Guwahati Court February 2001 Judgments

Ratna Paul and ors. Vs. Subhash Ranjan Paul and anr.

Court: Guwahati

Reported in: AIR2001Gau133

1. The granting of temporary injunction in favour of the Respondent/Plaintiff vide impugned order dated 26.9.2000 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Sr. Division) No. 2 at Cachar, Silchar in Misc. Case No. 29/2000 arising out of T. S. No. 43/2000 is the sole subject-matter of this Miscellaneous First Appeal.2. Needless to remind that injunction is a form of equitable relief and has to be adjusted in the aid of equity and justice to the facts and circumstances of each individual case. Granting of injunction being itself a discretionary matter, there is no straight jacket formula in the matter of granting or refusing temporary injunction. Depending on each case on its own facts, three cardinal principles governing grant of temporary injunction have been accepted, namely (i) a strong prima-facie case, (ii) the balance of convenience and (iii) irreparable loss and injury. Ordinarily in deciding a case for seeking temporary injunction the Court must be satisfied that (a) whether a strong pr...

Robert Zosanga Vs. State of Mizoram and ors.

Court: Guwahati

1. The petitioner was appointed as Sub-Inspector of Excise by the state of Mizoram by an order passed on 18th April, 1994. He joined the assignment on 19th April, 1994. Thereafter, the Commissioner of Excise vide order dated 7th June, 1994 terminated his service in pursuance of the proviso to Sub-rule (1) of Rule 5 of the Central Civil Services (Temporary Service) Rules, 1965. The order of termination is in challenge in this writ petition. 2. I have heard Shri George Raju, the learned counsel for the writ petitioner and Mr. N. Sailo, the learned State counsel for the respondents. 3. In order to appreciate their respective submissions it would be necessary to quote hereinbelow the order of termination: In pursuance of the proviso to sub-rule (1) of rule 5 of the Central Civil Services (Temporary Service) Rules, 1965, I hereby terminate forthwith the services of Shri Robert Zosanga, Sub-Inspector of Excise, Office of the Superintendent of Excise, Aizawl District, Aizawl and direct that...

Anindya Kumar Bhattacharjee and ors. Vs. State of Tripura and ors.

Court: Guwahati

1. By the writ petition as many as three T.C.S. Grade-II officers challenged the proposed amendment of Tripura Civil Services (Eighteenth) Amendment Rules, 2000 issued ride notification No. F.23(10)-GA/98 dated 23rd December, 2000. In the interim, the petitioners prayed for an interim direction staying the operation of the aforesaid notification dated 23.12.2000, the court is now concerned relating to the interim matter pending disposal of the writ petition. By the aforesaid notification, the Government proposed to earmark some duty posts to be manned by T.C.S. Grade-I and T.C.S. Grade-11 respectively. The petitioners' grievance, in short, is that Tripura Civil Service is a consolidated service having single identical status of all the officers irrespective of Grades. Though mention is there as to Grade-I with a particular pay scale and Grade-II with a higher pay scale of the officers under Tripura Civil Service Rules, 1967 (in short TCS Rules, 1967), but movement from Grade-II to Gr...

Murari Tea Industries Vs. Aseb and ors.

Court: Guwahati

1. In this Writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, the petitioner has challenged the legality and validity of the amended provisions of Clause 22(a) vide its resolution No. 24 dated 7.2.1991 of Assam State Electricity Board, here-in-after referred to as 'ASEB'.2. The facts relevant for deciding this petition briefly are that the petitioner being the partnership firm carried on business of manufacture and sale of black tea. Suddenly the Asstt. Executive Engineer, REC Sub-Division, ASEB, Tinsukia issued a letter dated 3.8.1992 to the petitioner's firm informing that on checking of connected load at the petitioner's garden on 4.7.1992, it was found that the total connected load was 266 KW instead of 240 KW i.e. 26 KW excess than the connected load and that as per the terms and conditions an assessment bill for excess connected load for 26 KWamounting to Rs. 39,312.60 vide bill No. 285/87 was also enclosed for payment. The petitioner vide his letter dated 4.8.1992 requested t...

Anindya Kumar Bhattacharjee and ors. Vs. State of Tripura and ors.

Court: Guwahati

ORDER1. By the writ petition as many as three T.C.S. Grade-II officers challenged the proposed amendment of Tripura Civil Services (Eighteenth) Amendment Rules, 2000 issued ride notification No. F.23(10)-GA/98 dated 23rd December, 2000. In the interim, the petitioners prayed for an interim direction staying the operation of the aforesaid notification dated 23.12.2000, the court is now concerned relating to the interim matter pending disposal of the writ petition.By the aforesaid notification, the Government proposed to earmark some duty posts to be manned by T.C.S. Grade-I and T.C.S. Grade-11 respectively. The petitioners' grievance, in short, is that Tripura Civil Service is a consolidated service having single identical status of all the officers irrespective of Grades. Though mention is there as to Grade-I with a particular pay scale and Grade-II with a higher pay scale of the officers under Tripura Civil Service Rules, 1967 (in short TCS Rules, 1967), but movement from Grade-II to ...

Robert Zosanga Vs. State of Mizoram and ors.

Court: Guwahati

ORDER In pursuance of the proviso to sub-rule (1) of rule 5 of the Central Civil Services (Temporary Service) Rules, 1965, I hereby terminate forthwith the services of Shri Robert Zosanga, Sub-Inspector of Excise, Office of the Superintendent of Excise, Aizawl District, Aizawl and direct that he shall be entitled to claim a sum equivalent to the amount of his pay and allowances for a period of onemonth (in lieu of the period of notice) calculated at the same rate at which he was drawing them immediately before the date on which this order is served on or, as the case may be, tendered to him. sd/- R. LALZAUVA Commissioner of Excise Mizoram: Aizawl.'. 4. The order of termination reproduced above ex-facie does not contain any stigma or aspersion. The petitioner in para-8 of his writ petition averred that on the previous day of his termination he had conducted a search and being a new recruit failed to seize the excisable goods, namely, canned beer. Consequent thereupon, the petitioner was...

Rajesh Sharma Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax and anr.

Court: Guwahati

1. The issue under judicial scrutiny in this application under Article 226 of the Constitution pertains to the non-release of the seized assets which were found to have been properly explained under section 132(5) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, hereinafter referred to as the act.2. I have heard Dr. Ashok Saraf, learned Sr. counsel assisted by Mr. S. Mitra, representing the petitioner. Also heard Mr. U.Bhuyan, learned counsel appearing for the Income Tax Department.3. Unfurling the factual matrix of the case, the petitioner has narrated that pursuant to the warrant of authorisation issued by the Director of Income Tax (Investigation), Ahmadabad, a search and seizure operation was conducted in the residential premises of one Sri S.S. Sharma at Shyamkunj, Khandala house on 29.4.1992. Simultaneously searches were also conducted at the Farm house at Heetapura Ajmir Road, Jaipur as well as Industry premises of M/s RCS Vanaspati Industries Ltd., 164/81, Industrial Area, Khotwara, Jaipur.4. Duri...

Rajesh Sharma Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax and anr.

Court: Guwahati

1. The issue under judicial scrutiny in this application under Article 226 of the Constitution pertains to the non-release of the seized assets which were found to have been properly explained undersection 132(5) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, hereinafter referred to as the act.2. I have heard Dr. Ashok Saraf, learned Sr. counsel assisted by Mr. S. Mitra, representing the petitioner. Also heard Mr. U.Bhuyan, learned counsel appearing for the Income Tax Department.3. Unfurling the factual matrix of the case, the petitioner has narrated that pursuant to the warrant of authorisation issued by the Director of Income Tax (Investigation), Ahmadabad, a search and seizure operation was conducted in the residential premises of one Sri S.S. Sharma at Shyamkunj, Khandala house on 29.4.1992. Simultaneously searches were also conducted at the Farm house at Heetapura Ajmir Road, Jaipur as well as Industrypremises of M/s RCS Vanaspati Industries Ltd., 164/81, Industrial Area, Khotwara, Jaipur.4. During...

R. Lal Biakthanga Vs. State of Mizoram and ors.

Court: Guwahati

D. Biswas, J.1. Heard Mr. G. Raju the learned counsel for the writ petitioner and Mr. T. Vaiphei, the learned Addl. Advocate General, Mizoram.2. In this petition the order dated 13.5.1992 (Annexure-VIII) passed by the Addl. Deputy Commissioner, Aizawl District directing recovery of supply-sale proceeds allegedly misappropriated by the writ petitioner has been challenged.3. Shri Raju, the learned counsel for the writ petitioner submitted that the writ petitioner while posted as Administrative Officer at Kawnpui was charged with the offence of mis-appropriation and placed under suspension on 18.8.1987. In the meantime, the matter was also referred to Police and two criminal proceedings was initiated. Thereafter, the suspension order of the petitioner was revoked by an order passed on 22.5.1989 and he has been allowed to continue as Administrative Officer at Kawnpui as before. The criminal proceedings initiated were disposed of in 1998 and 1999 and the writ petitioner was acquitted in bo...

Tori Nyokir and anr. Vs. State of Arunachal Pradesh and ors.

Court: Guwahati

A.H. Saikia, J.1. Heard Mr. B. Habung, learned counsel for the petitioner and also heard Mr. R.H. Nabam, learned State counsel appearing on behalf of the State respondents.2. This is an exemplary case of State Respondents' callous disregard for Court's order pertaining to filing of counter affidavit despite intermittent grant of time.3. This Court at the time of admission by issuing Rule vide order dated 31.8.2000, granted interim relief to the petitioner as follows : These two petitioners shall be allowed to serve under the respondents as work-charged employees and they shall be taken back in service within a period of one week from the date of receipt of this order and that, they shall be treated equally with those work-charge employees who are similarly situated with the present writ petitioners.'4. In the same order, this Court also directed that a copy of the said order be supplied/communicated to the learned State counsel by this Registry so as to enable him to highlight the mat...