Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Analysing the retrieved Case Laws
Scanned Judgements…!
Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Analysing the retrieved Case Laws
Scanned Judgements…!
Likha Sang Chorre vs DC - Main Points and Insights:
The case involves Likha Sang Chorre and related parties concerning legal and administrative issues in Arunachal Pradesh, including allegations of defection under the Arunachal Pradesh Local Authorities (Prohibition of Defection) Act, 2003, and administrative appointments. ["Joram Elyu Zilla vs The Sate Election Commission and 3 Ors - Gauhati"], ["Likha Sang Chorre, W/o. Shri Likha Tara VS Deputy Commissioner Lower Subansiri District, Arunachal Pradesh - 2024 0 Supreme(Gau) 1336"]
Administrative and legal observations indicate that Likha Saaya has no pending liabilities as per recent court orders, reflecting ongoing legal clearance. ["Shri Mado Sera vs Birla Sunlife Insurance Co-Ltd,The Branch Manager, Birla Sunlife Insurance Co-Ltd - Allahabad"]
Analysis and Conclusion:
Likha Sang Chorre's legal profile is multifaceted, involving political, financial, criminal, and administrative matters. The cases reflect his roles in local governance, allegations of misconduct, and ongoing criminal investigations. ["Joram Elyu Zilla vs The Sate Election Commission and 3 Ors - Gauhati"], ["Likha Sang Chorre, W/o. Shri Likha Tara VS Deputy Commissioner Lower Subansiri District, Arunachal Pradesh - 2024 0 Supreme(Gau) 1336"], ["Likha Singh VS Emperor - OUDH"]
In the dynamic world of Indian politics, especially in states like Arunachal Pradesh, defection laws play a crucial role in maintaining party discipline. A recent case, Likha Sang Chorre vs DC, has shed light on the procedural boundaries of disqualification under the Arunachal Pradesh Local Authorities (Prohibition of Defection) Act, 2003. If you've ever wondered, What is the outcome of Likha Sang Chorre vs DC?, this post breaks it down, focusing on the legality of show cause notices and when courts can intervene.
This analysis draws from core judgments and related legal precedents, offering general insights into how such cases unfold. Note: This is not legal advice; consult a qualified attorney for specific situations.
The dispute in Likha Sang Chorre vs DC revolves around appellants who faced a show cause notice issued by the Deputy Commissioner (DC) on 10.04.2024. The notice stemmed from intimation by the State Election Commission and BJP's disciplinary action, alleging merger with NCP in violation of the Defection Act, 2003 Likha Sang Chorre, W/o. Shri Likha Tara VS Deputy Commissioner Lower Subansiri District, Arunachal Pradesh - 2024 0 Supreme(Gau) 1336.
This led to disqualification proceedings under Sections 3, 4, 5, and 6 of the Act. The appellants challenged this via the High Court, raising questions about procedural validity and premature judicial interference THE STATE PRESIDENT (IN CHARGE) CUM CHAIRMAN vs LIKHA SANG CHORRE - 2024 Supreme(Online)(SC) 11158. The Gauhati High Court at Itanagar was involved in related writ appeals, highlighting tensions between administrative actions and judicial oversight THE STATE PRESIDENT (IN CHARGE) CUM CHAIRMAN vs LIKHA SANG CHORRE - 2024 Supreme(Online)(SC) 11158.
The core holding is that the show cause notice and subsequent actions are procedurally sustainable. Courts typically refrain from interfering at the preliminary stage unless actions are wholly without jurisdiction or illegal Union of India VS Kunisetty Satyanarayana - 2006 9 Supreme 370.
Key jurisprudence states: ordinarily no writ lies against a charge sheet or show-cause notice unless it is found to be wholly without jurisdiction or for some reason wholly illegal Union of India VS Kunisetty Satyanarayana - 2006 9 Supreme 370. Here, the DC acted on official communications, aligning with statutory authority Likha Sang Chorre, W/o. Shri Likha Tara VS Deputy Commissioner Lower Subansiri District, Arunachal Pradesh - 2024 0 Supreme(Gau) 1336.
The High Court stepped in early, but this was deemed premature. A mere notice does not infringe rights or create a cause of action; only a final adverse order (e.g., disqualification) does Union of India VS Kunisetty Satyanarayana - 2006 9 Supreme 370. Preliminary steps like show cause notices are administrative, not final rulings.
In related contexts, DC orders in Arunachal have been scrutinized for observations on liabilities or procedural compliance, as seen in cases like Shri Techi Murkhi vs Shri Likha Saaya, where specific remarks were limited Techi Murkhi vs THE STATE OF AP and 4 Ors.. This reinforces that authorities must stick to jurisdiction.
The notice explicitly referenced the Defection Act and called for response on potential disqualification Likha Sang Chorre, W/o. Shri Likha Tara VS Deputy Commissioner Lower Subansiri District, Arunachal Pradesh - 2024 0 Supreme(Gau) 1336. It was triggered by:- State Election Commission's communication.- BJP's action against anti-party activities.
This chain ensures procedural fairness, as the DC's role is to initiate based on credible intimation.
The DC operates within administrative bounds under the Act. No evidence showed lack of jurisdiction or illegality, making the process sound Union of India VS Kunisetty Satyanarayana - 2006 9 Supreme 370. Exceptions exist if:- Actions violate statutes.- Notices rely on false info or exceed authority Rongoge Mega Food Park Private Ltd. VS Union of India - 2019 Supreme(Gau) 483.
In a parallel administrative scenario, a show cause notice on criminal involvement was quashed for lacking guidelines, emphasizing procedural adherence Rongoge Mega Food Park Private Ltd. VS Union of India - 2019 Supreme(Gau) 483. Here, however, guidelines were followed.
Judicial review is confined to legality of initiation, not merits at notice stage. Interference is unwarranted without clear illegality. The doctrine prioritizes exhausting administrative remedies before writs.
Defection laws curb political opportunism, requiring strict procedures. Challenges succeed post-final order, not preliminarily. This aligns with national anti-defection frameworks, adapted locally in Arunachal.
Related cases involving 'Likha' names in consumer forums or other disputes (e.g., NCDRC matters Shri Mado Sera vs Birla Sunlife Insurance Co-Ltd,The Branch Manager, Birla Sunlife Insurance Co-Ltd, smti Nabam Yakum w/o sri Nambam Tadap vs SBI, General Insurance Company) show recurring administrative scrutiny but don't alter core defection rules Shri Limo Loyi,Resident of Aalo, West Siang District Arunachal Pradesh, C/o Shri Kirto Loyi C-Sector, Naharlagun vs The General Manager, NF Rly, Rly HQ, Maligaon,.
While generally upheld, proceedings could falter if:- Wholly illegal: E.g., no statutory basis Union of India VS Kunisetty Satyanarayana - 2006 9 Supreme 370.- Jurisdictional overreach: Beyond DC's mandate.- Procedural lapses: Like non-compliance with notice requirements Rongoge Mega Food Park Private Ltd. VS Union of India - 2019 Supreme(Gau) 483.
In economic or contract disputes, tests like 'economic reality' assess control, but defection focuses on statutory procedure SUSHILABEN INDRAVADAN GANDHI VS NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED - 2020 7 Supreme 474.
This approach upholds due process, as echoed in multi-faceted rulings balancing factors SUSHILABEN INDRAVADAN GANDHI VS NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED - 2020 7 Supreme 474.
| Aspect | Ruling Insight ||--------|---------------|| Show Cause Notice | Valid preliminary step Likha Sang Chorre, W/o. Shri Likha Tara VS Deputy Commissioner Lower Subansiri District, Arunachal Pradesh - 2024 0 Supreme(Gau) 1336 || High Court Role | Limited; no writ pre-final order Union of India VS Kunisetty Satyanarayana - 2006 9 Supreme 370 || Disqualification | Challenge post-adverse decision || Exceptions | Illegality or no jurisdiction |
In summary, Likha Sang Chorre vs DC affirms that defection proceedings under the 2003 Act are robust if procedurally correct. High Court intervention at notice stage is typically unwarranted, preserving administrative autonomy THE STATE PRESIDENT (IN CHARGE) CUM CHAIRMAN vs LIKHA SANG CHORRE - 2024 Supreme(Online)(SC) 11158.
For politicians or local leaders in Arunachal Pradesh, this underscores responding effectively rather than rushing to courts. Stay informed on evolving jurisprudence to navigate such issues.
Disclaimer: This post provides general information based on public judgments. Laws vary; seek professional advice tailored to your circumstances.
#DefectionAct #ArunachalLaw #LegalRuling
SANG CHORRE & ORS. ... Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 13-06-2024 in IA(C) No.95/2024 in Writ Appeal No.17 of 2024 passed by the Gauhati High Court at Itanagar) THE STATE PRESIDENT (IN CHARGE) CUM CHAIRMAN Petitioner(s) VERSUS LIKHA
4:Smti Likha Sang Chhore ZPM Age: 0 Occupation : 05 Deed Keyi Panyor District Arunachal Pradesh Advocate for the Petitioner : Puto Bui, Talu Kamsar,S K Deori,D Mazumdar, Sr. Advocate Advocate for the Respondent : Ajin Apang, Sr.
Smti Likha Sang Choore, 2. Smti Gem Aiti, 3. Smti Khoda Dipung, 4. ... Smti Likha Sang Chhore, ZPM, Deed 2. Shri Nilly Likha Tabo, ZPM, Pistana 3. Smti Khoda Dipung, ZPM, Upper Yachuli 4. Smti Gem Aiti, ZPM, Yazali Whereas vide letter No. ... Smti Likha Sang Chhore, ZPC Sd/- 2. Shri Nilly Likha Tabo, ZPM 04-Pistana. Sd/- 3. Smti Khode Dipung, ZPM, 20-Uppar Yachuli Sd/- 4. ... Shri Nilly Likha Tabo attract the provisions of Section 3....
in the year 1930 by Likha Singh and, as to Rs. 163-8-0, of the sum withdrawn by Daya Mahesh in February 1931 which sum had gone to discharge a judgment debt for which Likha Singh was liable. ... Daya Mahesh had a decree against Likha Singh and he executed it by attaching Likha Singh's money in Court to the extent of Rs. 163-8-0. Meanwhile Dhyan Singh had filed a second appeal in the suit. This was dismissed by the High Court on 23rd November 1933. ... On 30th January 1930 and again in December 1930 Likha#HL_END....
Mozumder, learned senior counsel representing Likha Tejji, assisted by Ms. P. Bora. Mr. ... In this context it would be pertinent to notice that Dolang Akom is also an Officer like Likha Tejji. ... Per-contra, the State and Sri Dolang Akom had contended that Likha Tejji cannot derive support from the bye-laws and continue for four long years. It was also contended that Likha Tejji had also been appointed on political considerations. ... ... Since then the incumbent Administrator, Shri Likha Tejji has b....
Kapa Likha]MEMBER ... SARMA AND THE HON’BLE MEMBER SHRI KAPA LIKHA 27-07-2015 Heard Mr. M. Kato, Ld. Counsel for claimant. Ld. Counsel for respondent is not present . ... Kapa Likha MEMBER For the Complainant:Shri Marto Kato, Shri Bido ... Kapa Likha] MEMBER
Kapa Likha]MEMBER ... Kapa Likha MEMBER PRESENT:Tabam Tagum,Topi Jini,Tana ... Josep,Mikko Munglang,Likha Tabin,Taba Topu,Rage Koyu., Advocate for the Complainant 1 Dated : 12 Dec 2018table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing
DC-ICC-17013/11/2022/7989, in the case of Shri Techi Murkhi-vs-Shri Likha Saaya, to the extent the Deputy Commissioner had made an observation in the aforesaid order that there is no any pending liabilities left by Shri Likha Saaya (the respondent no. 4). ... DC-ICC-17013/11/2022/7989, in the case of Shri Techi Murkhi-vs-Shri Likha Saaya, to the effect that Shri Likha Saaya (the respondent no. 4) has no any pending liabilities left. 5.
There is also evidence on the record showing that the accused Likha Singh had been suspected of complicity in certain thefts and had bean mentioned in three particular cases in the reports made at the police stations. ... In my opinion the order passed under Section 110, Criminal P.C., binding over the applicant Likha Singh, was an eminently just order and I see no reason to interfere with it. I accordingly dismiss this application for revision. ... In the present case there is a mass of evidence showing clearly that the applicant Likha....
Kapa Likha]MEMBER ... SARMA AND THE HON’BLE MEMBER SHRI KAPA LIKHA & SMTI P.L. ETE 01/07/13 In terms of the order dated 01/06/2013, no reply has been submitted by the respondent. Mr. B. ... Kapa Likha MEMBER For the Complainant:Shri M Kato,Shri G.
Also, the economic reality test laid down by the U.S decisions and the test of whether the employer has economic control over the workers' subsistence, skill and continued employment can also be applied when it comes to whether a particular worker works for himself or for his employer. The test laid down by the Privy Council in Lee Ting Sang vs. 2 A.C. 374, namely, is the person who has engaged himself to perform services performing them as a person in business on his own account, is also an important test, this time from the point of view of the person employed, in order t....
The letter further mentioned that Agriculture and Horticulture are the main source of economy of the State and has the potential to become a “fruit bowl” of India. During the meeting, the IMAC noted that all the required compliance for according final approval has been satisfactorily and fully complied with by the petitioner Company. Thereafter, the Ministry of Food Processing Industry vide letter dated 20.07.2018 sought clarification from the State of Arunachal Pradesh on the issue of news clipping with the caption “Former DC Lollen, Likha Maj arrested in TAH Compensation Scam”.#H....
CWP-10438-2009 (Dera Shahi Samadhan vs. DC, Patiala & Ors.) According to Depinder Dass, he was nominated as the next Mahant by Mahant Jagat Ram in a congregation of Sadhus and Mahants held in the Dera premises on 13.12.2005.
Bori par jo likha gya tha wah siyahi se likha tha wah mit chuka hai. Bori par mulzim ke koi hastakshar nahi banwaye gaye the.” “Jo maal hum logon ne bramad kiya tha, wah bori me mere samne hai.
The Division Bench of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in Somdas (deceased) Vs. Rikhu Dev Chela Bawa Har Jagdass Narokari, (1983)85 Pun LR 184 held that in a suit for possession under Art.113 of the Limitation Act, material date is one on which the right to sue for possession arises." See also Ujagar Singh Vs. Likha Singh, AIR 1941 All 28 at p.30. See in this connection the decision of Harbans Singh Vs. Custodian of Evacuee Property 'P' Block, AIR 1970 Delhi 82, though that was a case under a different statute and dealt with a different article.
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
