Supreme Court of India Judgements

46448 Judgements hosted as on 05/05/2024 - Search (FREE), Subscribe, Read & Download

Category: Service

Service Matters
Service

Administrative Tribunals (Procedure for Appointment of Members) Rules, 2011 – Rule 9(4) – There cannot be any manner of doubt that a conscious decision was taken by the Selection Committee not to recommend the extension of tenure of the respondent – Order of extension of term of appointment is set aside – Appeal allowed.

May 8, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISON BENCH UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. NAVNEET KUMAR — Respondent ( Before : L. Nageswara Rao and B. R. Gavai, JJ. )…

Service Matters
Service

Two reserved category candidates having more marks than the general category candidates appointed, were entitled to the appointment in the general category and the seats reserved for OBC category were required to be filled in from and amongst the remaining candidates belonging to the OBC category

May 3, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH BHARAT SANCHAR NIGAM LIMITED AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. SANDEEP CHOUDHARY AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : M.R. Shah and B.V. Nagarathna, JJ.…

Service Matters
Service

LIC recruitment – Regularization – All persons who are found to be eligible on the above norm shall be entitled to compensation computed at the rate of Rs 50,000 for every year of service or part thereof – Payment of compensation at the above rate shall be in lieu of reinstatement, and in full and final settlement of all claims and demands of the workers in lieu of regularisation or absorption.

May 1, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH RANBIR SINGH — Appellant Vs. SK ROY, CHAIRMAN, LIFE INSURANCE CORP. OF INDIA AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : Dr. Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud,…

Service Matters
Service

HELD there appears no reason for withholding the names of the present appellants and merely because they were appointed at a later point of time, would not deprive them from claiming to become a member of Tamil Nadu Pension Rules, 1978, which is applicable to the employees who were appointed on or before 1st April, 2003.

Apr 28, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH P. RANJITHARAJ — Appellant Vs. THE STATE OF TAMIL NADU AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Ajay Rastogi and Bela M. Trivedi, JJ.…

Service Matters
Service

Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 – Sections 1(3)(c), 2(a) and 3(1)(b) – Anganwadi centres – Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 – Section 11 – The 1972 Act will apply to Anganwadi centres and in turn to Anganwadi Workers (AWWs) and Anganwadi Helpers (AWHs) – Anganwadi centres are establishments contemplated by clause (b) of sub­section (3) of Section 1 of the 1972 Act

Apr 26, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH MANIBEN MAGANBHAI BHARIYA — Appellant Vs. DISTRICT DEVELOPMENT OFFICER DAHOD AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Ajay Rastogi and Abhay S. Oka, JJ.…

You missed

I P C

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Sections 120-B read with Section 420 – Cheating – The case involves fraudulent transactions by accused in connivance with Indian Bank officials resulting in interest-free advances to the petitioners – The main issue is whether the petitioners were involved in cheating the bank and if they availed any undue benefit from the fraudulent transactions – The petitioners argued that they were not involved in the cheating, had not availed any undue benefit, and that the transactions were normal business dealings – The court dismissed the Special Leave Petitions, upholding the Trial Court’s conviction of the petitioners for cheating the bank through unauthorized transactions.

May 5, 2024 sclaw
Limitation

Limitation Act, 1963 – Section 5 – Condonation of Delay – Delay of 1663 days – The State of U.P. filed a SLP against an order dated 13.11.2009 by the Allahabad High Court, with a delay of 1,633 days – The main issue was the condonation of the significant delay in filing the SLP – The State argued that the delay was due to the time taken for obtaining legal opinion and permissions, and later, the realization that the appeal was not filed initially – The application for condonation of delay was dismissed, and consequently, the SLP was also dismissed – The court found the explanation for the delay unsatisfactory, especially since the State was aware of the High Court’s order when it was passed – The court did not find sufficient cause to condone the delay, leading to the dismissal of the SLP.

May 5, 2024 sclaw
Property Matters

Partition Suit – The dispute involves partition of properties left by Late ‘R’ with the main contention over roof rights of a property in Kota and another in Jaipur – The primary issue is the valuation of roof rights for further construction and the equal distribution of property among co-sharers – The appellants argue that the valuation report failed to assess the value of roof rights, which would affect the overall property valuation and entitlement of co-sharers – The respondents maintain that the property valuation and shares were appropriately determined by the approved Valuer and upheld by both the Trial Court and High Court – The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal, finding no merit in revaluating the property or altering the determined shares of the parties – The Court emphasized the importance of family ties over property disputes and suggested alternative dispute resolution methods for amicable settlements – The Court referenced the case of Afcons Infrastructure Limited vs. Cherian Varkey Construction Company Private Limited, advocating for ADR in family-related property disputes – The Supreme Court concluded that revisiting the valuation and partition would only prolong litigation and upheld the decisions of the lower courts.

May 5, 2024 sclaw
Constitution Municipal Laws

West Bengal Municipal(Building) Rules, 2007 – Rule 50 – Open spaces for building in areas other than municipalities in hill areas – The appellants challenge the High Court of Calcutta’s order regarding a contempt petition related to their residential property construction and its compliance with Rule 50 of Rules, 2007 – The appellants argue that the writ petition was a private matter and should not have been entertained by the High Court – They also claim that municipal authorities are unfairly pressuring them due to the contempt proceedings – The respondent claims that the appellants violated the sanctioned building plan, justifying the High Court’s direction for an enquiry – The Supreme Court allowed the appellants to challenge the enquiry report and show cause notice, ensuring their objections would be considered objectively without prejudice from the contempt or writ proceedings – The court expressed reservations about the High Court’s exercise of writ jurisdiction in a private dispute and suggested the civil court as the appropriate forum for grievances – The appeal was disposed of with the appellants given the liberty to challenge the enquiry report and show cause notice, without cost order.

May 5, 2024 sclaw