Kolkata Court July 1995 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.
Ardhendu Sarkar Vs. Subhas Chandra Chowdhury and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-19-1995
Reported in: 1996CriLJ195
ORDERNripendra Kumar Bhattacharyya, J.1. The petitioner by this revision under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has challenged the legality, propriety and correctness of Order No. 6 dated 2-2-1993 passed by the learned District and Sessions Judge, However, in Crl. Misc. No. 574 of 1992, whereby the learned District and Sessions, Judge, Howrah, upon an application of one Subhas Chandra Chowdhury, Managing Director of M/s. National Iron and Steel Company Limited, allowed the prayer of the said Managing Director of the said Company and directed further investigation into the matter after vacating the order dated 16-5-1992 passed by the learned S.D.J.M. Howrah, in G.R. Case No. 2298 of 1988 whereby the learned Magistrate ordered stoppage of investigation and discharged the accused under Section 167(5) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The learned District and Sessions Judge passed that order under sub-section (6) of Section 167 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.2. A short res...
Tapan Kumar Biswas Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-17-1995
Reported in: 1996(53)ECC9
S.B. Sinha, J.July 17, 1995.1. The contours of natural justice is in question in this writ application. Before adverting to the said question, the fact of the matter may be noticed in brief.2. A vehicle was seized by the Customs Department. Occupier of the said vehicle, upon interrogation named the petitioner who is the Superintendent of Central Excise and Customs as one of the persons responsible for alleged violation of the provisions of the Customs Act and alleged illegal use of the said vehicle. A notice dated 28.6.1994 under Section 124 of the Customs Act was served upon the concerned persons including the petitioner which is contained in Annexure 'A' to the writ petition.3. The said notice also contained statements of fact. It was categorically stated therein:-- 'The written reply in this show-cause notice should be submitted within 30 (thirty) days from the date of its issue to the Additional Collector Customs (Prev.), West Bengal, Calcutta, M.S. Building, 5th Floor, Customs Hou...
Dahyalal and Company and anr. Vs. the Calcutta Municipal Corporation a ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-14-1995
Reported in: (1995)2CALLT284(HC)
Surya Kumar Tiwari, J.1. This revisional petition has been filed by the accused against the order taking cognizance of the offence punishable under Section 435 of the Calcutta Municipal Corporation Act, 1980, by Municipal Magistrate, Calcutta, in Case No. 4320-B of 1988.2. The contentions of the learned counsel for petitioner is that (1) the complaint has not been lodged by the Municipal Commissioner; (2) The complainant was not examined under Section 200 Cr. P.C. and (3) The accused was not required to take licence from the Corporation for carrying out his whole sale drug shop.3. As regards point No. 1, the learned counsel relies on Supreme Court Judgment reported in (1) : 1960CriLJ752 (Ballabh Das v. J. C. Chakrawarty), (2) Corporation of Calcutta v. Bibhuti Basu 73 CWN 786 and (3) C. Lakhotia v. S.K. Mondal, 87 CWN 859.4. As regards Ballabh Das case Supreme Court after examining evidence on record found that there was no order of delegation of power infavour of Health Officer, hence...
Miss Srumoyu Ghosh Vs. the State of W. B. and Others
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-13-1995
Reported in: AIR1996Cal1
ORDER1. The petitioner's case is that in 1992 she appeared in the secondary examination held by the West Bengal Board of Secondary Education and secured 75.66% marks with better marks in three subjects. In the Higher Secondary Examination, however, she having obtained only second division marks having secured only 548 marks she applied for Post Publication Scrutiny of her answer script on all the subjects, namely, English, Physics, Chemistry and Mathematics and submitted the requisite fees. In the Gazette of Post Publication Scrutiny it was declared that the marks obtained by her was correct. It was alleged by the petitioner that there was no proper examination of her answer scripts and a few days before the result was published the answer scripts were found to be moving from door, to door it the teachers for the examination of those papers. The petitioner accordingly prayed for reviewor re-examination of her answer scripts in respect of English, Chemistry, Physics and Mathematics.2. I...
Gostha Behari Das Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-13-1995
Reported in: 99CWN1037,(1996)IIILLJ74Cal
A.K. Dutta, J.1. The Petitioner is represented by his learned Advocate. There is none to represent any of the Respondents. No Affidavit-in-Opposition has either been filed by any of the Respondents as yet despite opportunities granted to them. The Respondents are absent even today without any step, even though the matter is pending since 1990, suggesting that they have nothing to oppose the Writ Application filed by the Petitioner.2. The Petitioner, who was Driver under the Calcutta State Transport Corporation (hereinafter referred to as Corporation) has filed the instant Writ Application praying the Court for an Order upon the Respondents to offer suitable employment to his son in terms of the provisions of the disablement Retirement Benefit Scheme, along with other reliefs prayed for, in terms thereof for the reasons stated therein. It was however, submitted by the learned Advocate for the petitioner during the hearing that his pensionary benefits has mostly been paid to him by the R...
Registrar, High Court Original Side, Calcutta Vs. Bijoy Ghosh and Othe ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-11-1995
Reported in: AIR1995Cal376
ORDERBhagabati Prposad Banerjee, J. 1. The Registrar, Original Side, of this Court preferred this appeal against the order dated 12th June, 1995, passed by the learned Trial Judge, in so far as permitting the writ petitioner, opposite party, to move Application without routing it through Computer Department which had been very recently set up. 2. Previously, so long it was a practice in the Original Side of this Court to move the Applications before the learned Judges merely by presenting the same directly to the Court. There was no standing rule on the Original Side of this Court which prescribed moving of an application or filing a petition without numbering thereof as the same was the practice in this Court so long. 3. In order to keep it on records, the particulars of the Applications or petitions to be filed in the Court and giving a number thereon, a Computer Section had been set up with the approval of the learned Chief Justice, who is the Administrative Head of this Court, who ...
Sailen Kumar Mandal and ors. Vs. the State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-11-1995
Reported in: (1996)1CALLT93(HC),[1996(73)FLR1183],(1996)IIILLJ78Cal
Satyabata Sinha, J.1. The only question that has arisen for my consideration in this application is as to whether the Amin Tahashildars can get the same scale of pay as that of the surveyors on the basis of equal pay for equal work as enshrined in Article 14 read with Article 39(d) of the Constitution of India. In a judgment delivered by me relying on various Supreme Court decisions. I have held that keeping in view that the nature of the job the educational qualifications etc. are different in the case of Amins and Surveyors in terms of the doctrine of equal pay for equal work. However, it appears that another learned Single Judge has taken a contrary view. I am informed by the Bar that both the cases arc pending consideration before a Division Bench of this Court.2. Mr. Neogi submits that keeping in view of the fact that the earlier judgment passed by this Court wherein it has been held that Amins arc entitled to get equal pay for equal work as that of the Surveyors, the petitioners ...
Pratic Kumar Sen Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-11-1995
Reported in: (1995)2CALLT376(HC),99CWN953
Arun Kumar Dutta, J.1. By this Application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India the Petitioner-Detenu-Pratic Kumar Sen in Jail (hereinafter referred to as detenu) has challenged the order of his detention under Section 3(1) of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 (hereinafter referred to as COFEPOSA ACT) made on 4th October 1994 by Sri K. L. Verma, Joint Secretary to the Govt. of India, specially empowered thereunder, with a view to preventing him from abetting smuggling of goods. He was detained on 21st October, 1994 in pursuance of the aforesaid detention order.2. Stated briefly, the detenu is alleged to be involved in the import of three consignments of integrated circuits of foreign origin in the names of fictitious Firms, but actually meant for Sri V.N. Lakhi, another COFEPOSA Detenu. There was clearance of consignments of mis-declared goods and evasion of duty. The detenu had allegedly admitted his offence in his statemen...
Krishna Chandra Singha Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-11-1995
Reported in: (1996)1CALLT118(HC)
Satyabrata Sinha, J.1. The question that has arisen for my consideration in this application as to whether Tahasil peon is entitled to retiral benefit computed on the basis of past services. The following facts are not disputed.2. In the Land Manual, Tahasildar used to be appointed for collection of land revenue, cess etc. The said Tahasildars were also not government employees and were appointed on contract basis. In terms of the said Land Manual, Tahasilders were entitled to appoint Tahasil peons subject to payment of a minimum sum. It is not and could not be the case of the petitioner that the Tahasildars or that the Tahasildar peons were appointed by the State upon following the recruitment rules and in compliance of the provision of Article 16 of the Constitution of India.3. However the State Government adopted a policy decision in the year 1984 in terms whereof the Tahasildars were absorbed and re-designated as Bhumisahayaks. Some of the Tahasil peons appointed by the Tahasildars...
Navneet Kumar Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-11-1995
Reported in: 1996(84)ELT19(Cal)
C.J.1. This appeal has been preferred against the judgment of the learned Single Judge dated May 8,1995 dismissing the writ petition.2. In this appeal before us the learned Counsel for the appellant has argued that as Shri Sukumar Shankar has issued the show cause notice as Additional Collector and at the same time has filed the affidavit giving his mind already to the controversy, he is biased and the proceedings before him should be transferred to some other authority having competent jurisdiction.3. For deciding the point urged before us, facts are not required to be stated in detail excepting to note down the background from which the same arises.4. While the investigation was on under the Customs Act the appellant filed a writ petition before a learned Judge of this Court on December 13,1994. The said writ petition was dismissed on January 19, 1995 by laying down the time schedule within which the Customs Authorities should serve the Show Cause Notice and finalise the adjudication...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »