Withholding Tax Refunds Without Justification Violates Section 55 Of JVAT Act: Jharkhand High Court

The Jharkhand High Court has held that withholding tax refunds beyond the statutorily prescribed period without adequate justification, violates Section 55 of the Jharkhand Value Added Tax Act, 2005, and deprives the taxpayer of rightful dues. The Court ruled that the refund must carry interest from the date the excess demand was determined, and non-allocation of funds by the State...

Jharkhand HC Rejects State's Plea Against Quashing Of Executive Order Barring Society From Registering Land Despite Final Decree, Fines ₹50K

The Jharkhand High Court dismissed state government's appeal against a single judge's decision which had quashed an executive order restricting a cooperative society from registering a land despite a civil court decree in the latter's favour which had attained finality. In doing so the court said that the civil court decree will not be set aside merely because the State claims that there was...

Jharkhand State Universities Act | Prior JPSC Approval Must To Initiate Disciplinary Action Against Teacher: High Court

The Jharkhand High Court has held that under the first proviso to Section 57A(1) of the Jharkhand State Universities Act, 2000, the governing body of a minority-affiliated college must obtain prior approval from the Jharkhand Public Service Commission (JPSC) before initiating disciplinary proceedings against a teacher. It ruled that disciplinary proceedings carried out without such approval...

Pendency Of Proceedings Before Competent Authority Under Jharkhand Apartment Ownership Act Will Not Affect Application U/S 11 Of A&C Act: Jharkhand HC

The Jharkhand High Court Bench of Chief Justice M.S. Ramachandra Rao has observed that 'competent authority' within the meaning of Section 3(l) of the Jharkhand Apartment (Flat) Owners Act, 2011 is an executive authority and not a quasi-judicial or judicial authority. Accordingly, pendency of some proceedings under the said Act would not preclude the court from appointing an arbitrator...

Jharkhand High Court Orders ₹1.23 Crore GST Refund To Tata Steel Over ITC On Compensation Cess

The Jharkhand High Court has ordered Rs. 1,23,22,617/- GST refund to Tata Steel, whose largest steel plant is situated in State's Jamshedpur city.The amount represented Input Tax Credit (ITC) on Compensation Cess paid by the company under Section 8(2) of the Goods and Service Tax (Compensation to States) Act, 2017 for purchasing its key raw material- Coal.Finding that the refund was denied by...

Jharkhand HC Asks Power Dept To Not Cut Electricity During Festivals, Directs Action To Protect Procession-Goers From Overhead Tension Lines

In a suo moto action, the Jharkhand High Court has directed the Jharkhand Bijli Vitaran Nigam Limited (for short 'JBVNL') to not cut electric supply to neighbourhoods during the festive season. These directions were passed by a division bench of CJ M.S. Ramachandra Rao and Justice Deepak Roshan in a plea complaining of power outages during the Sarhul festival in Ranchi on April 1st.It cannot...

Penalty Under RTI Act Cannot Be Imposed Without Notifying Responsible Officer: Jharkhand HC Sets Aside ₹25k Fine On Addl Dy Commissioner

The Jharkhand High Court has held that a penalty under Section 20(1) of the Right to Information Act, 2005, cannot be imposed without first issuing notice to the officer actually responsible for the delay in furnishing information.Justice Sujit Narayan Prasad, setting aside a ₹25,000 penalty imposed on Ganesh Kumar, the then Additional Deputy Commissioner of East Singhbhum, said, “for...

State Cannot Retain Deposits When At Fault: Jharkhand High Court Permits Bidders To Seek Refunds Over Delayed Environmental Clearance

The Jharkhand High Court has held that where cancellation of a government auction is caused by the State's own delay in issuing mandatory environmental clearance, the bidder is entitled to seek refund of the earnest money and security deposit. The ruling affirms that no financial burden can be imposed on a party when the fault lies with administrative authorities and not the bidder.The...

Landlord Has Exclusive Right To Choose Property For Bona Fide Requirement, Tenant Can't Dictate Alternative Arrangements: Jharkhand High Court

The Jharkhand High Court has held that in eviction matters based on bona fide necessity, the landlord is the best judge to decide which of their properties is required to meet their needs, and the tenant cannot dictate alternative arrangements.Justice Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, while rejecting the tenant's plea that alternative premises were available, stated, “The law with regard to the eviction...

Legal Services Institutions Must Ensure Support For All Sections Of Society And Inspire Them To Seek Justice: Justice MS Ramachandra Rao

Jharkhand High Court Chief Justice, Justice M.S. Ramachandra Rao, while addressing the 5th State Level Meet of District Legal Services Authorities (DLSAs) of Jharkhand on March 23, 2025, emphasized that legal services institutions need to take a step to assure that the services provided by them reach all sections of society and inspire them to seek justice. He also acknowledged the...

Jharkhand High Court Issues Notice On PIL Challenging Rules For Selection And Appointment Of State's DGP & DIG

The Jharkhand High Court has issued notice on a PIL filed by BJP leader and former Chief Minister Babulal Marandi seeking striking down of Selection and Appointment of Director General and Inspector General of Police, Jharkhand (Head of Police Force) Rules, 2025 in particular Rules 4, 5(C) and 10, as manifestly arbitrary, unreasonable, and ultra vires.A division bench of Chief Justice...

Interlocutory Maintenance Order Can Be Challenged Under Article 227, Not U/S 19 Of Family Courts Act: Jharkhand High Court

The Jharkhand High Court has held that a petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is maintainable against an interlocutory order granting interim maintenance, as no appeal can be filed under Section 19 of the Family Courts Act, 1984, against such orders.Justice Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, presiding over the case, observed, “In view of above discussions when the provisions of Section...