M/S. Jai Coke Industries vs. Union Of INDIA And 5 Ors.
Held
The Court allowed the impleadment of the individuals listed as respondent Nos. 6 to 27 in the writ petition. The reasoning provided is based on the submissions made by the learned counsels for both parties. The counsel for the petitioners argued for the impleadment, and the counsel for the respondent (State of Assam) stated they had no objection. In light of these submissions, the Court found no impediment to allowing the application. The interlocutory application was accordingly disposed of. The specific reasons for impleadment or the nature of the dispute involving these individuals were not elaborated upon in the order, beyond the agreement of the parties.
Facts
This matter concerns an interlocutory application (I.A. No. 1384/2022) filed in a writ petition (W.P.(C) No. 1311/2019). The petitioners, Shri Bhaben Dutta and others, sought to implead specific individuals, listed as respondent Nos. 6 to 27, as parties in the main writ petition. These individuals are police personnel holding various ranks and posted in different units within the Assam Police. The main writ petition appears to involve M/s. Jai Coke Industries versus the Union of India and others, with the State of Assam and its officials also listed as respondents. The current application specifically addresses the addition of the named police personnel as respondents.
Key Issues
1. Whether the individuals named as respondent Nos. 6 to 27 should be impleaded as parties in the writ petition. The petitioner argued for their impleadment. The respondent, represented by the State of Assam, stated they had no objection to the application being allowed. No specific legal provisions were cited in relation to the impleadment itself, but the context implies the court's discretion in managing parties to a proceeding. The core question is whether these individuals have a direct stake or are necessary parties to the proceedings initiated by M/s. Jai Coke Industries or the writ petition filed by Shri Bhaben Dutta and others.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Page No.# 1/7 GAHC010087882022
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/1384/2022 SHRI BHABEN DUTTA, ASI AND ORS. S/O-LT. GUNA RAM DUTTA, KAHILIPARA, GHY-781019, NEAR 10 APBN GATE, ASSAM. 2: SATISH DAS ASI (UB) S/O- LATE UTSHAB DAS DALALPARA NATUN BASTI P.O AND P.S- FATASIL AMBARI- 781001 DIST- KAMRUP(M) ASSAM 3: MRITUNJAY SAIKIA ASI (UB) S/O- SRI GOLAP CHANDRA SAIKIA POLICE COMMISSIONERATE GHY- 781001 DIST- KAMRUP(M) ASSA VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ORS. REP. BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT OF ASSAM, HOME DEPTT, ASSAM SECRETARIAT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI- 781006 2:THE DGP ASSAM ASSAM POLICE HQ ULUBARI GUWAHATI- 781007 3:THE ADDL DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE ASSAM (ADMN)
Page No.# 2/7 ASSAM POLICE HQ ULUBARI GUWAHATI- 781007 4:THE ADGP (T AND AP) ASSAM POLICE HQ ULUBARI GHY- 07 5:THE ASSTT IGP (TRG) ASSAM ULUBARI GUWAHATI- 781007 6:SHRI LAKHI DAS HAVILDER (M) CDO BN DIBRUGARH POSTED AS SI STF ASSAM. 7:SHRI SUBHASH MALAKAR ASI ( CLK )21 ST AP (IR) BN CACHAR POSTED AS SI DIMA HASAO 8:SHRI UJJAL KR. DAS ASI ( CLK )21 ST APB
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.