kata Supari from Ganesh Chandra Saha on 25.4.1999. Copies of the challan relating...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Patna
Nagendra Rai, J. 1. The petitioner, a political party duly registered with the Election Commission of India, having its head office at Bariatu Road, Ranchi, has filed the present writ application for quashing the order dated December 2, 1996, passed by the Commissioner of Income-tax, Ranchi, in exercise of the power under Section 127(2)(a) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), by which he has transferred the case of the petitioner from the Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle-1, Ranchi, the Assessing Officer, to the Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle IV, under the Commissioner of Income-tax, Delhi. By the same order the case of four other persons, namely, Suraj Mandal, President, Sibu Soren, Vice-President, Sailendra Mahto, Secretary, and Simon Morandi, a member of the petitioner, have also been transferred, a copy of the said order has been annexed as annexure '7' to the writ application. 2. The petitioner is an assessee under the Act...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Patna
S.N. Jha, J.1. The petitioner have challenged the validity of seizure of the goods, namely, cloves and javitri. They also seek direction to the respondents to permit them to carry on trade and business in cloves, javitri and other items. The controversy in the two writ petitions being identical, they have been heard together and are disposed of by this common judgment.2. Shorn of details, the petitioner in Cri. W.J.C. No. 419 of 1993 claims to be holder of monopoly rights for working of cloves in the State of Manipur for the period of two years effective from 23rd October, 1992. The petitioners in Cr. W.J.C. No. 474 of 1993 claim to be settles of the cloves and the Javitri Mahals in the State of Nagaland for the period of one year ending on 9th September 1992. On the basis of the settlement aforesaid, according to them, they collect articles and despatch them to different places by air or mail on payment of royalty to the respective Government, namely, Government of Manipur and Nagala...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Patna
1. This Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution has been filed by one Shri Chandra Pathak, Sub-Judge, Saharsa for quashing the Notification dated 21st February, 2013 passed by the respondent-State on the recommendation of the Patna High Court on administrative side by which the petitioner has been inflicted upon with the punishment of compulsory retirement in terms of the provisions contained under Rule 14(ix) of the Bihar Government Servant (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules 2005 (hereinafter referred to as œthe Rules of 2005?). The further prayer made is to allow the petitioner to resume his duties as a member of the State Judicial Services along with all the consequential benefits including seniority, pay, etc. 2. Learned advocate Mr. Abhinav Srivastava appears for the petitioner. Mr. Abhinav Srivastava has stated that he has no objection, if this Bench hears and decides the matter. Learned advocate Mr. Mrigank Mauli appears for the High Court and learned advoca...
Tag this Judgment!