Guwahati Court May 2002 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
The Indian Institute of Bankers and ors. Vs. Jogabrats Deb and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: May-21-2002
A.H. Saikia, J.1. Heard Mr. S.S. Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioners and also heard Mr. B.R. Dey, learned counsel for the respondents.2. This Revision Petition is directed against the impugned order dated 16-2-1996 passed by the learned Munsiff No. 3 at Guwahati in T. S. No. 272/92.3. The brief facts of the case are that the Respondent No. 1 being a permanent employee of the State Bank of India appeared in the Associate Examination, Part-1 in the year 1987 conducted by the petitioner No. 1, Indian Institute of Bankers. The Petitioner No. 1, being an association of Bankers with its principal object, to encourage study of theory of banking and for this purpose to institute a scheme of examination and award certificate etc. The petitioner No. 1 conducted some examinations from Born-bay, being its Head Office without having any other office or branch office whatsoever outside Bombay. The examinations of the Institute were conducted on all India basis at about 530 centres all over ...
Sashi Kanta Sarma Vs. District Judge and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: May-21-2002
A.H. Saikia, J. 1. In 1930 a Suit was originated being Original Suit No. 12/1930 before the then Court of Special Judge, Assam Valley District at Guwahati under Section 92 of the Code of Civil Procedure for formulating a Scheme for better management of the affairs of Ugratara Temple which has been situated in the heart of the Guwahati city at Uzanbazar. This temple was established during the reign of Ahom Kingdom of earstwhile Assam. The management for preservation of the said temple had been run by a Trustee consisting of two families of Bordeories as Trustees. These two families had been consisted of Bordeories one at Degheli and the other at Soalkuchi in the District of Kamrup. These Bordeories were regarded as the real trustees of the temple. Amongst these Bordeories one Doloi had been selected for supervision and management of the worship and the properties of the temple. Since there was some dispute amongst Decries as well as the matter relating to powers and functions of the Do...
Arabinda Chanda Vs. Regional Director, Oil and Natural Gas Corporation ...
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: May-20-2002
1. This writ appeal has arisen under the following facts and circumstances :The appellant as writ petitioner had filed writ petition No. Civil Rule 363 of 1996 in this court on 5.8.1996 with a prayer to direct the respondents to consider him for promotion to the post of Junior Engineer (Electronics) with effect from 15.6,1989 with all the arrears of salary from the date on which the respondent No. 3, allegedly junior to the petitioner, was so promoted.It was alleged in the writ petition that the writ petitioner (now appellant) was working as Junior Technician (Electronics) with the respondents, He, pursuant to a circular dated 18.1.1989, for promotion to the posts of Junior Engineer (Electronics), had applied for the said post but was not called for interview whereas the respondent No. 3 along with other eligible candidates were called for interview and on the basis of the interview conducted the respondent No. 3 had been appointed as Junior Engineer (Electronics).The learned Single ...
Ngurzakhuma Vs. State of Mizoram and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: May-17-2002
S.K. Kar, J. 1. This is a petition by one Ngurzakhuma who was appointed admittedly on October 4, 1972 temporarily as Soil Conservation Demonstrator vide Order No. ESSTT-2/72/ 2544 dated October 4, 1972 and posted at Buarpui after serving for sometime at Haulawng.2. The petitioner contended, inter alia, that his pay and allowances were withheld since 1976 on the plea of Government that he did not join his place posting at Barapansury pursuant to the transfer order. That in fact no transfer order was served on him. On making inquiry he found in 1977 that a transfer order was lying in file without service on him. He wanted to join thereafter to the new posting but was not allowed to do so. That the Respondent No. 3 (Director, Soil and Water Conservation Department, Government of Mizoram) to his surprise issued articles of charges vide his Memo No. DS-/79/10797- 8 dated November 14, 1979 regarding non-joining of duty at place of posting. Petitioner submitted in defence that he was not se...
Shambhu Paul and ors. Vs. State of Assam
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: May-17-2002
A.H. Saikia, J.1. I have heard Mr. AB Choudhury, learned counsel for the appellants and Mr. K Munir, learned P P Assam. 2. This appeal has been carried from the Judgment and order dated 19.12.2000 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Karimganj in Sessions Case No. 27/98 convicting the two appellants namely Sambhu Paul and Bhola Paul under Section 498A/304B read with Section 34 IPC and sentencing them to rigorous imprisonment for three years and a fine of Rs. 5000 each, in default, rigorous imprisonment for one year for offence under Section 498A, IPC and also rigorous imprisonment for seven years under Section 304B, IPC. The sentences of imprisonment are to run concurrently. 3. The prosecution case, in brief, is that late Shyma Paul was married to appellant No. 1, Sambhu Paul on 14.12.1994. Since her marriage the appellant No. 1 along with his mother brother and sister, being not satisfied with the usual gifts given at the time of marriage, used to assault and inflict torture on her...
Kaziranga Tobaco Products Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: May-17-2002
P.G. Agarwal, J.1. This batch of 23 writ petitions are disposed of by this common judgment and order.2. We have heard Shri Ashok Desai, Sr. Advocate, Shri P.K. Goswami, Sr. Advocate, Shri G.N. Sahewalla, Sr. Advocate, Dr. Ashok Saraf, Sr. Advocate, for the writ petitioners and Shri A.K. Ganguly, Sr. Advocate, Shri K.N. Choudhury, Sr. Advocate for the respondent Union of India.3. The facts are that the Government of India announced a separate Industrial Policy for the North-Eastern Region in the month of December, 1997 to stimulate development of industries so that the Region overcomes its continuing backwardness. The State of Assam also announced their industrial policy. In order to make operational the policy, number of Notifications were issued by the Government of India as well as the State of Assam and out of them Excise Notification issued by the Ministry of Finance on 8-7-99 on the eve of the Hon'ble Prime Minister's visit to Assam was the major incentive.4. The case of the writ...
Meghalaya State Electricity Board Vs. Sita Ram Singh
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: May-15-2002
1. Heard Mr. S.R. Sen, learned counsel appearing for the appellant, assisted by Ms. P.D. Buzarbarua, and Ms. A. Paul, learned counsel appearing for the respondent.2. Brief facts giving rise to the present appeal at the behest of the Meghalaya State Electricity Board (for short 'the MSEB'), may be noticed.3. Under Section 79 of the Electricity (Supply) Act, 1948, the MSEB had framed Regulations known as the Meghalaya State Electricity Board Service Regulations, 1996. The opening part of Section 79 of the Act, 1948 reads as under :- '79. Power to make regulations. -The Board may, by notification in the Official Gazette, make regulations not inconsistent with this Act and the rules made thereunder to provide for all or any of the following matters, namely -*** *** ***It will be apparent from the reading of the aforesaid section that regulations would become enforceable when they are notified in the official gazette. We are not much concerned here with Section 79A of the Act, 1948, which ...
C. Lalneihkimi and anr. Vs. State of Mizoram and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: May-15-2002
S.K. Kar, J. 1. The petitioners Mrs. C. Lalneihkimi and Mr. C. Ngurthanmawia with intent to enforce their Fundamental Rights have come up with this petition Under Section 226 of the Constitution for appropriate relief by way of order/direction from this Court. The petition is in-connection with their expected promotion to the next higher grade of Principal, Government Higher Secondary School on the plea that they are holders of M.Ed. degree and challenging the interpretation of M.Ed. degree made by the respondents and thereby refusing their claim to promotion as arbitrary and illegal.2. Fact of the case, in brief, are as below.Both the petitioners belong to Mizo Scheduled Tribe Community entitled to enjoy all rights and privileges granted under the Constitution. That petitioner No. 1 is presently working as the Headmistress of Mamawii Girl's Higher Secondary School, Aizawl since April, 2001 and had good academic records and was holder of M.Ed. degree from NEHU. Petitioner No. 2 is als...
New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. C. Keiliana and anr.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: May-15-2002
S.K. Kar, J.1. This petition by the New India Assurance Co. Ltd., Aizawal Branch, is presented on the strength of Articles 226/227 of the consortium of India challenging the legality of the order dated 30.5.2000 passed by Presiding Officer, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (in short M.A.C.T.), in M.A.C.T. Case No. 88 of 1997. (The petition is, however, drafted very exhaustively like that of a petition of appeal). Insofar a question of maintainability of this petition under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India is concerned, the law has been well settled by the Full Bench judgment of this Court in Milan Rani Saha v. New India Assurance Co. Ltd. . The Court, now, definitely is required to enter into the matter in order to see whether there was any case of miscarriage of justice due to any infirmity, illegality or arbitrariness in the impugned judgment passed by the M.A.C.T.2. The quintessence of the submission made by the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner is that on the...
New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Sh. C. Keiliana and anr.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: May-15-2002
S.K. Kar, J. 1. This petition by the New India Assurance Company Limited, Aizawl Branch, is presented on the strength of Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India challenging the legality of the order dated 30.5.2000 passed by Presiding Officer, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (in short MACT), in MACT Case No. 88/97. (The petition is, however, drafted very exhaustively like that of a petition of appeal). Insofar a question of maintainability of this petition under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India is concerned, the law has been well-settled by the full bench judgment of this Court reported as 2000 (2) GLT 393, Miloni Rani Sana, Appellant v. New India Assurance Company Ltd. and Ors. The Court, now, definitely is required to enter into the matter in order to see whether there was any case of miscarriage of justice due to any infirmity, illegality or arbitrariness in the impugned judgment passed by the MACT. 2. The quintessence of the submission made by the learned counsel a...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »