Guwahati Court July 2003 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.
Zakir HussaIn and ors. Vs. State of Assam and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Jul-15-2003
D. Biswas, J.1. By this common judgment and order, W.P. (C) No. 4244/2003, W.P (C) No. 4579/2003, W.P. (C) 3745/2003, W.P. (C) 4812/2003 and W.P. (C) 4649/2003 along with Misc. Case Nos. 442/2003, 314/2003 and 443/2003 are being disposed of.2. The dispute in all these cases relates to the issue of tender notice for settlement of markets in the rural areas.3. I have heard Mr. B.K. Sarma, learned senior counsel ; Mr. H.N. Sarma, learned senior counsel; Mr. M.A. Sheikh and Mr. T Das, learned counsel for the petitioners. I have also heard Mr. A.K. Phookan, learned Advocate General Assam.4. The question to be answered in these cases is whether the Anchalik Panchayats are the authority for settlement of hats (markets) within the territorial jurisdiction of the Anchalik Panchayat irrespective of the annual value of the market.5. The above question has cropped up in view of the provisions of Section 109 (6) or the Assam Panchayat Act, 1994 which provide for settlement of hats, ferries and fis...
BolIn Chetia Vs. Jogadish Bhuyan and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Jul-15-2003
A.M. Saikia, J. 1. Vanquished in the battle of ballots by a narrow margin of 196 votes, the election petitioner (hereinafter called as 'the petitioner') has launched a legal attack against the election of the respondent No. 1 by filing this election petition basically on two fronts. The first is the improper reception and rejection of the ballot papers and the second is the corrupt practice of booth capturing by the election agent of the respondent No. 1. Accordingly the petitioner has prayed for scrutiny and recounting of all the 2149 number rejected ballot papers and all the ballot papers counted in favour of respondent No. 1 and thereafter on the basis of such scrutiny and recounting, the petitioner has sought for a declaration that the election of the respondent No. 1 from No. 126 Sadiya Legislative Assembly Constituency (for Short Sadiya, 'LAC') is void under the mandate of Section 98(b) read with Section 100(1)(b) and Section 100(1)(d)(iii) and (iv) of the Representation of the ...
R.A. Shukla Vs. Oil and Natural Gas Commission and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Jul-15-2003
D. Biswas, J. 1. The writ petitioner was dismissed from service by the Executive Director, ONGC, Nazira by an order passed on 19.4.2002 in exercise of powers conferred by Rule 41(a) of the ONGC (CDA) Rules, 1994 consequent upon his conviction by the Special Judge, Shillong in a CBI Case No. RC. 22/82-SHG under Section 120B/468/471/47A I.P.C. read with Section 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947.2. The order of dismissal has been assailed on the ground that an appeal against the judgment of conviction and sentence is pending and, as such, the conviction cannot be a ground for dismissal of the writ petitioner from service unless it attains finality. Besides, the order of dismissal has been deprecated having been passed without pre-decisional hearing by an authority not authorised by law to pass such order.3. The respondent authority in their affidavit-in-opposition contended that the gravity of the criminal charges and the conviction of the petitioner impelled the authority ...
Shyamali Haldar Vs. State of Assam and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Jul-14-2003
P.P. Naolekar, C.J. 1. In 1996 an advertisement was made for the post of LD Assistant in the office of the District Fishery Development Officer, Hailakandi,. The present Respondent No. 4, Smt. Jahanara Mazumdar, and the appellant, Smt. Shyamali Haldar, applied for appointment. Both were selected and while the Respondent No. 4, Smt. Jahanara Mazumdar, was shown at serial No. 1, the appellant, Smt. Shyamali Haldar, was shown at serial No. 2 in the merit list. Both the persons were appointed temporarily. Later on in the year 1996 itself the appellant, Smt. Shyamali Haldar was regularised in the post of LD Assistant although she was placed at serial No. 2 in the merit list. This gave rise for the Respondent No. 4 to approach this Court by filing a writ petition which was registered as Civil Rule No. 2088/1996. In the writ petition the Court passed the following order: 'The respondents are directed to consider the case of the petitioner by regularising her to the post of which she is work...
Lalhmingthanga Vs. State of Mizoram and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Jul-10-2003
S.K. Kar, J. 1. This is a petition under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India intended to challenge order dated 18.03.2002 passed by respondent No. 3, the Commissioner of Excise, Govt. of Mizoram, placing the petitioner below the private respondent Nos. 4, 5 and 6 in the inter se seniority list of the Inspectors of Excise in the concerned department. It is submitted that the impugned order has been violative of the rights of the petitioner and is against the spirit and principle of Articles 14, 16, 21 and 309 of the Constitution of India etc. 2. I have heard both sides. The brief facts are as follows : The petitioner, Lalhmingthanga, initially appointed as Sub-Inspector of Excise on the recommendation of the duly constituted D.P.C. (Departmental Promotion Committee) vide letter of the D.P.C. dated 17.10.1984 on which date he joined the service. In the meantime the Mizoram Revenue, Excise and Taxation Department (Group C) Recruitment Rules, 1979 underwent several changes comin...
Archana Paul Vs. State of Tripura and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Jul-10-2003
P.K. Sarkar, J.1. These group of cases involved the same questions of facts and law and, therefore, I decide by this common judgment.2. In all these cases, the petitioners are poor women who had two/three children and had opted for sterilisation in different Health Camps in Tripura and in Govt. Hospital, but subsequently had to bear pregnancy and ultimately some of them gave birth to a female child and some gave birth to a male child inspite of sterilisation operation by Govt. Doctors. It is, therefore, contended by the petitioners that the doctors who conducted the sterilisation operation were negligent and the operation failed for which they became pregnant inspite of sterilisation operation. All these petitioners therefore filed these writ petitions claiming compensation as damages and for maintaining the unwanted child for medical negligence.3. The Govt and the doctors who were made parties in some of the writ petitions filed counter-affidavit stating that the sterilisation scheme...
New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Shanti Stores
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Jul-07-2003
S.K. Kar, J.1. This revision petition is directed against the order and judgment dated 19.9.2003 passed by learned A.D.M. (Judicial), Aizawal, in Misc. Case No. 1 of 2002 arising out of R.F.A. No. 1 of 2002 of his Court.2. The respondent, M/s. Shanti Stores, brought a suit, Money Suit No. 14 of 1996, claiming a sum of Rs. 3,22,922/- as additional amount due from the shopkeeper's insurance policy. The shop of the respondent was gutted by fire during communal disturbance on 27.9.1994.3. The claim was contested by the present petitioner/insurer pleading, inter alia, full and final settlement satisfaction of the claim of insurance policy on receipt of Rs. 2,45,658/- by the plaintiff/respondent. But the Trial Court overruling the objections decreed the suit. Being aggrieved the petitioner presented a memorandum of appeal registered as R.F.A. No. 1 of 2002, along with petition for condonation of delay of 75 days in presenting the appeal. The petition for condonation of delay was registered...
B. Hmangaisanga Vs. State of Mizoram and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Jul-04-2003
S.K. Kar, J. 1. This is an petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India filed by B. Hmangaihsanga Constable No. 356, 1st I.R. Bn. In the context of his alleged resignation and subsequent orders passed by the appellate authority punishing him with stoppage or three increments with cumulative effect. The petitioners contends there is a case of violation of Articles 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India along with violation of natural of justice etc.2. Brief facts are that petitioner being a constable while in service was charged by his senior colleague with the accusation of attempting to steal a shirt. Authorities took steps to lodge a FIR but refrained from doing so as the petitioner offered to resign from his service on condition that no police case will be filed against him. Thereafter, he tendered his resignation which was accepted. Against this acceptance of his resignation later on he filed a writ petition, W.P. (C) No. 73 of 2001, alleging that resignation was su...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›