Back
IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM & ARUNACHAL PRADESH) PRINCIPAL SEAT
SOUMITRA SAIKIA
AK Interior & Exterior Associates – Appellant
Versus
Indian Oil Corporation Limited – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner was empanelled contractor with a history of satisfactory work. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. petitioner accused of using sub-standard materials after canopy collapse. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. petitioner denied allegations and insisted on quality of materials. (Para 5 , 6) |
| 4. allegations against petitioner lacked independent verification. (Para 7 , 8) |
| 5. petitioner argues for a fair hearing prior to holiday listing. (Para 10 , 11) |
| 6. respondents assert the proper process was followed. (Para 12 , 15) |
| 7. legal principles of natural justice relevant to administrative decisions. (Para 13 , 14) |
| 8. supreme court precedence underlines importance of hearings in civil consequence cases. (Para 18 , 19 , 23) |
| 9. court emphasizes need for personal hearing in administrative decisions affecting rights. (Para 26 , 27) |
| 10. court directs to set aside holiday listing and conduct a re-hearing. (Para 28 , 29 , 30) |
JUDGMENT :
SOUMITRA SAIKIA, J.
This writ petition is filed by the petitioner who was an empanelled Contractor with the respondent Corporation under the Silchar D.O. The writ petitioner is a proprietorship concern having its office at South Sarania, Asshram Road, Ulubari, Guwahati. The petitioner is
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
