Kolkata Court June 2008 Judgments

Director General, Prasar Bharati (Broadcasting Corporation of India) a ...

Court: Kolkata

Reported in: [2008(119)FLR611],(2009)ILLJ855Cal

Kalyan Jyoti Sengupta and Prasenjit Mandal, JJ.1. This application is against an order passed in exercise of the contempt jurisdiction by the learned Central Administrative Tribunal in C.P.C. 10 of 2006 in connection with O.A. 652/2004. Mr. Das, learned senior counsel for the respondents has not questioned the maintainability of the application, therefore, we make it clear that without going into the question of maintainability we shall examine the matter on merit. The fact of the case is as follows:The respondents herein made an application, being O.A. 652/2004, before the learned Tribunal praying for grant of temporary status by regularization as if they were working as Casual Production Assistants in the Doordarshan Kendra, Kolkata. The said application was heard extensively and upon hearing, learned Tribunal disposed of the same by passing an order dated November 16, 2005. The relevant ordering portion of the said order is quoted hereunder:8. In order to do justice to the applicant...

Rahamat Khan Alias Badal Khan and anr. Vs. State of West Bengal

Court: Kolkata

Reported in: (2008)4CALLT85(HC),2008(4)CHN562,2008CriLJ3285

Kishore Kumar Prasad, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order of conviction dated 29-4-2004 and order of sentence dated 30-4-2004 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, 10th Bench, City Sessions Court, Calcutta in Sessions Trial No. 2(9) of 2003 arising out of Sessions Case No. 93 of 2002 convicting the appellants under Sections 392/394 of I.P.C. and sentencing them to suffer rigorous imprisonment for ten years as also to pay fine Rs. l,000/- each in default, to suffer further simple imprisonment for a period of six months each for both the offences punishable under Sections 392/394 of I.P.C.2. The sentences awarded to the appellants were ordered to run concurrently.3. The facts and circumstances of the case briefly stated are as follows:The informant Bijoy Gupta (P.W. 1), a broker by profession on 14-6-2002 at about 16.30 hours boarded into a bus of route No. 12C/1A from Khidirpur after collecting payment through account payee cheques. When the bus moving along Khid...

Abbas Ali Mondal Vs. State of West Bengal

Court: Kolkata

Reported in: (2008)3CALLT554(HC),2008(3)CHN488,2008CriLJ3475

Kishore Kumar Prasad, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order of conviction dated 28-4-2006 and order of sentence dated 29-4-2006 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court, Kalna in Sessions trial No. 109 of 2005 arising out of sessions case No. 6 of 2003 convicting the appellant Abbas Ali Mondal alias Abbas Mondal under Section 302 of I.P.C. and sentencing him to undergo life imprisonment as also to pay fine Rs. 5,000/- in default to suffer rigorous imprisonment for a period of three months. The seven co-accused persons namely the Chhupia Bibi, Jaker Ali Mondal, Nur Ali Mondal, Kokila alias Kohinur Khatun, Barel Khatun alias Jahura, Samad Ali Mondal, Rokia Bibi namely mother, sisters and brothers of the appellant were however, acquitted to all the charges under Sections 498A/304B/302 of I.P.C.2. The case of the prosecution appearing from the written complaint (Ext. 1) which was the foundation for registration of F.I.R. No. 100 dated 28-9-200...

Tanmoy Ramaya Lahiri and ors. Vs. the State of West Bengal and ors.

Court: Kolkata

Reported in: (2008)3CALLT205(HC)

Ashim Kumar Banerjee, J.1. Both these appeals relate to identical judgments passed in two writ petitions on the same day. Hence, both are disposed of by this common judgment.2. The writ petitioners/appellants were enrolled with the Employment Exchange. They alleged that the District Primary School Council did not permit them to participate in the selection process for the post of primary school teachers as they were not sponsored by the Employment Exchange. On perusal of the records it appears that the writ petitioners were not sponsored as they were juniors to the candidates sponsored by the Employment Exchange. The appellants/writ petitioners approached the learned single Judge by filing two writ petitions being W.P. No. 14524 (W) of 2006 and W.P. No. 14525(W) of 2006 with the identical contentions that once they were enrolled as unemployed youth having eligible qualification for the post of Primary School Teacher they must be allowed to participate in the selection process irrespect...

Union of India (Uoi) and ors. Vs. Pranab Kumar Mukhopadhyay

Court: Kolkata

Reported in: [2008(119)FLR32],(2009)ILLJ144Cal

ORDER1. This application is directed against the Judgment and order dated May 11, 2006, whereby and whereunder the learned Tribunal has set aside not only the orders of punishment but also the entire disciplinary proceeding holding that the respondent employee was not given reasonable opportunity of being heard.2. The fact of the case is as follows:The respondent employee Pranab Kumar Mukhopadhyay was chargesheeted on or about November 22, 1999 on various articles of charges of misconduct. He replied to the same and not being satisfied with his reply, regular enquiry proceeding was initiated by appointing enquiry officer. The enquiry officer after analyzing the evidence adduced, both oral and documentary, found the respondent employee guilty for committing misconduct. On receipt of the enquiry report, the disciplinary authority, viz. the Senior Commercial Manager (P. M.) passed an order of punishment on February 23, 2001 of stoppage of one increment for a period of one year with cumula...

State of West Bengal and ors. Vs. Burdwan District Bus Association and ...

Court: Kolkata

Reported in: AIR2009Cal32,(2008)3CALLT489(HC)

Ashim Kumar Banerjee, J.1. The respondent No. 1 is an association of Bus perators in the District of Burdwan. They challenged a notification issued by the State imposing colour restriction on State Carriage. Similar challenge was also made through various writ petitions by different bus operators. The learned single Judge disposed of altogether eight writ petitions by common judgment and order impunged in this appeal. Learned single Judge allowed the writ petition and quashed the impungned notification. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the judgment and order of the learned single Judge State preferred the instant appeal in connection with W.P. No. l3191(W) of 2005. In respect of other seven writ petitions State did not prefer any appeal. We, however, directed notice to be given to the respective writ petitioners. Accordingly notice was served upon the learned advocates. We also heard Mr. Sanat Kumar Roy appearing for the writ petitioners in W.P. No. 11685(W) of 2005 and 13676(W) o...

The Islampur Municipality and anr. Vs. Chaudhuri M. Manjar Afaque and ...

Court: Kolkata

Pratap Kumar Ray, J.1. On remand by the Apex Court by the order dated 28th November, 2007 in Civil Appeal No. (Nil) of 2007 arising out of SLP (C) No. 441 of 2005, this appeal has been placed before us by the administrative order of the Hon'ble The Chief Justice dated 9th April, 2008, on 22nd April, 2008. We concluded the hearing on 14th May, 2008 and as summer vacation intervened, we could not DELIVER the judgment earlier. The order of the Apex Court remanding the matter back reads such:Heard learned Counsel for the parties.Leave granted.Challenge in this appeal is to the judgment of a Division Bench of the Calcutta High Court allowing the appeal filed by Appellant No. 1, Islampur Municipality and Anr. to the extent indicated in the order. Before the Division Bench challenge was to the order passed by learned Single Judge of the High Court.Respondent No. 1 applied for license for holding that (market) in Plot No. 676 which according to him belongs to him because of proceedings under S...

Kanchrapara College and ors. Vs. Dr. Sunil Kumar Khan

Court: Kolkata

Pratap Kumar Ray, J.1. Challenging the judgment and order dated 13th May, 2004 passed by learned trial Judge in W.P. No. 127 (W) of 2004, this appeal has been preferred by the respondent Nos. 7 to 10, 12 to 14, 17 and 18 of the writ application, except respondent No. 7 of the writ application, who are members of the Governing Body of Kanchrapara College. From the memo of appeal, it appears that three other members of the Governing Body, namely, respondent Nos. 15, 16 and 19 of the writ application have been made as parties under the heading 'proforma respondent Nos. 7, 8 and 9 of the appeal'.2. By the impugned judgment under appeal, learned trial Judge quashed the resolution dated 6th May, 2003 passed by the Governing Body of Kanchrapara College, hereinafter referred to for brevity as 'said College', whereby a decision was passed discharging the service of writ petitioner, the Principal of the College, whose appointment was on probation on the ground of unsatisfactory service by taking...

Biswanath Roy Chowdhury and anr. Vs. Pranab Kumar Sengupta and ors.

Court: Kolkata

Reported in: 2008(3)CHN376

Ashim Kumar Banerjee, J.1. Two appeals were filed against the judgment and order dated January 19, 2006 passed by the learned Single Judge while disposing of a contempt proceeding.2. One Pranab Kumar Sengupta was appointed a Primary Teacher on March 21, 1973 in Basak Bagan Primary School, Patipukur, Calcutta (now under the District Primary School, 24-Parganas North).3. At the prevalent time the school being an urban school was guided by West Bengal Urban Primary Education Act, 1963. According to Pranab since he was appointed in an urban school in early part of 1973 he was to be guided under the said Act of 1963 and the State authorities including the Director of School Education were the proper authorities to approve his appointment. He made several representations for approval of this appointment. However, his prayer was not considered. Ultimately he filed a writ petition in 1993 being C.O.No. 13320 (W) of 1993. The learned Single Judge by judgment and order dated April 11, 1994 allow...

Swapan Chatterjee Vs. State of West Bengal

Court: Kolkata

Reported in: (2008)3CALLT177(HC),2009CriLJ16

Pranab Kumar Deb, J.1. This appeal has been directed against the conviction and sentence under Section 376 IPC passed by the learned Additional Session Judge, Kalna in connection with Sessions Case No. 27 of 2001/Sessions Trial No. 29 of 2001.2. The prosecution case, as recorded in the FIR, and elaborated further in course of the trial was to the effect that the appellant, who frequented the house of the father of the victim girl, had developed intimate relationship with her. Taking advantage of the absence of the parents of the victim girl, the convict continued to enjoy her company. Holding out the promise of marrying her, the convict was involved in physical relationship with her. The victim girl had a firm belief that the convict would give her recognition as his wife by marrying her. The victim girl conceived in the wake of her having sustained intimate relationship with the convict. When the victim girl earnestly implored him to marry her, the convict adopted a dilli-dally approa...