Oh Issueno Xi

8/3/2019 Oh Issueno Xi

1/40


2/40

Honble Shri Justice Venkategowda Gopalagowda being Sworn - in as Chief Justice of Orissa High Courtby His Excellency Shri Murlidhar Chandrakant Bhandare, the Governor of Orissa on 25.03.2010

Honble Shri Justice Bijaya Krishna Patel being Sworn - in as Judge of Orissa High Courtby Honble Shri Justice I.M. Quddusi, the Acting Chief Justice of Orissa High Court on 14.01.2010

Honble Shri Justice L.Mohapatra

Honble Shri Justice I.Mahanty

Honble Shri Justice B.K.Patel

Editorial Board


3/40

Inauguration of Mediation

Programme for referral Judges from

20.2.2010 to 25.2.2010 by Honble

Shri Justice Cyriac Joseph, Judge,

Supreme Court of India in presence

of Honble Shri Justice I.M.Quddusi,

the then Acting Chief Justice, Orissa

High Court.

Valedictory ceremony of Intensive

Training Programmes on Mediation

held in the Orissa Judicial Academy,

Cuttack on 25.3.2010. Seen on the dais

(from L to R) Honble Shri Justice

B.P.Das, Judge, Orissa High Court,

Honble Shri Justice V.Gopala Gowda,

Chief Justice, Orissa High Court and

Honble Shri Justice L.Mohapatra,

Judge, Orissa High Court.

Honble Shri Justice A.K.Patnaik,

Judge, Supreme Court of India

addressed to the newly recruited

Judicial officers on 21.12.2009 in their

joining First Foundation Course at

O.J.A., Cuttack.


4/40

State Level Judicial Colloquium

on the issue of Implementation of

PC & PNDT Act held at Orissa

High Court, Cuttack on

20.02.2010.

Guests on the dais (from L to R)

Ms. Anu Garg, Secretary, H&FW.Deptt, Honble Minister Sri

Prasanna Acharya, H&FW Deptt.,

Honble Shri Justice Cyriac

Joseph, Judge, Supreme Court of

India, H.E. Shri Murlidhar

Chandrakant Bhandare, Governor

of Orissa, Honble Shri Justice

I.M.Quddusi, the then Acting Chief

Justice, Orissa High Court,

Honble Shri Justice B.P. Das,

Judge, Orissa High Court & Shri

Nesim Tumkaya, UNFPA - Country

Representative, India.

Observance of International

Womens Day organized by

Orissa State Legal Services

Authority in association with

High Court Legal Services

Committee at Orissa High

Court, Cuttack on 8.3.2010.

Guests on he dais (from L to R)

Smt. Mrinalini Padhi, Member,

HCLSC, Honble Kumari Justice

Sanju Panda, Honble Shri

Justice B.P.Das, Judges of

Orissa High Court,

Dr. Manjushree Patnaik and

Smt. Sujata Mohapatra,

Members, HCLSC.

Intensive Mediation Training

Programme for referral Judges

organised by OSLSA in the O.J.A.,

Cuttack from 22.2.2010 to 25.2.2010.

Guests on the dais (from L to R) Smt.

Sobha Patil, Master Trainer, Bangalore

Mediation Centre, Honble Shri Justice

B.P.Das, Judge, Orissa High Court,

Honble Shri Justice Cyriac Joseph,

Judge, Supreme Court of India,

Honble Shri Justice I.M.Quddusi, the

then Acting Chief Justice, Orissa HighCourt, Honble Shri Justice

L.Mohapatra, Judge, Orissa High Court

& Smt. S.Sushila, Master Trainer,

Bangalore Mediation Centre.


5/40

Justice V. Gopala Gowda

CHIEF JUSTICES BUNGALOWKILLA FORT, CUTTACK - 753 001

Phone : (0671) 2507808 (Off.)2301703 (Res)2301505 (Res)

Fax: (0671) 2301703 (Res)(0671) 2508446 (Off.)

21st April, 2010

FROM THE DESK OF THE CHIEF JUSTICE

I am extremely happy to know that the Orissa High Court is continuing release of

Court News since 2007. This is the 1st issue published after my assuming the office of

the Chief Justice of this High Court on 25th of March, 2010. The publication of this Eleventh

Issue of Court News is the sustained effort of all persons concerned of this Court, which

is commendable and highly appreciated.

Judiciary is the bedrock of democracy which will have great social commitment

for administration of justice to the people of the country. The problem of huge pendency of

cases is threatening the faith of the masses in this institution. To restore the confidence of

the people on this great Institution, it is necessary for all of us to make sincere endeavour

to tackle this problem with the existing infrastructure.

I wish and hope that publication of the Court News will disseminate vital information

to the people about the functioning of the Courts and the same will be very much usuful for

this institution to maintain its independence and for better functioning to achieve ourconstitutional goals.

(V. GOPALA GOWDA)


6/40

ADDRESS OF HONBLE MR. JUSTICE I. M. QUDDUSI, THE THEN ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE,ORISSA HIGH COURT IN THE FULL COURT REFERENCE HELD AT 12.30 P.M. ON 09.02.2010

ON THE SAD DEMISE OF SHRI JUSTICE SAMBHU CHARAN DATTA, FORMER JUDGE

OF ORISSA HIGH COURT.

With a heavy heart I want to bring it to your kind noticethat Justice Shri Sambhu Charan Datta, a Former Judge of thisCourt has passed away today at 4.30 a.m. at his Calcutta residencedue to massive heart attack.

Late Justice Datta was born on 1.9.1936 and aftercompleting his schooling he graduated from Calcutta University in1954. After obtaining Degree in Law from the said University in 1956,he joined the legal profession and after doing practice for some years joined the Judicial Service in 1962. In 1979 he became a DistrictJudge. During his tenure as a District Judge he held many importantposts, like Special Officer of Damodar Valley Corporation, SpecialSecretary, Judicial Department, Government of West Bengal, Legal Remembrancer,Government of West Bengal and continued as such till his elevation as a permanent Judgeof Calcutta High Court on 17.11.1994. Thereafter he was transferred to Punjab and HaryanaHigh Court on 8.12.1994 and again on being transferred to this High Court he joined on2.4.1996 and retired on 31.8.1998. After his retirement, he was appointed as the Chairman,West Bengal State Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum.

Though I had no personal acquaintance with late Justice Datta, I have heard thathe was a great believer of moral values and was always giving importance to the dispensationof speedy justice. His knowledge in civil law was very good and the judgments rendered byhim prove his efficiency and high calibre in civil law.

I am told, Justice Datta was very upright and a strict disciplinarian with a kind andloving heart. He was a gentleman par excellence. Though his stay in Orissa was not for long,still he is remembered by all for his amiable nature.

He is survived by two sons; one of his sons is a Doctor. Unfortunately, his wifepredeceased him long ago.

We pray God that his departed soul may rest in peace and to give enoughstrength to the members of the bereaved family to bear the loss.

EDITORIAL ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

HONBLE SHRI JUSTICE S.J.MUKHOPADHAYA,CHIEF JUSTICE, HIGH COURT OF GUJURAT, SOLA, AHMEDABAD.

... I am in receipt of your letter dated 9th March 2010 enclosing herewith a copy of Tenth

Issue of Court News published by the Orissa High Court. I have gone through the same and

happy to mention that it contains lot of valuable and useful information / details pertaining to the

Judiciary in the State of Orissa in general and Orissa High Court, in particular.

I appreciate the efforts put in by all concerned for bringing out this publication ...


7/40

Court

News

CONTENTS

1

01. Names of Honble the Chief Justice and Honble

Judges of Orissa High Court at present. ... 2

02. Appointments and Transfer. ... 3

(A) Elevation of Honble the Chief Justice

(B) Appointment of Honble the Judge

(C) Transfer of Honble the Judge.

03. Sanctioned strength & vacancies in Orissa High Court. ... 3

04. Institution, Disposal and Pendency of Cases in the High Court ... 4

from 1.1.2010 to 31.3.2010.

05. Sanctioned strength & vacancies in District & Subordinate Courts ... 4

06. Institution, Disposal and Pendency of Cases in ... 5

District & Subordinate Courts from 1.1.2010 to 31.3.2010

7. Outlines of some recent Orissa High Court Judgments ... 9

8. Activities of Orissa Judicial Academy ... 26

9. Major Events ... 27

10. Programmes attended by Honble Judges of ... 28

Orissa High Court at Bhopal & other places.

11. Activities of High Court Legal Services Committee ... 29

12. Activities of Orissa State Legal Services Authority ... 30

HHH


8/40

Court

News2

HONBLE JUDGES OF THE ORISSA HIGH COURT

HONBLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE

Honble Shri Justice V. Gopala Gowda, B.Sc., LL.B.

HONBLE JUDGES

Honble Shri Justice I.M.Quddusi, LL.B

Honble Shri Justice B.P. Das, M.A., LL.B.

Honble Shri Justice L. Mohapatra, B.Sc., LL.B.

Honble Shri Justice A.S. Naidu, B.Sc., LL.B.

Honble Shri Justice Pradip Kumar Mohanty, LL.B.

Honble Shri Justice M.M. Das, M.A., LL.B.

Honble Shri Justice R.N. Biswal, M.A., LL.M.

Honble Shri Justice I. Mahanty, LL.M.

Honble Kumari Justice Sanju Panda, B.A., LL.B.

Honble Shri Justice B.N. Mahapatra, M.A., LL.B., PGDTL.

Honble Shri Justice B.P. Ray, LL.B.

Honble Shri Justice S.C. Parija, LL.B.

Honble Shri Justice B.K. Patel, M.A., LL.B.

Honble Shri Justice B.K. Nayak, LL.M.

Honble Shri Justice S.K.Mishra, M.A., LL.B.

Honble Shri Justice C.R.Dash, LL.M.

( Elevated on 25.3.2010 )

( Transfered to Chhattisgarh High Court on 25.3.2010)


9/40

Court

News3

(A) Elevation of Honble the Chief Justice of Orissa High Court

Name of the Honble Chief Justice Date of appointmentas Chief Justice ofOrissa High Court.

Honble Shri Justice 06.10.1951 25.3.2010Venkategowda Gopalagowda.

Date of Birth

(B) Appointment of Honble Judge of Orissa High Court

Name of the Honble Addl. Judge Date of appointment

as Permanent Judge

Date of appointment

as Addl. Judge

Honble Shri Justice 2.2.1956 14.1.2010Bijaya Krishna Patel

(C) Transfer of Honble Shri Justice I.M.Quddusi,as Judge of Chhattisgarh High Court.

Honble Shri Justice 18.06.1950 06.12.2004Ishrat Masroor Quddusi

Name of the Honble Judge Date of Birth Date of Appointmentas Judge of OrissaHigh Court.

(i) Date of transfer(ii) Notification No.

(i) 25.3.2010(ii) Notification No.K.11017/2/2010-US.II,dated 22nd March, 2010of Govt. of India, Ministryof Law & Justice(Deptt. of Justice)

Appointments & Transfer

SANCTIONED STRENGTH & VACANCIES IN HIGH COURT(As on 31.3.2010)

Sanctioned Strength Working Strength Vacancies

17 + 5* = 22 13 + 3* = 16 6

(A)* Addl. Judges(B) One Honble Judge of this Court has been elevated as Chief Justice of

Patna High Court and one Honble Judge of other High Court has beenelevated to this High Court as Chief Justice.


10/40

Court

News4

Category of Posts SanctionedStrength

WorkingStrength

SANCTIONED STRENGTH & VACANCIES INDISTRICT AND SUBORDINATE COURTS

(A) DISTRICT & SUBORDINATE COURTS

(As on 31.3.2010) (Regular Establishment)

(B) FAST TRACK COURTS(As on 31.3.2010)

Sl. No. Vacancies

1. District Judge Cadre

2. Sr. Civil Judge

3. Civil Judge

Functional Strength Present Strength Vacancies

98 82 16

134 113 21

259 254 05

35 28 7

4. Special Judicial Magistrates 18 14 04

INSTITUTION, DISPOSAL AND PENDENCY OF CASES IN THE HIGH COURT(From 1.1.2010 to 31.3.2010)

MAIN CASESPendency as on1.1.2010

Institution duringthe period

Total disposalduring the period

Pendency as on31.3.2010

Civil Criminal Civil Criminal Civil Criminal Civil Criminal

MISC. CASES

Pendency as on

1.1.2010

Institution during

the period

Total disposal

during the period

Pendency as on

31.3.2010

Civil Criminal Civil Criminal Civil Criminal Civil Criminal

TOTAL NO. OF CIVIL & CRIMINAL CASES DURING THE PERIOD(From 1.1.2010 to 31.3.2010)

Opening Balance Institution Disposed of

CivilCriminal

114885 27381 8337 7490 6155 8426 117067 26445

116384 1168 7594 2669 5551 2283 118427 1554

231269 15931 11706 235494

28549 10159 10709 27999

Pending


11/40

Court

News5

STATEM

ENTSSHOWINGINSTITUTION,DISPOSAL&PENDENCYOF

CIVIL&CRIMINALCASESINTHESUBORDINATEJUDICIARY

FROM1.1.20

10TO31.3.2010

Nameo

fthe

Judges

hip

CIVILSUITS

Open

ing

Ba

lance

ason

1.1.2

010

Ins

titution

Dispose

d

of

Pen

dency

ason

31

.3.2

010

C

IVILAPPEALS

CIVILMISC.APPEALS

Open

ing

Ba

lance

ason

1.1.2

010

Ins

titution

Dispose

d

of

Pen

dency

ason

31

.3.2

010

O

pen

ing

B

alance

ason

1

.1.2

010

Ins

titution

Dispose

d

of

Pen

dency

ason

31

.3.2

010

Balasore

Bolangir

Cu

ttack

Dh

enkanal

Ga

njam

Kalahandi

Keonjhar

Khurda

Koraput

Ma

yurbhanj

Phulbani

Puri

Sambalpur

Sundargarh

Total:

967

213

1444

614

461

261

143

906

166

313

146

546

441

205

6826

704

196

960

328

321

118

94

545

97

284

53

389

189

106

4384

20330

2719

22949

4767

4583

1732

1131

14825

1067

4643

469

6714

4806

1584

92319

73

31

80

18

46

11

14

23

24

27

09

41

39

30

466

46

35

45

22

21

08

03

19

13

45

16

38

34

21

366

1755

590

1453

342

703

265

136

707

299

214

77

1037

343

394

8315

78

08

75

09

14

02

07

35

04

08

06

33

23

10

312

93

10

75

09

12

02

05

30

10

25

09

23

16

19

338

972

137

852

88

208

73

40

503

107

65

22

566

78

99

3810

20067

2702

22465

4481

4443

1589

1082

14464

998

4614

376

6557

4554

1485

89877

1728

594

1418

346

678

262

125

703

288

232

84

1034

338

385

8215

987

139

852

88

206

73

38

498

113

82

25

556

71

108

3836


12/40

Court

News

CIVILREVIS

IONS

EXECUTIONPROCEEDINGS

M.A.C.T.CAS

ES

S

ESSIONSCASES

CRIMINALAPPEALS

117

54

444

105

150

19

47

70

74

51

28

107

135

122

1523

130

48

685

86

149

08

110

171

55

45

21

61

134

212

1915

1761

374

12044

1260

3949

296

873

3574

998

1090

160

4211

1141

2588

34319

160

82

348

111

100

44

44

99

108

85

85

86

142

88

1582

148

60

182

94

121

16

62

79

103

76

90

98

123

58

1310

1237

670

2417

639

2195

223

446

1171

656

466

355

1791

1092

460

13818

26

26

34

12

20

08

19

21

36

16

33

45

27

41

364

20

21

24

21

24

01

07

19

34

21

42

15

14

54

317

557

476

474

198

342

320

192

310

320

143

146

334

148

220

4180

M.J.Cs./SPECIALACTCASES

03

06

08 -- 0

602 -- 0

8 -- 03 -- 0

203

0243

06

01 -- -- 0

401 -- 0

5 -- 07

01

02

01

07

35

23

30

24

06

28

07

02

38

01

04 -- 5

224

07

246

115

16

87

22

23

04

22

47

35

23

02

24

32

38490

21

17

185

37

28

12

38

15

08

15

04

09

14

17420

1491

775

2870

1857

1718

373

597

2080

768

719

199

796

1503

788

16534

784

92

1134

208

169

159

91

690

69

62

24

352

186

92

4112

669

94

1081

134

128

85

84

390

60

58

13

327

97

81

3301

7824

697

13326

2346

2491

1076

342

8184

468

711

188

3602

1700

614

43569

N

ameo

fthe

Ju

dges

hip

Open

ing

Ba

lance

ason

1.1.2

010

Ins

titution

D

ispose

d

of

Pen

dency

ason

31

.3.2

010

Open

ing

Ba

lance

ason

1.1.2

010

In

stitution

Dispose

d

of

Pen

dency

ason

31

.3.2

010

Open

ing

Ba

lance

ason

1.1.2

010

Ins

titution

Dispose

d

of

Pen

dency

ason

31

.3.2

010

Balasore

Bolangir

Cuttack

Dhenkanal

G

anjam

Kalahandi

Keonjhar

Khurda

Koraput

M

ayurbhanj

Ph

ulbani

Puri

Sambalpur

Sundargarh

Total:

Nameo

fthe

Ju

dges

hip

Open

ing

Ba

lance

ason

1.1.2

010

Ins

titution

D

ispose

d

of

Pen

dency

ason

31

.3.2

010

Open

ing

Ba

lance

ason

1.1.2

010

In

stitution

Dispose

d

of

Pen

dency

ason

31

.3.2

010

Open

ing

Ba

lance

ason

1.1.2

010

Ins

titution

Dispose

d

of

Pen

dency

ason

31

.3.2

010

Balasore

Bolangir

Cuttack

Dhenkanal

Ganjam

Kalahandi

Keonjhar

Khurda

Koraput

Mayurbhanj

Ph

ulbani

Puri

Sambalpur

Su

ndargarh

Total:

26

25

16

06

26

06

02

35

01

08

01

52

22

12

238

1397

776

2968

1872

1723

381

613

2048

741

711

201

781

1485

767

16464

7709

699

13273

2272

2450

1002

335

7884

459

707

177

3577

1611

603

42758

1774

368

12285

1241

3948

285

936

3675

979

1084

153

4165

1140

2678

34711

1225

648

2251

622

2216

195

464

1151

651

457

360

1803

1073

430

13546

551

471

464

207

346

313

180

308

318

148

155

304

135

233

4133

6


13/40

Court

News7

N

ameo

fthe

Ju

dges

hip

Open

ing

Ba

lance

ason

1.1.2

010

Ins

titution

D

ispose

d

of

Pen

dency

ason

31

.3.2

010

Open

ing

Ba

lance

ason

1.1.2

010

In

stitution

Dispose

d

of

Pen

dency

ason

31

.3.2

010

Open

ing

Ba

lance

ason

1.1.2

010

Ins

titution

Dispose

d

of

Pen

dency

ason

31

.3.2

010

Balasore

Bolangir

Cuttack

Dhenkanal

G

anjam

Kalahandi

Keonjhar

Khurda

Koraput

M

ayurbhanj

Ph

ulbani

Puri

Sambalpur

Sundargarh

Total:

Nameo

fthe

Ju

dges

hip

Open

ing

Ba

lan

ce

ason

1.1.2

01

0

Ins

titution

Dispose

d

of

Pen

dencyas

on

31

.3.2

010

Balasore

Bolangir

Cuttack

Dhenkanal

Ganjam

Kalahandi

Keonjhar

Khurda

Koraput

Mayurbhanj

Ph

ulbani

Puri

Sambalpur

Su

ndargarh

Total:

CRIMINALREVISIONS

C

RIMINALMISC.CASES

SPECIALACTCASES

46

25

18

13

38

07

03

35

23

12

16

26

35

20

317

59

37

32

12

42

04 -- 3

322

29

15

37

39

28

389

425

214

196

96

260

140

18

215

132

67

50

178

109

42

2142

553

390

1034

402

861

180

306

774

389

260

165

535

643

365

6857

556

374

1102

429

853

173

255

736

372

250

171

528

642

363

6804

77

44

100

30

119

37

74

147

71

35

11

68

64

31

908

39

46

12

10

09

28

13

24

28

08

02

14

32

05

270

21

10

06

15

13

09

07

08

17

06

02

14

06

12

146

470

196

285

299

270

325

63

373

282

63

40

274

200

41

3181

PREVENTION

OFCORRUPTIONACT(VIG.+C

.B.I.)

03

06

11 -- 1

8 -- -- 35

06 -- -- -- 0

6 -- 85

04 -- 0

6 -- 08 -- -- 2

106 -- -- -- 0

8 -- 53

517

134

534

--274

-- --864

128

-- -- --457

01

2909

438

226

210

95

264

137

15

213

131

84

49

189

113

50

2214

80

28

168

57

111

30

23

109

54

25

17

61

63

29

855

452

160

279

304

274

306

57

357

271

61

40

274

174

48

3057

518

128

529

--264

-- --850

128

-- -- --459

01

2877


14/40

Court

News

N

ameo

fthe

J

udges

hip

CRIMINALCASESOF

MAGISTERIALCOURTS

OpeningBalanceason1.1.2010

Institution

Disposedof

Pendencyason31.3.2

010

Ba

lasore

Bo

langir

Cu

ttack

Dh

enkanal

Ga

njam

Ka

lahandi

Ke

onjhar

Kh

urda

Ko

raput

Ma

yurbhanj

Phulbani

Pu

ri

Sa

mbalpur

Su

ndargarh

To

tal:

Gen.

File

Tria

lFile

To

tal

G

en.

File

Tria

lFile

To

tal

Gen.

File

Tria

lFile

To

tal

TOTALNO.OFCIVILANDCRIMINALCASES

DURINGTHEPERIODFROM

1.1.2010

TO31.3.2010

Open

ing

Ba

lance

Ins

titution

Dispose

do

f

Pen

dency

CIVIL

196099

13772

10759

199112

CRIMINAL

882865

61177

55491

888551

4193

3202

5289

3478

4529

1713

941

6446

3331

653

1487

2417

10562

3461

51702

630

1910

1330

1852

1999

06

335

3752

484

44

212

459

5373

120

18506

2194

1427

3597

866

2299

1433

658

951

3452

732

1162

1392

5039

2764

27966

2824

3337

4927

2718

4298

1439

993

4703

3936

776

1374

1851

10412

2884

46472

23179

13500

130153

51532

37163

25882

13966

10222

50543

17861

11821

23758

63431

60606

533617

41277

7824

46617

12190

18590

9405

677

106043

21137

10503

5156

14050

16008

12219

327796

64456

21324

1

76770

63722

55753

35287

20743

1

16265

71680

28364

16977

37808

79439

72825

8

61413

40105

13916

129800

50763

36609

25503

14036

104429

50827

17880

11914

23499

63552

60060

642893

22982

7543

46608

12199

18913

9510

6759

10093

21458

10607

4950

13743

15737

12188

213290

63087

21459

176408

62962

55522

35013

20795

114522

72285

28487

16864

37242

79289

72248

856183

8


15/40

Court

News9

OUTLINES OF SOME RECENT ORISSA HIGH COURT JUDGEMENTS

SUDARSAN SETHI V- STATE OF ORISSA.CRIMINAL REVISION NO.458 OF 1996.(Dt.5.1.2010)

BIHAR & ORISSA EXCISE ACT, 1947 SEC.47(a).

I.D. liquor recovered from the house of the accused Whenever any article is seized from thehouse of the accused it is for the prosecution to establish that such contraband articles were inconscious and exclusive possession of the accused In order to establish the same, the prosecution,must prove the exclusivity of possession of such contraband by the accused by independent evidence.

In this case there is no iota of evidence regarding the sole and exclusive possession of thecontraband articles by the accused There is no independent evidence regarding his residence in thathouse Secondly whenever there were other adult members in that house, the prosecution mustexclude the possession of other inmates of the house and prove that the accused was in fact inexclusive and conscious possession of the contraband articles Held, impugned judgments are setaside.

(S.K.Mishra, J.)

BOARD OF SECONDARY EDUCATION, ORISSA -V- MAHENDRA KUMAR PATEL & ORS.REVPET NO.3 OF 2010. (Dt.6.1.2010)

CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE, 1908 ORDER 47, RULE 1.

Power of Review When exercised The power of review may be exercised on the discoveryof new and important matter or evidence which after the exercise of due diligence was not within theknowledge of the person seeking the review or could not be produced by him at the time when the orderwas made.

(M.M.Das, J.)

LINGARAJ REAL ESTATES & DEVELOPERS (P) LTD.-V-STATE OF ORISSA & ANR.CRIMINAL REVISION NO.112 OF 2008.(Dt.6.1.2010)

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE, 1973 SEC.313.

Summons case Court may dispense with recording of accused statement where his attendancewas dispensed with U/s. 205 Cr.P.C. However the accused has to make an application supported byhis/her own affidavit indicating his/her real difficulties vis--vis an undertaking that he/she will not raisethe question of prejudice at any stage of the case including appeal and revision.

(S.K.Mishra, J.)

SAROJ KUMAR PANDA -V- STATE OF ORISSA.CRLMC.NO.2536 OF 2003.(Dt.11.01.2010)

PREVENTION OF CORRUPTION ACT, 1988 SEC.13(1)(c)(d) & (2) r/w SEC.120-B IPC.

Petitioner is the proprietor of a private firm He can not be implicated for an offence under theP.C.Act.

No material to show the commission of offence of conspiracy No statement showing meetingof mind between the two accused persons Prosecution failed to make out a case U/s.120-B IPC. Held, order of cognizance passed by the learned Special Judge (Vigilance), Bhubaneswar against thepetitioner is quashed.

(M.M.Das, J.)


16/40

Court

News10

MAHESWAR MISHRA -V- STATE OF ORISSA & ANR.CRIMINAL REVISION NO.45 OF 2008.(Dt.12.01.2010)

NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS ACT, 1881 SEC.138.

Cheque dishonoured for payment countermanding by the drawer and drawers signature differs Cognizance of the offence U/s.138 N.I. Act was taken against the petitioner Order of cognizancechallenged Held, order of cognizance is not bad on the ground of countermanding of the cheque.

(S.K.Mishra, J.)

SMT. SUBASINI CHOUDHURY -V- SMT.BISAKHA KAR & ORS.F.A.O. NO.251 OF 2004. (Dt.13,1,2010).

(A) SUCCESSION ACT, 1925 SEC.63.

Will Not compulsorily registrable Court should not draw any inference against the genuinenessof the will on the ground of its non-registration.

(B) SUCCESSION ACT, 1925 SEC.63.Execution of will Deprivation of natural heirs Whole idea behind execution of will is to

interfere with the normal line of succession So natural heirs would be debarred in every case of willeither fully or partially.

In the present case there are materials appearing on the face of the will that the testator wasneglected by all his kith and kin which by implication includes his daughter Held, no suspiciouscircumstances can be presumed as the testator had only one daughter who was debarred by executionof the will.

(C) SUCCESSION ACT, 1925 SEC.63.

Will Question of title over the properties bequeathed under the will Court in which a willis sought to be probated has no jurisdiction to examine the question of title to the property underthe will.

(D) SUCCESSION ACT, 1925 SEC.63, 276.

Will Appreciation of evidence of attesting witnesses to a will They happened to be chancewitnesses Discrepancies in their evidence bound to appear in view of the long gap between the dateof execution of the will and the date of examination of the witnesses No ground for disbelieving theirevidence.

Held, impugned judgment is not sustainable This Court finds the will is a genuine one Thereis no suspicious circumstances concerning the execution of the will The testator executed the willwhile in sound health and mind and the will is the last will of the testator The will be probated andrequired letter of administration be issued in favour of the appellant.

(M.M.Das, J.)

SRI HIRALAL GUPTA -V- REPUBLIC OF INDIA & ORS.CRIMINAL REVISION NO.5 OF 2010. (Dt.13.1.2010).


Petitioner was appointed as representative of the Company DITCO U/s. 305 (2) Cr.P.C. He filedpetition before the trial Court for exempting him to go on bail Application rejected Hence this revision.

The provision has been enacted to overcome practical difficulties in trial of a corporation TheParliament have not used the word accused to describe the representative of the Company Moreoverthe question of bail arises only when any person is an accused Held, there is no necessity for thepetitioner to apply for bail.

(S.K.Mishra, J.)


17/40

Court

News11

MIRZA SIDDIK V- STATE OF ORISSA & ORS.

W.P.(C) NO.12457 OF 2009. (Dt.14.1.2010)

ORISSA GOVERNMENT LAND SETTLEMENT ACT, 1962 SEC.7-A(3).

Land sanctioned in favour of the father of the petitioner as a concession for his serving in Army

He was declared eligible by the State Government Resumption of land after the death of the father

of the petitioner Order challenged In this case land settled in favour of an ex-army personnel under

special lease principles of the Government but not under the provisions of the Act.

Held, suo motu proceeding U/s.7-A(3) of the Act is without jurisdiction which is liable to be

quashed.

(I.M.Quddusi, ACJ & Sanju Panda, J.)

CHHOTE KISHAN -V- STATE OF ORISSA

JAIL CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.74 OF 1996.(Dt.14.01.2010).

PENAL CODE, 1860 SEC.304, PART-I.

Deceased gave a push to the wife of the appellant Appellant brought an axe (Falsia) and gave

only one blow on the chest of the deceased Occurrence took place due to sudden provocation of the

appellant Held, conviction of the appellant U/s.302 IPC. is converted to one U/s.304 Part-I IPC.

(Pradip Mohanty,J & B.K.Patel,J.)

SOUBHAGYA MOHANTY -V- HAREKRUSHNA MOHANTY & ORS.

W.P.(C) NO.17609 OF 2009.(Dt.14.1.2010).


Recall of witness for further cross-examination Discretion of the Court to allow at any time

before delivery of judgment Discretion must be exercised judicially and on well accepted judicial

principles and not arbitrarily or capriciously The Court should exercise the discretion with an aim for

giving full opportunity to the parties to present their case and not to fill up their lacuna or drag the

proceeding.

In the present case P.W.1 was earlier examined and cross-examined He was also further

cross-examined as per the direction of this Court Successive applications filed on the same plea was

dismissed by the trial Court Held, there is no error apparent on the face of the impugned order for

interference by this Court.

(Sanju Panda, J.)

NIRANJAN SAHOO V- STATE OF ORISSA.

BLAPL NO.17303 OF 2009.(Dt.19.1.2010).


Anticipatory bail Earlier application rejected by a Bench of Co-ordinate jurisdiction Petitioner

moved second application Maintainability of the application when principle of resjudicata is not applicable

to bail applications.

This Court consciously rejected the earlier application and granted liberty to the petitioner to

surrender before the Court below and move for regular bail and without complying with the direction of

this Court, petitioner filed the present application No substantial change of circumstances or events

Held, Second application for anticipatory bail is not maintainable and accordingly it stands rejected.

(B.K.Nayak, J.)


18/40

Court

News12

SK.IBRAHIM -V- STATE OF ORISSA & ORS.W.P.(C) NO. 15573 OF 2006.(Dt.22.1.2010).

ORISSA FOREST ACT, 1972 SEC.56 (2-C).

Confiscation of vehicle Vehicle carrying Kendu leaves without any authority

In this case petitioner had given the vehicle to his driver - Even if the petitioner instructed thedriver not to use the vehicle for illegal purposes and he had no knowledge about the use of his vehicleillegally, the driver being the agent in charge of the vehicle, knowingly used the same for Commissionof forest offence Held, the vehicle cannot escape confiscation.

(I.M.Quddusi, ACJ & B.K.Nayak, J.)

PREMANJAN PARIDA -V- STATE OF ORISSA & ANR.W.P.(C) NO.5488 OF 2006.(Dt.25.1.2010)

CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, 1950 ART.311.

Departmental Proceeding Unexplained delay in initiation of the Proceeding Proceeding

vitiated.In this case departmental Proceeding initiated in 2001 Opp. Parties did not choose to frame

charges & petitioner had been exonerated of the charges No explanation to frame charges seven yearsafter the alleged incident Held, departmental proceeding is quashed.

(L.Mohapatra, J & B.P.Ray, J.)

PRAMOD KUMAR BASTIA -V- STATE OF ORISSA.CRIMINAL MISC.CASE NO.1428 OF 2008. (Dt.28.01.2010).


Quashing of proceeding U/s.376 IPC Not compoundable in terms of Section 320 Cr.P.C. Petitioner being a teacher had kept sexual relationship with the victim who was a student Petitionermanaged to subvert the course of justice as he continued as a Govt. teacher for the last 17 years

although N.B.W. issued by the trial Court for his apprehension Anguish of the victim about the clearfailure of the judicial system compelled her to file affidavit supporting the prayer of the petitioner forquashing of the proceeding.

Held, plight of the victim can not be allowed to be used as a ground in the hands of the accusedpetitioner for seeking quashing of a Criminal Proceeding Direction issued for immediate apprehensionof the petitioner and for initiation of appropriate disciplinary action.

( I.Mahanty, J.)

ANUPAMA BEHERA & ORS. -V- D.M.,L.I.C. OF INDIA CUTTACK & ANR.W.P.(C) NO.6994 OF 2005.(Dt.29.1.2010).

INSURANCE ACT, 1938 SEC.45.

Repudiation of claim Test to determine If the facts not disclosed in the proposal form

has any bearing on the risk undertaken by the insurer then the same can be construed as a materialfact for repudiation.

In the present case the insured died on 18.06.2004 due to heart failure No material that theinsured suffered from any serious disease affecting his lite expectancy prior to his taking the policies The medical book maintained by the employer of the insured disclosed that he had complained oflower back pain in the year 1999 Merely because the insured had not disclosed in the proposal formsome minor ailments which had no material bearing on the risk undertaken by the L.I.C., the same cannot be construed as fraudulent suppression of material facts so as to authorise the LIC to repudiate itsliability under the contract of Insurance.

Held, repudiation of Insurance Policies and rejection of claim by the LIC not justified.

(B.P.Das, J & S.C.Parija, J.)


19/40

Court

News13

KISHORE CHANDRA MOHANTY -V- UNION OF INDIA & ORS.RVWPET NO.210 OF 2008. (dt.29.1.2010).


Review Jurisdiction Power of review could only be exercised for correction of a mistake oran error which is apparent on the face of the record. Even an illegal or erroneous finding whether on factor law can not be a ground for review and the only remedy available to the party to challenge suchdecision in appeal.

In the present case the review petitioner calls upon the Court to reconsider the issue afresh ona point which was never argued earlier Held, review petition is liable to be dismissed.

(L.Mohapatra, J & I.Mahanty, J.)

SRIDHAR JENA -V- SANTOSH KUMAR JENA & ORS.W.P.(C) NO.15462 OF 2009.(Dt.2.2.2010)

ORISSA MUNICIPAL CORPORATION ACT, 2003 SEC.87.

Petitioner elected as Corporator Bhubaneswar Municipal Corporation His election was challengedon the ground of corrupt practice who suppressed pendency of Criminal Case against him at the timeof filing nomination Petitioner filed petition Under Order 7 Rule 11 C.P.C. to reject the election petitionas not maintainable Application dismissed Hence the writ petition.

Section 89 of the Act lays down the grounds to declare an election void and suppression ofpendency of Criminal Case would not amount to corrupt practice as provided U/s.87(c) of the Act Held,impugned order is set aside consequently the election petition stands rejected.

(R.N.Biswal, J.)

SMT.TULASI SAHUKAR -V- NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LTD.& ORS.MACA NO. 452 OF 2004 (Dt.2.2.2010).

MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, 1988 SEC.157.

Insurance Policy While in force owner expired and the offending vehicle met with an accident Policy not cancelled Ownership of the vehicle transferred in the name of the appellant duringsubsistence of the said policy Policy issued infavour of the previous owner is deemed to have beentransferred in favour of the present owner Impugned award directing owner to pay compensation is setaside Held, no scope for the Insurance Company to avoid the statutory liability towards third partyclaims but to pay compensation with interest and cost to the claimants.

(B.K.Patel, J.)

KELU CHARAN BEHERA -V- STATE OF ORISSA.CRIMINAL REVISION NO.248 OF 1996.(Dt.2.2.2010)

PENAL CODE, 1860 SEC.354.

Outraging the modesty of woman Test to determine Action of the offender is importantwherefrom it could be perceived as to how it is capable of shocking the sense of decency of a woman.

In the present case the informant does not complain that the petitioner aimed the blow to herbreast Rather she has very categorically stated that the petitioner pressed the lathi (Katha) on herneck and stood on it Then the petitioners wife dragged him It appears that the injury to her breastcaused accidentally There is no suggestive overtuous regarding sex Held, offence U/s.354 is notmade out and the conviction of the petitioner U/s.354 IPC. is not sustainable.

(S.K.Mishra, J.)


20/40

Court

News14

MADAN MOHAN SAHU -V- M/S. CENTRAL AGENCIES.CRIMINAL REVISION NO.883 OF 2007.(Dt.2.2.2010).

NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENT ACT, 1881 SEC.138 r/w SEC.319 Cr.P.C.

Issuance of two cheques on different dates Dishonour of both the cheques Held, both theoffences can be tried in a single trial and it is not necessary to start two separate complaints for thetwo cases.

(S.K.Mishra, J.)

XAVIER INSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT, BBSR. -V- SWAPNA HARRISON.W.P.(C) NO.8701 OF 2009. (Dt.4.2.2010)

CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE, 1908 ORDER 39 RULE 1 & 2.

Suit filed by Opp.Party challenging her termination from service along with an application underOrder 39 Rule 1 & 2 By the interim order she was reinstated in service Order confirmed in appeal Hence the writ.

In the present case the main prayer and the interim prayer of the plaintiff is same So sheshould not have been re-instated in service before passing of the decree in the suit Moreover oncethe plaintiff was not in service the Court had no jurisdiction to issue an injunction prohibiting thedefendant from removing her from service or directing the authority to continue the plaintiff in service.

Held, Courts should not grant interim relief at the initial stage which amounts to final relief whileconsidering the interim application.

(Sanju Panda, J.)

NITYANANDA BEHERA V- STATE OF ORISSA & ANR.W.P.(C) NO.8647 OF 2006.(Dt.5.2.2010)

NOTARY ACT, 1952 - SEC.5(2) r/w RULE 13 (12) (b).

Notarial Certificate of practice Renewal of A Notary once registered is entitled to renewalas a matter of course State Government has no discretion to refuse renewal.

In the present case there was allegations of misconduct against the petitioner State Governmentafter considering the misconduct exercised power under Rule 13(12)(b)(iii) of the Notaries Rules, lettingoff the petitioner with warning Held, the self same misconduct can not be a ground for refusing renewalof his Notarial Certificate of practice Direction issued to Opp.Parties to grant renewal to the petitionerwithin four weeks.

(B.P.Das, J & S.C.Parija, J.)

G.M.,REPRESENTING GRIDCO, NOW OPTICL & ANR.-V- SMT.SHYAMALIKA DAS.R.S.A. NO.101 OF 2006. (Dt.5.2.2010).

CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE, 1908 (ACT NO.5 OF 1908) SEC.89.

Suit for permanent injunction from raising High Tension Tower for drawing the transmission lineon the disputed land.

Court is required to weigh the individual interest of the plaintiff vis-a-vis the general public interestfor getting electricity supply Court to find ways and means to see that public inconvenience is avoidedwhile protecting the interest of the plaintiff.

Section 89 has been introduced for the first time for settlement of disputes out side the Courtwith the avowed objective of providing speedy justice.


21/40

Court

News15

In the present case this Court without referring the matter for a settlement out of Court decidedthat the appellant shall pay a sum of Rs.1,75,000 as compensation for raising High Tension Tower overthe land of the respondent but shall not acquire any title over the land in question.

(M.M.Das, J.)

NILAKANTHA PRADHAN -V- STATE OF ORISSA & ORS.CRL.REV. NO.107 OF 2006.(Dt.5.2.2010)


Informants revision against an order of acquittal- Evidence of the witnesses have not beenproperly discussed in the impugned judgment consisting of proper reasoning Propriety has beenentirely ignored Approach of the trial Court has resulted in manifest illegality and gross miscarriageof justice Held, order of acquittal recorded by the trial Court can not be sustained which requiresinterference of the revisional Court.

(S.K.Mishra, J.)

SMRUTI RANJAN PARIDA -V- TARAMANI DAS & ORS.M.A.C.A. NO.311 OF 2009.(Dt.8.2.2010).

MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, 1988 SECS. 2(21),147.

Light Motor Vehicle can also mean a light passenger carriage vehicle and light goods carriagevehicle when the gross vehicle weight or unladen weight does not exceed 7500 Kgs.

In the present case the offending vehicle is an Auto Rickshaw delivery van but since the driverpossess a DL to drive an Auto Rickshaw, the learned Tribunal held that the driver does not possessa valid DL and fixed the liability on the owner.

This Court held the Auto Rickshaw had been constructed solely for carriage of goods and assuch does not cease to be a light motor vehicle as the gross vehicle weight does not exceed 7500

kgs Hence the driver of the Auto Rickshaw Delivery Van was holding a valid and effective DL and therebeing no violation of policy condition, the Insurance Company is held liable to pay the compensationamount.

(S.C.Parija, J.)

SYED NAZAM AHMED @ SAYAD NAJAM AHMED -V- REPUBLIC OF INDIACRLMC.NO.1628 OF 2008. (Dt.9.2.2010).


Prayer to recall P.Ws.5,6 and 8 for further cross-examination Case registered in 2001 andcharge-sheet filed 7 years ago All the above witnesses were cross-examined at substantial length evenP.W.6 was again recalled and was further Cross-examined Held, learned C.B.I. Judge was correct thatthere was no real justification to issue summons to those witnesses for the ends of justice.

(I. Mahanty, J.)

ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO.LTD.-V-MOCHIRAM SAHOO & ORS.M.A.C.A.NO.100 OF 2009.(Dt.10.02.2010).

MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, 1988 SEC.147.

Accident causing death Vehicle involved is a private vehicle Vehicle covered by a comprehensivepolicy Insurance Company is liable to pay the compensation to the claimants.

(B.N.Mahapatra, J.)


22/40

Court

News16

M/S. D.T.M. CONSTRUCTION (INDIA) LTD. V- CAPT. P.K.SRIVASTAVA & ANRW.P.(C) NO.1486 OF 2010 (Dt.11.2.2010)

ARBITRATION & CONCILIATION ACT, 1996 SEC.9, 37.

Application U/s.9 of the Act before the District Judge, Puri , seeking interim relief Clause 19.3of the agreement provides venue of the arbitration shall be at Mumbai Learned District Judge returnedthe application for presentation in proper Court at Mumbai No order allowing or refusing the prayer Not appellable U/s.37 (1) of the Act Writ petition is maintainable.

However since the word only or ouster has not been used in the said Clause of the agreementthe jurisdiction of the Court at Puri is not ousted Held, there is error in the impugned order which isset aside Matter remanded to the learned District Judge, Puri to consider the application on merit.

(Sanju Panda, J.)

JADUMANI ROUT -V- M.D.,ORISSA STATE SEEDS CORPORATION LTD.&ANR.O.J.C. NO.14002 OF 2001.(Dt.16.02.2010).

ORISSA STATE SEEDS CORPORATION SERVICE RULES, 1988 RULE 7(iii).

Employee of the Corporation Age of superannuation 60 years He can be asked to retire atthe age of 58 if the authority found efficiency of the employee have been impaired.

Non-service of three months prior notice Notice does not disclose that the petitioner made toretire compulsorily as his efficiency was found to have been impaired A fresh reason can not beassigned by way of affidavit to validate the earlier order Performance of the petitioner was quitesatisfactory and there was no adverse remark with regard to the efficiency of the petitioner during hisincumbency.

Held, impugned order set aside Petitioner is deemed to have retired from service onsuperannuation at the age of 60 Direction issued to the Opp.Parties to pay salary/differential salaryto the petitioner along with normal annual increments along with other consequential service benefitswithin two months.

(A.S.Naidu, J & B.N.Mahapatra, J.)

GARBAPU VENKATIRAMANA -V- STATE OF ORISSA.JAIL CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.220 OF 1998. (Dt.16.2.2010)

EVIDENCE ACT, 1872 SEC.27.

Leading to discovery Police arrested the accused on 11.08.97 at 12 noon Accused gavedisclosure statement in presence of P.W.4 vide Ext.5 Thereafter accused led the police to the halfconstructed house of one Babu Rao and brought out the weapon of offence M.O.I from the heap of bricksand the same was seized vide Ex.6 P.W.4 is a witness to the leading to discovery He stated tohave signed the police paper on the night of occurrence i.e. on 10.03.97 and the accused led the police

and M.O.I was recovered at 2.30 P.M.

Discrepancy with regared to date of seizure and arrest of the appellant Held, this Court is notinclined to place reliance upon Ext.5 & 6.

(Pradip Mohanty, J & B.P.Ray, J.)

DILIP KUMAR RAY -V- STATE OF ORISSA & ORS.CRIMINAL MISC.CASE NO.1895 OF 2002.(Dt.17.2.2010).


Quashing of F.I.R. Petitioner was not arrayed as an accused in the F.I.R. No materialto implicate the petitioner Even after taking the petitioners case as in the F.I.R. and the charge sheet


23/40

Court

News17

on its face value, if the allegation made are accepted and nothing is added there to or substracted therefrom, no offence is made out against the petitioner.

Held, continuance of Criminal Proceeding against the petitioner for the offence U/s.13(2)

read with Section 13(1)(d) of the P.C.Act, 1988, Section 120-B IPC and Section 21 of Orissa Timber andother Forest Produce Transit Rules, 1980 will amount to miscarriage of justice and abuse of the processof Court.

(B.P.Das, J.)

SK.AKHTARUL ISLAM -V- D.I. OF POLICE & ANR.W.P.(C) NO.17667 OF 2008.(Dt.17.2.2010).


Every action of the executive must be fortified by reasons and should be free from arbitrariness.

Petitioner applied for the post of Constable His application accepted and he appeared at thephysical test Thereafter he was informed that his form has been rejected due to wrong mentioning of

his age.

Mistake in calculation of the age by one day appears to be inadvertent and not deliberate andby such mistake petitioner does not gain any thing Held, action of the authorities in rejecting theapplication of the petitioner not justified Direction issued to the Opp.parties for appointment of thepetitioner to the post of Constable failing which the petitioner shall be entitled to compensation ofRupees one lakh which shall be paid within three months or which ever is earlier.


STATE OF ORISSA & ORS.-V- SRI JIRIMIYA PRASAD NANDA.O.J.C. NO.73 OF 2002.(Dt.18.2.2010).

POLICE ACT, 1861 SEC.9.

Under Section 9 of the Police Act, 1861 there is neither any scope for the Opp.Party to withdrawthe resignation after it was accepted nor there is any scope for the employer to wait for two monthsto accept the resignation.

(B.P.Das, J & B.K.Nayak, J.)

AKURA NAYAK -V- STATE OF ORISSA.CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.25 OF 2007.(Dt.19.2.2010).

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE, 1973 SEC.289 (3), 446.

Conviction by trial Court Trial Court allowed the accused persons to remain on bail and obtainbail from the appellate Court within thirty days Order of the appellate Court could not be obtained intime Prayer made before the trial Court for extension of time for obtaining order of bail and fordispensing with the presence of the convicts Prayer refused Notice issued to the bailer to showcause as to why the bail amount shall not be realized from him Show cause filed by bailer Showcause not accepted without even discussing the grounds taken therein Order challenged.

Held, it was within the jurisdiction of the learned trial Court to extend time for obtaining bail orderfrom the appellate Court This Court also sets aside the order directing realization of bail amount fromthe appellant.

(S.K.Mishra, J.)


24/40

Court

News18

SAROJ KUMAR NAYAK -V- STATE OF ORISSA & ORS.O.J.C. NO.14987 OF 2008. (Dt.22.02.2010).

ORISSA EDUCATION (RECRUITMENT & CONDITIONS OF TEACHERS & MEMBERS OF THE

STAFF OF AIDED EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS) RULES, 1974 RULE 21(1).Director can invoke the jurisdiction under Rule 21 only if the Governing Body refuses or neglects

to take disciplinary action.

In this case on receipt of information from the Director, the Governing Body initiated a proceeding,conducted an enquiry and found the petitioner not guilty and was not inclined to initiate any disciplinaryproceeding Thus, the requirement of law is not satisfied and it can not be presumed that the GoverningBody refused or neglected.

Held, suspension of the petitioner two days before he retires on attaining the age of superannuationwithout following the mandatory requirements of Rule 21(1) of the 1974 Rules can not be sustained.


JOGENDRANATH GHARAI -V- CHAIRMAN & M.D., U.CO.BANK, KOLKATA & ORS.

W.P.(C) NO.13914 OF 2007.(Dt.23.2.2010).


Disciplinary proceeding Writ Court can not re-appreciate evidence but can not shut its eyeswhere the evidence and relevant materials have not been taken into consideration.

In this case there is deliberate omission of the evidence of D.W.1 which goes in favour of thedelinquent and there was non-consideration of the reply to the enquiry report Held, proceeding vitiated,impugned orders set aside Matter remitted to disciplinary authority to restart from the stage offurnishing the reply However, before the proceeding restarts the petitioner be reinstated in service.

(A.S.Naidu,J & B.N.Mahapatra,J.)

NAMITARANI PRADHAN -V-STATE & ORS. & GUNANIDHI DEHURY & ANR. -V-SUB-COLLECTOR, ANGUL & ANR.

W.P.(C) NO.14559 & 16024 OF 2009.(Dt.23.02.2010).

ORISSA GRAM PACHAYAT RULES, 1968 RULE 226.

Procedural law It is the handmade of justice and not its mistress- It is not a tyrant but aservant Where noncompliance of the procedure is prejudicial to the parties, then only it is mandatory,otherwise not.

In the present case there was requisition for no confidence motion against Sarpanch Thereis nothing in Rule 226 that in case of initiating no confidence motion against a Sarpanch, the requisitionshall be made to him However if such a requisition is made to the Sarpanch he would be in an

embarrassing position and he may not also call such a meeting and in that event members who signedthe requisition may report the fact to the Sub-Collector who must call the meeting within seven daysfrom the date of receipt of the report Hence the notice of no confidence motion along with the copyof the requisition and the resolution is required to be sent to all the members including the Sarpanch So the Sarpanch is aware of the allegation made against her and in no way she is prejudiced Held,even if requisition was not made to the Sarpanch for holding the special meeting to initiate no confidencemotion against her it would not be fatal.

(R.N.Biswal. J.)


25/40

Court

News19

MAHESH CHANDRA PATTNAIK -V- STATE.CRIMINAL REVISION NO.1153 OF 2007.(Dt.24.2.2010).


Right to speedy trial Pendency of proceeding against the petitioner for possessing assetsdisproportionate to his known sources of income There is no explanation with regard to delay of sevenyears in investigation There after it took long twelve years for preparation of copies of police papers No circumstances is brought to the notice of the Court to indicate that the delay in investigation aswell as commencement of trial is attributed to the petitioner No exceptional circumstances exists foroverlooking such inordinate delay Held, in order to ensure propriety and to secure the ends of justice,the proceeding against the petitioner is quashed.

(B.K.Patel, J.)

INDRAMANI SWAIN -V- STATE OF ORISSA & ORS.W.P.(C) NO.14891 OF 2006.(Dt.25.2.2010).

CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, 1950 ART. 21.

Unnatural death of U.T.P. Injury Nos.1,4,5,6 & 9 are ante mortem in nature There was noclear explanation as to the cause of such injuries which normally can not be caused in one fall Evenif the opinion of the doctor is accepted that the deceased died due to over dose of Nitroson-10 then itis also the negligence of the authorities for which Nitroson-10 group of drugs reached the U.T.Ps insidethe jail Held, death of the deceased was due to negligence on the part of the officers concerned whowere in charge of proper watch and ward duty of UTPs - Direction issued for payment of Rs.2,50,000/-as Compensation to the petitioner.


SUBASH CHANDRA MAHATAB -V- STATE OF ORISSA & ORS.W.P.(C) NO.19577 OF 2009.(Dt.25.2.2010).

CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, 1950 ART.16, 309.

Advertisement to fill up the post of Member, State Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Cuttack Petitioner already appeared at the interview - He was again asked to appear for the second roundof interview Action challenged Plea that in the Ist interview short-listing of Candidates was adopted Advertisement silent about short-listing Neither the Act nor the Rules contain such provision Held,decision to conduct second round of interview for the said post is quashed Authorities are directedto select Candidates out of the list prepared in the first round of interview.


DR.ANANGA KUMAR MOHAPATRA V- STATE OF ORISSA & ANR.W.P.(C) NO.13338 OF 2009. (Dt.26.2.2010)

CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, 1950 ART. 311.

Disciplinary proceeding While the petitioner was working as H.O.D. department of CommerceB.J.B. Autonomous College, a student of +3 Commerce committed suicide Her suicides note revealsthat two lecturers are indulging in private tuitions and harassing students who did not take their coaching.

Petitioner being the H.O.D. was aware of the circular of the Govt. prohibiting private tuitions -Inquiry Authority found the petitioner and two lecturers guilty and imposed punishment Tribunal failedto interfere as the punishment was minor in nature.

Findings arrived at by the Commissioner for Department Inquiries (C.D.I) are totally perverse,absurd and defiance to logic and beyond the scope of reference and charges Held, it is a fit casewhere the Disciplinary proceeding against the petitioner is liable to be quashed.

(B.P. Das, J & B.K. Nayak, J.)


26/40

Court

News20

ROHITA @ SUMANTA DALAI @ DAS & ANR.-V- STATE OF ORISSA.JAIL CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.307 OF 1998.(Dt.2.3.2010).

EVIDENCE ACT, 1872 SEC.27 & 32.

Dying declaration Recorded by the doctor P.W.9 under Ext.10 In cross-examination, P.W.9admitted that there was no endorsement in Ext.10 that the said declaration was recorded by him Absence of endorsement would not render the dying declaration not acceptable as P.W.9 was satisfiedthat the injured was in a free state of mind and was capable to make such declaration.

More over after appellants were arrested appellant No.1 led the police and gave recovery of theknife The knife was identified in Court by the witnesses More over clothings of appellant No.1 wereseized by the police which were stained with blood.

Held, prosecution is able to prove that both the appellants with their common intention havecommitted murder of the deceased.

(Pradip Mohanty, J & B.P.Ray, J.)

SISTER MEENA LALITA BORWA -V- STATE & ORS. & THOMASCHELLAN & ORS. -V- STATE OF ORISSA & ORS.TRP (CRL) NOS. 15 & 17 OF 2009. (Dt.3.3.2010)


Transfer of Sessions Trial from the Court of Addl. Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court-I at Phulbanito Cuttack Large scale communal violence in Kandhamal district Petitioner was allegedly sexuallyassaulted, raped and paraded naked by the mob Petitioner claiming threat to her life so also thewitnesses.

Law is well settled that the state has a definite role to play in protecting the witnesses,especially in sensitive cases involving those in power, who have potitical patronage and could wieldmuscle and money power in order to avoid the trial getting tainted and de-railed and truth becoming a

casuality The State as a protector of its citizens has to ensure that during a trial in Court thewitnesses could safely depose the truth without any fear of being hunted by those against whom he hasdeposed The object of Criminal justice system is not only to mete out justice to accused but alsoto protect the innocent A Criminal trial is in essence a search for truth In our Criminal justice system,which is substantially dependent on the oral testimony of witnesses truth can only be arrived at, if suchwitnesses who are the eyes and ears of justice system can come fearlessly and depose the truth inCourt So the witnesses need to be protected by the state to ensure that Criminal proceedings do notbecome mere mock trials Held, transfer applications are allowed with certain directions.

(I. Mahanty, J.)

INDIAN RARE EARTHS LTD. V- M.D.,(SOUTCO),GANJAM & ANR.O.J.C. NO.2774 OF 2000. (Dt.3.3.2010)

ORISSA ELECTRICITY REGULATORY COMMISSION DISTRIBUTION (CONDITIONS OF SUPPLY)CODE, 1998 REGULATION 85(3).

Disruption of power supply due to Super Cyclone Demand of Energy bills against the petitionerduring that period is under challenge Opp.Party says that this being an act of God the aforesaidprovision will not be applicable to the petitioners case.

Held, during the period in dispute there being no contractual obligation on either of the Parties,levy of demand on the petitioner as made by the Opp.Party Company can not be sustained.

(B.P.Ray, J.)


27/40

Court

News

GEETANJALI PATTNAIK & ORS. -V- DISTRICT JUDGE, BALASORE & ANR.W.P.(C) NOS.9690,9691 & 9692 OF 2009.(Dt.5.3.2010).


Service Regularisation Petitioners were selected in the recruitment held under the 1969Rules They were appointed temporarily on adhoc basis and continued to be employed since 2003without any interruption Their services are otherwise required by the institution and they would betterserve than the fresh recruits by virtue of their experience gained in the meantime Held, no justificationto refuse regularisation to the petitioners on the pretext of the special scheme.

(I.M.Quddusi, ACJ & Sanju Panda, J.)

UNION OF INDIA REP.THROUGH THE C.G.M. (TELECOM),BSNL & ANR.- V- SHRI JUGAL KISHSORE SAMAL.W.P.(C) NO.8215 OF 2009.(Dt.5.3.2010)

CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, 1950 ART.309, 311.

Promotion Sealed cover Procedure D.P.C. recommended Promotion of Opp.Party under

OTBP and BCR Schemes w.e.f. 30.11.1983 and 1.7.1991 respectively By that time Opp.Party sufferedpunishment in a disciplinary proceeding So recommendation of D.P.C. kept in sealed cover Opp.Partywas found guilty and was awarded punishment of stoppage of promotion for a period of one year videorder Dt.31.12.2003.

Held, during currency of the punishment Opp.Party is not entitled to the benefits under both theSchemes and the department rightly extended the benefits to the Opp.Party w.e.f. 31.12.2004 and1.1.2005 respectively.

(L.Mohapatra, J & B.K.Patel, J.)

DIVISIONAL MANAGER, UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO.LTD., CUTTACK V-NAGENDRA SETHI & ORS. (WITH BATCHE).

M.A. NOS.454,455,456,457,458,465,466,467,468 & 469 OF 1996.(Dt.5.3.2010)

(A) MOTOR VEHICLE ACT, 1988 SEC.140.Accident Dt.16.06.1992 Deceased died Under the unamended provision of Section 140

quantum of compensation was fixed at Rs.25,000/- in case of death The said provision amended w.e.f.14.11.1994 making Rs.25,000/- as Rs.50,000/- - Tribunal directed for payment of Rs.50,000/- as thepayment was made after Amendment Act came in to force Hence these appeals.

Held, the Amendment made w.e.f. 14.11.1994 does not have any retrospective application Liability of the insurer can be stretched within the law that was prevailing on the date of accident.

(B) MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, 1988 SEC.140.

Whether interest is payable on the amount of no fault liability awarded U/s.140 of the Act.

Held, in respect of no fault liability, the question of awarding interest does not arise as interestmay be awarded at the time of final award.

(B.N.Mahapatra, J.)

SRI KELU CHANRANA JENA & ORS. -V- STATE OF ORISSA.CRLREV NO.533 OF 2006. (Dt.5.3.2010)


Petitioners were named in the F.I.R. as accused persons Not charge sheeted by the investigatingagency However the informant and his son have in their evidence in Court specifically implicated thepresent petitioners ascribing different roles played by each of the petitioners during occurrence Learnedcourt below has exercised his discretionary power properly and judiciously Held, impugned ordersuffers from no infirmity.

(B.K.Nayak. J.)

21


28/40

Court

News22

SRI ARJUNA CHANDRA SAHOO -V- P.O., INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL, ROURKELA & TWO ORS.W.P.(C) NO.1194 OF 2003. (Dt.10.3.2010).

INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES ACT, 1947 SEC.25-f.

Petitioner was engaged as peon on daily wage basis He served the Bank continuously from1.10.1995 to 27.7.2000 His daily wage enhanced from time to time Tribunal found the appointmentof the petitioner was not in terms of the Staff Service Rules and terminated him from service Hencethe Writ Petition.

Even if the engagement of the petitioner was not in accordance with the Staff Service Rules,1984, the petitioner having rendered continuous service of 240 days in one calendar year he can beconsidered as a workman Once he is a workman he can swim into the harbour of Section 25-F andhe can not be terminated without payment at the time of retrenchment Held, retrenchment of thepetitioner is illegal and he is entitled to an order of reinstatement and a compensation of Rs.50,000/- bepaid to him in lieu of back wages.

(M.M. Das, J.)

SMT.SATYABATI PRADHAN -V- SHYAM SUNDAR NAYAK & ORS.W.P.(C) NO.12404 OF 2008.(Dt.11.3.2010).


Amendment of plaint Application allowed in part Order challenged Impugned order ifallowed to stand will be an error apparent on the face of the record as the Court below has notconsidered the amendment application on its proper prospective and further, it will cause injustice to theparties Held, this Court sets aside the impugned order and allowed the amendment application of theplaintiff subject to payment of cost to O.P.1 to 4 before the trial Court.

(Sanju Panda, J.)

SASHIREKHA NAYAK -V- CHIEF EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, NESCO (ELECTRICAL), BALASORE & ORS.

WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO.4336 OF 2007.(Dt.12.3.2010).


Electrocution death Deceased came in contact with live electric wire Compensation claimedby the widow in writ petition.

Whenever there is any disputed fact in issue for adjudication, writ jurisdiction is not the properforum Held, petitioner should approach the Civil Court for redressal of the grievances.

(S.K.Mishra, J.)

SRI JALANDHAR PRADHAN -V- STATE OF ORISSA & ANR.W.P.(C) NO.8912 OF 2007. (Dt.15.03.2010)

SERVICE De novo enquiry Not provided under the statute So when permissible.

Disciplinary Authority can direct for a de novo enquiry while disagreeing with the findings of theInquiry Officer if the inquiry report suffers from material irregularity and when important evidence, eitherto be relied upon by the department or by the delinquent official, is shut out, as the same would notresult in any advancement of justice but on the other hand result in a miscarriage there of - Moreoverthe Disciplinary Authority while giving direction for a de novo inquiry should satisfy itself that there isfundamental procedural error.



29/40

Court

News

MANOJ KUMAR TRIPATHY V- MAYARANI PRAHARAJ.MATA NO.41 OF 2003.(Dt.18.3.2010).

HINDU MARRIAGE ACT, 1955 SEC.13 (1) (ia).

Divorce sought on the ground of cruelty No evidence regarding any specific instance of cruelty Further plea that due to long separation of parties there has been irretrievable break down of marriagewhich is not included as a ground for divorce U/s.13 of the Act Only the Apex Court in some casesdirected the marriage to be dissolved on that ground in exercise of jurisdiction Under article 142 of theConstitution of India and such jurisdiction is not available to any other Court including the High Court.

Held, in the absence of cogent evidence to prove cruelty, long separation by itself can not bea ground for grant of decree of divorce.

(L.Mohapatra,J & B.K.Patel, J.)

K.N.SINGH & ANR. V- G.M. (PERSONNEL), M.M.T.C. LTD. & ORS.WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO.9934 OF 2009.(Dt.18.03.2010).

SERVICE Transfer of Class-IV or low paid employees Power of transfer should be usedsparingly when required under administrative exigencies and not in a routine manner More so, thepower has to be exercised in good faith not arbitrarily and the employer should try to accommodate thelow paid employees at near by places as his transfer to a far distant place may cause him and his familygreat financial hardship and make his survival difficult.


DEBENDRA SWAIN & ORS. V- STATE OF ORISSA & ORS.W.P.(C) NO.2424 OF 2009. (Dt.18.3.2010).


Impletion of parties A person who has direct interest in the subject matter of litigation canbe impleded as a party Whether a person will be impleded as a party in the suit or not, does not

depend merely on the wish of the plaintiff The policy of law is to avoid multiplicity of litigation.

In the present case O.P.2 to 6 filed application in a representative capacity representing thevillagers as they have a right over the said property which is used as a grazing field Held, O.P. 2 to6 have direct interest in the property and the trial Court rightly impleded them as parties to the suit.

(Sanju Panda, J.)

HRUSIKESH SETHI & ORS. V- STATE & ORS. & RAJEEBA KUMAR DUTTA V- STATE OF ORISSA & ORS.

WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NOS.3388 & 3752 OF 2010.(Dt.19.3.2010)

ADMINSTRATIVE TRIBUNALS ACT, 1985 SEC.15.

Civil Service of the State Dispute with regard to matters concerning contractual/adhoc/

temporary recruitment to Civil Service in consonance with Section 15 of the Act Held, AdministrativeTribunal alone has jurisdiction to decide such disputes.


M/S. GULF OIL CORPORATION LTD. & ANR.-V- STATE OF ORISSA & SIXTEEN ORS.Review Petition Nos.230, 231, 232, 233, 234, 235, 236 & 237 ,all of 2009. (Dt.22,3,2010).


This Court dismissed the writ petition on 10.4.2008 as withdrawn with a liberty to approachother forum Without approaching other forums, petitioners approached the Honble Supreme Court Before the Apex Court, they also seek permission to withdraw the petition in order to file appropriatepetition before the High Court Petitioners again filed fresh writ petitions on the same cause of action This Court dismissed the writ petitions Hence the review petition before this Court.

23


30/40

Court

News

Allowing withdrawal of the writ petition liberty was granted to the petitioners to approach anyother forum which is obviously not another Bench of this Court Before the Supreme Court petitionersprayed to withdraw their petitions with permission to file appropriate petition before this Court is not adirection from the apex Court Moreover the order impugned does not come within the ambit of reviewas the same does not suffer from any error apparent on the face of the record.

Held, Review Petitions are dismissed in limine.(B.P.Das, J & C.R.Dash, J.)

M/S.HARSHPRIYA CONSTRUCTION (P) LTD.-V- THE I.G. OF REGISTRATION, ORISSA, CUTTACK & ORS.

W.P.(C) NO.8690 OF 2009.(Dt.23.3.2010).

THE INDIAN STAMP (ORISSA AMENDMENT) ACT, 2008 SEC.47-A r/w SEC.61(2) OFREGISTRATION ACT.

Under valued sale deed Neither the Registering Officer nor the Stamp Collector is legallyempowered to retain possession of the same They are obliged under law to return it to the Petitioner.

(I.M.Quddusi, ACJ & B.K.Nayak,J.)

GAYATRI DATTA NAYAK & ORS. -V- STATE & ORS, ORISSA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION V- ANANTA

GOPAL BEHERA & ORS., RAMESH CHANDRA DAKUA & ORS. V- STATE OF ORISSA & ORS.

W.P.(C) NO.4635,4826 & 4886 OF 2010. (Dt.23.03.2010).

ORISSA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION (CODITION OF SERVICE) REGULATION 1952 REGULATION 3.

O.P.S.C. consists of a Chairman and five members Presently two members have beenappointed by the Govt. and one is nominated to act as Chairman Tribunal observed that the Commissionis not complete to declare the result of Orissa Civil Service (Main) Examination-2006 and stayed the viva-voce test Hence this writ petition.

The word any mentioned in Regulation-3 according to 6 th Edition of Blacks law Dictionary doesnot necessarily mean only one person but may have reference to more than one or to many Held,order passed by the Tribunal that in the absence of more than one member business of O.P.S.C. cannot be transacted is fallacious and erroneous Interim order passed by the Tribunal is set aside andOPSC is directed to proceed with the interview.


HARISCHANDRA PATEL -V- STATE OF ORISSA. CRIMINAL MISC.CASE NO.3038 OF 2009. (Dt.25.3.2010).


Accusation of petitioner with the aid of Section 34 I.P.C. On a plain reading of the case recordsas well as the charge sheet, it appears that nothing has been made out by the Prosecution to establisheither directly or circumstantially that there was any plan or meeting of minds of all the accused personsto commit an offence nor even it was prima facie established that there was any pre-arrangement ormeeting of minds on the spur of the moment before commission of the crime.

Held, requirement of Section 34 I.P.C. in the present case has not at all been satisfied for thepurpose of implicating the present petitioner as a co-accused Order Dt.15.12.2008 taking cognizanceagainst the petitioner is quashed.

(I. Mahanty, J.)

24


31/40

Court

News

SMT.LAXMIDEVI RAM -V- TIRUPATI ELECTRO MARKETING PVT.LTD.CRLMC NO. 2189 OF 2009. (Dt.25.3.2010)

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE, 1973 - SEC.482.

Offence U/s.141 N.I.Act A penal provision creating vicarious liability Every person connectedwith the company shall not fall within the ambit of the provision Only those persons who were in chargeof and responsible for the conduct of the business of the company at the time of commission of anoffence will be liable for criminal action.

In the present case the complaint case discloses that there was no clear averments to implicatea Director i.e. the petitioner for having connived or neglected in committing the offence and admittedlythe Managing Director Sri Rajendra Prasad Ram impleded as accused No.2 in the complaint petitionhad issued the cheque in question.

Held, no scope to prosecute the present petitioner and the order of cognizance passed againsthim is quashed.

(I. Mahanty, J.)

ANABIHARI DAS V- BIJAY KUMAR SAHU & ORS.W.P.(C) NO.4435 OF 2010.(Dt.26.3.2010).

ORISSA MUNICIPAL ACT, 1950 SEC.16(1)(ix) r/w ORDER 3 RULE 4(2) C.P.C.

Petitioner was elected as Chairman of the N.A.C. His election was challenged on the groundthat at the time of filing nomination he was an advocate appearing against N.A.C. Petitioner says hegave up briefs prior to filing of nomination Learned District Judge disqualified the petitioner U/s.16(1)(ix)of the Act Hence the writ petition.

An advocate engaged in a case owes duty not only to his client but also to the Court He isan officer of the Court - The advocate by his obligation is bound to discharge his duties to his clientwith the strictest fidelity and is answerable to the disciplinary jurisdiction of the Court for dereliction ofduty The relation involves the highest personal trust and confidence so much so that it cannot be

delegated without consent.

Held, his appointment is deemed to continue till the leave is granted by the Court There isabsolutely no scope to read the provision U/s.16(1)(ix) of the Act in isolation Determination of employmentor appointment of an advocate has to satisfy the requirement under order 3 Rule 4(2) C.P.C.. No reasonto interfere with the impugned judgment.

(L.Mohapatra, J & B.K.Patel, J.)

KUMAR DAS & ORS. -V- BANCHHANIDHI BEHERA & ANR.CRIMINAL REVISION NO.51 OF 2001.(Dt.26.3.2010).

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE, 1973 SEC.256 (1), 300.

Complaint case ended in acquittal Whether Second complaint in respect of the very same

occurrence is maintainable in view of the bar provided U/s.300 Cr.P.C. - No.In the present case the subsequent complaint case was tried and petitioners were convicted and

the same was confirmed in appeal Held, revision is allowed Impugned original & appellate ordersof conviction & sentence are set aside.

(B.K.Nayak, J.)

PRAFULLA KUMAR MOHANTY V- STATE OF ORISSA.BLAPL NO.2924 OF 2010. (Dt.29.3.2010).

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE, 1973 SEC.438, 439.

Offence U/s. 302/201 I.P.C. Petitioner has been given interim protection U/s.438 Cr.P.C. While under such protection petitioner moved application U/s. 439 Cr.P.C. for regular bail Maintainabilityof the said application.

25


32/40

Court

News

Held, though the petitioner is on interim protection extended U/s.438 Cr.P.C. he is deemed tobe in custody for the purpose of the present bail application U/s.439 Cr.P.C. and the same is maintainable.

(C.R.Dash, J.)

SARASWATI PANIGRAHI -V - D.M., UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO.LTD. & ORS.W.P.(C) NO.11633 OF 2007. (Dt.30.3.2010).


S.B.I. Credit Card Complementary Personal Insurance coverage of Rs. 2.00 lakhs for loss oflife in any accident Certificate holder died in a road accident Wife applied for the claim InsuranceCompany wanted to pay Rs.1.lakh on the ground that due to new agreement between the insurer andthe S.B.I. the assured amount was reduced to Rs.1.00 lakh Hence the writ petition.

While issuing certificate promise has been made to pay the Card-Holder Rs.2. lakhs and thereduction of quantum of insurance coverage has never been communicated by S.B.I. during the life timeof the late husband of the petitioner Held, since the certificate holder was not a party to the change

in the master policy and the agreement between the S.B.I. and the insured, the insurer is liable to paya sum of Rs.2 lakhs to the petitioner towards insurance coverage of her late husband.

(B.P.Das, J & I.Mahanty, J.)

Course contents ofthe Training

Cadre ofOfficers

participating

No. of Officersparticipated.

Sl.No.

Remarks

ORISSA JUDICIAL ACADEMYDuring the period, following training programmes are organized in Orissa Judicial Academy

imparting training on the topics as hereunder.

1. 21.12.2009continuing

First Foundation Course Civil Judges onProbation

(Newly recruitedJudicial Officers)

43 Civil Judges = 43

Durationof the

Programme

2. 06.02.2010&

07.02.2010

Cyber Law & Challengesof Cyber Space

District Judes 25 D.J. = 25

3. 20.02.2010to

25.02.2010

Mediation Dist. Judge &Civil Judge (SD)

16 D.J. = 2C.J.(S.D.) = 14

4. 27.02.2010

&28.02.2010

ADR with special referenceto Sec. 89 C.P.C.

Sr. Civil Judges 22 Sr.C.J. = 13

C.J. = 9

5. 17.3.2010to

19.3.2010

Juvenile Justice C.J.M., Membersof C.W.C.s &

J.J.B.s.

25 C.J.M. = 5C.W.C.s. = 14

J.J.Bs. = 6

6. 21.3.2010to

25.3.2010

Mediation Advocates Adv. = 14

7. 27.3.2010&

28.3.2010

Juvenile Justice Act C.J.M.,C.J. (S.D.)

25 C.J.M. = 13C.J.(S.D.) - 12

26


33/40

Court

News

MAJOR EVENTS

1. Swearing-in-Ceremony of Honble Shri Justice Venkategowda Gopalagowda as ChiefJustice of Orissa High Court.

Honble Shri Justice Venkategowda Gopalagowda was appointed as Chief Justice of Orissa High

Court vide Notification No. K.13027/1/2010-US.II dated 22.3.2010 of the Govt. of India, Ministry of

Law & Justice (Department of Justice), New Delhi.

His Excellency Shri Murlidhar Chandrakant Bhandare, the Governor of Orissa administered the

Oath of Office to His Lordship on 25.3.2010 at 10.30 A.M.

Honble the Chief Minister of Orissa, Honble Judges of the Court, Honble Ministers and high

dignitaries of the State were present on the said occasion.

2. Swearing-in-Ceremony of Honble Shri Justice Bijaya Krishna Patel as Judge of Orissa

High Court.

Honble Shri Justice Bijaya Krishna Patel was appointed as Judge of Orissa High Court vide

Notification No. K.13027/3/2009-US.II dated 12.1.2010 of the Govt. of India, Ministry of Law &

Justice (Department of Justice), New Delhi.

His Lordship took Oath of Office on 14.1.2010 at 4.00 P.M. in the name of God.

3. Celebration of Republic Day.

On the occasion of celebration of Republic Day in the High Court premises, Honble Mr. Justice

I.M.Quddusi, the then Acting Chief Justice, Orissa High Court hoisted the National Flag on 26thJanuary, 2010. Honble Judges, officers and staff of the Court also graced the function.

4. Observance of Martyrs Day.

On 30.1.2010 (Martyrs Day) at 11.00 A.M., silence for two minutes by standing was observed in

Orissa High Court in the memory of those who sacrificed their lives in the struggle for Indias

Freedom.

5. Inauguration of 5th floor of the 2nd Extension Building of Orissa High Court.

The 5th floor of the 2nd Extension Building of Orissa High Court was inaugurated by Honble Mr.

Justice I.M.Quddusi, the then Acting Chief Justice, Orissa High Court on 23rd March, 2010.Honble Judges of the Court also graced the said occasion.

6. Inauguration of the 1st floor of the New Civil Court Building at Balasore.

The 1st floor of the new Civil Court Building at Balasore was inaugurated by Honble Mr. Justice

B.N.Mahapatra, Judge, Orissa High Court on 20.3.2010. The Judicial Officers and Members of

the Bar at Balasore also attended the said occasion.

27


34/40

Court

News

Names of Honble Judges of Orissa High Court

participating Programmes/ Courses at the N.J.A., Bhopal and other places

Names of the Honble Judges PeriodSl. No. Topics

1. Honble Shri JusticeI.M.Quddusithe then Acting Chief Justice

23.1.2010 Attended High Level NationalConsultation Meeting on National Policy

and Action Plan for Enforcement ofCyber Law at New Delhi.

Attended the Conference on WomensAccess to Justice and Rehabilitation ofvictims of rape to mark the International

Womens Day at Vigyan Bhawan,New Delhi.

2. Honble Shri JusticeB.P.Das

13.3.2010 Attended the function 8th All India meetof Legal Services Authority

at Chandigarh.

3. Honble Shri JusticeI. Mahanty

23.1.2010&

24.1.2010

Resource Person for the OrientationProgramme for Newly Appointed ADJs.

at N.J.A, Bhopal

7.3.2010

Attended the Conference on WomensAccess to Justice and Rehabilitation ofvictims of rape to mark the International

Womens Day at Vigyan Bhawan,New Delhi.

7.3.2010

4. Honble Shri JusticeB.N.Mahapatra

23.1.2010&

24.1.2010

Attended the National Conference ofHigh Court Justices on the Contribution

of High Courts to the Development of Lawat N.J.A, Bhopal

5. Honble Shri JusticeS.K.Mishra

20.3.2010&

21.3.2010

Participated in the National Conference ofHigh Court Justices on Indian Judiciary :

The Next Decade at N.J.A, Bhopal

30.1.2010&

31.1.2010

Resource Person for the East ZoneJudicial Conference on Enhancing Timely

Justice, Strengthening Criminal JusticeAdministration at Gauhati.

28


35/40

Court

News

HIGH COURT LEGAL SERVICES COMMITTEE

1. Honble Shri Justice B.P.Das, Seniormost Judge, Orissa High Court has been nominated by

the Governor as the Executive Chairman of Orissa State Legal Services Authority after transfer

of Honble Shri Justice I.M.Quddusi to Chhattisgarh High Court. Honble Shri Justice L.Mohapatra,

who was an Ex-Officio Member of this Committee has been n

Documents

Oh Issueno Xi