Guwahati Court January 2001 Judgments

Mukut Chandra Borah Vs. State of Assam and ors.

Court: Guwahati

Heard Mr. A K Phukan and Mr. V Thomas, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. S. Sarma, learned Standing Counsel for the Gauhati Municipal Corporation. In this- application under Article 226 of the Constitution, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 17.6.97, whereby the petitioner was forced to go on compulsory retirement. The petitioner joined the Nagaon Municipal Board in the year 1967, and while he was serving as Head Assistant, he was sent on compulsory retirement. The petitioner has challenged the same mainly on the following grounds : (a) The order of compulsory retirement was punitive in nature as the petitioner was involved in a disciplinary proceeding ; (b) No public interest was involved ; (c) No notice of three months pay was paid to the petitioner ; (d) The impugned order has cast a social stigma. The respondent Municipal Board has filed an affidavit-in-opposition stating, inter alia, that the impugned order was neither related to any contemplated disciplinary...

Md. Matiur Rahman Vs. Ramjan Ali

Court: Guwahati

1. This Revision petition is to be allowed. It is really an unfortunate state of thing that for the fault of the Presiding Officer a parry is to suffer. There was an application Under Order 9 Rule 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure and a Medical Certificate was produced and that was exhibited and the signature of the Doctor was also exhibited. Thereafter the exhibit was not signed by the then Presiding Officer (Shri L. C. Nath, then Munsiff No. 1, Golaghat). But he took that document into consideration and allowed the application Under Order 9 Rule 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure. There was an appeal being Misc. Appeal No. 1/96 before the learned Assistant District Judge at Golaghat and the learned Assistant District Judge by the impugned Judgment dated 27/9/96 has held that the Judgment of the learned Munsiff is nullity in the eye of law and as such he quashed that Judgment and sent back the matter to the learned Munsiff with a further direction that this Presiding Officer, Shri L. ...

Abani Saikia Vs. Hindustan Paper Corporation Ltd. and ors.

Court: Guwahati

1. Petitioner Abani Saikia joined Hindustan Paper Corporation Ltd., for short 'HPC' in the year 1981. In 1991 he was promoted as Assistant Forest Officer. In the year 1992 the petitioner was charged with as many as 15 charges which read as follows :-5.I Theft, fraud or dishonesty in connection with business or property of the Corporation.5.II Misappropriation of the Corporation's fund by retaining the money by way of advance or otherwise.5.VI. Acting in a manner prejudicial to the interest of the Corporation.5.VII Wilful insubordination or disobedience, whether or not in combination with others, of any lawful and reasonable order of his superiors.5.VIII Absence without leave or overstaying the sanctioned leave without sufficient grounds or proper or satisfactory explanation.5.X Neglect of work or negligence in the performance of duty including maligering or slowing down of work of the Corporation.5.XI Damage to any property of the Corporation.5.XIX Absence from the employee's appointed...

Pijupara Haridoba Paharpara Jallally Matchya Babyasai Sampradai Societ ...

Court: Guwahati

1. This application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed by M/S Pijupara Haridoba Paharpara, Jal jally Matchya Babyasai Sampradai Samittee Ltd., hereinafter referred as 'Pijupara' challenging the order of settlement No. FISH. 18/81 / 815 dated 24th October, 2000 whereby No. 3{B) Lower Part Brahmaputra and No. 13 Rupna Jaljally Kholabandha Fishery under Kamrup District for short 'the fishery' was settled with the private respondent No. 4 M/S Guwahati Anunnata Sampradai Bahumukhi Samabai Samity Ltd., hereinafter referred as 'the respondent society.2. Heard Mr. K.K. Mahanta, learned counsel for the writ petitioner, Mr. A.K. Bhattacharaya, senior Advocate for the respondent society and the learned Govt. Advocate.3. The case of the petitioner Pijupara is that the said society is constituted with 100% actual fishermen and they reside in the neighbourhood of the fishery which is a 60% fishery. The said fishery is also within the area of operation of the petitioner Pij...

Pijupara Haridoba Paharpara Jallally Matchya Babyasai Sampradai Societ ...

Court: Guwahati

1. This application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed by M/S Pijupara Haridoba Paharpara, Jal jally Matchya Babyasai Sampradai Samittee Ltd., hereinafter referred as 'Pijupara' challenging the order of settlement No. FISH. 18/81 / 815 dated 24th October, 2000 whereby No. 3{B) Lower Part Brahmaputra and No. 13 Rupna Jaljally Kholabandha Fishery under Kamrup District for short 'the fishery' was settled with the private respondent No. 4 M/S Guwahati Anunnata Sampradai Bahumukhi Samabai Samity Ltd., hereinafter referred as 'the respondent society.2. Heard Mr. K.K. Mahanta, learned counsel for the writ petitioner, Mr. A.K. Bhattacharaya, senior Advocate for the respondent society and the learned Govt. Advocate.3. The case of the petitioner Pijupara is that the said society is constituted with 100% actual fishermen and they reside in the neighbourhood of the fishery which is a 60% fishery. The said fishery is also within the area of operation of the petitioner Pij...

Mukut Chandra Borah Vs. State of Assam and ors.

Court: Guwahati

Heard Mr. A K Phukan and Mr. V Thomas, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. S. Sarma, learned Standing Counsel for the Gauhati Municipal Corporation.In this- application under Article 226 of the Constitution, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 17.6.97, whereby the petitioner was forced to go on compulsory retirement. The petitioner joined the Nagaon Municipal Board in the year 1967, and while he was serving as Head Assistant, he was sent on compulsory retirement. The petitioner has challenged the same mainly on the following grounds :(a) The order of compulsory retirement was punitive in nature as the petitioner was involved in a disciplinary proceeding ;(b) No public interest was involved ;(c) No notice of three months pay was paid to the petitioner ;(d) The impugned order has cast a social stigma.The respondent Municipal Board has filed an affidavit-in-opposition stating, inter alia, that the impugned order was neither related to any contemplated disciplinary proceed...

Abani Saikia Vs. Hindustan Paper Corporation Ltd. and ors.

Court: Guwahati

1. Petitioner Abani Saikia joined Hindustan Paper Corporation Ltd., for short 'HPC' in the year 1981. In 1991 he was promoted as Assistant Forest Officer. In the year 1992 the petitioner was charged with as many as 15 charges which read as follows :-5.I Theft, fraud or dishonesty in connection with business or property of the Corporation. 5.II Misappropriation of the Corporation's fund by retaining the money by way of advance or otherwise. 5.VI. Acting in a manner prejudicial to the interest of the Corporation. 5.VII Wilful insubordination or disobedience, whether or not in combination with others, of any lawful and reasonable order of his superiors. 5.VIII Absence without leave or overstaying the sanctioned leave without sufficient grounds or proper or satisfactory explanation. 5.X Neglect of work or negligence in the performance of duty including maligering or slowing down of work of the Corporation. 5.XI Damage to any property of the Corporation. 5.XIX Absence from the employee's ap...

Md. Matiur Rahman Vs. Ramjan Ali

Court: Guwahati

Reported in: AIR2001Gau148

1. This Revision petition is to be allowed. It is really an unfortunate state of thing that for the fault of the Presiding Officer a parry is to suffer. There was an application Under Order 9 Rule 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure and a Medical Certificate was produced and that was exhibited and the signature of the Doctor was also exhibited. Thereafter the exhibit was not signed by the then Presiding Officer (Shri L. C. Nath, then Munsiff No. 1, Golaghat). But he took that document into consideration and allowed the application Under Order 9 Rule 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure. There was an appeal being Misc. Appeal No. 1/96 before the learned Assistant District Judge at Golaghat and the learned Assistant District Judge by the impugned Judgment dated 27/9/96 has held that the Judgment of the learned Munsiff is nullity in the eye of law and as such he quashed that Judgment and sent back the matter to the learned Munsiff with a further direction that this Presiding Officer, Shri L. C...

Assam State Fertilisers and Chemicals Ltd. Vs. E.S.i. Corporation and ...

Court: Guwahati

J.N. Sarma, J. 1. The impugned judgment shall stand quashed in view of the decision of the Apex Court in Municipal Committee, Abohar v. Regional Commissioner, E.S.I Corporation and Anr. 1996(7) SCC 488 : 1996-II-LLJ-98, wherein the Supreme Court pointed out that the employees of a statutory Corporation are governed by the rules made under the Act and in some cases the benefits of health schemes have been extended and if they are provided with the health scheme and are also eligible to medical facilities and reimbursement of the amount spent by the employees, such employees cannot be covered by the Employees' State Insurance Scheme and the Supreme Court pointed out that coverage ofemployees under the Act is per se illegal as the benefits which they received from the Statutory Corporation will be much more beneficial than the benefits which can be given by E.S.I. Corporation. In view of that matter, the impugned judgment stands quashed and the matter now shall go back to find out wheth...

Dilip Baruah Vs. State of Assam and ors.

Court: Guwahati

1. This is an application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for a direction to the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner to the post of Surveillance Worker in the establishment of respondent No.4. The only ground for seeking such appointment in this writ petition is that the petitioner is a handicapped person. 2. The case of the petitioner is that he is a handicapped person and he has been suffering from traumatic paralysis of the left hand and as such he is a handicapped person. His percentage of disablement is 60% as evident from the certificate issued by the Jt. Director of Health Services, Sonitpur at Tezpur mentioned in Annexure-A to the Writ petition. Being situated, with the said disablement, the petitioner has approached the respondents for his appointment in any Grade III or Grade IV post particularly, as Surveillance Worker and the District Malaria Officer, Sonitpur at Tezpur vide his communication dated 26.2.1988 appointed the petitioner a...