Guwahati Court November 2000 Judgments

Dipankar Bhattacharjee Vs. State of Assam and ors.

Court: Guwahati

P.G. Agarwal, J. 1. This public interest litigation was initially initiated by four petitioner to express serious apprehension of the Bengali community that Bengali Higher Secondary School, an institution built 63 years back, a linguistic minority institution under Article 30 of the Constitution has sought to be destroyed and that the said minority institution is not managed as required under the constitution and the statutory provisions. 2. We have heard Mr. Bijoy Das, learned Senior Advocate for the petitioner and Mr. P.G. Baruah, learned Advocate General for the State of Assam, who has raised a preliminary objection regarding the maintainability of the case. It is stated that during the pendencyof this writ petition, three out of four petitioner had withdrawn and only the writ petitioner Dipankar Bhattacharjee is continuing/ proceeding with the matter and as such it has lost its public interest character. The matter was bought to the notice of this Court by the four petitioners and...

Dipankar Bhattacharjee Vs. State of Assam and ors.

Court: Guwahati

P.G. Agarwal, J.1. This public interest litigation was initially initiated by four petitioner to express serious apprehension of the Bengali community that Bengali Higher Secondary School, an institution built 63 years back, a linguistic minority institution under Article 30 of the Constitution has sought to be destroyed and that the said minority institution is not managed as required under the constitution and the statutory provisions.2. We have heard Mr. Bijoy Das, learned Senior Advocate for the petitioner and Mr. P.G. Baruah, learned Advocate General for the State of Assam, who has raised a preliminary objection regarding the maintainability of the case. It is stated that during the pendencyof this writ petition, three out of four petitioner had withdrawn and only the writ petitioner Dipankar Bhattacharjee is continuing/ proceeding with the matter and as such it has lost its public interest character. The matter was bought to the notice of this Court by the four petitioners and on...

Union of India and ors. Vs. Wood Crafts Products Ltd. and anr.

Court: Guwahati

ORDERA.M. Saikia, J.1. This is an application for condonation of delay of 118 days in preferring the Writ Appeal No. 352/2000 filed by the petitioners/ appellants, Union of India and others.2. We have heard Mr. K.N. Choudhury, learned Senior counsel representing the petitioners as well as Dr. D. Paul, learned Sr. counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents/O.Ps.3. In the instant case, in order to explain the delay in preferring the said Writ Appeal, the petitioners averred the facts in paragraph No. 2 of the condonation petition which is reproduced as follows:'That the petitioners state that the certified copy of the judgment and order dated 12.4.2000 could not be applied for immediately as the Court was on holidays on account of Bihu vacation from 13th April. 2000. On reopening of the Court the copy was applied for and the same was made over to the petitioners' counsel on 2.5.2000 by the Registry. The engaged counsel forwarded the certified copy to the office of the Assistant Commi...

New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Ujjala Debbath and ors.

Court: Guwahati

1. The short question involved in this appeal whether the award of Rs. 1,84,170 along with interest @ Rs. 12% p.a. given by the Commissioner under the provisions of the Workmen's Compensation Act could be sustained in law in view of the fact that the workman Sudhir Debnath, who was a driver working under Bikash Pal, died at Barasat while on duty.2. I have heard Mr. D.K. Biswas, learned counsel for the appellant-Insurance Co., also heard Mr. A. Chakraborty, learned Sr. counsel assisted by Mr. P.K. Paul, learned counsel for the claimant-respondents.3. It may be mentioned here that the deceased was working as a driver under respondent No. 4 is an admitted fact. He was sent on duty from Udaipur to Calcutta with the Truck No.TR-01-1695 driven by him. On 1.7.1997, the workman was coming from Calcutta towards Udaipur with the loaded Truck. He stopped the vehicle at Barasat town for taking meal. After taking meal, he slept inside the cabin of the vehicle. In the morning he fell ill and compla...

Gopal Prasad Kalowar Vs. State of Assam

Court: Guwahati

1. This Revision petition is directed against the order dated 15.7.1993 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Dhubri on Criminal Appeal No. 3(1) of 1993 affirming the conviction and sentence passed by the learned CJM in CR Case No. 832 of 1989 convicting the accused petitioner under section 4 of the Assam Liquor Prohibition Act and sentencing him there under to 3 months simple imprisonment and also pay a fine of Rs. 100 and in default to further 15 days' simple imprisonment. 2. I have heard Mr. N Choudhury, learned counsel for the petitioner, and Mr. D Saikia, learned PP, Assam. I have also considered the records of the case. 3. The prosecution case in brief is that on 25.9.1987 at about 9 A.M. Shri N. Ahmed Inspector of Excise, Dhubri had been to Sapatgram bazar to carry out excise raid. At Sapatgram bazar, he searched the dwelling house of the accused petitioner and recovered about 5 liters of cholai, liquor contained in a plastic jaricane therefrom. He seized the liquor...

Araya Samaj and anr. Vs. State of Meghalaya and ors.

Court: Guwahati

1. This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution has been preferred for two-fold directions, namely, (i) for declaration that the Meghalaya Aided Higher Secondary, Secondary, Upper Primary School Management Committee Rules, 1997, as unconstitutional and void and (ii) for a direction to the respondents to approve the Managing Committee of the Arya Kanya Vidhayala High School as proposed by the Arya Samaj vide Annexure-9. 2. I have heard the learned counsel for both the parties in details. For the purpose of resolving the dispute at hand, it would first be necessary to decide as to whether the Arya Kanya Vidyalaya High School is a religious minority institution within the meaning of Article 30(1) of the Constitution. 3. At the outset, it would be relevant to have a glimpse over the characteristics of the Arya Samaj as it would facilitate a decision as to whether this school established by them is a religious minority school within the meaning of Article 30(1) of the Constitution....

Araya Samaj and anr. Vs. State of Meghalaya and ors.

Court: Guwahati

1. This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution has been preferred for two-fold directions, namely, (i) for declaration that the Meghalaya Aided Higher Secondary, Secondary, Upper Primary School Management Committee Rules, 1997, as unconstitutional and void and (ii) for a direction to the respondents to approve the Managing Committee of the Arya Kanya Vidhayala High School as proposed by the Arya Samaj vide Annexure-9.2. I have heard the learned counsel for both the parties in details. For the purpose of resolving the dispute at hand, it would first be necessary to decide as to whether the Arya Kanya Vidyalaya High School is a religious minority institution within the meaning of Article 30(1) of the Constitution.3. At the outset, it would be relevant to have a glimpse over the characteristics of the Arya Samaj as it would facilitate a decision as to whether this school established by them is a religious minority school within the meaning of Article 30(1) of the Constitution. The...

New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Ujjala Debbath and ors.

Court: Guwahati

Reported in: 2001ACJ1219,(2001)IILLJ392Gau

1. The short question involved in this appeal whether the award of Rs. 1,84,170 along with interest @ Rs. 12% p.a. given by the Commissioner under the provisions of the Workmen's Compensation Act could be sustained in law in view of the fact that the workman Sudhir Debnath, who was a driver working under Bikash Pal, died at Barasat while on duty.2. I have heard Mr. D.K. Biswas, learned counsel for the appellant-Insurance Co., also heard Mr. A. Chakraborty, learned Sr. counsel assisted by Mr. P.K. Paul, learned counsel for the claimant-respondents.3. It may be mentioned here that the deceased was working as a driver under respondent No. 4 is an admitted fact. He was sent on duty from Udaipur to Calcutta with the Truck No.TR-01-1695 driven by him. On 1.7.1997, the workman was coming from Calcutta towards Udaipur with the loaded Truck. He stopped the vehicle at Barasat town for taking meal. After taking meal, he slept inside the cabin of the vehicle. In the morning he fell ill and complai...

Gopal Prasad Kalowar Vs. State of Assam

Court: Guwahati

Reported in: 2001CriLJ2678

1. This Revision petition is directed against the order dated 15.7.1993 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Dhubri on Criminal Appeal No. 3(1) of 1993 affirming the conviction and sentence passed by the learned CJM in CR Case No. 832 of 1989 convicting the accused petitioner under section 4 of the Assam Liquor Prohibition Act and sentencing him there under to 3 months simple imprisonment and also pay a fine of Rs. 100 and in default to further 15 days' simple imprisonment.2. I have heard Mr. N Choudhury, learned counsel for the petitioner, and Mr. D Saikia, learned PP, Assam. I have also considered the records of the case.3. The prosecution case in brief is that on 25.9.1987 at about 9 A.M. Shri N. Ahmed Inspector of Excise, Dhubri had been to Sapatgram bazar to carry out excise raid. At Sapatgram bazar, he searched the dwelling house of the accused petitioner and recovered about 5 liters of cholai, liquor contained in a plastic jaricane therefrom. He seized the liquor in ...

Dr. Ashis Kr. Rakshit Vs. State of Tripura and ors.

Court: Guwahati

D. Biswas, J. 1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 19.9.2000 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.(C) No.412/ 2000. 2. The appellant herein, as writ petitioner, filed the aforesaid writ petition challenging his order of transfer from I.G.M. Hospital, Agartala to Kanchanpur Hospital vide Annexure-2 to the writ petition. The said transfer order was challenged mainly on theground that he is an M.D. in Obstetrics and Gynaecology and this degree he obtained on being deputed by the State Government on the promise that after getting the training at the A1IMS he will be suitably employed by the sponsoring authority to work in the speciality in which training was provided at the AIIMS. 3. We have heard Mr. D.K. Biswas, the learned counsel appearing for the appellant. Also heard Mr. U.V. Saha, the learned senior Govt. Advocate assisted by Mr. T.D, Majumder, Advocate for the respondents. 4. Before we deal with the prime question involved in this case, it would be...