Court : Orissa
Reported in : 2003(162)ELT154(Ori)
ORDERR.K. Patra, J.1. In this petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner challenges the constitutional validity of Sub-section (2) of Section 61 of the Customs Act, 1962 (for short 'the Act')- It also impugnes the legality of the order dated 16-5-1991 (Annexure -1) passed under Section 142 of the Act and the order dated 8-3-1991 (Annexure-19) made under Sections 59 and 72 of the Act.2. The petitioner is a limited company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956. It is engaged in the business of manufacturing of specialised basic refractory bricks, fire bricks and allied products in its factory located at Lathikata in the district of Sundargarh. For the purpose of manufacturing the said products it imports various raw materials on consignments through different ports which are ultimately transported to its factory. The petitioner is permitted to house those consignments in a private warehouse licenced under Section 58 of the Act and after payment ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Reported in : AIR1995Ori168
Nanavati, C.J.1. These three petitions are filed by the students, who desire to appear at the Joint Entrance Examination -The Engineering and Medical, for admission to Orissa quota of seats in Government Medical Colleges to be held on 14th and J5th May, 1994. They have challenged the minimum eligibility criteria, fixation of upper age limit, provision for subjective and objective type questions and non-fixation of minimum qualifying marks in advance. In O.J.C. No. 1082 of the petitioners are 19 in number. The number of petitioners in O.J.C. Nos. 1470 and 2155 is 23 and 24 respectively.2. Their grievance in these petitions is that the requirement of passing the +2 Science Examination or equivalent examination by appearing in all the papers in one attempt and fixation of 25 years on 31st December, 1994 as the upper age limit will make them ineligible, for appearing at the said examination. Their contention, shortly stated, is that both these conditions are irrational and discriminatory. ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Reported in : 1994(II)OLR139
A. Pasayat, J.1. Petitioner's challenge to legality of cognizance taken by learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Bolangir (in short, the 'SDJM') having been repelled by learned Sessions Judge, Bolangir. this application has been filed under Section 432 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (in short, Cr PC ) for interference.2. Background facts giving rise to the application as portrayed by the petitioner are as follows :First Information Report was lodged on 1-1-1990, by one B. K. Mohanty, Circle inspector, Sadar, Bolangir alleging Commission of offences by petitioner punishable under Sections 379 and 411 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short,'IPC'). On the basis of that information P. S. Case No, 1/90 corresponding to G. R. Case No. 3/90 was registered, Allegation was that in course of search of petitioner's house ' he was found to be in possession of precious stones weighing 7-41 Kgs. Petitioner could not produce any authority for such possession. After completion of inve...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Reported in : 1995CriLJ63; 1994(II)OLR290
A. Pasayat, J.1. Petitioner Sk. Badar alias Badiruddin (hereinafter also referred to as the 'accusad') calls in question legality of appellale judgment passed by the learned Second Addl. Sessions, Judge, Puri finding him guilty of an offence punishable Under Sections 326 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short IPC), convicting him there- under and sentencing him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years, and to a fine of Rs. 2000/-, in default to undergo fuitner rigorous imprisonment for six months. The accused was convicted for an ofience punishable uder Section 307, IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for five years by the Asst. Sessions Judge, Khurda. The petitioner stood trial along with twenty six others for having committed various offences and causing injuries on police . personnel while they were discharging duties as public servants.2. Factual matrix as presented by the prosecution is as follows :On 15-1-1992 at about 8-30 p. m. the Officer-in - charge o...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Reported in : 1994(II)OLR308
A. Pasayat, J.1. Petitioner seeks cancellation of bail granted to Anirudha Singh (opp. party No. 2) by learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Salipur (in short, 'JMFC').2. Case of the petitioner, in short, is as follows : On 8-4-1993 the Class Teacher of Class IX of Lalitagiri High School found Bidulata Singh, daughter of the petitioner missing from school. Since her whereabouts could not be known, petitioner was informed. He searched for his daughter and it was revealed from Bidulata's classmate Mamata Maharana, that while Bidulata was sitting in the class, Anirudha called her and she was taken against her will in a scooter bearing registration No. OR-04-2747 at about 7 40 a. m. Petitioner searched the nearby areas, but having failed to find her lodged a report at Mahanga Police Station at about 10 p m. It was alleged that an offence punishable under Section 363 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short, 'IPC' ) has been committed. G R. Case No. 242 of 1993 was registered before lea...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Reported in : 78(1994)CLT608; 1995CriLJ3570
A. Pasayat, J.1. Laballing order of acquittal passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Kalahandi, Bhawanipatna to be indefensible, Sankar, Rana (hereinafter referred to as the 'informant') has moved this Court under Section 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (in short, 'Cr. P.C.') for interference. The opposite parties 1 to 10 (hereinafter referred to as the 'accused') faced trial by learned Sessions Judge on the accusation to having committed offences punishable under Sections 148/149/ 307 and 302 of the Indian Penal Code 1860 (in short, 'IPC').2. Prosecution versions sans unnecessary details is as follows:There was long drawn litigation between the informant's father Suka Rana (hereinafter referred to as the 'deceased') and the accused persons. On 22-7-1984 at 6 a.m. informant (P.W.I) along with the deceased went towards their agricultural field in order to draw in out water which had accumulated due to heavy rain on the previous night. While going towards their agricultural la...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Reported in : AIR1995Ori146; 78(1994)CLT318
Nanavati, C.J.1. Paradeep Port Trust floated a tender for construction and delivery of one 18-ton bollard pull tractor tug fitted with schettel propulsion system by publishing a notice dated 6-5-1993 in newspapers. Tenders were invited from experience and reputed ship-builders having built and delivered tractor tugs of 15-ton bollard pull. The last date for submission of tenders was 21-7-1993. In order to see that more parties submitted tenders, the last date for rolling (Giling) the tenders was extended to 30-7-1993 and for opening the tenders, it was extended to 20-8-1993. Tenders were to besubmitted in two sealed envelopes, one containing technical bid and the other containing financial bid. On 20-8-1993, the technical bids were opened and thereafter on evaluation certain deficiencies/ differences were noticed in the technical specifications. The tenchnical requirements were then modified and finalised and all the three tenderers who had submitted their tenders were advised to submi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Reported in : 1994(II)OLR125
G.B. Pattnaik, J.1. The petitioner, a company registered under the Companies Act and was engaged in manufacture of Steel, assails the validity of proviso to Regulation 46 of the Orissa State Electricity Board (General Condition of Supply) Regulations, which was brought in by way of amendmant by notification dated 25-6-1987, inter alia. on the ground that the said provision is ultra vires of Art. 14 of the Constitution. The petitioner has also prayed for quashing the bills raised by the Orissa State Electricity Board for the period January 1989; to August 1990 in accordance with the aforesaid amended Rugulations2. The petitioner entered into an agreement with the Board, opp. party No 1 on 16-8-1981 and under the agreement the said opp. party No. 1 undertook to supply power up to a maximum demand of 777 8 KVA/7000-KW called 'the contract demand' and the said agreement continues to be still in force. It is alleged in the write application that notwithstanding the aforesaid agreement betwe...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Reported in : 78(1994)CLT772; 1994(II)OLR343
G.B. Pattnaik, J.1. The petitioner who had been appointed as Managing Director of Orissa Mining Corporation (hereinafter referred to as the 'Corporation') challenges the order of the State Government cancelling his appointment as the Managing Director of the Corporation under Annexure 3 as well as the order posting him as General Manager of the Corporation, inter alia, on the ground that the orders are arbitrary and outcome of malice and positive act of vindictiveness on the part of the Chief Minister of Orissa, The petitioner prays for a direction to be posted as the Chief Executive of the Corporation and protection of his pay and should be paid arrear leave salary.2. The short facts are that the petitioner was promoted to the post of Genera! Manager of the Corporation in the scale of pay of Rs. 1600/-to Rs. 2150/- in the year 1978. In 1983 the petitioner was made the Executive Director of the Corporation on an additional emolument of Rs. 300/- per month. He was inducted as Director i...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Reported in : AIR1994Ori318
G.B. Patnaik, J. 1. An interesting question of law arises for determination in this writ application, namely, whether levy of penalty under the Orissa Motor Vehicles Taxatio'n Act for delayed payment of tax can be said to be a part of tax for non-payment of which an application for grant of temporary permit would be excluded from consideration. 2. The petitioner is the owner of a Bus bearing Registration No. CSU 8922 and he had been regularly paying the tax for the vehicle in question until 1989. Between the period 1989 and 1993 there was some delay in depositing the tax for the vehicle in question and for such delayed payment of tax penalty was levied under Section 13 of the Orissa Motor Vehicles Taxation Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Taxation Act') to (sic) Rs. 80,248/-. It is alleged that while levying penalty no'notice was issued to the petitioner and the petitioner came to know of the same only when the said amount was sought to be realised through a proceeding under the Or...
Tag this Judgment!