Kolkata Court April 2006 Judgments

Khem Chand Bothra Vs. Commercial Tax Officer

Court: Kolkata

Reported in: (2007)8VST391(NULL)

Pradipta Ray, Chairman 1. The petitioner, Khem Chand Bothra, claims that he carries on business of resale of various types of packing materials under the name and style 'M/s. Jain Packaging' at Mallarpur in the district of Birbhum. In the course of his business the petitioner purchased 7,500 pieces of corrugated paper boxes on August 16, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as, 'the disputed goods') from one M/s. Aurora Print Pack Pvt. Ltd., for a total price of Rs. 82,500. The petitioner obtained an order from one M/s. Kanchan Oil Industries for supply of corrugated paper boxes. He consigned the said 7,500 pieces of disputed goods to the purchaser at Jhargram in the district of Midnapore in a vehicle bearing Registration No. WGH 8618. The petitioner duly handed over the invoice, challan and the declaration as required under Rule 214B of the West Bengal Sales Tax Rules, 1995 framed under the West Bengal Sales Tax Act, 1994, to the driver of the aforesaid vehicle. When the vehicle was on its w...

Bakul Chandra Dey Vs. State Bank of India and ors.

Court: Kolkata

Reported in: (2006)2CALLT631(HC),[2007(112)FLR1099],(2007)ILLJ166Cal

Pranab Kumar Chattopadhyay, J.1. The petitioner herein has filed this writ petition challenging the validity and/or legality of the disciplinary proceedings initiated against the said petitioner.2. It has been alleged on behalf of the petitioner that the departmental enquiry was conducted on a concocted allegation manufactured in a calculated manner by the respondent No. 5 to satisfy the personal vengeance. It has been specifically urged on behalf of the petitioner that, the enquiry was not conducted in accordance with law upon observing the prescribed procedures and rules as are applicable in this regard. It has further been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the disciplinary proceeding was concluded in the present case even without supplying the enquiry report to the petitioner.3. It has been alleged by the respondents that the petitioner on 25th July, 1969 instructed one Khageshwar Burman, an employee of the North Bengal University to withdraw money from the savings bank acc...

Md. YeasIn and ors. Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.

Court: Kolkata

Reported in: 2006(3)CHN655

Asok Kumar Ganguly, J.1. Both the appeal and the application, with the consent of the parties, have been heard in full and both of them are disposed of by the following judgment.2. This is an appeal filed by Md. Yeasin, Sk. Abdul Hanif & Sri Uttam Kumar Konar from therein a judgment and order dated 2nd August, 2005 passed by a learned Single Judge of the Writ Court.3. As these appellants were not impleaded to the writ petition in which the judgment under appeal was rendered, the locus standi of these appellants was challenged by the writ petitioner on various grounds which will appear from the facts of the case.4. The relevant facts are that these appellants filed a complaint to the Sub-Divisional Officer, Burdwan, North Sub-Division, District Burdwan alleging that the writ petitioner/respondent, Sk. Mansur Haque was running his business of M.R. Dealer of Jamar Village in Village & P.O. Jamar, P.S. Burdwan Sadar in such a way that essential commodities were not being properly distribut...

Mausumi Maity, Daughter of Late Birendra Nath Maity Vs. the State of W ...

Court: Kolkata

Soumitra Sen, J.1. The petitioner in this application claims higher scale of pay commensurate to her educational qualification. II. is submitted that the petitioner is a Post-Graduate in Physical Education and, therefore, she is entitled to pay commensurate to a Post Graduate candidate. The petitioner was appointed on 16th April, 2001 as per recommendation of the Regional School Service commission, Western Region. From the letter of appointment and also the approval granted by the School Service Commission it appears that the petitioner was considered at the material point of time as a Pass Graduate (B.P.F.D.) The scale of pay was fixed according to such educational qualification. It is the case of the petitioner that before her appointment, she had already obtained the Post-Graduate degree of Physical Education and therefore. she is entitled to higher scale of pay.2. The petitioner's case is not similar to those candidates who improved their educational qualification during the course...

Union of India (Uoi) and ors. Vs. Bimal Kumar Rakshit

Court: Kolkata

Reported in: (2007)1CALLT71(HC),[2007(113)FLR697]

1. In the instant writ petition, the petitioners before us is the Union of India and certain officials of Northern Frontier Railway challenging an order passed by Central Administrative Tribunal, Calcutta Bench, holding that the petitioner is entitled to pension for his service rendered to the said Railways.2. The admitted position is that the petitioner was initially appointed as a casual worker on 5th February, 1982 and continued as such till he was granted temporary status with effect from 1st January, 1984. His service was regularized on 15th September, 1992. Under the relevant provisions of law, a railway servant becomes entitled to pension only upon completing service for a period of 10 years. In the present case the main dispute revolves around the methodology for computation of this period of 10 years. The Tribunal in this Judgment has held that since the petitioner was granted temporary status from 1st January, 1984 he should have been treated to be in service from that date c...

Chunda Murmu Vs. State of West Bengal

Court: Kolkata

Reported in: 2006(3)CHN644

Sankar Prasad Mitra, J.1.This appeal has been directed against the judgment dated 6th September, 2000, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Malda, in Sessions Case No. 25 of 1995, Sessions Trial No. 16 of 1997, whereby the appellant was convicted and sentenced under Section 302 of IPC to suffer rigorous imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 2000/- in default to suffer rigorous imprisonment for six months. He was also sentenced under Section 364 of IPC to suffer rigorous imprisonment for seven years. The appellant was further sentenced under Section 201 of IPC to suffer rigorous imprisonment for seven years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/- in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three months and all the sentences were directed to run concurrently.2. The crux of the prosecution case is that on 15th March, 1990, one Anil Mardi, P.W. 7 lodged a complaint at Habibpur Police Station being scribed by Susil Kr. Hembram, vide Exhibit 2 series to the effect that his s...

Aniruddha Basu Vs. Kolkata Municipal Corporation and ors.

Court: Kolkata

Reported in: 2006(4)CHN177

V.S. Sirpurkar, C.J.1. Allowed to withdraw with liberty to approach the Corporation. If the petitioner approaches the Corporation the said A-75 Form shall be supplied and further action will be taken by the Corporation, without any loss of time as far as possible, not beyond three months. The petitioners agrees to pay the arrears and on payment of the arrears further step will be taken. The petitioner would be free to take objection against the assessment in terms of the provisions of Calcutta Municipal Corporation Act, 1980. If this objection is taken, the same shall also be decided within six weeks thereof. The application and the appeal (treating the same on the day's list) are dismissed as withdrawn.MAT No. 140 of 2006; CAN No. 353 of 2006 Kolkata MunicipalCorporation and Ors. v. Aniruddha Basu2. In view of the order passed in MAT No. 192 of 2006 there is no necessity to proceed with this appeal. The application and the appeal (treating the same on the day's list) are accordingly d...

Md. Taslim Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.

Court: Kolkata

Reported in: AIR2006Cal192

ORDERJyotirmay Bhattacharya, J.1. Inaction on the part of the authorities of the Kolkata Municipal Corporation for not considering the petitioner's prayer for grant of certificate of enlistment for profession trade and calling under Section 199 of the Kolkata Municipal Corporation Act, 1980, has been complained of by the petitioner in this writ petition.2. The petitioner wants to set up a medical shop under the name and style of M/s. Hussein Pharmacy at premises No. 1, N. Satgachi, Kolkata-39, for carrying on retail business of selling medicine from the said Shop. The petitioner applied for grant of certificate of enlistment for profession, trade and calling under Section 199 of the said Act before the respondent No. 4 on 9th September 2005. The petitioner has also deposited a sum of Rs. 3,000/- towards the application fees in the Reserve Bank of India on 8th September 2005.3. The landlady of the proposed medicine shop has also granted 'no-objection' certificate to the petitioner for s...

Showlal Vs. Kolkata Port Trust

Court: Kolkata

Reported in: (2006)3CALLT444(HC),2006(3)CHN174

Subhro Kamal Mukherjee, J.1. This case reveals the story of sufferings of an unfortunate retired sweeper of Kolkata Port Trust.2. The petitioner, who was a sweeper in the Mechanical Engineering Department, Kolkata Port Trust, initially, moved an application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India complaining of non-release of his pension by the authorities.3. The said writ petition was moved upon notice. I dispose of the said writ petition by my order dated December 15, 2005, inter alia, directing the authorities to remit all arrear pension of the petitioner up to the month of December, 2005 to his pension account maintained with the State Bank of India, Kidderpore Branch, by January 15, 2006 and to remit subsequent monthly pension regularly to the said account.4. The respondents in the writ petition on January 3, 2006 filed an application being CAN No. 5 of 2006, inter alia, for modification of my said order dated December 15, 2005.5. The said application was, primarily, filed ...

Gulf (Oil) Corporation Limited Vs. Steel Authority of India Limited an ...

Court: Kolkata

Reported in: 2006(3)CHN718

V.S. Sirpurkar, C.J.1. Present application under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter called 'Act') is filed by Gulf (Oil) Corporation Limited, a company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 having its registered office at Hyderabad in the State of Andhra Pradesh. It is pointed out in this application that a Notice Inviting Tender (NIT for short) was floated by the respondent No. 1, M/s. Steel Authority of India Limited ('SAIL' for short) and the respondent No. 2, its General Manager and respondent No. 3, Chief Materials Manager. It is pointed out that the petitioner in pursuance of that advertisement, participated in the price bid and since the quotation offered by the petitioner was the lowest, he was termed as 'L-1' by the respondent No. 1. It is then pointed out that on 19th October, 2004, the petitioner submitted the price break up for the explosives to be supplied under the Request For Quotation (RFQ for short). It is then pointed that in...