Guwahati Court August 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.
Arenthung Yanthan Vs. State of Nagaland
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Aug-08-2005
I.A. Ansari, J.1. Heard Mr. Supu Jamir, learned Counsel for the petitioner, and Mrs. Y. Longkumer, learned Government Advocate, appearing on behalf of respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 3.2. The present writ petition arises out of peculiar set of facts, for, the order of appointment of the petitioner as well as of others, termination of their services, re-appointment of some of the persons, whose services were terminated along with the service of the petitioner, and appointment of the private respondents, namely, respondent No. 4, have all been contrary to law.3. The material facts, which are not in dispute before me, may be noticed as follows: By order, dated February 7, 2003, issued, by the respondent No. 3, the writ petitioner was appointed in the office of the Directorate of Printing and Stationary, Government of Nagaland, as a Counter against an existing vacancy caused by promotion of its incumbent. By similar orders passed, on February 7, 2003 and March 6, 2003, five more persons were app...
Sako Chang Vs. State of Nagaland and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Aug-08-2005
I.A. Ansari, J.1. The present writ petition is, somewhat, unusual and this become transparent, when the following facts are noticed.Petitioner's elder, brother Omang Chang (since deceased), was appointed, on 16.2.1987, as a work charge employee (Mohorrie) under the establishment of the Project Engineer, Police Engineering Division, Alichen, Nagaland. While the said deceased was functioning as a work charge employee, his service was terminated by order, dated 13.9.1988, issued by the appointing authority. Challenging the order of termination, dated 13.9.1988, aforementioned, the said deceased instituted a writ petition, viz., WP(C) No. 93(K) 2003, his case being, in brief, that while he was discharging his duty as Sectional Assistant under the 3rd NAP (Project), Tuensang, he was directed by respondent No. 5 to supervise construction of security fencing in and around the residence of the then Superintendent of Police (DEF), Tuensang and when after completion of the said work, one and ha...
Narayan Chandra Dey Vs. State of Tripura and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Aug-08-2005
T. Vaiphei, J.1. The validity of the order dated 14.6.1995 imposing upon the petitioner the penalty of reduction of his pay to the lowest of the time scale for a period of two years and the departmental enquiry proceedings in connection therewith is called into question in this writ petition.2. The petitioner is serving as Forester in the Department of Forests. Government of Tripura, and was at the material time functioning as Attached Officer to the Beat Officer, Ramsankar Para Beat in the Teliamura Division. In the year 1992, a departmental enquiry was initiated against the petitioner on the following articles of charges:Article No. IThat the said Narayan Chandra Dey, Forester while posted/ functioning as Attached Officer to the Beat Officer, Ramsankar Para Beat acted as quite irresponsibly and unbecomingly by submitting false seizure report and by allowing unauthorized person to use the seizure hammer which was issued to him by the Government for his exclusive use for the purpose ...
Kumud Barman Vs. State of Assam and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Aug-05-2005
B.P. Katakey, J.1. This writ petition is directed against the order dated 24.6.2005 issued by the Director, Health Services, Assam approving the rates quoted by the respondents No. 5 for supply of dietary articles to Mangaldai Civil Hospital during the year 2005-06, i.e., from 1.7.2005 to 30.6.2005, in groups I to VI and consequently issuing work orders for supply of the said articles.2. The facts in brief is that a notice inviting tender was issued by the Joint Director, Health Services, Darrang, Mangaldai on 28.3.2005 inviting tender for supply of dietary articles to the Superintendent, Mangaldai Civil Hospital, Mangaldai for the period commencing from 1.4.2005 to 31.3.2006 in VI groups, namely, group I, II, III, IV, V, and VI fixing 22.3.2005 is the last date for submission of tender, stipulating that the rate will be accepted groupwise and sample will be required for item No. 1 to 9 of the items of Group -1 and reserving right by the authority to accept any tender or not to accept...
Hasan Ali Vs. State of Meghalaya and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Aug-05-2005
A. Hazarika, J.1. To begin with, the Supreme Court in D.K. Basil's case has observed that 'custodial death is perhaps one of the worst crimes in a civilized society governed by the Rule of Law. The rights inherent in Article 21 and 22(1) of the Constitution required to be jealously and scrupulously protected. We cannot whisk away the problem. Any form of torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment would fall within the inhibition of Article 21 of the Constitution, whether it occurs during investigation, interrogation or otherwise. If the functionaries of the Government become Law breakers, it is bound to breed contempt for law and would encourage lawlessness and every man would have the tendency to become law into himself thereby leading to anarchism...' The caution and the guidelines enumerated in the case has been violated in the tiny State of Meghalaya by the Police Personnel in the night of 15.4.2002. The brief facts leading to the filing of the case is narrated hereunder.2. ...
Amiya Kumar Das Vs. Food Corporation of India and anr.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Aug-05-2005
B.P. Katakey, J.1. By this writ petition, the petitioner, who is working as Asstt. Manager (General), Food Corporation of India, Regional Office at Guwahati, has challenged the communication dated 24.1.2003 issued by the Joint Manager (V & S), Food Corporation of India, Zonal Office (NE) refusing to allow the Sri Jatindra Nath Bora, a co-employee of the petitioner, to act as defence assistant in the departmental proceeding initiated against the petitioner and also for stay of the further proceeding of the departmental proceeding initiated vide memorandum dated 29.8.2002 issued by the Zonal Manager (NE), Food Corporation of India, on the ground that on the same facts the criminal proceeding against the petitioner is pending.2. The facts leading to the filing of the present writ petition is that a first information report was lodged by the Superintendent of Police, CBI in Crime No. RC 3(A)/99-SHG dated 8.1.1999 alleging entering into criminal conspiracy by one Sri S.P. Singh while poste...
Registrar (i and E), Gauhati High Court Vs. Amarjit BorgohaIn and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Aug-03-2005
R.B. Misra, J.1. Heard Mr. G.N. Sahewalla, learned senior counsel alongwith Mr. D. Senapati learned Counsel for the petitioner/applicant the Registrar (I & E) Gauhati High Court in Review Application No. 72/05 preferred in W.P.(C) 5416/05 and Mr. R.P. Sharma learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. S.M.T. Chestie for the writ petitioner and Mrs. M. Bora, learned Govt. Advocate for the State of Arunachal Pradesh.2. Vide an administrative order dated 3.8.05 passed by the Hon'ble Chief Justice, the present review application has been nominated to be heard by this Bench.3. It appears that the writ petition No. WP(C) 5416/05 (A. Borgohain @ A.B. Gohain v. State of Arunachal Pradesh) has been filed before this High Court (Principal Seat) Gauhati where in addition to the State of Arunachal Pradesh other respondents under the jurisdiction of State of Arunachal Pradesh, however were arrayed as parties/respondents, at the pleasure and permission of Hon'ble the Chief Justice, the writ petition was...
Dimapur Bar Association Vs. State of Nagaland and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Aug-03-2005
A.H. Saikia, J.1. Heard Mr. A. Zhimomi, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Mrs. Y. Longkumar, learned State Counsel appearing for the official respondents.2. By this writ petition, the petitioner, the Dimapur Bar Association, has made a limited grievance to the effect that though they have welcome the establishment of 5(five) Motor Accident Claims Tribunals (for short, the 'Tribunal') for 5 territories curving out within the State of Nagaland to exercise territorial jurisdiction over the areas specifically demarcated therein vide Notification dated 24.9.2003, the last paragraph of the said Notification is disturbing inasmuch as the same is contrary to the provision of law laid down in Section 166(2) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short, 'the Act').3. For the sake of convenience, the Notification dated 24.9.2003 as well as Section 166(2) of the Act may be quoted as under:GOVERNMENT OF NAGALANDTRANSPORT and COMMUNICATION DEPARTMENTKOHIMANOTIFICATIONDated Kohima the 24th Septem...
Naveen Enterprises and anr. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Aug-03-2005
I.A. Ansari, J. 1. I have heard Mr. K.N. Choudhury, learned senior counsel for the petitioners, and Mr. K.K. Batra, learned Counsel for the respondent Nos. 1, 3 and 4. I have also heard Mr. M. Bhuyan, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent No. 1.2. The material facts, which are not in dispute, may, in a narrow compass, be set as follows : -The petitioner No. 1, which is a limited company registered under the Companies Act with the petitioner No. 2, as one of its shareholders, availed credit facilities from the respondent No. 3, namely, Union Bank of India (in short 'the UBI') for construction of a project known as 'Hotel Kuber'. On failure of the petitioner No. 1 to keep its commitment to the UBI, the account of the petitioner No. 1 became 'Non-performing Asset' (hereinafter referred to as-'NPA') as far back as in the year 1991. The UBI, thereafter, initiated a recovery proceeding, which was registered as OA 135/97, in the Debts Recovery Tribunal (in short 'the DRT'), G...
L. Biakchhunga Vs. State of Mizoram and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Aug-01-2005
Amitava Roy, J. 1. This appeal while registering a challenge to the judgment and order dated 27.6.2003 passed by the learned Additional District Magistrate (Judicial), Aizawl, in RFA 5/2003 raises a question of considerable moment relating to the applicability of the Limitation Act, 1963, to the State of Mizoram. By the impugned judgment and order, the learned Appellate Court affirmed the judgment and order of the learned Trial Court dismissing the suit of the appellant/plaintiff amongst others being barred by limitation.2. I have heard Mr. C. Lalramzauva, learned Counsel for the appellant and Mr. N. Sailo, learned Government Advocate for the respondents.3. The pleaded facts are indispensable. The appellant/plaintiff instituted Money Suit No. 50/98 in the Court of the Additional Deputy Commissioner (Judicial), Aizawl, against the respondents praying for a decree, inter alia, for declaring that the respondents/defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay a sum of Rs. 10,12,500 on...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »