Guwahati Court June 2004 Judgments

Jubair Ahmed Barbhuiya Vs. State of Assam and ors.

Court: Guwahati

B.K. Sharma, J.1. This writ petition has been filed assailing the legality and validity of the order dated 7.10.1997 by which the earlier order dated 3.9.1996 by which the services of the petitioner as Assistant teacher in the M.E. School in question was regularised has been cancelled. The petitioner was initially appointed by order dated 30.1.1996 as Assistant Teacher in the M.E. School in question. His such appointment was for a period of 3 months. By another order dated 16.5.1996 his service was extended for a further period of 3 months. By yet another order dated 7.8.1996, his such services were further extended for a period of 3 months. Eventually, his service was regularised by order dated 3.9.1996. Within about one year of such order of regularisation dated 3.9.1996 the impugned order dated 7.10.1997 was issued. Admittedly, the course of action was taken without putting the petitioner to any kind of notice and giving him opportunity of being heard.2. I have heard Ms A. Begum, l...

Assam Conductors and Cables Manufacturers' Association and Ors. Vs. As ...

Court: Guwahati

P.G. Agarwal, J.1. The petitioner, Assam Conductors & Cables Manufacturers Association, is a registered Society under the Societies Registration Act, and the members of the Association are the manufacturers of Conductors and Cables, transformers, PSC Poles in the State of Assam. The petitioner has challenged the Tender Notice No. 171/02 dated 2.10.2002, issued by the Chief Engineer (M), ASEB for alleged violation of the provision of the Assam Preferential Stores Purchase Act, 1989, for short 'the 1989 Act'.2. The case of the petitioners, in brief, is that under the 1989 Act, PSC poles, cables, conductors, distribution transformers are reserved items for S.S.I, units of Assam and 23 members of the Association are involved in the manufacturing of the said items. The respondent - ASEB, vide Tender Notice No. 171/02 dated 2.10.2002, invited tenders from the Turn Key Conductors for implementation of the work packages, mentioned therein, which are meant for Accelerated Power Development, an...

Divisional Forest Officer-cum-authorised Officer Vs. Maya Dolo

Court: Guwahati

P.G. Agarwal, J.1. This revision has been filed by the petitioner Under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, challenging the order dated 23.7.2002, passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Sonitpur, Tezpur, in Criminal Appeal No. 3 (S-D/2000, whereby the order of confiscation of truck, bearing registration No. AR-057-0145, passed by the D.F.O., Sonitpur, was set aside.2. The relevant facts leading to the present petition, in brief, are that the vehicle No. AR-05/-0145 was seized by the Forest Department and a case Under Sections 24/25 and 40, 41 and 49(1) of the Assam Forest Regulation (Amendment) Act, 1995 was initiated and, thereafter, a proceeding for confiscation of the seized truck Under Section 49(4) of the AFR (Amendment) Act, 1995 was taken up by the D.F.O. A notice was issued to the respondent-owner of the vehicle and, thereafter, the authorised officer passed an order of confiscation on 21.1.2000. The respondent, Smt. Maya Dolo, thereafter, filed a Criminal Appeal No. 3(S-...

Parimal Chakraborty Vs. Ranjit Debnath and ors.

Court: Guwahati

P.G. Agarwal, J. 1. The respondent Sri Ranjit Debnath instituted a complaint alleging commission of offence under Section 420/406, etc. IPC and after holding enquiry under Section 202 Cr.P.C., the learned Magistrate issued process against the accused person under Sections 420/468 IPC vide order dated 24.10.96 passed in CR 1657/96. While the case was pending for appearance of the accused persons, the complainant remained absent on two consecutive dates and thereafter by order dated 9.9.97 the complaint was dismissed. Thereafter the complainant appeared and filed an application for restoration of the complaint case and vide impugned order dated 22.1.98 the learned Magistrate revived/restored the complaint back to life and hence the present revision. 2. At the outset, it is submitted that the complaint case we dismissed under the provisions of Section 249 Cr.P.C., but in the facts and circumstances of the present case the provision of Section 249 Cr.P.C. were not applicable. '249. Absenc...

East Line Projects Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Dr. B. Borooah Cancer Institute and o ...

Court: Guwahati

P.G. Agarwal, J.1. All these writ petitions were heard analogous and disposed of by this common order.2. All these four writ petitions relate to the establishment of a Pharmacy at Dr. B. Barooah Cancer Institute (hereinafter referred to as the Institute for convenience sake). The Institute floated a tender vide NIT, dated 18-2-2004 for establishment of a Pharmacy at the said Institute to be named as BBCI Pharmacy for the convenience of the patients undergoing treatment at the said Institute. Pursuant to the said/NIT, M/s. New Barman Medicos, petitioner in WP (C) No. 2039/2004; M/s. Becon Drug Distributors, petitioner in WP (C) No. 1826/ 2004 and M/s. Jyotshna Medical, petitioner in WP (C) No. 2268/2004 submitted their tenders. The other petitioner M/s. East Line Projects Pvt. Ltd., did not submit any tender and they have challenged the said tender process on certain grounds to which we will be reverting at a later stage. The Committee of the Institute consisted of seven members (one w...

Dilip Kumar Rabidas Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Guwahati

Reported in: (2005)(2)SLJ280CAT

(i) To set aside the memorandum of charge sheet dated 12.5.1997, impugned order of penalty dated 12.12.2002 and the impugned appellate order dated 22.8.2003. (ii) To direct the Appellate Authority to condone the delay in preferring the appeal and further to direct the Appellate Authority to pass reasoned order on merit of the appeal. (iii) To direct the respondents to promote the applicant to the post of Senior Superintendent (stores) at least from the date of promotion of his immediate juniors with all consequential benefits. While the applicant was working, as Junior Superintendent, Government Medical Stores Depot, Guwahati, a surprise check of stock of medicines was conducted by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI for short) authority on 11.7.1996 and the following discrepancies were found: "(a) Shortage of 53,770 nos. of Tab.Pyrimetharnine Sulphadoxine Combination (250mg) valued Rs. 51,081.50 in NMEP Section. (b) As per declaration in Bincard No. 67204, the stock of tablet Py...

B. Rokima Vs. State of Mizoram and ors.

Court: Guwahati

B. Lamare, J. 1. Heard Mr. H. Lalrinthanga, learned counsel for the petitioner in WP(C) No. 36 of 1998, Mr. C. Lalramzauva, learned counsel for thepetitioners in WP(C) No. 22 of 2003 and also heard Mr. Aldrin Lallawmzaula, learned Government advocate for the respondents. 2. Briefly stated the fact is that the petitioner Shri B. Rokima was appointed temporarily as Forest Ranger by order dated 26-9-75 Subsequently, the respondents by notification dated 8-1-80 appointed 2 (two) Assistant Conservator of Forest (ACF) for a period of 2 years with effect from 7-5-79. By another order dated 15-12-81 another person was appointed as ACF on ad hoc basis. By order dated 15-12-81 one more ACF was appointed on ad hoc basis with effect from 25-10-80. By notification dated 15-12-82, 4 (four) more ACF were appointed on ad hoc basis with effect from 30-10-82. By another order dated 16-3-82 one ACF was appointed on ad hoc basis with effect from 31-1-82. By notification dated 8-8-83, 5 (Five) more ACF/...

Nikhumi Vs. State of Mizoram and ors.

Court: Guwahati

B. Lamare, J.1. Heard Mr. C. Lalremzauva, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Mr. N. Sailo, learned counsel for the respondents.2. The petitioner was appointed as Teacher of Thenzawl Council L.P. School vide order dated 21-6-63. Since the appointment, the petitioner has served in the school till the month of March 1967 when she was dismissed from the service on her alleged link with the MNF movement. The petitioner was also arrested -by the Assam Rifles on 13-9-67 and she was kept in their custody for about a month and later on released her. The State Government in the Home Department issued a circular dated 27-8-93 addressed to the Head of the oDepartments for reinstatement of the Government servant who were dismissed/removed due to the alleged link with the MNF. By this circular the Government has decided to reinstate on compassionate ground all those who were removed from service with retrospective effect, i.e., 17-12-90.3. Pursuant to this circular the petitioner submitt...

State of Arunachal Pradesh and ors. Vs. Nefa Udyog and ors.

Court: Guwahati

I.A. Ansari, J.1. Heard Mr. K.P, Pathak, learned senior counsel, appearing for the review applicants, assisted by Mr. S. Sarma, and Mr. N. Dutta, learned senior counsel, appearing for the writ petitioners-opposite parties, assisted by Mr. P.N. Goswami.2. These review petitions, namely, Review Petition Nos. 116/2003, 117/ 2003, 118/2003, 119/2003, and 120/2003, which seek to get reviewed the orders, dated 27.1.2003, passed in Writ Petition (Civil) Nos. 458(AP)/ 2001, 397(AP)/2001, 398(AP)/2001, 483(AP)/2001, 498(AP)/2001 respectively, have been resisted at the threshold on the ground of maintainability of the review petitions by the writ petitioners-opposite parties herein.3. The maintainability of the present set of review petitions has been challenged, in a nut-shell, on two grounds. It is, first, contended by Mr. N. Dutta, learned senior counsel, that Rule 6 of Chapter-X of the Gauhati High Court Rules requires that either the applicant, who presents the review application, or his A...

Mahendra Kr. Singh Vs. N.F. Railway and ors.

Court: Guwahati

Ranjan Gogoi, J.1. An order dated 16/17/8/2002 dismissing the writ petitioner from service has been put to challenge in the present writ application. The appellate order dated 24.2.2003 dismissing the appeal filed by the writ petitioner against the aforesaid order of dismissal is an incidental matter of challenge in the present writ proceeding.2. The facts, in brief, may be noted at the outset.A complaint dated 1.6.1998 was lodged by one Shri Ram Avtar Singh to the Chief Security Commissioner, Railway Protection Force, R.P.F., New Delhi alleging-Chat the writ petitioner who was at the relevant point of time serving as a Constable in the Railway Protection Force and posted at Maligaon, Guwahati, Assam had accepted a sum of Rs. 60,000.00 for arranging the appointment of the nephew of the complainant one Shri Bijendra Singh, as a Constable in the Railway Protection Force. On the basis of the complaint filed, the authority decided to hold a preliminary enquiry and for said the purpose, tw...