Guwahati Court October 2002 Judgments

Smt. Aniva Dutta, Postal Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Guwahati

Reported in: (2004)(1)SLJ195CAT

1. The issue is identical is all the four O.As. concerning the legitimacy of the impugned order dated 10.9.2002 transferring the four applicants from Agartala Postal Division. The text of the order is reproduced below: '"The Chief Postmaster General, North Eastern Circle, Shillong hereby ordered the transfer/posting of the following officials of Agartala Postal Division under Rule 37 of P&T Manual Vol. IV to have immediate effect and in the interest of service. The above four (4) officials who are being transferred out of Agartala Postal Division should be relieved within 14th September, 2002 positively. If they are not relieved within the stipulated date, they will be deemed to have, been relieved. The Sr. Supdt. of P.Os., Meghalaya Division, Shillong will immediately issue the posting order in respect of Shri Janardhan Debnath and Shri Haru Das Gupta. The Supdt. of P.Os., Dharmanagar Division will also immediately issue the posting order in respect of Smti Aniva Dutta and Smti A...

Kuldip Chandra Talukdar Vs. State of Assam

Court: Guwahati

Amitava Roy, J. 1. This appeal is directed against the Judgment and order dated 12.6.2001 passed by the learned sessions Judge, Kamrup in Sessions Case No. 100(K) of 1997, convicting the appellant under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing him to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000 in default to suffer R. I. for another three months. 2. We have heard Mr. J.M. Choudhury, Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. B. M. Choudhury, Advocate for the appellant and Mr. P. Gayan, PP, Assam. 3. The case of the prosecution in short is that on 12.11.1996, one Anita Das, PW 2, lodged an FIR with the Officer-in-Charge, Hajo Police Station alleging that on 10.11.1996 at about 10-30 P.M. the accused appellant and to others (named therein) came to the gate of their house, armed with iron rods, with a view to kill the members of her family out of previous grudge over a pending litigation involving land. They abused the inmates of the house in filthy language, at the sam...

In Re: Board of Trustees for the Port of Kolkata

Court: Guwahati

Ranjan Gogoi, J. 1. The applicant, the Board of Trustees for the Port of Kolkata, has filed the instant Company application for appropriate orders from this Court directing the Official Liquidator to disclaim all interests in the property covered by lease dated May 2, 1983 made between the applicant and Him Containers Limited (Company in liquidation). Details of the said leased property has been mentioned in the Schedule annexed to the application and marked as Annexure-'A'. Consequential orders directing the Official Liquidator to remove all movable assets, furniture and fixtures on the leased land and for delivery of possession to the applicant have also been prayed for. 2. According to the applicant, land measuring about 40460.450 sq. meters situated within the Haldia Dock Complex (West Bengal) was leased out for a period of 30 years w.e.f. 22-12-1982 by a Lease Deed dated 2-5-1983 executed by and between the applicant on one part and the Company in liquidation on the other part. ...

Janardhan Dutta Vs. Tapas Pratim Saikia and ors.

Court: Guwahati

Amitava Roy, J 1. The above writ appeals have been presented assailing the common judgment and order dated 20.6.2000 passed by the learned Single Judge allowing the two writ petitions being Civil Rule No. 2773 of 1998 and Civil Rule No. 3184 of 1998 wherein the present appellant was impleaded as respondent No. 4. The Writ Appeal No. 312/2000 corresponds to Civil Rule No. 3184 of 1998 and the Writ Appeal No. 313/2000 corresponds to Civil Rule No. 2773 of 1998. The respondent No. 1 in both the appeals, was the writ petitioner in the respective writ petitions. 2. As the appeals involve common questions of facts and law, we propose to dispose of the same by this common judgment and order. 3. We have heard Mr. B.K. Sharma, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. D. K. Sharma, Advocate for the appellant and Mr. N. N. Saikia, learned senior counsel assisted by Ms. G. Deka, Advocate for the respondent No. 1. Mrs. A. Hazarika, learned Additional Senior Government Advocate, Assam has appeare...

Kamrup Medicine Dealers Association and anr. Vs. State of Assam and or ...

Court: Guwahati

P.G. Agarwal, J.1. These two writ petitions, Civil Rule No. 1736 of 1999 and W.P. (C) No. 8489 of 2001 are disposed of by this common judgment as the common question of law has been raised in these writ petitions.2. W.P. (C) No. 8489 of 2001 has been filed by the Assam Drug Dealers Association whereas Civil Rule No. 1736 of 1999 has been filed by the Kamrup Medicine Dealers Association.3. Heard, Dr. A.K. Saraf, Senior Advocate, Dr. B.P. Todi, Advocate, Sri D. Baruah, Advocate, as learned counsels for the petitioners and Mr. B.J. Talukdar, the learned Government Advocate for the respondents.4. The petitioners before us are two dealers association representing medicine dealers who deal in medicine by way of retail selling. The question that has been raised is whether the retail dealers of medicine are liable to register themselves as 'dealers' under Section 11 of the AGST Act, 1993 (Assam General Sales Tax Act, 1993), for short 'the Act'.5. Section 11 of the Act reads as follows : '11....

Pura Lodar Vs. Deputy Commissioner

Court: Guwahati

1. This revision is directed against the judgment and order, dated 3.11.1999, passed by the learned Deputy Commissioner, Papumpare District, Itanagar, in Criminal Appeal No. 3/94, upholding the judgment and order, dated 14.6.1994, passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate (First Class), Papumpare District, Itanagar, in GR Case No. 124/93, convicting the accused-petitioner under Section 468 IPC and sentencing him to undergo imprisonment for a period of one year and pay a fine of Rs. 3000 and, in default, to undergoimprisonment for a further period of three months. 2. In a nutshell, the material facts and various stages leading to the present revision may be, briefly, narrated as follows :- (i) The accused-petitioner was charge sheeted by police for having allegedly committed an offence under Section 468 IPC and was accordingly brought for trial before the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Itanagar, in GR Case No. 124/93. The case against the accused-appellant, as unfolded at the ...

Brahmaputra Par Ii Mach Mahal Samabai Samity Ltd. Vs. State of Assam a ...

Court: Guwahati

Amitava Roy, J. 1. Both these appeals are directed against the common judgment and order dated 30.5.2002 passed by the learned Single Judgedisposing of the writ petitions being W.P. (C) No. 1181/2002 and W.P. (C) No. 1580/2002. The writ petitioners are in appeal before us being aggrieved by the impugned judgment and order dismissing the writ petitions. 2. We have heard Mr. N.C. Das, learned senior counsel assisted by Smt. B. Begum, advocate for the appellant in Writ Appeal No. 267/ 2002, Mr. P. C. Kalita, Advocate for the appellant in Writ Appeal No. 366/2002, Mrs. A. Hazarika, learned Additional Senior Govt. Advocate, Assam for the state respondents and Mr. P. Pathak, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. P. Barman, Advocate for the private respondent M/s Bhitorkakila Mach Poha and Matshya Babasayee Samabai Samity Ltd. Bhitorkakila, P.O. Nimatighat. 3. The matter relates to settlement of Brahmaputra Part -- II Fishery of Sibsagar District (hereinafter referred to as the Fisherry) u...

Md. Makibur Rahman Vs. Md. Wahidur Rahman @ Bhola and anr.

Court: Guwahati

N.S. Singh, J.1. Heard Mr. S.A. Laskar, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. S.K. Deori for the petitioners and also heard Mr. M.K. Chowdhury, learned counsel assisted by Mr. TV Islam for the respondents.2. The judgment dated 2.8.2002 passed by the District Judge, Darrang, Mangaldoi in Misc. Appeal No. 1 of 2002 thus setting aside the order of injunction dated 11.4.2002 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division) Darrang at Mangaldoi in Misc. (J) Case No. 24/2000 is the subject under challenge in this revision petition.3. The facts of the case in a short compass are as follows :The plaintiffs, appellants herein instituted a suit being Title Suit No. 71/2000 before the trial Court as against the present respondents for a decree for right of preemption in respect of the suit land by contending inter alia, that under the Mahamadian Laws the plaintiffs are entitled to preempt the property of the defendant No. 1. However defendant No. 1 transferred the suit land/property under a...

Dugar Tea Industries Pvt. Ltd. and ors. Vs. State of Assam and ors.

Court: Guwahati

P.G. Agarwal, J.1. The abovementioned batch of writ petitions are disposed of by this common judgment. The petitioners have challenged the validity of the Notification No. FTX. 60/93/Pt/44 dated December 13, 1993 issued by the Government of Assam, The writ petitioners are all dealers in tea and registered under the Assam General Sales Tax Act, 1993 as well as the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956. They used to purchase tea from the tea brokers as well as from the tea gardens and they are aggrieved by the impugned notification dated December 13, 1993, whereby a tax was made payable by the brokers at the rate of two paise in the rupee. The impugned notification reads as follows :-- 'Notification dated Dispur, the 13th December, 1993.No. FTX. 60/93/Pt/44 :--In exercise of powers conferred by Sub-section (3) of Section 9 of the Assam General Sales Tax Act, 1993 (Assam Act XII of 1993) the Governor of Assam, is hereby pleased to direct that : (a) Notwithstanding anything contained in the Assam ...

Jubenor HussaIn Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court: Guwahati

P. P. Naolekar, C.J. 1. This habeas corpus petition has been filed by the detenu challenging the order of detention dated 18.4.2002. The facts in brief are that the petitioner-detenu was arrested on 8.3.2002 and afterwards on 18.4.2002 he was served in Jail with a detention order No. CON/NSA/41/2002 dated 18.4.2002 alongwith the grounds of detention passed by the Special Secretary to the Government of Nagaland in the name of Governor of Nagaland in exercise of powers conferred by Sub-sections (1) and (2) of Section 3 of the National Security Act, 1980. The grounds of detention as mentioned in the aforesaid order dated 18.4.2002 are as follows : '1. That your activities in the capacity of a Arms Smuggler were prejudicial to - (a) Security of the State of Nagaland, and (b) Maintenance of public order. 2. The particulars which have a bearing on the above two matters are specified in the schedule attached. 3. You are also informed that you have a right to make a representation to the d...