Guwahati Court March 2014 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.
State of Assam and Others Vs. M/s. Jagunbari Tea Co.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Mar-03-2014
A.M. Sapre, C.J. Heard Mr. D Saikia, learned Addl. Advocate General, Assam appearing for the appellant. Also heard Mrs. N Saikia, learned counsel appearing for the respondents. The decision rendered in this appeal shall also dispose of the other connected appeals being WA No.14/2014, Sl No.219950 WA, Sl No.219953 WA and Sl. No.219954 WA because all the four appeals involve identical issue and therefore, as prayed by the learned counsel for the parties, can be disposed of by passing one common order. This is an intra-court appeal filed by the respondents of W.P.(C) No.6775 of 2010 under Rule 2(3) of Chapter V-A of the Gauhati High Court Rules against the judgment and order dated 8.6.2012 passed by the Single Judge in the abovementioned writ petition. By impugned order dated 8.6.2012 passed in WP(C) No.6755/2010, learned Single Judge allowed the writ petition filed by the writ petitioner (respondent herein) and issued the writ of mandamus against the respondents (appellants herein) direc...
All Assam Tribal Sangha and Another Vs. The State of Assam and Others
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Mar-03-2014
A.M. Sapre, C.J. Heard Mr. J. Ahmed, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr.P. Roy, learned Additional Advocate General, Assam. Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner and on perusal of the records of the case, we are inclined to dispose of this PIL with liberty to the individual in-service candidates belonging to various reserved categories to raise their individual grievances with respect to their promotion etc. based upon filling up of backlog vacancies etc. in a particular Department of the State in appropriate fora. Indeed, this Court will then be in a position to examine the same properly in the context of individual grievance of in-service candidate belonging to reserved categories of cases, but not in a PIL filed by an Association in its representative capacity. Even otherwise, in service jurisprudence, it is the affected individual employee who can be allowed to raise his personal grievance with respect to his service benefits against the Government and it is for t...
Jogen Talukdar Vs. Alok Rawat and Others
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Mar-03-2014
A.M. Sapre, C.J. 1. Heard Mr H.K. Das, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. C. Barua, learned Central Government Counsel, appearing for the respondents. 2. This contempt petition has been filed under sections 11 and 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 read with the provisions of Contempt of Court (Gauhati High Court) Rules, 1977 and Article 215 of the Constitution of India alleging willful and deliberate violation of judgment and order dated 21.02.2013 passed by the Division Bench of this Court in Writ Petition (C) No.5637 of 2012. 3. The operative part of the judgment and order rendered in the Writ Petition (C) No.5637 of 2012, reads as follows: 19. In the backdrop of what have been pointed out above, we notice that the resignation of the respondent herein was accepted by the impugned order, dated 18.07.2007, with effect from 30.09.2006. However, the acceptance of resignation by the petitioners with retrospective effect is wholly illegal inasmuch as the petitioners have accep...
Bimal Paul Vs. The Chairman, Central Board of Direct Taxes and Others
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Mar-03-2014
A.M. Sapre, CJ. Heard Mr. A. K. Purkayastha, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. S. Sarma, learned Standing Counsel, Income Tax Department, appearing for the respondents. The only grievance of the petitioner in this writ petition filed under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India is that the appeal filed by the petitioner before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), N.E. Region, (respondent No.3 herein) against the assessment order dated 12.03.2013 for the assessment year 2010-2011 is not being decided by the respondent No.3 i.e. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Aayakar Bhawan, M.G. Road, Shillong, Meghalaya, due to which the petitioner is suffering loss, injury and inconvenience. It is contended that since the petitioner is being assessed to income tax in the State of Assam by the Income Tax Officer, Silchar (respondent No.4) and therefore he rightly filed an appeal before the respondent No.3 against the assessment order referred to above so also the writ petitio...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›