NOMINAL INDEXM/s Himadri Speciality Chemical & Anr. Versus The Commissioner of Central Excise 2023 LiveLaw (Cal) 12Niladri Saha v State of WB 2023 LiveLaw (Cal) 13Calcutta High Court Quashes Ex Parte Order Imposing Excise Duty On Incineration Of Lean Gas Used In Generation Of ElectricityCase Title: M/s Himadri Speciality Chemical & Anr. Versus The Commissioner of Central...
NOMINAL INDEX
M/s Himadri Speciality Chemical & Anr. Versus The Commissioner of Central Excise 2023 LiveLaw (Cal) 12
Niladri Saha v State of WB 2023 LiveLaw (Cal) 13
Case Title: M/s Himadri Speciality Chemical & Anr. Versus The Commissioner of Central Excise
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Cal) 12
The Calcutta High Court has quashed the ex parte order imposing excise duty on the incineration of lean gas used in the generation of electricity.
The bench of Justice Md. Nizamuddin has remanded the matter back to the adjudicating authority concerned to pass a fresh adjudication order by allowing the petitioner to file an objection against the adjudication order by treating it as show cause notice and to take all the points raised in this writ petition.
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Cal) 13
Case: Niladri Saha v State of WB
The Calcutta High Court on Thursday questioned the bonafide research of a petitioner who had filed a PIL challenging the attacks on members of the Enforcement Directorate who had gone to conduct raids in West Bengal's Sandeshkhali and Bongaon.
A division bench of Chief Justice TS Sivagnanam and Justice Supratim Bhattacharya dismissed the plea and held:
"This plea seeks an investigation by the NIA or CBI into an incident at Sandeshkhali. The annexures are nothing but newspaper reports. The petitioner who is a practising advocate, appears to have not done any research. Based upon newspaper reports, without any research by the petitioner, a writ petition cannot be entertained at this juncture. The matter concerns an attack upon ED officials, and the petitioner is not advised as to what the said central agency has to do, as they have all the expertise to handle this situation. Therefore we are not inclined to entertain the matter as a PIL. Dismissed."
Case: Fabian Ricklin, alias Ranabir Vs. State of West Bengal & Ors.
Case No: W.P.A. No. 3792 of 2023
The Calcutta High Court has recently held that the right to privacy of a biological parent, especially an unwed mother who gave up her child for adoption and subsequently went untraceable, would prevail over the right of the child to conduct a 'root search' to trace his origins.
A single bench of Justice Sabyasachi Bhattacharya declined a Swiss citizen's plea to trace his biological origins by seeking the relinquishment deed which was executed by the adoption agency that facilitated his adoption, as well as for action against the agency if the deed was not preserved.
The Court held that not only would the biological mother's right to privacy be given primacy in such a situation, but that the adoption agency was under no obligation to preserve these records, which dated back to 1988.
Case: SUVENDU ADHIKARI AND ANR VS RAJIVA SINHA STATE ELECTION COMMISSIONER AND ORS
Case No: WPCRC/195/2023
The Calcutta High Court on Monday took up a contempt matter against the West Bengal State Election Commission (SEC) wherein the Court had issued Rule Nisi against the SEC and directed it to show cause why action should not be taken against it under contempt jurisdiction for "wilfully and deliberately" failing to comply with the court's orders for immediate deployment of central forces during the 2023 Panchayat Elections.
The SEC had argued that they had delayed requesting central force deployment since they were in the process of appealing against the High Court's order before the Supreme Court and that any disobedience of the Court orders was completely unintentional and inadvertent. The Supreme Court subsequently rejected the SLP and upheld the HC order.
Case: Soumen Nandy v State of WB
Case No: WPA 9979/2022
The Calcutta High Court on Wednesday objected to the appearance of Advocate General Kishore Datta as an advisor of the State in the ongoing cash-for-jobs, recruitment scam matter which is being investigated by the CBI & ED and monitored by the High Court.
A single bench of Justice Amrita Sinha noted that Datta had earlier appeared for interested parties in the litigation and said that his participation as the Advocate General in the proceedings would be a clear case of conflict of interest. It said:
"I only see you [Datta] as the AG. [Since you had appeared for the parties earlier] your presence cannot be for the State in this matter at least. I am not getting the benefit of hearing submissions from the legal advisor of the state in this matter. I wanted the legal advisor of the state's presence, but that is not possible as there is a conflict of interest. When the interest of the party and the interest of the state becomes the same. then it is very difficult to adjudicate. Not only for the court but also for everybody. Let justice be seen to be done. So you are out by default."
The Calcutta High Court has inaugurated Wi-Fi facilities for advocates in all bar rooms on the High Court premises.
The inauguration ceremony was presided over by Chief Justice TS Sivagnanam in Bar Room No. 2, in the presence of the various members of the Bar.
The Calcutta High Court Bar had approached the State government to provide Wi-Fi facilities to all bar rooms to enable the smooth functioning of the members of the Bar.
Such a request was acceded to by the State which has installed wi-fi facilities in all bar rooms free of cost, for a total project expense of Rs 1 crore.