Guwahati Court February 2016 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.
Rupak Barman Vs. The State of Assam Represented By The Commissioner an ...
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Feb-08-2016
Judgment and Order (Cav) Manojit Bhuyan, J. 1. Heard Mr. PK Roychoudhury, learned counsel representing the appellant/writ petitioner as well as Dr. B Ahmed, learned counsel representing the Co-operation Department. Having regard to the issues for determination, service of notice upon the remaining respondents is not deemed necessary. Accordingly, the present writ appeal is taken up for final disposal. 2. To traverse the facts briefly, the appellant/writ petitioner i.e. Sri Rupak Barman had joined the Gauhati Co-operative Bank Ltd. in the year 1991 as Assistant Cashier and continued as such until he retired from service. The appellant was constrained to institute WP(C) 5122/2015 challenging two orders/letters issued by the Gauhati Co-operative Urban Bank (hereinafter alluded to as the Bank ) dated 1.6.2015 and 31.7.2015. By the former letter dated 1.6.2015 the appellant was informed that he would retire from service on 2.8.2015 on attaining the age of 58 years on that date. He was reque...
Kohinur Dewan Vs. State of Assam Represented by the Commissioner and S ...
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Feb-08-2016
M. Bhuyan, J. 1. Heard Mr. MA Sheikh, learned counsel representing the appellant/writ petitioner as well as Mrs. B Goyal, learned counsel representing the State respondents. 2. Challenge is made to the order dated 25.1.2016 passed in WP(C) 46/2016. Brief facts appearing is that the appellant while discharging function as the President of Hatipara Gaon Panchayat was confronted with a Requisition Notice submitted by 8 members of the said Gaon Panchayat expressing want of confidence in him. The said Requisition Notice dated 8.12.2015 was made under Section 15(2) of the Assam Panchayat Act, 1994. On 14.12.2015, the fact of the Requisition Notice was brought to the knowledge of the petitioner by the Secretary of the Gaon Panchayat. 3. The appellant preferred WP(C) 46/2016 alleging that the said Requisition Notice could not be allowed to be acted upon, inasmuch as, the same did not fulfill the requirements of the provisions under Section 15(2) of the said Act. The pin-pointed plea of the app...
M/s. Bordubi Engineering Works Vs. Union of India, represented by the ...
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Feb-03-2016
1. This batch of three writ petitions involving virtually a common question of fact and of law were heard together and are now being disposed of by this common judgment. In WP(C) No. 6776 of 2014, the petitioner, which is private engineering firm, is questioning the validity of the notice dated 16-1-2014 issued by the respondent No. 3 requiring it to show cause as to why the Service Tax amounting to Rs.22,37,916, Education Cess amounting to Rs.44,757/- and Secondary and Higher Education Cess amounting to Rs.22,381/- totalling to Rs.23,05,054/- should not be demanded and recovered from it and the order dated 27-6-2014 passed by the Additional Commissioner, Central Excise and Service Tax, Dibrugarh (respondent 3) confirming the demand and recovery of Service Tax from it and the imposition of a penalty of Rs. 23,05,054/-. In WP(C) No. 6777 of 2014, the same petitioner is challenging the notice dated 16-1-2014 issued by the same respondent requiring him to show cause as to why the Service ...
Diamond Power Infrastructure Ltd. Vs. Assam Power Distribution Company ...
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Feb-01-2016
1. Heard Mr. K.N. Balgopal, learned senior counsel representing the petitioners, assisted by Ms. T. Khro and Ms. M. Deb, Advocates, as well as Mr. B. D. Das, learned senior counsel representing APDCL, assisted by Mr. H. K. Sarma and Mr. D. Nath, Advocates. Also heard Mr. A.C. Buragohain, learned Advocate General, State of Assam and Mr. J. Deka, learned counsel representing respondent no.5. 2. All the 12 (twelve) writ petitions filed by the same Company are taken up together and concluded by a common judgment and order. The basic facts are 11 pari materia to each other save and except WP(C)5811/2015 and WP(C)5812/2015 which are clothed with certain additional facts requiring findings and decision independent of the other 10 (ten) writ petitions. 3. Invitation for Bids (IFB) for rural electrification works in various districts of Assam was issued by the Assam Power Distribution Company Limited (APDCL) during July-August 2014, on being so entrusted to execute the projects by the Governmen...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›