Court : Guwahati
M. Sharma, J. 1. The writ petitioner, in this writ petition has assailed the notice dated 28-2-94 (Annexure-13) and 5-5-94 (Annex-ure-17) issued by the Gauhati Metropolitan Development Authority (in short G.M.D.A.) by which the petitioner has been directed to discontinue the construction of the building in the 6th floor and also to demolish the 4th, 5th and 6th floors which were alleged to be constructed without the permission of the G.M.D.A. 2. The G.M.D.A. and the Chief Executive Officer, G.M.D.A. are made respondent Nos. 1 and 2 respectively and the Gauhati Municipal Corporation (in short G.M.C.) and its Commissioner are impleaded as Respondents 3 and 4 and the State of Assam has been Impleaded as Respondent No. 5 respectively. 3. The dispute in this writ petition is regarding the permission for construction/ extension of the existing building of the petitioner for which he filed application before the G.M.C. for further construction of his existing building on the 4th 5th and 6th...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Guwahati
Brijesh Kumar, C.J. 1. Civil Rule No. 3118 of 1994 has been filed on behalf of theSatradhikar of Bengana-ati Satra, P.O. Majuli, District Jorhat, impugning the vires of Section 25A of the Assam State Acquisition of Lands Belonging to Religious or Charitable Institutions of Public Nature Act, 1959 (Assam Act IX of. 1961) (hereinafter to be referred to as the Act). The offending provision provides for constitution of a committee to have control over the matter of utilization of the annuity and verification of the proper maintenance of the institution. Section 25A of the Act has been inserted by means of Assam Act No. XIX of 1987. Its operation, however, remained In abeyance; but it was made effective in the year 1994, which gave rise to the grievance of the petitions; hence, this petition. 2. Civil Rule No. 6221 of 1998 has been filed by some of the Dolois of Kamakhya temple. According to the averments made in the petition, the petitioners are engaged in the management of the affairs...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Guwahati
B.K. Sharma, J. 1. All the four writ petitions pose common questions of law on same set of facts and thus taken up for a common judgment and order. The core issue involved in all the three writ petitions is whether 'River Silt' can be said to be 'Minor Mineral' or can be said to be 'ordinary clay' as defined in Assam Minor Mineral Concession Rule, 1994 for the purpose of levying royalty by the State Government.2. According to the averments made in the writ petitions, the petitioners are carrying of the business of transportation of 'Brahmaputra River Silt' to various destinations located within the territorial jurisdiction of the Guwahati city for the purpose of earning their livelihood. According to them, they collect/extract 'River Silt' from Pahikhaiti, Chunsali, Dompara etc. in and around greater Gauhati and transport the same to various destinations by their own trucks which are used for the purpose of earth feeling. Their grievance is that the Government of Assam in the forest d...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Guwahati
Amitava Roy, J.1. This batch of writ petitions register an identical challenge to the constitutional validity of Section 3D, 3E, Clause (ii) and (iii) of Explanation-1 to Section 21 as well as Section 21(1), 21(2), 21(3), 21A, 23 and 25(xiii) of the Assam Agricultural Produce Market Act, 1972 as amended by Assam Agricultural Produce Market (Amendment) Act, 2000 and the Assam Agricultural Produce Market (Amendment) Act,2006 with the consequential relief of refund of the cess collected thereunder by the respondents together with the interest @ 15% thereon for the period 13.08.2001 to 08.12.2005 and till such time the same is exacted from the petitioners.2. The contextual facts though vary minimally, the spectrum of assailments being strikingly common in the cases, these petitions were analogously heard and this adjudication would answer the issues raised.3. We have heard Mr. D.K. Mishra, Senior Advocate assisted by Ms. Section Jahan, Advocate for the petitioner in WP(C) Nos. 5491 /2001,...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Guwahati
I.A. Ansari, J.1. In a federal set up like ours, conflicts between Parliamentary and State enactments are not really uncommon. How to resolve such conflicts is also, by and large, well settled ; but every time, such a conflict is brought before the Courts for resolution, the Courts undertake a massive exercise. This happens not because of any kind of inherent disinclination, on the part of the Courts, to readily resolve such a conflict, but to ensure that in order to resolve such a conflict, the Courts, while interpreting with an open, liberal and modern mindset, the provisions of the Constitution of India and the laws framed thereunder, remain steadfast to the basic structures of the Constitution and while interpreting the Constitution, howsoever liberally, maintain not only the letter but also spirit of the basic and fundamental concepts of the Constitution. The present Writ petition invites this Court to undertake such an arduous exercise. In order to ensure that the States are not...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Guwahati
I.A. Ansari, J.1. By making this application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners, who claim that petitioner No. 1 is a private limited company, engaged in the business of development and sale of immovable property, i.e., real estate, have impugned a notice, dated March 6, 2006 issued by respondent No. 3, namely, Superintendent of Central Excise, to the petitioner, whereby the petitioner-company has been asked to get itself registered under Section 69 of the Finance Act, 1994 (hereinafter referred to as, 'the Finance Act, 1994'), inasmuch as the petitioner-company has been, according to respondent No. 3, 'providing commercial or industrial construction service/construction of complex service'. The petitioners challenge the very authority of respondent No. 3 to issue the notice, which stands impugned in the present writ petition, the case of the petitioners being, in brief thus: Petitioner No. 1 is a private limited company engaged in the business of developm...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Guwahati
Ranjan Gogoi, J.1. The challenge projected being identical both the writ petitions were heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment and order.2. Both the writ petitioners are public sector undertakings engaged, inter alia, in the exploration of hydrocarbons from which the petitioners extract crude oil and natural gas. Crude oil and natural gas bearing land having been brought within the definition of 'specified land' by the Assam Taxation (on Specified Lands) (Amendment) Act, 2004 and such land having been made exigible to payment of tax under the provisions of the principal Act, i.e., the Assam Taxation (on Specified Lands) Act, 1990, it is the validity of the aforesaid amendment Act that is the subject-matter of challenge in both the writ applications under consideration.3. The Assam Taxation (on Specified Lands) Act, 1990 was enacted by the State Legislature of Assam with a view to providing additional revenue to the State by imposing a tax on certain categorie...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Guwahati
T. Vaiphei, J. 1. This is an application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for directing the respondents to give effect to the recommendation of the 4th Tripura Pay Commission for revision of pay scale in respect of the Officers/Supervisors of Tripura Jute Mills Limited with effect from 1.1.1986 and also for providing house rent allowance, compensatory allowance, career advancement scheme and dearness allowance to the petitioners on par with the employees of the State Government and other public sector undertakings.2. The facts of the case leading to the filing of this writ petition may be briefly stated as follows :- The Tripura Jute Mills Limited (hereinafter called as 'T.J.M.L.) registered under the Indian Companies Act, 1956 is wholly a Government Company and having a Board of Directors, who are appointed by the Government of Tripura. At the time of constitution of 1st Pay Commission by the Government of Tripura, the T.J.M.L. was not yet in existence. However, the 2...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Guwahati
B.P. Katakey, J.1. The State Legislature of Assam, on obtaining previous Presidential sanction under proviso to Article 304(b) of the Constitution, enacted the Assam Entry Tax Act, 2001 (Assam Act 4 of 2001)(in short, 'the principal Act') with a view to levy tax on entry of goods, into any local area of Assam for consumption, use or sale therein, which came into force on October 1, 2001, on publication of a notification dated September 28, 2001 in the Assam Gazette (Extraordinary) specifying the said date, in terms of the provisions contained in Section 1(3) of the said Act. Clause (b) of Section 2(1) defines 'entry of goods into a local area' as entry of goods as specified in the schedule into a local area from any place outside the State for consumption, use or sale therein. Section 2(1)(d) defines 'importer' as a person who brings specified goods into the local area from any place outside the State for consumption, use or sale including for consumption or use of such goods in works...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Guwahati
I.A. Ansari, J.1. When a lis is brought or a proceeding is instituted in a Court of law, desirable it is that the Court, unless the law indicates otherwise, decides the maintainability of such a lis/proceeding. Howsoever, appealing may be the case of the party bringing the matter before the Court, the Court shall, keeping its mind completely disabused from the impression that it might have formed on the merit of the case, decide the question of maintainability. If the Court finds that the proceeding is not maintainable, the proceeding must terminate without carrying out any exercise to determine the merit or otherwise of the respective cases of the parties concerned and/or ' the question as to what reliefs the parties are entitled to. This rule is, however, subject to certain exceptions, one of such exceptions being that if the proceeding cannot progress on account of omission to implead the necessary party, the Court shall give an opportunity to the person, who approaches the Court, ...
Tag this Judgment!