Kanshai Mushahary And 15 Ors vs. The State Of Assam And 512 Ors
Held
The Court allowed the application for modification. It reasoned that the applicants, being fresh graduates with no source of income, faced genuine financial hardship in complying with the original order's requirement for publication in multiple newspapers, including the expensive "Assam Tribune". The Court found merit in their request to limit the publication to a more affordable option. Therefore, the Court directed the applicants to serve notice on private respondents (Nos. 4 to 513 in WP(C) No. 4769/2024) by publishing it in the "Dainik Asom" newspaper within 10 days, with a returnable date of December 2, 2024. An affidavit of compliance was to be filed subsequently. No issue was expressly left undecided.
Facts
The applicants, petitioners in WP(C) No. 4769/2024, sought modification of a previous court order dated September 18, 2024. The original order mandated notice publication in both the "Bodosa" newspaper and the "Assam Tribune" and "Dainik Asom". The applicants had already published in "Bodosa". However, they faced financial constraints in publishing in "Assam Tribune" (costing Rs. 3,00,000) and "Dainik Asom" (costing Rs. 80,000 plus GST). As fresh graduates with no income, they requested permission to publish only in "Dainik Asom". The respondents included the State of Assam and the Bodoland Territorial Council.
Key Issues
1. Whether the applicants should be permitted to modify the prior court order regarding the mode of service of notice on private respondents, specifically concerning newspaper publication, given their financial inability to afford publication in all mandated newspapers. Contentions: Petitioner/Applicants: Argued that they had complied with the publication in "Bodosa" newspaper. They submitted that the cost of publication in "Assam Tribune" was Rs. 3,00,000 and in "Dainik Asom" was Rs. 80,000 plus GST. As fresh graduates with no source of income, they prayed to be allowed to publish the notice only in "Dainik Asom". Revenue/State: No specific argument recorded for the revenue/State on this point.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Page No.# 1/100 GAHC010221242024
2024:GAU-AS:10470
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/3255/2024 KANSHAI MUSHAHARY AND 15 ORS AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS, S/O- NAUSHAD ALI, R/O- VILLAGE- MADAIKATA, P.O- DHEPARGAON, P.S- TAMULPUR, PIN-781354 DISTRICT- TAMULPUR, ASSAM. 2: DHIRAJ MOHAN BRAHMA AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS S/O- RENGENA BRAHMA RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- BAJRAJHAR P.O. AND P.S. ROWTA PIN- 784508 DISTRICT- UDALGURI ASSAM. 3: MOHOR BASUMATARY AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS S/O SUDEM BASUMATARY RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- SERFANGURI P.O. AND P.S. SERFANGURI PIN- 783346 DISTRICT- KOKRAJHAR ASSAM. 4: PABITRA KUMAR BRAHMA AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS S/O NIGEN BRAHMA RESIDENT OF NILIBARI P.O. SIMLAGURI P.S. DHALIGAON PIN- 783381 DISTRICT- CHIRANG ASSAM. 5: RUBUL SARMA
Page No.# 2/100 AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS S/O RAGHUDEV SARMA RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- SUTARPARA P.O. HALTUGAON P.S. KOKRAJHAR PIN- 783370 DISTRICT- KOKRAJHAR ASSAM. 6: KING BRAHMA AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS S/O MANAB BRAHMA RESIDENT OF ODALGURI PALASHGURI- II P.O. KHAGRABARI P.S. DHALIGAON PIN- 783380 DISTRICT- CHIRA
The judgment continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full GST judgments a month (one account works on both bharattax.net and this site). Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
Reproduced from the public record of the Gauhati High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.