Court : Patna
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. In this writ petition, the prayer of the petitioner reads as follows: "1(i) For quashing the proceeding of serial No.25 of proceeding dated 16.11.2011 of District Compassionate Committee, Darbhanga as contained in 'Annexure-8" by which it was wrongly taken decision against the petitioner for rejecting the grievances of the petitioner. (ii) For quashing the order of Additional Collector, Darbhanga vide letter no. 634 (Establishment) dated 2.4.2012 by which who has intimated to petitioner that the application for appointment on basis of compassionate appointment has been rejected on 16.11.2011 by District Compassionate Committee, Darbhanga on the basis of Sankalp no. 3927 dated 31.03.2011 of Government of Bihar. (iii) For commanding the respondents to act properly upon the Government instruction of Sankalap No. 2937 dated 31.03.2011 as to clearify by the Joint Secretary of General Administration Department, Government of Bihar vide letter no. ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Patna
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the State as well learned counsel for the B.N. Mandal University. 2. The prayer of the petitioner in this writ application reads as follows: "1.(i) For quashing the Memo No. 458 dated 28.05.2012 (Annexure-6) passed by respondent no. 2 in as much as respondent no. 2 failed to adjudicate and decide the grievance of the petitioner in terms of the order dated 15.02.2012 passed in C.W.J.C. No. 20078 of 2010 (Annexure-4) after considering Annexure-5 and impugned order makes the petitioner suffer for the fault of the college authorities who failed to produce records despite repeated directions by respondent no. 2 and on account of such failure the petitioner has been made to suffer. (ii) For directing the respondents authorities of the concerned college to produce the alleged termination order of the petitioner dated 07.01.1992, if any, and quash the same or the same be declared to be void and of no effect and also produc...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Patna
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel for the State. 2. In this writ petition, the two petitioners have prayed for the following relief: ".. to quash letter no. 178 dated 18.03.2013 issued by the District Programme Officer, Literacy, Supaul by which he held that the selection of the petitioner as Prerak has been done against the rule and directed to appoint Smt. Archana Kumari as Prerak against the unreserved categories and Sit Narayan Sah against the reserved category of Backward Class; and further for quashing the consequential decision of the Panchayat Selection Committee dated 30.04.2013 as contained in Resolution no. 2,3 and 4; and further for issuance of writ in the nature of mandamus and/or any other appropriate writ, order or direction commanding upon the respondents to re-instate the petitioners on their post of Prerak of Panchayat Lok Shiksha Samitee, Lalmania, Block- Maraua at Belhi, District- Supaul." 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners, in...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Patna
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. The prayer of the petitioner in this writ application reads as follows: "1(i) To quash the letter no. 5512 dated 22.8.2008 issued by District Superintendent of Education, Patna, whereby and whereunder he has rejected the claim of the petitioner for appointment on compassionate Ground. (Annexure-7) (ii) To make appointment on class three post to this petitioner as she was only child of her deceased mother and has attained the majority and posses requisite qualification." Learned counsel for the petitioner, in support of the aforementioned prayer, has submitted that the impugned order passed by the District Superintendent of Education, Patna (hereinafter referred to as the D.S.E.) dated 22.08.2008 is factually incorrect and legally impermissible inasmuch as the petitioners appointment on compassionate ground could not have been refused on the ground that she was a minor on the date of death of her mother. In t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Patna
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. The prayer of the petitioner in this writ application reads as follows:- œ1(i) That this is an application for issuance of writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing of the office order dated 7.3.1995 bearing letter no. 9-M4-0648/92/79 (Annexure-10) and for quashing of the order dated 27.12.2011 bearing Memo No. 06/6-54/2011/581 (Annexure-13) as the same is contrary to the section 4(2) of the Bihar Non Government Elementary School (Taking over of control) Act, 1976 and enquiry report dated 16.7.86 (Annexure-5). (ii) To grant arrear of salary from the date of taking over i.e. 6.1.1981 to 6.3.1995. (iii) To issue writ in the nature of mandamus/certiorari/commanding the respondent no.2 to 5 to act at per with the enquiry report dated 16.7.86 bearing letter no. 526 (Annexure-5) because admittedly petitioner was appointed on 6.8.1970 and his joining was accepted 6.8.1970, so it was incumbent upon the respondent no.2 to 5 to accord the ap...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Patna
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. In this writ application the petitioner has prayed for the following relief: œa. For issuance of an appropriate Writ in the nature of Mandamus commanding the respondent State to produce the said notification by which the private respondent Shri Kishor Kunal has been nominated the member of the State Govt. in the search committee for appointment on the post of Vice Chancellor and Pro-Vice Chancellor in Kameshwar Singh Darbhanga Sanskrit University and after production of the same issue a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing the same. b. For issuance of an appropriate writ in the nature of certiorari quashing the part of the press release dated 22.10.2013 (Annexure 3) issued by the GovernorŸs Secretariat, Bihar so far as it relates to constitution of Search Committee for recommending Panels of names for the post of Vice Chancellor and Pro-Vice Chancellor of Kameshwar Singh Darbhanga Sanskrit University is concerned. c. For ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Patna
1. This appeal has been preferred by the appellant Rajiv Singh against the judgment of conviction dated 21.10.2011 whereunder, he has been found guilty for an offence punishable under Sections 304B, 201, 498A of the I.P.C. and sentence dated 25.10.2011 directing to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years under Section 304B of the I.P.C., rigorous imprisonment for two years as well as also slapped with fine appertaining to Rs. Five thousand in default thereof, to undergo simple imprisonment for one month additionally under Section 201 of the I.P.C., rigorous imprisonment for two years as well as also fined Rs. Five thousand in default thereof, to undergo S.I. for one month additionally, under Section 498A of the I.P.C. with a further direction to run the sentences concurrently. 2. After hearing both sides as well as going through the record, certain admitted fact is to be taken note of for better appreciation. Appellant Rajiv Singh happens to be the husband of Rani Archana Sinha (so...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Patna
I.A. Ansari, J. 1. Under challenge, in the present appeals, are the judgment, dated 13.01.2014, of conviction, in Sessions Trial No.242 of 1987, by learned Ad hoc Additional Sessions Judge II, Vaishali at Hajipur, and the order, dated 18.01.2014, whereby sentences have been passed against all the accused-appellants. 2. By the impugned judgment, the learned trial Court has convicted all the accused-appellants, except accused-appellant, Kameshwar Singh, namely, (i) Uday Kumar Singh @ Uday Singh, (ii) Ranjeet Choudhary, (iii) Ram Babu Singh, (iv) Sachitanand Singh @ Sachchidanand Singh, (v) Sanjay singh, (vi) Kapildeo Singh, (vii) Sunil Kumar Singh, and (viii) Surendra Singh, under Sections 302 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code. Following their conviction under Section 302 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code, the accused-appellants, namely, (i) Uday Kumar Singh @ Uday Singh, (ii) Ranjeet Choudhary, (iii) Ram Babu Singh, (iv) Sachitanand Singh @ Sachchidanand Singh,...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Patna
1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 28.8.2009 passed by Railway Claims Tribunal, Patna Bench in Claim Case No. O.A. No. 00303/1999 by which the claim case of the applicant-appellant has been rejected. 2. The case of the applicant-appellant, in brief, is that on 4.8.1999, her husband Bablu Prasad was travelling from Neora Station to Rajendra Nagar Station on Train No. 388 Down. He was travelling as a bona fide passenger with proper ticket no. 39433 dated 4.8.1999. Due to heavy rush in the compartment, her husband was standing at the foot board on the southern side of the coach. Her husband was hit by the open door of the goods train coach which was coming from Patna on the Up-line and due to which he died on the spot. 3. Written statement was filed on behalf of respondent-railway denying the claim of the applicant-appellant on the ground that it does not come within the purview of Section 124 A of the Railway Act. After framing issues, A.W. 1, the appellant w...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Patna
I.A. Ansari, J. 1. By the judgment and order, dated 05.06.2006, passed, in Sessions Trial No. 781 of 2003, by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No. II, Jamui, the appellant, Kamli Devi, stands convicted under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. Following her conviction under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, the accused-appellant, Kamli Devi, has been sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life. 2. The case of the prosecution may, in brief, be described thus: (i) On the night of 2nd June, 2003, when Prakash Yadav (since deceased) was sleeping, on a cot, with his brother, Dharmendra Yadav (PW 8) and their father, Bhikho Yadav, Prakash Yadav cried out of pain. Shocked by his cries, PW 8 (Dharmendra Yadav) woke up and so woke up his father, Bhikho Yadav. In order to find out as to what had happened to Prakash Yadav, PW 8 (Dharmendra Yadav) switched on a torch-light and noticed, in the focus of the torch-light that, while Prakash Yadav was writhing in pain, accused, ...
Tag this Judgment!