Guwahati Court August 2005 Judgments

Sawarmal Agarwalla Vs. State of Assam and anr.

Court: Guwahati

I.A. Ansari, J.1. By making this application under Section 482, Cr.P.C. the petitioner, who is accused in CR case No. 1589 (C)/1994 of the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kamrup, has approached this Court with prayer to get quashed the complaint, which has given rise to the CR case No. 1589(C)/1994 aforementioned, and also to get set aside an quashed the order, dated June 27, 1995, passed therein directing issuance of warrant of arrest against the accused-petitioner.2. The material facts and various stages, which have led to the present revision, may, in brief, be set out as follows:Shri D.N. Das, an Inspector, appointed Under the Employees' State Insurance Act, 1948, (hereinafter referred to as 'the ESI Act'), instituted a complaint on behalf of the Employees State Insurance Corporation (in short, 'the Corporation'), which gave rise to CR Case No. 1589(C)/1994 aforementioned, the case of the complainant being, in brief, thus. The present accused-petitioner, namely, Sawarm...

Batou and ors. Vs. State of Nagaland and ors.

Court: Guwahati

1. I have heard Mr. A Zhimomi learned Counsel for the petitioners, and Mr. L.S Jamir learned Government Advocate, Nagaland, appearing on behalf of the State respondents. None has appeared, on behalf of the private respondents.2. By this common judgment and order, I propose to dispose of the two writ petitions, namely, WHO No. 14 (K)/05 and WHO No. 27 (K)/05, for, on the request of the learned Counsel for the parties, both the writ petitions have been heard together inasmuch as the same involve identical facts, raise common questions of law and the decision in any of the two writ petitions may have a bearing on the out-come of the other writ petition.3. Though in a democracy, the right to cast vote is of great importance, it has never been recognised, in England, as a common law-right or civil right. Since we, in India, have followed Anglo-Saxon jurisprudence, the right to cast vote and elect has never been treated, in India, as a civil right or a fundamental right. A right to cast vot...

Jyotish Chandra Pathak Vs. State of Assam and anr.

Court: Guwahati

Ranjan Gogoi, J.1. The validity of a departmental proceeding initiated against the petitioner after his retirement from service in exercise of the powers under the Assam Services (Pension) Rules, 1969 (hereinafter referred to as the Pension Rules) is the subject-matter of the present writ petition.2. The writ petitioner, who was a substantive member of the Assam Civil Service, was at the relevant point of time, working as the Project Director, District Rural Development Agency, Dibrugarh. He was transferred to the said post on 8.11.1996 from Nalbari where he had earlier worked as the Project Director of the District Rural Development Agency of the Nalbari District. His tenure of service in Nalbari was from the year 1992. The petitioner was asked to explain certain irregularities allegedly committed by him while working at Nalbari. This was by a letter dated 23.4.1997. The petitioner retired from service on superannuation with effect from 31.7.1998. After the petitioner submitted his r...

Subir Kumar Dey Vs. Joya Dey @ Joya Mahajan

Court: Guwahati

A.H. Saikia, J.1. Heard Mr. G.N. Sahewalla, learned senior counsel, assisted by Md. Aslam, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Mr. S. Banik, learned Counsel for the respondent.2. This petition has been filed by the petitioner under Article 227 of the Constitution of India against the order dated 28.4.2004 passed by the learned Addl. District Judge, Dibrugarh in T.S.(D) No. 2/01 renumbered as Title Suit (D) 57/03 wherein the petitioner was directed to pay maintenance pendentilite to the respondent as per order dated 23.5.2003 passed by the learned District Judge, Dibrugarh in the same case.3. The impugned order dated 28.4.2004 may be noticed as under:Parties appeared before court alongwith their Id. counsel. It is submitted by Id. counsel for the petitioner/respondent that the petitioner/opp. Party has not paid any amount towards maintenance pendentilite. Petition shall pay the maintenance pendentilite to the opp. party as per order dated 23.5.2003 respondent submitted written state...

Prasanna Kumar Phukan Vs. State of Assam and ors.

Court: Guwahati

Ranjan Gogoi, J.1. Heard Mr. A.S. Chaudhury, learned senior counsel for the petitioner and Mr. H.K. Mahanta, learned Government advocate, Assam appearing on behalf of the official respondents.2. The punishment imposed on the petitioner by an order dated 19.2.2004 after a full-fledged departmental enquiry into the charges levelled against the petitioner by charge memo dated 18.6.2002, is the subject-matter of challenge in the present writ petition. After receipt of the charge memo dated 18.6.2002, the petitioner submitted his reply on 8.7.2002 and sought for permission to inspect certain documents. Permission was granted to the petitioner and thereafter an enquiry officer was appointed to enquire into the charges levelled. The petitioner participated in the enquiry, in course of which oral and documentary evidence in support of the charges were adduced before the enquiry officer. At the end of the enquiry the enquiry officer submitted a report of the disciplinary authority, a copy of w...

Abdul Qadir Siddique Vs. State of Arunachal Pradesh and ors.

Court: Guwahati

B.K. Sharma, J.1. This writ petition is directed against the order by which the petitioner who is on deputation in the borrowing department has been repatriated to his parent department.2. Briefly stated the facts material for the purpose of disposal of the instant writ petition are that the petitioner was first appointed as Instructor in the department of Industries w.e.f. 9.3.92 pursuant to Annexure-I advertisement dated 9.4.98 issued by the Arunachal Pradesh Energy Development Agency (APEDA) inviting applications for filling up two posts of Project Officer (PO) (Energy) on standard deputation terms initially for a period of two years, the petitioner offered his candidature for one such posts. Pursuant to selection etc., the petitioner was appointed as a PO under APEDA by Annexure-III order dated 4.9.2000. He was so appointed with the following terms and conditions:Sept. 2000ORDERConsequent upon recommendation of the selection committee, the following Officers are hereby appointed a...

Subodh Kumar Pattnaik Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Guwahati

Reported in: (2006)(91)SLJ262CAT

1. The matter relates to promotion to the post of Director, Geology in the scale of pay of Rs. 12000-16500 in the Geological Survey of India under the Government of India, Ministry of Mines, New Delhi.2. The applicant is working a Geologist (Senior), M.G.P. Division in the Office of the 4th respondent. The applicant was originally appointed as Geologist (Junior) on selection by the Union Public Service Commission in the year 1976 in the Geological Survey of India.He was promoted as Geologist (Sr.) in the year 1985. He had completed the residency period of 6 years required for promotion to the post of Director (Geology) in the year 1991. The applicant was at serial No.670 in the seniority list of Geologist (Sr) prepared by the Geological Survey of India as on 1.10.1990. As per the provisional seniority list of Geologist (Sr.) as on 1.8.2000 (Annexure-II) applicant is serial No.172 while respondents 8 to 10 are serial Nos. 174,175 and 204 respectively. The applicant has filed this O.A. ...

John Lal Ngilneia Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and anr.

Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Guwahati

Reported in: (2006)(92)SLJ153CAT

1.The applicant is presently working as Additional Commissioner (Group 'A' Officer) in the Office of the Chief Commissioner, Central Excise and Customs, Shillong. He has filed this application seeking for direction to promote him on ad hoc basis as Commissioner, Customs and Central Excise on the basis of D.P.C, held in December, 1999 with effect from the date of promotion of his juniors/from a date following the six-monthly review immediately following the adoption of sealed cover procedure. He has also sought for subsequent monetary benefits from the date of his promotion/ad hoc promotion.2. The brief facts are that the applicant was recruited through UPSC and initially joined as Assistant Collector (Group - A, IRS) in the Central Excise and Customs in 19/3. He was promoted as Deputy Collector in 1981 and subsequently promoted as Additional Collector in 1990. The designation of Collector was changed in the year 1991 to Commissioner.As such, he is an Additional Commissioner. The next ...

Prasanna Mahanta and ors. Vs. State of Assam and ors.

Court: Guwahati

Ranjan Gogoi, J.1. Heard Mr. S. Shyam, learned Counsel for the petitioners and Mr. I. Choudhury, learned Standing Counsel, P.W.D. Also heard Mr. H.K. Mahanta, learned Government Advocate, Assam.2. The petitioners, who are 9 in number, are retired employees of the Public Works Department of the State of Assam. They had retired on different dates in the year 2000, 2001 and 2002 while holding either the post of Senior Grade junior Engineer or Assistant Engineer. The non-finalization of the entitlement of the petitioners to pension and the consequential non-payment of the pensionary dues is what has led to the initiation of the present writ application.3. The facts are long and an attempt must be made to recite only what is essential. Pursuant to the recommendations of the Pay Commission, the Government of Assam, way back in the year 1989, took the decision to introduce a senior grade pay scale to eligible Junior Engineers of different departments with effect from 1.1.1989. The aforesaid ...

Angom Sarat Singh Vs. District Magistrate and ors.

Court: Guwahati

M.B.K. Singh, J.1. In this writ petition, the petitioner is challenging the legality of the order being No. DC (CCP) CRIL/NSA/ 2004(3), dated 7-1.0-2004, passed by the District Magistrate. Churachandpur by which he was ordered to be detained under NSA 1980 purportedly with a view to prevent him from acting in any manner prejudicial to the security of the Slate and maintenance of public order in the District, and also the order being No. 17(1)/804/2004-H, dated 6-11-2004 passed by the Special Secretary (H), Govt. of Manipur in the name of the Governor of Manipur by which the said detention order was confirmed and the period of detention was fixed as 12 months from the date of detention.2. We have heard Mr. Ch. Ngongo, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, Mr. Jalal, learned Addl. G.A. appearing on behalf of the State-respondents and Mr. N. Ibotombi, learned CGSC appearing on behalf of the respondent No. 4. We have also perused the materials before the Court.3. The said...