SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2008 Supreme(Jhk) 723

AMARESHWAR SAHAY
Babu Lal Mandai – Appellant
Versus
State of Jharkhand – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr. Dilip Kumar Prasad.
For the Respondents: Mr. R.A. Mishra.

Order

Heard the counsel for the parties.

2. In this writ application, the petitioner is challenging the order dated 19.10.2001, passed by the Sub-Divisional Officer, Jamtara, contained in Annexure-3 to the writ application, whereby the learned Sub-Divisional Officer held that the appointment of Village Head (Pradhan) would be made on the basis of election and during that election the case of Babu Lal Mandal and his other two relatives would be considered and be given priority if they gain bare minimum support of the Raiyat. The petitioner ha also challenged the appellate order date 10.12.2007 passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Jamtara, contained in Annexur-4, which was filed against the order of the Sub-Divisional Officer, wherein the Deputy Commissioner directed the S.D.O. to consider firstly the claim of the heirs of the Late Village Pradhan and after consideration, if one of them are not fou'1d acceptable to Tetulbandha village, then to go for election.

3. The dispute with regard to appointment of Village Head (Pradhan) arose only after the death of the Village Pradhan namely, Jogeshwar MandaI. After his death one Arjun Raila and Jharilal Pandit applied for their appointment as



Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top