Supreme Court of India Judgements

46820 Judgements hosted as on 28/07/2025 - Search (FREE), Subscribe, Read & Download

Category: Labour Cases

Labour Cases

Closure of Mill–Bench Hunting–Withdrawal request–Whether a case of bench hunting ? NO, because company could have waited for the expiry of 60 days and could have the benefit of deeming clause, but it was trying for an amicable settlement and this was clearly its bona fide Bench Hunting–Meaning of.

Oct 18, 2017 sclaw

  2007(5) LAW HERALD (SC) 4110 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Before The Hon’ble Mr. Justice C.K. Thakker The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Markandey Katju Civil Appeal No 5458 of…

Labour Cases

Gratuity–Where a benefit has been extended by the Authorities under the Act to the workman by recording a finding that the applicant had completed requisite service of 5 years to be eligible to get gratuity–High Court should not interfere with such findings even if another view is possible.

Sep 11, 2017 sclaw

  2007(5) LAW HERALD (SC) 3904  IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Before The Hon’ble Mr. Justice C.K. Thakker The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Tarun Chatterjee Civil Appeal No. 3889 of…

Labour Cases

Service and Labour Law–Industrial Disputes Act,1947, Section 25F–Termination–Workman appointed as a Security Guard in the Telecom Department on 1-10-1996–Terminated from service on 1-6-1999–Termination challenged on the ground that provisions of section 25F of the I D. Act had not complied with as he had completed 240 days of service before the impugned order

Sep 10, 2017 sclaw

  2007(5) LAW HERALD (SC) 3874   IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Before The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Tarun Chatterjee The Hon’ble Mr. Justice P. Sathasivam Civil Appeal No. 4264…

Labour Cases

Service and Labour Law–Regularisation–Daily Wager–Completion of 240 days of work in a year by a daily wage employee–Whether confer any right to regularisation–No–It only confers that the employer has to follow certain obligation at the time of termination of the employee’s service.

Aug 3, 2017 sclaw

  2007(5) Law Herald (SC) 3520 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Before The Hon’ble Mr. Jusitce Arijit Pasayat The Hon’ble Mr. Jusitce P. Sathasivam Civil Appeal No. 4856 of…

You missed

Education

Education Law — Admissions — Eligibility Criteria — Prospectus issued by University — Amendments and Addendums — Appellant admitted to postgraduate program based on provisional admission — Completed course and received degree — University withdrew degree based on initial ineligibility — Court held that due to confusion and uncertainty caused by frequent changes in eligibility criteria, the benefit should go to the appellant, especially since she had completed the course with good marks.

Jul 29, 2025 sclaw
Matrimonial

Transfer Petition — Jurisdiction — Courts — Petition seeking transfer of matrimonial and criminal cases from one state to another filed by both parties, wife seeking transfer of divorce case from Delhi to UP, husband seeking transfer of criminal cases from UP to Delhi. Parties have also filed special leave petitions against High Court orders. Supreme Court has the power to transfer cases.

Jul 29, 2025 sclaw
Acquittal

Penal Code, 1860 — Sections 302, 34, 120B — Murder — Appeal against conviction and sentence for murder — Key eyewitness evidence of the deceased’s son and wife — Distance allegedly covered on bicycle within thirty minutes questioned — Improbability of covering 16 kilometers in that timeframe raised substantial doubt about their presence at the crime scene — Absence of corroboration from other witnesses, who turned hostile and suggested multiple assailants, further weakens the prosecution’s case — Post-mortem report indicating numerous injuries, consistent with multiple attackers — Deceased’s history as a habitual drunkard and criminal suggests potential enmity with various individuals — Conviction based solely on questionable eyewitness testimony not sustainable when reasonable doubt exists about accused’s presence and involvement — Appeal allowed, conviction and sentence set aside

Jul 29, 2025 sclaw
Service

Central Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1965, Rule 13(2) and Rule 14, Appendix 3 — Disciplinary proceedings for major penalties — Initiation of by authority competent to impose minor penalties — Permissible — Rule 13(2) allows a disciplinary authority competent to impose minor penalties to institute proceedings for major penalties, even if not competent to impose major penalties itself. – Charge Sheet — Validity of issuance by General Manager (Telecommunications) for major penalties — Held valid as the General Manager is competent to impose minor penalties and Rule 13(2) permits initiation of proceedings for major penalties by such an authority.

Jul 29, 2025 sclaw