Guwahati Court March 2001 Judgments

Hemkatna Deka and ors. Vs. State of Assam and ors.

Court: Guwahati

D. Biswas, J. 1. Civil Rule No. 1411/97 and Writ Petition (C) No. 2590 of 2000 are being disposed of by this common judgment.2. Both the writ petitions have been filed for a declaration that Clause (c) of Rule 3 of the Assam Elementary Education (Provincialisation) Rules, 1997 as ultra vires of the Constitution and for quashing the impugned advertisement dated 28.12.1996 (Annexure-II) so far it relates to the recruitment of Assistant Teachers in Morigaon District with consequential direction for appointment of the petitioners as Assistant Teachers in L.P., M.V. or M.E. Schools in the said District.3. This court by an interim order dated 11.3.1998 directed that no appointment of Assistant Teachers in Morigaon District be made until further orders. As a result, no appointment could be made.4. Petitioners' case is that the respondents issued an advertisementon 3.9.1991 inviting applications for filling up 7,606 posts of Assistant Teachers in different lower primary schools. The petitioner...

Kumari Thounaojam Rajeeta Devi Vs. State of Manipur and anr.

Court: Guwahati

N.S. Singh, J. 1. Upon hearing Mr. N. Kottshwor Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Mr. R.K. Jayantakumar Singh, learned Additional Govt. Advocate and, also on perusal of the available materials on record, I am of the view that this matter can be disposed of at this stage considering the simple nature of the case and, accordingly, this writ petition is hereby disposed of with the following short order.In this writ petition, the petitioner Kumari Thounaojam Ranjeeta Devi made a prayer for a direction to the respondents/authority concerned to appoint her to any of the vacant post of Field Assistant under the respondents-Department on compassionate ground by contending Inter alia, that the father of the petitioner namely late Th. Rameshwar Singh while he was working/serving as Peon in the Department of Horticulture & Soil Conservation, Govt. of Manipur died on 03.01.1999 due to Cardlo respiratory failure following hypertensive stroke and he was the only earning mem...

Gopal Bhowmik Vs. State of Tripura

Court: Guwahati

Reported in: 2001CriLJ2656

1. The present Criminal Appeal arises out of the judgment of conviction and sentence dated 29.6.1996 imposed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge (Mr. M.C. Roy), West Tripura, Agartala in Sessions Trial No. 25(W.T/A) of 1994.2. By the impugned judgment, the learned trial court convicted the appellant Shri Gopal Bhowmik under section 302 IPC with a sentence of Rigorous Imprisonment for life and also under section 326 IPC with a sentence to suffer Rigorous Imprisonment for five years with a further direction that both the sentences would run concurrently.3. The prosecution case, in short, is that on 21.8.1990 in the evening the appellant Shri Gopal Bhowmik came to the house of his relative Shri Pradip Roy. The appellant is the husband of the sister of Shri Pradip Roy of Amtali. Shri Pradip Roy was not available in the house. His wife Smti Swapna Roy and daughters Bulti alias Prativa and Papan alias Papri had been there in the house. The appellant being close relative came and asked S...

Government Pensioners' Association vs. State of Tripura and ors.

Court: Guwahati

1. By this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner challenged the office Memorandum No. F.8 (II) -FIN (G)/99 dated 25-3-1999 and also sought for a direction allowing the equal retiral benefit to all the pensioners who retired on any date between 1.10.1998 and 31.12.1998 at par with those who retired between 1.1.1996 and 30.9.1998.2. The case in short is that the Government of Tripura, the respondent No. 1, in exercise of power under the proviso to Article 309 of the Constitution of India made a Rule called Tripura State Civil Services (Revised Pay) Rules, 1999 [ hereinafter referred to as R.O.P., 1999.) commencing from 1.1.1996 whereby the pay structure of the employees serving under the Government of Tripura and including the employees of Government undertaking of the State have been revised. But, subsequently, by the impugned office Memorandum bearing No. F.8(II)-FIN(G)/99 dated 25.03.1999 made some amendment regarding the rate of pension, mode of...

Rajendra Kr. Sood and ors. Vs. Jagat Singh Dugar

Court: Guwahati

Reported in: 2001CriLJ3466

1. By this Petition Under Section 482 read with Section 401 of the Criminal Procedure Code with Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the Revisionist prayed for quashing of complaint case No. 812c/88 pending in the Court of Judicial Magistrate. Kamrup, Guwahati on the ground inter-alia that the learned Trying Magistrate has taken cognizance after the mandatory period imposed by Section 468 of the C.P.C. inasmuch as punishment prescribed Under Section 403 of the I.P.C. is punishable with imprisonment for two years.2. I have heard Mr. S P Roy, learned counsel for the Revisionists as well as Mr. A 13 Choudhary, learned counsel for the Respondent.3. The complaint case No. 812c/88 has been registered before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Kamrup, Guwahati preceded by a complaint Petition dated 13.6.88 filed by the complainant/ respondent. The complaint petition has been registered Under Section 403 of the I.P.C. On receipt of the complaint, the learned trying Magistrate passed the foll...

Gopal Bhowmik Vs. State of Tripura

Court: Guwahati

Reported in: 2001CriLJ2656

B.B. Deb, J. 1. The present Criminal Appeal arises out of the judgment ofconviction and sentence dated 29.6.1996 imposed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge (Mr. M.C. Roy), West Tripura, Agartala in Sessions Trial No. 25(W.T/A) of 1994.2. By the impugned judgment, the learned trial court convicted the appellant Shri Gopal Bhowmik under section 302 IPC with a sentence of Rigorous Imprisonment for life and also under section 326 IPC with a sentence to suffer Rigorous Imprisonment for five years with a further direction that both the sentences would run concurrently.3. The prosecution case, in short, is that on 21.8.1990 in the evening the appellant Shri Gopal Bhowmik came to the house of his relative Shri Pradip Roy. The appellant is the husband of the sister of Shri Pradip Roy of Amtali. Shri Pradip Roy was not available in the house. His wife Smti Swapna Roy and daughters Bulti alias Prativa and Papan alias Papri had been there in the house. The appellant being close relative came...

Rajendra Kr. Sood and ors. Vs. Jagat Singh Dugar

Court: Guwahati

Reported in: 2001CriLJ3466

1. By this Petition Under Section 482 read with Section 401 of the Criminal Procedure Code with Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the Revisionist prayed for quashing of complaint case No. 812c/88 pending in the Court of Judicial Magistrate. Kamrup, Guwahati on the ground inter-alia that the learned Trying Magistrate has taken cognizance after the mandatory period imposed by Section 468 of the C.P.C. inasmuch as punishment prescribed Under Section 403 of the I.P.C. is punishable with imprisonment for two years.2. I have heard Mr. S P Roy, learned counsel for the Revisionists as well as Mr. A 13 Choudhary, learned counsel for the Respondent.3. The complaint case No. 812c/88 has been registered before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Kamrup, Guwahati preceded by a complaint Petition dated 13.6.88 filed by the complainant/ respondent. The complaint petition has been registered Under Section 403 of the I.P.C. On receipt of the complaint, the learned trying Magistrate passed the foll...

Government Pensioners' Association Vs. State of Tripura and ors.

Court: Guwahati

1. By this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner challenged the office Memorandum No. F.8 (II) -FIN (G)/99 dated 25-3-1999 and also sought for a direction allowing the equal retiral benefit to all the pensioners who retired on any date between 1.10.1998 and 31.12.1998 at par with those who retired between 1.1.1996 and 30.9.1998.2. The case in short is that the Government of Tripura, the respondent No. 1, in exercise of power under the proviso to Article 309 of the Constitution of India made a Rule called Tripura State Civil Services (Revised Pay) Rules, 1999 [ hereinafter referred to as R.O.P., 1999.) commencing from 1.1.1996 whereby the pay structure of the employees serving under the Government of Tripura and including the employees of Government undertaking of the State have been revised. But, subsequently, by the impugned office Memorandum bearing No. F.8(II)-FIN(G)/99 dated 25.03.1999 made some amendment regarding the rate of pension, mode of...

Deep Chand Vs. Union of India and ors.

Court: Guwahati

1. Heard Mr. R P Sarma, learnes counsel for the petitioner as well as Mr. K K Mahanta, learned Sr. CGSC for the respondents.1. Petitioner Sri Deep Chand bearing No. 690523581 was employed under the CRPF establishment and was working as Tailor of Group Centre at the relevant time. By memorandum dated 10.8.1999, he was charged with the following articles of charge -ARTICLE -1That the said No. 690523581 SI/Tlr.Deep chand while functioning as SI/Tlr. In GC, CRPF, Gauhati committed an act of misconduct in that he gave his VCP to Shir B Bhatta, Radiographer of BH-3 CRPF Gauhati on hire basis @ Rs. 700/- per month for screening films thus violated the provision of rule 15(l)(a) of CCS (Conduct) Rules - 1964.ARTICLE IIThat the said No. 690523581 SI/Tlr. Deep Chand while functioning as in charge of Tailor shop GC, CRPF, Gauhati was guilty of neglect of duly/remissness in the discharge of his duties in his capacity as member of the force under Section 11(1) of CRPF Act, 1949 in that he failed to...

Atul Chandra Das and ors. Vs. Abhijit Kumar Sinha Kashyap and ors.

Court: Guwahati

1. This writ petition has been filed challenging the order of dismissal passed by the Superintendent of Police, Hailakandi on 9.10.1993 in exercise of powers under Article 311(2)(b) of the Constitution of India read with section 7 of the Police Act, 1861 and Rule 66 of the Assam Police Manual Part - III. It is pertinent to mention here that the petitioners also, by way of abundant caution prayed for revocation of the suspension order which preceded the dismissal order. 2. I have heard Mr. RP Sharma, learned senior counsel for the writ petitioners and also Mr. D. Goswami, learned State counsel. 3. The dismissal orders annexed with the writ petition as Annexure II series show that all the five constables were dismissed on the same ground. Hence, for the purpose of adjudication of the dispute raised, it would be convenient to quote here-in-below one of such orders. The order passed in respect of constable ABC/36 Atul Chandra Das reads as follows : 'OFFICE OF THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE...