Guwahati Court May 2006 Judgments
Bijoy Kumar Pandey Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: May-31-2006
T. Nandkumar Singh, J.1. The petitioner was unsuccessful in challenging the termination of his service as TGT (Maths) Teacher in the Navodaya Vidyalaya Samity under the order of the Deputy Director, Navodaya Vidyalaya Samity, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Regional Office, Shillong dated 23.1.1998 by filing O.A. No. 254/03 before the Central Administrative Tribunal, Guwahati Branch and the Tribunal by passing the reasoned judgment and order dated 14.6.2003 dismissed the O.A. No. 254/03. Hence, the present writ petition for assailing the reasoned judgment and order of the learned Tribunal dated 14.6.2003.2. Heard Mr. S.N. Sharma, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. J. Roy, learned Counsel for the petitioner and. Mr. K.N. Choudhury, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. R.S. Choudhury, learned Counsel for the respondents.3. The facts, stated in short, of the petitioner are that his educational qualifications are M.Sc. (Chemistry), B.Ed. and M.Ed from the recognized univers...
Tag this Judgment!Union of India (Uoi) and ors. Vs. Md. Zainul AbedIn and anr.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: May-31-2006
T. Nandakumar Singh, J.1. In this writ petition the judgment and order of the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT), Guwahati Bench. dated 1.5.2001 for allowing the Original Application No. 299/1999(T) filed by the present respondent No. 1 for setting aside the Memorandum dated 16.7.1998 issued by the Deputy Commissioner (Trg), Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan that the candidate whose name does not exist in the select list cannot be allowed to continue in service because his appointment already made is ab initio void without any authority of law, had been put into challenge.2. Heard Mr. S.C. Biswas, learned Counsel appearing for the writ petitioner and also Mr. J.L. Sarkar, learned Counsel appearing for the respondent No. 1.3. Since the present writ petition relates with the appointment of the respondent No. 1 to the post of PGT (History) in the Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan it would be required to see the relevant recruitment rules for the post of PGT (History) in the Kendriya Vidyalaya S...
Tag this Judgment!Lankashi Tea and Seed Estates P. Ltd. and anr. Vs. Commissioner of Tax ...
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: May-30-2006
A.H. Saikia, J.(A) Issues raised under reference:1. The questions that have been referred to this larger Bench by the Hon'ble the then Chief Justice (Acting) vide order dated October 31, 2005, on the administrative side for a conclusive resolution read as follows:(I) Whether in view of the provisions of section 8(2)(f)(vii) of the Assam Agricultural Income-tax Act, 1939, as amended by the Assam Act XXIII of 1989 with effect from December 28, 1989, (for short 'the Assam Act'), unpaid cess under the Assam Taxation (on Specified Lands) Act, 1990 (for short the 'Land Act'), is to be allowed as a deduction from the net agricultural income under the Assam Act?(II) If not, whether in view of the decision of the Supreme Court in CIT v. Gemini Cashew Sales Corporation , unpaid cess under the Land Act has still to be allowed as a deduction from the net agricultural income under the Assam Act, in a situation where the assessee has maintained its/his accounts in the mercantile system?(B) Provisio...
Tag this Judgment!S. Joychand Singh Vs. Gauhati High Court and anr.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: May-30-2006
B. Sudershan Reddy, C.J.1. We have heard Shri H.K. Mahanta, learned amicus curiae, Shri B.C. Das, learned Standing Counsel, Gauhati High Court and Shri U.K. Nair, learned Counsel for the 2nd respondent.2. The petitioner in the instant writ petition prays for an appropriate direction quashing the impugned Notification/Seniority List of Stenographers Grade-I/Private Secretaries of the Gauhati High Court, Imphal Bench, issued by the Registrar vide order dated 3.8.1998 (Annexure-A/3). The petitioner also prays for issuance of consequential direction directing the 1st respondent to re-fix the seniority of the Stenographer Grade-I/Private Secretaries by duly placing the writ petitioner above the 2nd respondent and further to give all service benefits including promotion to the higher post, which has been denied to the petitioner.3. In order to consider whether the petitioner is entitled to grant of any relief, a few relevant facts are required to be noticed:The petitioner together with the ...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Sagolsem Ningol Puyam Vs. State of Manipur and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: May-26-2006
R.B. Misra, J.1. Heard Mr. N. Brojen Singh, learned Counsel for the petitioner. Mr. Th. Ibohal, learned Addl. G. A. appearing on behalf of the respondents-1, 2 and 3 and Mr. K. Kumar, learned Addl. CGSC for the respondent No. 4.Sworn affidavit received by the learned Counsel for the Union of India by way of fax has also been presented to this Court and the learned Counsel for the petitioner is not objecting about such counter-affidavit response of the Union of India therefore keeping in view the urgency in the matter, the same is accepted and accordingly is placed on the record.2. In the present writ petition, the petitioner, the mother of detenu has prayed for quashing the detention order dated 3-6-2005 (Annexure-A/1) of Shri Puyam Ranachandra Singh (@ Bidhi @ Budhijao) passed by the District Magistrate, Imphal West District, Manipur under Section 3(2) of the National Security Act, 1980 (for short called 'Act of 1980), in exercise of power under Sub-section (3) of Section 3 of 'Act 1...
Tag this Judgment!Arron Bricks and anr. Vs. State of Tripura and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: May-25-2006
A.B. Pal, J.1. The first petitioner, M/s. Arron Bricks, is a partnership firm and the second petitioner, Srimathi Pritha Datta is a partner. The other three partners are pro forma-respondent Nos. 5, 6 and 7. The partnership firm was registered on November 6, 1986. The writ petition is, as a matter of fact, the exposition of the grievances of the second petitioner who received a notice on March 20, 1996 from the Superintendent of Taxes, the third respondent herein, asking her to attend the office of the respondent on March 23, 1996 in order to complete sales tax assessment of the said firm for seven years at a time commencing from 1988-89 to 1994-95. After receiving the said notice, she tried to contact with the other three partners, the pro forma-respondents herein, but failed. As her husband was seriously ill, she sent her agent to appear before the third respondent and made a prayer for time to submit her response. But without disposing of her prayer the said respondent hastily made...
Tag this Judgment!Pranab Kumar Baruah Vs. State of Assam and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: May-24-2006
Amitava Roy, J.1. The petitioner is aggrieved by the notional Fixation of date of his promotion to the post of District Transport Officer in the Transport Department in the State of Assam (hereafter referred to as the Department) thus inter alia rendering him junior to the Respondent No. 4 herein, denying the benefit of his officiating service in the said post with effect from 13.06.1989. The judgment and order dated 26.05.1999 passed by the learned Assam Administrative Tribunal, Guwahati, (hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal) in Case No. 29ATA/97 to the above effect is, therefore, the subject matter of challenge.2. I have heard Mr. D.P. Chaliha, Sr. Advocate for the petitioner and Mr. P. Bora, learned State Counsel, Transport Department for the Official respondents. The notice of the proceeding though accepted to be served on the non-official Respondents except the respondent No. 5, no body had responded thereto.3. An account of the facts is indispensable to appreciate the rival ...
Tag this Judgment!General Manager, Hindustan Paper Corporation Ltd. Vs. Presiding Office ...
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: May-24-2006
B.P. Katakey, J.1. The Management of Nagaon Paper Mills of Hindustan Paper g Corporation Ltd. filed an application under Section 33(2)(b) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, (in short 'the Act') before the Industrial Tribunal, Assam at Guwahati seeking approval of their action of removal of the respondent-workman from the service vide Order dated 17.10.1995/ 4.11.1995 issued by the Deputy Manager (P and A), which was registered as Case No. 12/95, wherein the respondent-workman on receipt of notice filed his objection. The learned Tribunal upon appreciation of the evidences on record, both oral and documentary, rejected the application filed by the Management seeking approval of their action, vide Order dated 11.8.1998. Being aggrieved, the Management filed a writ petition being Civil Rule No. 5456 of 1998, which was dismissed by the learned a Single Judge vide judgment and Order dated 26.3.2002 and hence the present appeal by the Management.2. The facts in brief, necessary for decid...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Rupa Bania Vs. State of Assam
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: May-24-2006
I.A. Ansari, J.1. This revision is directed against the judgment and order, dated 10-1-2006, passed, in Criminal Appeal No. 17/ 2005, by the learned Sessions Judge, Jorhat, whereby the Judgment and order, dated 26-5-2005, passed by the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Jorhat, in GR Case No. 1036/1999, convicting the present accused-petitioner under Section 471, IPC has been upheld, but the sentence stands modified by directing the present accused-petitioner to undergo simple Imprisonment for 6 (six) months and pay a fine of Rs. l,000/- and, in default of payment of fine, suffer simple imprisonment for a further period of 1 (one) month instead of undergoing, as directed by the learned trial Court, the sentence of rigorous imprisonment for 2 (two) years with fine of Rs. 1,000/- and, in default of payment of fine, suffer simple imprisonment for a further period of 1 (one) month.2. The case of the prosecution, as unfolded at the trial, may, in brief, be stated as follows:On the...
Tag this Judgment!Rameswar Das and ors. Vs. Jogeswar (Kalita) Das and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: May-23-2006
H.N. Sarma, J.1. This revision petition is filed by the decree holders/petitioners challenging the judgment and order dated 05.06.1999 passed by the Civil Jude, Senior Division No. 1, Kamrup, Guwahati in Misc. (J) Case No. 126/94 arising out of the Title Execution Case No. 12/80. By the impugned order, the learned Executing Court accepting the objection of one of the decree holders 'extinguished' the decree which is sought to be executed in the Execution Case No. 12/80.2. For the purpose of disposal of this revision petition, following brief narration of fact is considered necessary.In the year 1959, the T.S. No. 32/59 was filed by the plaintiffs/decree holders against the defendants/opposite party praying for declaration of the right, title and interest over the suit land and for khas possession thereof by ejecting the defendants. The suit property as described in the schedule of the plaint is an area of land measuring 6 B 4 L covered by Dag No. 688, periodic patta No. 66, situated a...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »