Guwahati Court March 2011 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.
The Management of M/S Steelsworth Vs. State of Assam and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Mar-10-2011
1. Challenge in this writ petition is made to the order dated 15.03.2008 whereby and whereunder the Labour Commissioner and Certifying Officer under the Industrial Employment Standing Orders Act, 1946 (for short 'the Act') raised the superannuation age of the workers of the company to 58 years with effect from 01.01.2008 holding that the company has not opposed to the amendment proposal wherein the Trade Union workers have moved a proposal to the Certifying Officer of Standing Order of Assam for amending the age of superannuation from 55 years to 58 years. 2. In order to determine the controversy raised in the instant writ petition a brief facts of the case is summarized hereinbelow- The petitioner herein is the Management of M/s Steelsworth Pvt. Ltd. Tinsukia Makum Road, Tinsukia a Private Ltd. Company registered under the Companies Act, 1956 having its registered office at Kolkata. The company deals with manufacturing and fabrication of steel items of various descriptions including m...
Usha Rani Goswami Vs. State of Assam
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Mar-10-2011
(1.) Heard Mr. I. Choudhury, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. A. Deka, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Education Department. (2.) The petitioners who were appointed as Assistant Teachers in different M.E. Schools under the Guwahati Sub-Division, following selection made in the year 1993-94 by the Sub-Divisional Level Advisory Board, challenge the communication dated 6th June 2003 (Annexure-J), whereby the Authority of the District level officers of the Education Department to regularize the services of ad hoc appointees have been curtailed and the said power is vested only on the Director of Elementary Education. They also seek disbursal of their current and arrear salaries. (3.) At the very outset, it is submitted by Mr. Choudhury that in pursuant to the interim order passed by this Court on 27th August 2004, the petitioners are now receiving their current salaries and the only issue that is left to be determined is the right of the petitioners ...
The Director General and ors. Vs. Ghanashyam Vishwakarma
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Mar-09-2011
1. In challenge is the Judgment and Order dated 10.9.2010 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.(C) No. 51 of 2009 whereby and whereunder the respondents therein are directed to revise the pay scale of the petitioners therein at Rs. 5000-8000 w.e.f. 1.1.1996, which is the revised pay scale for the post of Overseer as recommended by the 6th Central Pay Commission and accepted by the Government of India. 2. The background facts which would be pertinent for this appeal briefly are as follows :- The respondent herein was initially appointed to the post of Mason on 16.4.1985 after being selected in the selection test held in accordance with the relevant Recruitment Rules. As per the General Reserve Engineer Force (GREF) Group 'C' and 'D' Recruitment Rules, 1982 the post of Overseer is to be filled up 10% by direct recruitment and the balance 90% by promotion from different posts including Mason, who are matriculate with 3 years regular service in the grade in GREF subject to passing of ...
United Bank of IndiA. Vs. Sri Ganesh Chandra Konwar, Son of Sri Bihuba ...
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Mar-07-2011
1. Whether an employee of the Union Bank of India (in short, 'the bank') constituted with the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1970, who opts to go on voluntary retirement under a Voluntary retirement Scheme (in short, 'VRS'), is entitled to receive pension if he happens to have completed 10 years of service in his employment with the bank, is the question, which has been mooted for decision in this appeal.2. Before we endevour to answer the question, mooted above, it is necessary to take note of the facts and circumstances leading to this appeal, which has been preferred by the bank against the judgment and order, dated 15.05.2007, passed, in WP(C) No.9612/2003, whereby a learned Single Judge of this Court has allowed the writ petition holding that the respondent herein, who was an employee of the bank, and who has voluntarily retired from service under a Voluntary Retirement Scheme, is entitled to receive pension, because he has completed 10 years of ...
Manoj Kumar Das S/O Jogen Chandra Das. Vs. the State of Assam.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Mar-03-2011
1. The appellant, herein, stands convicted under Section 307 and 224 of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter, referred to as the 'IPC', for short), vide impugned Judgment and Order dated 23.04.2003, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge No. 1 (Adhoc), Kamrup, in Sessions Case No. 209 (K) of 2001. On such conviction, the appellant has been sentenced to undergo SI for 10 (ten) years for his conviction under Section 307 IPC and SI for 2 (two) years for his conviction under Section 224 IPC. Being aggrieved with the conviction and sentence, the accused has preferred this appeal.2. Heard Sri Binod Kumar Singh, learned counsel (Amicus Curiae) for the appellant and Sri K A Mazumdar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State of Assam. We have also gone through the impugned Judgment and the evidence on record.3. The gist of the prosecution case is that on 27.11.1998, the injured Police Officer along with few other Police personnel went to Village Bhati Jiyakur to apprehend the a...
Jiwan Chandra Pant Vs. Union of India
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Mar-03-2011
(1.) Heard Mr. R. Mazumdar, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Mr. J.M. A. Choudhury, learned Central Government Counsel. (2.) The petitioner, who is presently serving as Assistant Commandant in the S.S.B., is aggrieved by deprivation of the benefit of Senior Time Scale of Rs.10,000325-15,200/- Pre-revised (Since Revised 15600-PB + GP 6600/-) and so also the benefit of promotion to the post of Deputy Commandant. The petitioner has been deprived of the said benefit on the ground that he is unfit for the Senior Time Scale and promotion, being medically categorized as "colour blindness". The petitioner has placed reliance on the circular dated 17.5.2002 and 31.7.2002 in respect of his plea that irrespective of such colour blindness, he is entitled to get the aforesaid benefits. For a ready reference, the said two circulars are quoted below :- "(Typed copy) MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS (PERS-II) Subject :- Introduction of Medical category SHAPE-I for the purpose of promotion of CPMS...
Commissioner Cum Secretary, Department of Power Vs. T.C.Syndicate
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Mar-03-2011
C.R. SARMA J. (1.) The above mentioned seven appeals, involve similar question of law and facts and the parties are represented by the same set of Advocates. The suits, which have given rise to these appeals, have been filed by the same power of attorney holder on behalf of the plaintiffs. Therefore, for the sake of convenience and as agreed to by the learned counsel, appearing for both the parties, we prefer to dispose of these appeals by this common judgment and order. (2.) The respective respondents, who instituted the Money Suit Nos.2 of 2008, 3 of 208, 4 of 2008, 5 of 2008, 6 of 2008, 7 of 2008 and 8 of 2008 for recovery of money from the appellants, are the sole proprietorial firms, represented by their Proprietors, as indicated below : (i) M/s T.C. Syndicate, represented by its sole proprietor, namely, Sri Tapio Charu, which is the respondent in RFA No.07 of 2009, instituted the Money Suit No.02 of 2008 in the Court of the learned Deputy Commissioner cum District Judge, Khonsa, ...
Dharmendra Gogoi Vs. State of Assam
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Mar-03-2011
MADAN B. LOKUR, CJ. (1.) There are two appellants before us, namely, Dharmendra Gogoi and Chakra Bora. They are aggrieved by the conviction and sentence dated 6.11.2003 awarded by the Addl. Sessions Judge (Ad-hoc), Jorhat (FTC) in Sessions Case No. 11(J-J) 2000. (2.) A First Information Report was lodged by Tarun Borah on 20.2.1996 to the effect that on 19.2.1996 at about 11 PM, three unknown persons entered his house and took away gold ornaments and cash of '2500/-. The three unknown persons also raped his wife after he was tied up with a gamocha. He had opened the door of his house to these three persons when they showed him lethal weapons from outside the house. (3.) The police acted on the FIR and after investigations, charged the two appellants and one Nirmal Gogoi (now absconding) with having raped the wife of Tarun Borah and thereby committing an offence punishable under Section 376(2)(g) of the Indian Penal Code and also committing theft of gold ornaments and household articles...
Sandeep Kumar Patel Vs. Pulinder Singh
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Mar-01-2011
GOSWAMI, J. (1.) By this application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has prayed for a Writ in the nature of habeas corpus directing the respondent Nos 1 and 2, who are parents of his wife, Smt Nitu Singh, with a further direction to the respondent Nos 3, 4, 5 and 6 to recover and produce her before this Court by liberating her from forceful custody of respondent Nos 1 and 2. (2.) The case of the petitioner, in brief, is that both the petitioner and Smt Nitu Singh are aged about 27 years. The petitioner came in contact with Smt Nitu Singh when they were prosecuting their B.Com. course and they had become friends. The friendship blossomed into love over a period of time and after a courtship of about four years, after informing their respective parents, they solemnized their marriage in the year 2009 under the Special Marriage Act, 1984 before the Marriage Officer (M), Kamrup, Guwahati. After the marriage, they started living together as husband and wife al...
Shujata Barman Vs. State of Assam
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Mar-01-2011
(1.) This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 05.01.2011 passed by a learned single Judge of this Court in WP(C) No.4915 of 2010, whereby the settlement order dated 11.08.2010 of Sunduba-Pabakati fishery passed by the Managing Director, Assam Fisheries Development Corporation (AFDC), respondent No.4 was set aside and the respondent-Corporation was directed to issue fresh Notice Inviting Tender (for short hereinafter as NIT) for settlement of the fishery in question and to settle the same in accordance with law on or before 31.03.2011. (2.) We have heard Mr. GN Sahewala, learned Senior counsel assisted by Mr. S Banik, learned counsel for the appellant, Mr. PS Deka, learned Government Advocate, representing the State respondents, Dr. B Ahmed, learned Standing Counsel, AFDC and Mr. FKR Ahmed, learned counsel, with Mr. MK Hussain, learned counsel, appearing on behalf of the writ petitioner/respondent No.5. (3.) Few basic facts leading to the presentation of the writ pet...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »