Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD, ARUN KUMAR RAI
Jiwan Lakra S/o Late Marsel Lakra – Appellant
Versus
State of Jharkhand through the Secretary, Human Resources Development Department – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. dismissal of writ petitions based on prior judgment. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. policy decisions impact employment rights. (Para 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 3. supreme court orders for further examination. (Para 10 , 11) |
| 4. arguments reflect claims of discrimination. (Para 12 , 14) |
| 5. reasonable classification under article 14. (Para 16 , 19 , 30) |
| 6. appeal dismissed; no error found. (Para 32 , 33 , 34) |
JUDGMENT :
Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.
1. The instant appeal under Clause 10 of the LETTERS PATENT is directed against the common order dated 28.02.2022 passed in W.P(S) No.4661 of 2018 and analogous cases whereby and whereunder this batch of writ petitions has been dismissed by the learned Single Judge whereby and whereunder the common prayer for extending the benefits to these writ petitioners as that of the Non-Formal/Special Education Instructors in the State of Bihar has been declined.
2. The brief facts of the case as per the pleadings made in the writ petition needs to refer herein which reads as under:
(i) It is pleaded that in the erstwhile State of Bihar a Central sponsored National Adult Education came into existence and started w.e.f. 02.10.1978. Subsequently, another scheme namely
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
