Latest Gauhati Hc updates from LegalRepublic.in.
The Gauhati High Court quashed Section 145/146 CrPC proceedings where the complainant's own petition before the Magistrate conceded that the petitioner was in possession of the disputed land.
Dibrugarh University must pay subsistence allowance with revisions for twelve years after the Division Bench upheld that an employee was under deemed suspension once his dismissal order was set aside.
Petitioners who failed to challenge the original demolition order under the GMDA Act were told to exhaust the statutory appeal remedy before the District & Sessions Judge, Kamrup.
Division Bench holds that a UGC-regulated private university's termination of a professor remains a contractual matter, not amenable to writ jurisdiction under Article 226.
Justice Manish Choudhury upheld a Rs 52.66 lakh ITC-fraud attachment but referred a conflict between coordinate benches on whether PMLA reason to believe is confidential.
The Gauhati High Court held that diplomas earned under the unconstitutional ARHRA Act 2004 cannot be nullified, directing the State to frame a separate cadre and restore practice rights within 90 days.
Gauhati High Court holds that mere pendency of a CBI criminal case cannot justify indefinitely withholding an MBBS pass certificate from a doctor who completed her course and secured registration.
The Gauhati High Court held that cancelling an entire departmental promotion exam over suspicion about two candidates was disproportionate and directed N.F. Railway to segregate those candidates and complete the selection.
The Gauhati High Court dismissed a second appeal in a long-running Lakhimpur land dispute, holding that plaintiffs claiming through Badal Hussain produced no title deed establishing his ownership of the suit land.
Gauhati High Court upholds provincialisation of a Junior Assistant as Library Assistant, rejecting a rival employee's claim that his own service was manipulated and his degree was valid.
A Division Bench of the Gauhati High Court set aside murder convictions resting entirely on Section 164 confessions recorded while a police officer was present in the room.
Justice Mridul Kumar Kalita allowed a review petition after finding that the court's earlier civil revision order had entirely omitted any discussion of one of two impugned Executing Court orders.
A Division Bench of the Gauhati High Court dismissed a writ petition challenging a Foreigners Tribunal's declaration, finding the proceedee's written statement vague and his documentary evidence riddled with inconsistencies.
