Court : Patna
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. The prayer of the petitioner in this writ application reads as follows:- œ 1(a) For issuance of appropriate writ in the nature of Mandamus for directing and commanding the concerned respondent authorities to appoint the petitioner a panchayat Teacher by quashing the order passed in memo No.- 738 dated 02.12.2008 passed by the learned BDO, Chhaurahi, under Begusarai District whereby and whereunder the learned BDO-Chhaurahi has found it that the persons who have been appointed as Panchayat Teachers (i.e.- Respondent No.-11) have less than the present petitioner as- petitioner is having 57.55% marks while Respondent No.-11 Anil has got 54.44% but has refused to appoint the petitioner saying therein that the petitioner could not brought the certificate of the date of Birth even after information, but has not considered this fact that the date of birth of the candidates have already mentioned in the every certificate of matriculation. (b) F...
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:- "That, this is an application for issuance of an appropriate writ order or direction including a writ in the nature in the nature of Mandamus for direction to the concerned respondents to appoint the petitioner as Government servant in regular pay scale at the post of clerk on the basis of compensate ground in the light of the recommendation of the Headmaster of Jawaharlal Nehru High School Sevapuri Fakarabad to the compensate committee Kamur and thereafter cancel the employment of the petitioner from post of Prakhand Teacher,." 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that though the petitioner after the death of his father on 06.02.2010 who was working as Peon in Jawaharlal Nehru High School Sevapuri Fakarabad in the district of Kaimur was appointed on compassionate ground on the post of Prakhand Teacher by order dated 20.08.2011 and is still continuing aga...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Patna
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. In this writ application two petitioners have assailed an inquiry report dated 04.09.2009 as contained in Annexure-20 to this writ application and to that extent, it would be relevant to quote relevant portion of the prayer of the petitioners in this writ application which reads as follows:- "for issuance of an appropriate writ/order/direction quashing the enquiry report dated 04.09.2009 which is a nullity in the eyes of law and consequently the Respondents be directed to pay the arrears of salary of the petitioners with interest." 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners in this regard has submitted that the petitioners initial appointment on the post of Panchayat Shiksha Mitra having been made on 10.04.2003 and they having been continued on such post of Panchayat Shiksha Mitra till 01.07.2006 had stood absorbed on the post of Panchayat Teacher and therefore either the denial of payment of salary to them or an adverse inquiry report dated 04....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Patna
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. In this writ application, the petitioner has assailed the order dated 7.1.2012 passed by the District Teachers Appointment Appellate Authority, Jehanabad (hereinafter to be referred to as the Tribunal) in Complaint Case No. 518(41)/2011, whereby and whereunder while allowing the complaint of Respondent no. 7 the appointment of the petitioner on the post of Prakhand Teacher has been cancelled with a consequential direction to the respondent Block Education Extension Officer cum Secretary, Block Teacher Appointment Committee, Kako, Jehanabad to consider the case of the respondent no.7 for his appointment on the post of Prakhand Teacher. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner, in support of the aforementioned prayer, has basically concentrated on the aspect that the appointment of the petitioner was made against a specific post reserved for Backward Female Category and as such, her appointment could not have been questioned much less set aside a...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Patna
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. In this writ application, the petitioner has assailed the order dated 8.8.2011 passed by the District Teachers Employment Appellate Authority, Kisanganj (hereinafter to be referred to as the Tribunal) in Case No. 367 of 2011 and 368 of 2011, whereby and whereunder, while the complaint of the petitioner has been rejected on the ground of delay whereas the case of the respondent no.11, who had filed his separate case no. 368 of 2011, has been allowed by way of direction for appointment the respondent no.11 on the vacancy caused on account of termination of the service of Md. Matlub Alam. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the view taken by the Tribunal as with regard to filling up of the vacancy on the post of Panchayat Teacher due to termination of the service of Md. Matlub Alam could not have enured only to the benefit of respondent no.11 but all other eligible candidates including the petitioner who admittedly had file...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Patna
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. The relevant part of the prayer of the petitioners in this writ application reads as follows:- œ------ for commanding and directing the concerned authorities for the same and the similar treatment to the petitioner as par with the teachers working in the elementary schools taking into consideration the facts that they were appointed in pursuance of the different orders passed by the Apex Court pertaining to the appointment of 34540 Assistant Teachers and provide the pensionary benefit instead to the General Pension Scheme in terms of the ration decided by the Apex Court in case of D.S. Nakra? 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners, in support of the aforesaid prayer, has basically concentrated on the aspect that since the appointment of the petitioners, though made in the year 2012 at a point of time when the Government has decided to do away with the earlier pension scheme by substituting it with the contributory pension scheme, the s...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Patna
1. The insurer of the offending vehicle (tractor and trailer) has preferred this appeal against the judgment and award dated 7.7.2009 passed by the learned Motor Vehicles Claim Tribunal cum Additional District Judge, Kishanganj, in Claim Case no. 8 of 2000/A.C. 5 of 2000 by which the appellant has been directed to pay the amount of compensation with interest. 2. The brief fact of the case is that the deceased Deep Narain Singh, aged about 26 years and a permanent employee of the State Bank of India drawing Rs. 7402.28 paise per month, along with his son Pradeep Singh was returning to his house on 24.12.1999 at about 7-15 P.M. In the meantime, the tractor bearing registration no. BEK-2128 and trailer no. BR-37-0602 driven rashly and negligently dashed the deceased causing him multiple injuries which resulted into his death. The accident was reported to Kishanganj Police Station and Kishanganj P.S. case no. 0154 of 1999 was instituted against the driver of the tractor. During investigati...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Patna
1. Appellants Lalo Chaudhary, Upendra Chaudhary, Rajo Chaudhary, Maheshwar Chaudhary, Sachidanand Chaudhary, Debo Chaudhary, Yogendra Chaudhary who have been found guilty for an offence punishable under Section 302/34 of the IPC, directing each of them to under go R.I. for life, under Section 148 IPC where for each of them independently directed to undergo RI for one year. Appellant Lalo Chaudhary held guilty for an offence punishable under Section 323 of the IPC and directed to undergo RI for six month with a direction to run the sentences concurrently vide judgment dated 27th March, 1990 passed by Sessions Judge, Saharsa in Sessions Trial No.49 of 1986 have preferred instant appeal. 2. Daso Mehta (P.W.6) recorded First Information Report on 19.06.1985 at 09:00 AM at Police Station disclosing therein that yesterday while his son Rajendra Mehta was harvesting maize crop from a field which they have taken on Batai from Sheo Ratan Bhagat along with his wife while wife of Upendra Chaudhar...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Patna
1. These two appeals are directed against the common judgment dated 14th of March, 1990 passed by the 1st District and Sessions Judge, Rohtas at Sasaram in Sessions Trial No. 270/61 of 1978/1985, whereby and whereunder, the appellant Ram Sanehi Mishra and Basgit Koeri have been convicted under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code for committing offence of murder of Baliram Mishra while the remaining appellants, namely, Raja Mishra, Gobardhan Koeri, Aliyar Koeri and Sipahi Koeri were convicted for offence under Section 302 r/w 149 of the Indian Penal Code for commission of the said murder of Baliram Mishra and all of them have been sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life. The appellant Ram Sahehi Mishra, Raja Mishra, Gobardhan Koeri, Aliyar Koeri and Sipahi Koeri have also been convicted for offence under Section 148 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of three years. The appellant Basgit Koeri has been further convicted for offence un...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Patna
1. None appeared on repeated calls. I requested Shri Pramod Kumar, Advocate to assist the Court and accordingly, I have heard him. I have also heard Shri Sujit Kumar Singh, learned Additional Public Prosecutor. 2. It appears that a dacoity was committed at about 12 in the night on 04.09.1992 in the house of P.W.5 Bindhyachal Parit and in houses of other persons also. As per allegation the house of the informant and others, like, Narayan and Bilash were also plundered by the dacoits. After committing dacoity the criminals left the scene of occurrence but one of them, i.e., the present appellant Suresh Sahani, was captured by the informant. 3. On the basis of the Fardbeyan of P.W.5, the First Information Report was drawn up and the case was investigated into by P.W.6 who sent the accused up for their trial which ultimately ended in the impugned judgment. 4. The learned trial judge held that dacoity was indeed committed in the house of at least P.W.5 Bindhyachal Parit. It was also held by...
Tag this Judgment!