A division Bench headed by Chief Justice S S Nijjar on Wednesday passed an order staying the order of a single bench which stopped functioning of the computer training centres affiliated to the state Youth Welfare Department. Now,about 200 computer centres would function normally,according to an order passed by the division bench on Wednesday. Ranjit Nandi and 17 others,owners of computer centres in various districts,filed a writ petition on Tuesday,challenging the order passed on August 4. Justice Sanjib Banerjee of the Calcutta High Court had directed that Youth Computer Training Centres and Youth Vocational Training Centres set up since 2004 after obtaining affiliation from the Youth Affairs Department would not function. Justice Banerjee had directed the department not to give any approval or financial assistance for opening new computer centres in the state. Advocate Kalyan Banerjee,counsel of the owners of the computer centres,moved the plea saying thousands of students have been affected following the order passed by the single bench. The bench had passed the interim order before hearing arguments of both sides,he pleaded. Namaste London vs Poran Jay Joliya ReA Division Bench of Justices Pinaki Chandra Ghose and I P Mukerji of the Calcutta High Court on Wednesday did not pass any formal order on lifting the ban on the screening of Bengali film Poran Jay Joliya Re alleged to be a plagiarised version of a Hindi film. The Bench asked the counsels of both the producers Bipul Shah of Namaste London and Venkatesh Film of Poran Jay Joliya Re to submit the respective scripts as well as the screenplays on Friday. The Bench said that it would be easy to compare the two films once they go through the scripts. IT order on Suchitra Sens wealth set asideThe Calcutta High Court On Wednesday set aside an order of the Income Tax authority on wealth tax of noted actress Suchitra Sen over her flat in a posh south Kolkata locality. Justice Indira Banerjee ordered that Sen must be heard by the IT authority before passing any order over her appeal. Sen,who owned property at Ballygunge had given it to a developer and received nine flats in exchange. She sold six of them and turned the remaining three situated on one floor into a single one. Served with a demand of Rs 30,57,930 on March 30,2006,she appealed to the assistant commissioner of wealth tax seeking lowering of the amount. When she did not receive a reply,her tax consultant Sibendu Basu made a representation to the commissioner of wealth tax,who in his order on March 31,2008,said that the tax demand would not be lowered.
