Guwahati Court February 2005 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.
Barad Kesar Bhai Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Feb-02-2005
Ranjan Gogoi, J.1. An order dated 1.2.1997 dismissing the writ petitioner from service has been assailed by means of the present writ application. A subsequent order dated 13.11.1997 dismissing the appeal filed by the writ petitioner against aforesaid the order dated 1.2.1997 has also been put to challenge herein.2. The relevant facts of the case may briefly be noticed at this stage. The petitioner joined service as a Constable in the Border Security Force sometime in the year 1994. In the year 1996 he was posted at Panbari in the district of Dhubri of the State of Assam. The petitioner was granted leave on medical ground for a period of 40 days with effect from 9.9.1996 to 18.10.1996. During the period of the aforesaid leave, the petitioner had gone to his native place in the State of Gujarat. On the expiry of his leave, the petitioner did not join service and therefore the concerned authority had issued a letter dated 30.10.1996 requiring the petitioner to report back to duty within...
Dilip Kumar Saha Vs. State of Assam and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Feb-02-2005
Ranjan Gogoi, J.1. Five separate assessment orders each dated November 11, 2000 for the assessment years 1993-94, 1994-95, 1995-96, 1996-97 and 1997-98 have been impugned in the present writ petition. The assessments made are best judgment assessments under the provisions of Section 17(6) of the Assam General Sales Tax Act, 1993.2. I have heard Shri J. Bora, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. K.N. Chaudhury, learned Additional Advocate-General, Assam appearing for the State.3. The arguments advanced on behalf of the petitioner have been short and precise. The contention is that the petitioner received a notice from the assessing authority asking him to be present on August 18, 2000 for joint verification of the accounts seized by Bureau of Economic Offence. Thereafter, the assessing authority proceeded to complete the best judgment assessments in question, without, however, giving the petitioner any opportunity. In this regard the provisions of Section 17(6) and Rule 25 have b...
Gujarat Co-operative Milk Marketing Federation Ltd. and anr. Vs. State ...
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Feb-02-2005
Ranjan Gogoi, J.1. The question that arises for determination in the present writ petition is whether the three items of milk food, i.e., Amul Taza, Amul Gold and Amul Slim 'N' Trim Milk, manufactured by the petitioners, are items of pasteurised milk to fall within item No. 16 of the First Schedule to the Assam General Sales Tax Act, 1993 or whether the said items are milk or milk products as visualised under item No. 6(a) of the Second Schedule to the aforesaid Act. An answer to the above question will determine the tax liability of the products in question. It may be noticed at this stage that items included in the First Schedule to the Act are exempted items whereas those included in the Second Schedule attract the levy of tax at the rates prescribed. A specific order dated November 8, 2001 passed by the assessing authority as well as the communication dated February 25, 2002 issued by the Additional Commissioner of Taxes taking the view that the items are not items of pasteurised ...
S.P. Road Link and ors. Vs. State of Tripura and anr.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Feb-02-2005
R.B. Misra, J.The petitioners have prayed for directing the respondents for granting registration, as transporter, carrier and transporting agent as required under Section 38-B of the Tripura Sales Tax Act, 1976 (for short called, 'the Act') read with Rule 64-A of the Tripura Sales Tax Rules, 1976 (for short called, 'the Rules') without any security deposit.1. The brief facts necessary for adjudication of the writ petition are that the petitioners a partnership firm having five partners, are seeking registration under Rule 65 of Rules for running business as transporter, carrier and trading agent of taxable goods, had submitted an application dated October 7, 2002 to the Superintendent of Taxes, followed by other applications dated December 8, 2003, February 28, 2004, May 9, 2004 and July 9, 2004 to the Commissioner of Taxes, State Government of Tripura, stating that the firm shall abide by the rules and regulations and direction of tax authorities showing willingness to deposit Rs. 2...
Ramjitanti Vs. State of Assam
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Feb-01-2005
P.G. Agarwal, J.1. Heard Mr. G. Uzir, the learned Amicus Curiae for the accused appellant and Mr. F.H. Laskar, the learned P.P.2. This appeal is directed against the Judgment and Order dated 13.12.95 passed by the Sessions Judge, Dibrugarh in Sessions Case No. 148 of 1992 (GR Case No. 910 of 1992) convicting the accused appellant Under Section 302 IPC and sentenced to imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/- in default further imprisonment for six months.3. On 21.6.1992 Saudakar Tanti lodged written FIR (Ext. 2) before police stating, inter alia, that on that day at about 10 AM the accused appellant Ramji Tanti had an altercation with the younger brother Gobin Tanti and thereafter the accused appellant picked up a dao and hacked the deceased by shivering the neck from the body. Police registered a case and after usual investigation submitted charge sheet.The accused was tried by the Sessions Judge, Dibrugarh for the offence Under Section 302 IPC and during trial as many as...
Dewanchand Ramsaran Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Feb-01-2005
Amitava Roy, J.1. The stand off follows a divergence in perceiving the true import of the option to offer multiple rigs in a public contract for 'Charter Hiring of 1(one) No. 1400 HP (Minimum) Capacity Rig Package For Drilling In Assam and Arunachal Pradesh' under the OIL India Ltd. (hereafter referred to as 'the OIL'). The appellant/writ petitioner's contention that multiple rigs, if offered, are essentially to carry the same price bid and hence the respondent No. 4's tender being non-responsive was liable to be rejected having been negatived by the learned Single Judge, it is in appeal, assailing the judgment and order dated 23/12/2004 passed in WP(C) 8923/2004.2. We have heard Mr. KN Choudhury, Senior Advocate, assisted by Mr. P Kataki and Mr. N Barkakoti, Advocates for the OIL and Mr. H Rahman, learned Senior CGSC for the Union of India.3. The abbreviated pleaded facts indispensably necessary for disposal of the appeal have to be stated. A Notice Inviting Tender No. OIL/CCO/ DRLG/...
Utpal Pamey Vs. State of Assam and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Feb-01-2005
Ranjan Gogoi, J.1. The writ petitioner was an aspirant for admission to the First Year M.B.B.S. Course in the Medical Colleges of the State of Assam for the academic session 2004-05. Fortified with a certificate issued by the competent authority, i.e., the Deputy Commissioner, Dhemaji that the petitioner belongs to the Schedule Tribes (Plains), the petitioner staked a claim against the seats reserved for Scheduled Tribes (Plains) candidates. In the selection that was held, the petitioner secured 131 marks and was placed at serial No. 4 of the waiting list of candidates for admission against the seats reserved for Schedule Tribe (Plains) candidates. In the counseling and the consequential admissions that took place, the first three candidates in the waiting list were offered admission against the MBBS/Dental courses and according to the petitioner he had, in the above manner, become the first candidate in the waiting list. The respondent No. 5, i.e., Pranamika Konyak, whose name appear...
Miri Engtipi Vs. State of Assam and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Feb-01-2005
B.P. Katakey, J.1. The writ petitioner who is the wife of Hari Terang has filed thispresent application for awarding compensation for the custodial death of her husband and also to direct the respondents to take appropriate action against the respondent No. 2 namely Mukesh Agarwal, Superintendent of Police, Diphu.2. I have heard Mr. H.K. Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner and also Mr. Burgohain, learned Addl. Advocate General, Assam assisted the learned State counsel for all the respondents.3. The case of the writ petitioner in the writ petition is that the petitioner's husband Hari Terang, who was serving as Section an Assistant in the office of the Executive Engineer Diphu irrigation Division, was picked up by police on 30/10/1997 and while he was in police custody he was beaten mercilessly for which he was hospitalised and as a result of which the petitioner's husband died in Diphu Civil Hospital on 4/11/1997. The petitioner has, therefore, filed the present writ petition f...
Suren Orang Vs. State of Assam
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Feb-01-2005
H.N. Sarma, J.1. By this revision petition the accused petitioner has challenged the legality and validity of the judgment and order dated 17-4-97 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Lakhimpur in Criminal Appeal No. 4(1)/ 1996 upholding the conviction and sentence passed by the learned Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate Lakhimpur in GR Case No. 1134/93 convicting the accused under Section 493 IPC and sentencing him to undergo SI for one year and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000 in default to undergo SI for further one month.2. The prosecution case, inter alia, in brief, is that on 7-4-93 the accused petitioner came to the house of the complainant in absence of her parents and performed sexual intercourse with her deceitfully inducing her to believe that she is his lawfully married wife by putting vermilion on her forehead. She gave her consent for sexual intercourse on the belief that the accused person is her lawful husband as the accused stated that he married her and put vermilion on her f...
M.V. Kartikeyan Nair Vs. State of Arunachal Pradesh and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Feb-01-2005
H.N. SARMA, J.1. This batch of writ petitions involve common question of law and facts. The grievance of the petitioners, in all these petitions, is against the order of repatriation from different Departments of the Government of Arunachal Pradesh, i.e. their parent Departments, by the Accountant General, who posted the petitioners on deputation as Divisional Accountants in various offices of Arunachal Pradesh. It is the further prayer of the petitioners, in all the writ petitions, that they should be permanently absorbed in their existing deputation posts of Divisional Accountant under the State of Arunachal Pradesh. With similar prayer, some of the petitioners, namely, petitioners in W.P(c) No. 221(AP)/02, W.P(c) No. 256/03, W.P(c) No. 409(AP)/02 and W.P(c) No. 410(AP)/02 initially approached the Central Administrative Tribunal, Guwahati and the learned Tribunal having dismissed their prayers, they have challenged the respective orders before this High Court and accordingly, those...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »