Guwahati Court July 2014 Judgments
M/s. Ananta Charan Nayak Vs. The State of Assam and Others
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Jul-31-2014
A.M. Sapre, CJ. 1. Heard Mr. P. Deka, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. D. Saikia, learned Additional Advocate General, Assam appearing for the respondents. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that this petition can be disposed of in the light of our detailed order dated 17.12.2013 passed in WP(C) No.7359 of 2013 (M/S Nayak Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. Vs. State of Assam and others). We accept the statement and accordingly dispose of the writ petition in the light of the reasoning and the conclusion arrived in our order dated 17.12.2013 passed in WP(C) No.7359 of 2013 (M/S Nayak Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. Vs. State of Assam and others) with appropriate modification on facts. The copy of the order passed in WP(C) No.7359 of 2013 (M/S Nayak Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. Vs. State of Assam and others) be kept in the record of this case and be treated as part of this order. No cost....
Tag this Judgment!Bikash Chandra Bhuiya Vs. Tapti Nandi and Others
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Jul-30-2014
Heard Mr. D. Mazumdar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. S. P. Choudhury, learned counsel for the respondents. This revision by the judgment debtor under Section 115 of the C P Code against the order dated 19.07.2013 passed by Munsiff No.1, Cachar, Silchar in Misc(J) Case No.171/2008 filed in Title Execution Case No.09/2008 (Annexure-5). The impugned order was passed by the learned executing Judge on an application made by the judgment debtor under section 47 read with section 151 of the C P Code contending, inter alia, therein that decree dated 07.05.86 passed in Title Suit No.139/1983 by Sadar Munsiff No.1 which is affirmed by the High Court on 07.09.1993 in Second Appeal 174/87 is unexecutable due to non-existence/non-availability of the suit property on the land in question. I have perused the order passed by the learned executing Judge dated 19.7.2013 and find that the issue involved in this case should have been decided keeping in view the law laid down by the Supreme Co...
Tag this Judgment!M/s. Sankha Press (Pvt) Ltd. Bijay Krishna Nath Vs. Assam Financial Co ...
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Jul-25-2014
Heard Mr SK Ghosh, learned counsel for the appellant and Mr LP Sharma, learned counsel for the respondent. This appeal is filed under Order 43, Rule 1(c) by the plaintiff of Title Suit No. 33/2007 against the order dated 5.9.2013 passed by Civil Judge No.1, Cachar, Silchar in Misc. Case No. 26/2009. By impugned order, learned Civil Judge No.1, Cachar, Silchar dismissed the application filed by the plaintiff under Order 9, Rule 9 read with Section 151 of the C.P. Code and declined to restore the civil suit which was dismissed for want of prosecution on 22.5.2009. So the short question that arises for consideration in this appeal is whether learned Civil Judge was justified in dismissing the application filed by the plaintiff (appellant herein) under Order 9, Rule 9 C.P. Code and thereby was justified in declining to restore the civil suit which was dismissed for want of prosecution by order dated 22.5.2009. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and upon perusal of the record ...
Tag this Judgment!Minati Bora, Lakhimpur Vs. The State of Assam Represented by the Commi ...
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Jul-24-2014
(Oral). 1. Heard Mr. B.K. Bhattacharjee, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. J. Abedin, learned Standing Counsel, Education Department. I have also heard Mr. R.K. Bora, learned counsel representing respondent Nos. 3 and 4. By means of this writ petition, the petitioner presently serving as Assistant Professor of Lakhimpur Girls College, has challenged the Annexure-J and K orders dated 18/12/2012 and 15/12/2012, by which she has been imposed with the penalty of withholding of 3 (three) increments with cumulative effect. 2. The petitioner was issued with the Annexure-D show cause noted dated 23/05/2012 with the following allegations:- 1. That while on duty, you remained absent unauthorizedly on 26/04/2007 without any intimation to the college authority either verbally or through any leave application. You are therefore charged with gross misconduct, dereliction, negligence of duty and insubordination on your part for unauthorized absence. 2. That, it was found that, you pu...
Tag this Judgment!Dr. Rajendra Nath Borpuzari, Assam Vs. The State of Assam Represented ...
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Jul-23-2014
(Oral). 1. The petitioners presently working in Assam Agricultural University have filed this writ petition challenging the Annexure-2 advertisement dated 27/06/2014 inviting applications for the post of Vice Chancellor, Assam Agriculture University. For a ready reference, the said advertisement is quoted below :- APPOINTMENT OF VICE CHANCELLOR OF ASSAM AGRICULTURAL UNIVERSITY Selection Committee constituted by the Governor of Assam and Chancellor of Assam Agricultural University (AAU) vide GSA.90/2008/169 dated 19/05/2014, invites applications for the post of Vice Chancellor, Assam, Agricultural University, from eminent scientists, academicians and administrators with background of Agriculture, Veterinary and Fishery Education, Research and Extension with ten years experience and proven leadership and administrative capabilities as provided for in the Assam Agricultural University Act 1968. The tenure for the post of Vice Chancellor is 5(five) years subject to the maximum age as is pr...
Tag this Judgment!Gobinda Mandal, Assam Vs. State of Assam Represented by the Principal ...
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Jul-17-2014
1. The legality of the order contained in the letter dated 18-8-2012 issued by the Principal Secretary to the Government of Assam, Urban Development Department (respondent 1) holding that the resolution dated 21-4-2012 removing the respondent No. 3 from the Chairmanship of Nalbari Municipal Board was untenable inasmuch as the Assam Municipal (Amendment) Act, 2012 requiring such removal by more than half of the whole number of the Commissioners was not fulfilled, is called into question in this writ petition. 2. So much of the facts as are necessary for disposal of this writ petition may be referred to at the outset. The petitioner is an elected Commissioner of Nalbari Municipal Board (the Board for short), which has altogether 12 elected Commissioners with two ex-officio Members, namely, the local MLA and one local MP. According to the petitioner, when the respondent 3 indulged in corrupt and other illegal activities in contravention of the provisions of the Assam Municipal Act, 1956 (...
Tag this Judgment!Nirbhai Kumar Singh Gautom, Assam Vs. The Union of India, Represented ...
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Jul-17-2014
1. In this writ petition, the petitioner is seeking re-fixation of his seniority in between serial No. 64 and Serial No. 66 of the Gradation List of Commandants as on 1-1-(Seniority) 2011 in accordance with the date of his confirmation in his service. 2. Even though the petitioner is purportedly aggrieved by the projection of his date of confirmation as Sub-Inspector, GD, CRPF and claiming seniority position in between Sl. No. 64 and SL. No. 66 of the G-List of Commandants as on 1-1-2011, on critical examination of his pleadings, it becomes apparent that he is trying to do indirectly what he cannot do directly. In my opinion, he is essentially aggrieved by the re-fixation of the Combined Gradation Lists of Sub-Inspectors and Inspectors ordered by the respondent No. 2 by his order contained in his letter dated 3-2-1999. Aggrieved by this re-fixation which had taken place some 13 years before the filing of this writ petition, a series of representations have been filed by him ad nauseam ...
Tag this Judgment!Umesh Ch. Sarma, Kamrup (M) Assam Vs. The State of Assam, Represented ...
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Jul-17-2014
(Oral). 1. Both the writ petitions by and between the same parties have been heard analogously and are being disposed of by this common judgment and order. While in the 1st writ petition being WP(C) No.67/2013, the petitioner has challenged the Anenxure-6 order of the Director of Secondary Education, Assam, placing him under suspension with a further prayer to release his pay and allowances w.e.f. 23.03.2012, in the 2nd writ petition being WP(C) No.568/2014, the challenge is to the order dated 23.03.2012 (Annexure-11), by which the petitioner has been imposed with the penalty of stoppage of two annual increment with cumulative effect. Be it stated here that by the said order of penalty, the petitioner with the imposition of the said penalty was shown reinstated in service. On the other hand, it is the case of the petitioner that he was never furnished with the copy of the order dated 23.03.2012 and it was only after filing of the 1st writ petition, he was made aware of the said order. ...
Tag this Judgment!Moriam Begum Vs. Abdul Hussain
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Jul-16-2014
Moriam Begum Versus Abdul Hussain Heard Ms. R. Choudhury, learned counsel for the petitioner. This is a revision filed by the defendant against the order dated 24.06.2014 passed by Munsiff, Sankardeve Nagar, Hojai in Money Suit No.03/2009. By the impugned order, the learned Munsiff declined to grant adjournment to the defendant for filing the written statement in a suit filed by the respondent thereby deprived him of filing a written statement to contest the suit on merits. So the short question which arises for consideration in this revision is whether learned Munsiff was justified in not granting further adjournment to the defendant to file the written statement. The impugned order dated 24.06.2014 reads as under: Plaintiff side absent. Defendant side present. Defendant side filed petition No.1329/14 praying to grant some time to file written statement. Prayer rejected as no further adjournment can be granted as asked on last date. Fix 23.7.2014 for necessary order. It is clear from ...
Tag this Judgment!Musstt. Eklatun Nessa Laskar and Others Vs. Durjyodhan Das and Others
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Jul-16-2014
This is a civil revision filed by the legal representatives of defendant No. 7 (late - Tajmul Ali Laskar) under Section 115 of C.P.Code against the order dated 14.7.2011 passed by Additional District Judge, Cacher (Silchar) in TA No. 36 of 2006 and also against the order dated 6.3.2013 passed by Munsiff No. 2 Cachar, Silchar in TS No. 148 of 2011. Facts of the case need mention in brief to appreciate the short controversy involved in the revision. The respondents herein filed a civil suit being TS No 106 /2001 against 7 defendants for declaration of their title and for recovery of khas possession along with other ancillary reliefs over the suit lands. One Tajmul Ali Laskar was defendant (defendant No. 7) in the suit. During pendency of the suit, parties to the suit filed a compromise petition on 3.2.2004 to settle their dispute in relation to some of the suit properties and accordingly obtained compromise decree in part. However, the suit for remaining properties, which were not subjec...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »