Court : Patna
Decided on : Nov-03-2004
v.n. sinha, j.1. the petitioner who is a minor girl and had appeared in matriculation examination conducted by the bihar school examination board in march, 2004 has filed this writ application for quashing the order bearing memo no. 1185 dated 30.9.2004 annexure-5 whereunder board has refused to publish her result on the ground that the residential certificate which was filed at the time of registration of the petitioner for appearing in 2004 matriculation examination was not issued by the competent authority. petitioner has further prayed for direction to the board and its authorities to declare her result. for similar relief petitioner had earlier come to this court and had filed cwjc no. 7919/04 which writ application alongwith other connected writ cases was heard and disposed of by a single judge of this court who under order dated 2.8.2004 directed the board to declare the result of the petitioner. against the aforesaid order dated 2.8.2004 board preferred lpa no. 869/04 which was disposed of under order dated 14.9.2004 (annexure 2) since reported in 2004 (4) pljr 345, whereunder division bench of this court set aside the order dated 2.8.2004 and directed the board to notice the petitioner and pass a reasoned order after considering her show cause reply and the documents filed in support thereof. in compliance of the aforesaid direction of this court board issued notice dated 22.9.2004 as contained in annexure-3 calling upon the petitioner to show cause as to why her .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Patna
Decided on : Oct-04-2004
s.k. katriar, j.1. the defendants first set are the appellants against a judgment of reversal. this appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dated 9.6.1998, passed by the learned 5th additional district judge, siwan, in title appeal no. 13 of 1992, jagdish tiwari v. lalmuni devi and ors., whereby he has allowed the appeal preferred by the plaintiff and the defendants second set, and set aside the judgment and decree dated 9.4.1992, passed by the learned 2nd munsif, siwan, in title suit no. 101 of 1984, jagdish tiwari v. rajpati chaudhary and ors. the learned trial court had dismissed the suit which has been set aside by the impugned judgment and decreed the suit. we shall go by the description of the parties occurring in the plaint.2. it arises out of a suit for declaration of title of the plaintiff and defendant 2nd set (respondent herein), and for confirmation of their possession over the suit land bearing plot no. 104. as per the plaint, ram ugrah tiwari had four sons, namely, sital tiwari, ramautar tiwari, muneshwar tiwari and deodut tiwari. sital tiwari died leaving behind his two sons, samsundar tiwari and nakched tiwari. shyam sundar also died issueless living jointly with his full brother nakched tiwari who died leaving behind his sons who are plaintiffs and defendant no. 8. the property belonging to late shyamsundar tiwari is coming in possession of the plaintiff and defendant no. 6 (ramautar tiwari), full brother of sital tiwari who died leaving behind .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Patna
Decided on : Sep-21-2004
r.s. garg, j.1. heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the cbi and learned counsel for the informant.2. the present is an application under section 439, cr.p.g. on behalf of the applicant rajesh ranjan alias pappu yadav.3. the applicant is in jail in connection with k. hat p. s. case no. 230/98, cr.c. case no. 12(s)/98 pending in sessions trial no. 976/99 before the cbi court. he has made this application for grant of bail.4. the facts material for deciding the matter in short are that one kalyan chandra sarkar lodged a first information report that his brother and other two were murdered while the fourth man suffered serious injuries in an attack opened by one rajan tiwary and his associates. from the records it would appear that the police after completing investigation filed a charge-sheet on 20-9-1998 and nothing was reported against the applicant. thereafter the cognizance was taken by the concerned magistrate on 23-9-1998 but no cognizance was taken against the applicant. on 28-9-1998 cbi took up the investigation and on 12-2-1999 co-accused rajan tiwari was arrested. on 22-2-1999 said rajan tiwari was produced before the metropolitan magistrate, delhi in proper custody, his confessional statements were recorded and thereafter his custody was again handed over to the police. in his confessional statement while admitting his guilt that he committed murder, he also made allegations against the present applicant-petitioner that there was meeting of .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Patna
Decided on : Sep-13-2004
chandramauli kr. prasad, j.1. this application has been filed for quashing he order dated 14.12.2001 passed by the special director, secondary education in appeal no. 19 of 1997, whereby respondent no. 9 has been declared senior to the petitioner.2. short facts giving rise to the present application are that the petitioner as also respondent no. 9 were appointed as teachers on 1.4.1981 and 1.1.1979 respectively. at the time of appointment, petitioner possessed degree and madhyama qualifications whereas respondent no. 9 had degree with honours. it appears that second post of teacher had fallen vacant some time in the year 1986-87 and step was taken to fill up the said post. the managing committee of the school vide its resolution, dated 22nd of june, 1987, decided to appoint the petitioner as second teacher and forwarded the decision to the bihar sanskrit shiksha board, hereinafter referred to as the board. the board approved the appointment of the petitioner by order dated 8th of august, 1988. respondent no. 9 challenged the aforesaid order in cwjc no. 5830 of 1989 but during the pendency of the said case, the authorities considered the case of respondent no. 9 and by order dated 7th of october, 1991 allowed him to function on the second post in the scale of rs. 730-1080/- cancelling the earlier order date 8th of august, 1988 referred to above. the aforesaid order was challenged before the special director by the petitioner who by order dated 7th of october, 1991, reversed .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Patna
Decided on : Sep-01-2004
r.s. garg, j.1. heard learned counsel for the parties.2. petitioner smt. phoolmanti devi was elected as pramukh of noorsarai panchayat samiti. it appears that certain members of the panchayat samiti were aggrieved by her conduct, therefore, they submitted a letter to convene a meeting on 5.6.2003 making certain allegations against the present petitioner and expressing their no confidence. the meeting was requisitioned but unfortunately was adjourned. thereafter, on 18.7.2003 some of the members of the panchayat samiti again submitted a no confidence requisition and required the pramukh/ authority to requisition the meeting. the meeting was directed to be held on 26.7.2003. a notice was issued on 19.7.2003. from annexure 1 it appears that the meeting was convened on 26.7.2003. the present petitioner and the up pramukh smt. renu kumari (petitioner in cwjc no. 10636 of 2003) came to take part in the meeting but after some time, they left the meeting. with the consent of the majority, one bhikhari prasad was nominated to chair the meting and thereafter the resolution was considered and ultimately no confidence motion was carried out. on the very same day, the up pramukh renu kumari was also removed from her office. each of the persons so removed, being aggrieved by their removal are before this court. at the instance of smt. phoolmanti devi cwjc no. 8037 of 2003 has been filed and cwjc no. 10636 of 2003 has been filed by renu devi and another.3. learned counsel for each of the .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Patna
Decided on : Aug-17-2004
mridula mishra, j. 1. this writ application under article 226 of the constitution of india has been filed for quashing the order of detention dated 15-11-2003 passed by the district magistrate, bhojpur at arrah (annexure-1) in exercise of the powers conferred under section 12(2) of the bihar control of crimes act, 1981 (hereinafter referred to as the act) as well as the order dated 24-11-2003 (annexure 2) passed by the state government approving the said order of detention in exercise of power under section 12(3) of the act and also the order dated 30-12-2003 (annexure 6) passed by the state government confirming the aforesaid order of detention under section 21(1) read with section 22 of the act. 2. section 12(1) of the act lays down that the state government may, if satisfied with respect to any person that with a view to preventing him from acting in any manner prejudicial to the maintenance of public order and there is reason to fear that the activities of anti-social element cannot be prevented otherwise than, by the immediate arrest of such person, make an order directing that such anti-social element be detained. 3. sub-section (2) of section 12 of the act states if having regard to the circumstances prevailing or likely to prevail in any area within the local limits of the jurisdiction of the district magistrate, the state government is satisfied that it is necessary so to do, it may by an order in writing direct, that during such period as may be specified in the .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Patna
Decided on : Aug-13-2004
chandra mohan prasad, j. 1. this appeal is against the order of conviction dated the 30th march, 1992 and sentence dated 31st march, 1992 of the 1st additional sessions judge, east champaran, motihari passed in s.t. no. 80 of 1991 whereby the appellant has been convicted under section 17 of the narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances act (hereinafter, in short, to be referred to as the 'act') and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years and also to pay a fine of rs. 1,00,000/- (rupees one lac) and in default of payment of fine, further rigorous imprisonment for five years. 2. the case of the prosecution is that on 26th august, 1990, krishna mohan verma, a.s.i. excise (p.w. 3) along with excise constables siyaram singh (p.w. 1) and madan ram (p.w. 2) came to the tempo stand near railway gumti, raxaul. they found appellant bal kishun dangal in suspicious condition there. then they conducted a search on his person and as a result of search, one paper pudia, containing 4 small pudias containing smacks was recovered from the bottom folder of his trousers. the pudias were kept concealed in the folder. after recovery, a seizure-list was prepared. the seizure-list in the writing and signature of p.w. 3 is ext. 1. the seizure was made in presence of a public witness arjun who also signed over it. his signature is ext. 2/2. after seizure, the case was enquired into and then a prosecution report (ext. 3) was filed. sample of the recovered smacks was also taken and it .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Patna
Decided on : Aug-04-2004
chandramauli kr. prasad, j. 1. initially this writ application was filed for quashing the notice dated 22.2.2003 issued by the executive officer communicated to the members that a special meeting to consider the no confidence motion brought against the pramukh and up-pramukh shall be held on 28.2.2003. thereafter, the no confidence motion has been passed and their prayer is to quash the said resolution.2. shorn of unnecessary details, facts giving rise to the present application are that the petitioner's are pramukh and up- pramukh of panchayat samiti narhat. a notice was given by the members to convene special meeting to consider the no confidence motion against the petitioners. the executive officer, by the impugned notice dated 22.2.2003 (annexure-3), conveyed to the members that the meeting to consider the no confidence motion shall be held on 28.2.2003. in the meeting so held, no confidence motion was passed against the petitioners and during the pendency of the application, it is common ground that other members have been elected as pramukh and up-pramukh of the panchayat samiti.3. in the writ application, several points have been raised but when the matter is taken up, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the notice informing to the members about the date of the special meeting to consider the no confidence motion, does into conform to the requirement of section 44(4) of the bihar panchayat raj act, hereinafter referred to as the act. it is pointed out .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Patna
Decided on : Jul-19-2004
aftab alam and b.k. jha, jj.1. this appeal and the connected appeal being criminal appeal no. 94 of 1998 are filed against the same judgment and order passed by the trial court and, therefore, these two appeals are to be heard together.2. appellant no. 2, maya shankar singh in this appeal stands convicted under section 302 of the penal code. the rest of the three appellants, daya shankar singh in this appeal and two other appellants in the connected appeal were convicted under section 302/34 of the penal code. both maya shankar singh and daya shankar singh were further convicted under section 27 of the arms act. all the appellants are sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for life for committing murder and the two appellants in this appeal are further sentenced to three years' r.i. for the offence under the arms act.3. the two appellants in the connected appeal being cr. appeal no. 94 of 1998 were granted bail by this court. in this appeal, however, the prayer for bail on behalf of both the appellants was rejected; in the case of maya shankar singh, his prayer for bail were rejected more than once.4. when the appeals were called out for hearing, mr. akhileshwar pd. singh, counsel appearing for the informant filed an affidavit in which it is stated that the appellant maya shankar singh had escaped from jail custody during the pendency of the appeal and had not yet been apprehended.5. mr. suraj narain pd. sinha, learned senior advocate appearing for the appellants in the two .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Patna
Decided on : Jul-15-2004
s.k. katriar, j. 1. heard mr. wasi akhtar for the petitioner, mr. dinu kumar, learned standing counsel (ceiling) for respondent nos. 1 to 4, and mr. syed firoz raza for respondent nos. 5 to 7. none appears on behalf of respondent no. 8 inspite of valid service of notice. these two writ petitions arise out of a common order dated 23.3.2000, passed by learned additional member, board of revenue, patna, in case no. 61/98/62/98, md. jilani v. abdul jalil, whereby the revision applications of respondent nos. 5 to 7 herein under section 32 of the bihar [consolidation of holdings] land reforms (fixation of ceiling area and acquisition of surplus land) act (hereinafter referred to as 'the act') has been allowed, and the orders of the learned first authority and the appellate authority have been set aside. it arises out of two applications under section 16(3) of the act.2. the petitioner is the pre-emptor, respondent nos. 5 to 7 are the purchasers, and respondent no. 8 is the vendor. respondent no. 8 executed two documents of absolute sale on 8.11.1990, in favour of respondent nos. 5 to 7, conveying right, title and interest of different portions of plot no. 306, which are admittedly side by side. the same were registered on 30.3.1993. the petitioner filed two separate pre-emption applications claiming reconveyance of the lands in question by virtue of being an adjoining raiyat. the two applications were allowed by a common order dated 20.3.1997 (annexure-3), passed by the learned .....Tag this Judgment!