Guwahati Court May 2002 Judgments

Jibontara Ghatowar Vs. Sarba Nanda Sonowal and ors.

Court: Guwahati

P.G. Agarwal, J. 1. This Election Petition under Section 80 and 80A of the Representation of People's Act 1954, for short, the 'Act' is presented by Smti Jibontara Ghatowar, hereinafter, referred to as the 'petitioner' challenging the legality and/or validity of election of Sarbananda Sonowal, the contestant respondent No. 1, hereinafter referred to as the 'respondent' to the 115 Moran Legislative Constituency, for short, the 'Constituency'. 2. The petitioner, the respondent, and four others, had participated in the election to the 115 Moran Legislative Assembly Constituency, the polling of which took place on 10.5,2001. The results were declared on 14.5.2001 and the final result sheet reads as under :-Total Votes PolledNo. of Rejected VotesJibontara GhatowarSarbananda SonowalHareshwar ChangmaiJoy Chandra NagbanshiBiren BorahLukua Changmai67, 5802,34626,92727,7771,2417,902995303 3. In this Election petition, the petitioner has prayed for scrutiny and recounting of the rejected ballo...

Dwrick Kamduk and ors. Vs. State of Arunachal Pradesh

Court: Guwahati

N. Surjamani Singh, J. 1. In this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners, namely, Sri Dwrick Kamduk, Sri Tapon Mibang and Sri Gammo Kamki have questioned the validity of the impugned order of reversion dated 5.9.1997 (issued on 28.9.1997) as in Annexure-III to the writ petition, by contending, inter alia, that they were appointed as Assistant Engineer (C) on ad hoc basis under the Respondent-Department by order dated 24.6.1997 as in Annexure-II to the writ petition. Three other persons appointed to the post of Assistant Engineer (C) on officiating basis along with the petitioners have been allowed to continue in their respective-posts without any disturbance, but the petitioners have been reverted to the post of Junior Engineer (C) by the impugned order dated 5.9.1997 (28.9.1997). Mr. Goswami, learned counsel for the petitioners, vehemently argued that the action of the respondents is discriminatory and not in accordance with law. This court whil...

Joint Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Nowrangroy Metals (P.) Ltd.

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Guwahati

Reported in: (2003)85ITD220(Gau.)

1 to 3. [These paras are not reproduced here as they involve minor issues.] 4. Another grievance of the department in all the appeals is pertaining to the depreciation on the flour mill building.5. As mentioned earlier, the assessee is running a flour mill. So, it was claimed that the building of the flour mill is a factory building, On the basis of a technical report, it was submitted that the said building is a plant. So, the depreciation at the higher rate was claimed by the assessee which was declined by the Assessing Officer.However, the CIT(Appeals) has allowed the claim of the assessee. / 6. From the record, it reveals that originally for the assessment year 1993-94 the assessee in its original return claimed the depreciation on building. Subsequently, the return was revised. The factory building was treated as a plant and higher rate of depreciation was claimed.During the course of argument, the learned Authorised Representative relied on a number of case laws where the buildi...

Rama Kanta Das Vs. State of Assam and ors.

Court: Guwahati

P.G. Agarwal, J. 1. Heard Mr. B. C. Das, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. J. Singh, learned counsel for the respondent No. 5. Also heard Mr. Thakur, learned Government Advocate for the respondent Nos. 1 to 4. 2. The petitioner Sri Rama Kanta Das was appointed as an assistant teacher in Kachua Govt. Aided M.E. School by the Managing Committee of the said school with effect from 1.8.1977. Respondent No. 5 Tarun Chandra Bora was also appointed as assistant teacher of Singimari Govt. Aided M.E. School by the Managing Committee of the said school with effect from 1.5.1977. The petitioner was appointed temporarily by the Inspector of Schools vide order dated 19.1:1979 with effect from 1.10.1977 and on the other hand, the private respondent was also appointed as assistant teacher with effect from 1.10.1977. Subsequently the gradation list of M.E. School teachers for Nagaon was published in the year 1994 wherein the name of the petitioner was shown at serial No. 100 and the name ...

State of Mizoram Vs. Zoliana

Court: Guwahati

A.H. Saikia, J. 1. Heard Mr. T. Vaiphei, learned P.P. Mizoram. None appears for the respondent despite notice upon him as reflected from the Office Note dated 27-5-2002.2. This application for cancellation of bail granted to the respondent, has been preferred by the State contending that since the offence is under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short 'the Act') which is exclusively triable by the Special Judge, the learne Addl. District Magistrate, Champhai District has no jurisdiction to entertain an application for bail of the respondent. Accordingly, on the count - of lack of jurisdiction of the learned Addl. District Magistrate to grant bail to the respondent-accused of an offence under Section 21 of the Act above, the bail so granted to him is liable to be cancelled. Mr. Vaiphei, learned P. P. has trenchantly contended that the Government of Mizoram has already constituted Special Court to be presided by the Special Judge under the Act for all the D...

Pinku Trading Corpn. Ltd. Vs. Bank of Baroda and ors.

Court: Guwahati

H.K.K. Singh, J. 1. Heard Mr. S. Deb (Jr.), the learned counsel appearing on be-half of the applicant and also Mr. Pradip Deb Ray, learned counsel for the Respondents. 2. A Letters Patent Appeal being L.P.A. No. 5 of 2001 has been sought to be filed by the applicant/petitioner as appellant against the Judgment and decree dated 15-5-2001 passed by the learned single Judge of this Court in F.A. No. 27 of 1994 (Re-RFA No. 3 of 2000) and by filing a separate application which has been registered as C.M. Application No. 180 of 2001 the appellant-applicant has sought for permission to file the appeal as an indigent person. Notices were issued to the respondents and respondents have appeared before the Court and they have filed objection and by an order of this Court passed on 24-4-2002, the District Collector, West Tripura, Agartala was asked to submit a report regarding the properties of the present appellant-applicant. Pursuant to the requisition, the District Collector has submitted his...

Lal Muan Thnga Vs. State of Mizoram and ors.

Court: Guwahati

A.H. Saikia, J. 1. Heard Mr. George Raju, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. T. Vaiphei, Addl. Advocate General assisted by Mr. N. Sailo, learned Govt. Advocate Mizoram for the State/Respondents.2. The writ petitioner, who was a constable while serving in 3rd Bn., Mizoram Armed Police since 1996 was removed from service vide impugned order dated 2.9.1998 (Annexure-5 to the Writ Petition) issued by the Commandant, 3rd Bn, MAP, Aizawl. This impugned order is under challenge.3. The removal of the Petitioner according to Mr. Raju, learned counsel for the petitioner, is challenged only on the sole ground of non-furnishing of enquiry report for which the Petitioner was highly prejudiced and the same has hit the principle of natural justice. On the other hand Mr. Vaiphei, learned Addl. Advocate General, Mizoram, defending the impugned removal order, has contended that though enquiry report was not furnished to the Petitioner, he was no way prejudiced by the impugned order in...

C. Lianthanga Vs. State of Mizoram and ors.

Court: Guwahati

A.H. Saikia, J. 1. Heard Mr. R. Thangkanglova, learned counsel for the petitioner and also heard Mr. N. Sailo, learned Govt. Advocate, Mizoram appearing on behalf of the State-respondents. 2. The only grievance of the writ petitioner in this writ petition is that he was given compulsory retirement with effect from 1.8.1988 vide office order dated 27.7.1988 (Annexure VI to the writ petition) before his superannuation without affording him any opportunity of hearing.He approached the authorities to reinstate him by reviewing the impugned order by submitting several representations but no action was taken. It is contended that as the petitioner was not given any opportunity of hearing before passing the impugned order of compulsory retirement, the impugned order is liable to be quashed. 3. Admittedly, this writ petition has been preferred by the writ petitioner challenging the legality and validity of the impugned order only in the year of 1998, i.e., on 8.9.1998 after a lapse of abo...

Union of India (Uoi) Vs. Sh. H. Thauamvela and anr.

Court: Guwahati

A.H. Saikia, J.1. Heard Mr. P.N. Choudhury, learned Addl. CGSC for the applicants. Also heard Mr. Michael Zo Thankhuma, learned counsel for the Respondents.2. This is an application preferred by the Union of India, supported by an affidavit for condoning the delay of 21 days in preferring the belated appeal. Explaining the delay of 21 days, the applicants have made the following contentions in paragraph 2 of this Misc. case : '2. That however in filing the present second appeal there is a delay of 21 days from the expiry of the specified period of 90 days for filing such appeal for reasoned which are being stated below: (i) That the present applicant organisation spreads through out the nook and corner of the country but its functioning is strictly centralised and even the smallest matter can be finally decided only by its central office situated at New Delhi.(ii) That in the instant case too the matter relating to the filing of the present appeal is decided by the central office and...

Aryendra Nath Gupta Vs. State of Meghalaya and ors.

Court: Guwahati

N.Surajamani Singh, J. 1. In this writ petition, the petitioner, namely, Sri Aryendra Nath Gupta, has made a prayer for declaring his arrest and detention for the period from 20.1.1997 to 29.1.1997 as illegal coupled with the prayer for a direction on the respondents to afford a consolidated damages of Rs. Lacs and another consolidated damages of Rs. 1 lac for the sufferings of his family members by contending, inter alia, that he was arrested on 18.1.1997 at the midnight by the police and thereafter released on bail on the very same day. But on the basis of a complaint/FIR lodged by one Sri A. K. Bhattacharjee with the Laitumkhrah Police Station, a case was registered against him, being Laitumkhrah PS Case No. 6(1)1997 under Sections 341, 326 and 307, Indian Penal Code. However, the FIR lodged by the writ petitioner on 19.1.1997 was not registered and the petitioner was arrested on the basis of the said FIR lodged by the said Sri A. K Bhattacharjee on 20.1.1997 at 8.30 PM and his t...