Service Archives - Page 38 of 87 - Supreme Court of India Judgements

January 11, 2026 9:00 pm

Service Code does not stipulate any time period within which the appeal may be preferred to the Board of Directors whose decision is to be final, but it is well settled that no time does not mean any time – Challenge to the order of dismissal from service by way of appeal was after four years and five months, which is certainly highly belated and beyond justifiable time – Without satisfactory explanation justifying the delay, it is difficult to hold that the appeal was preferred within a reasonable time – Order of dismissal uphold.

Nov 21, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH THE CHAIRMAN, STATE BANK OF INDIA AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. M.J. JAMES — Respondent ( Before : L. Nageswara Rao and Sanjiv Khanna,…

Service

Mr. Dinkar Gupta was appointed as Director General of Punjab Police – HELD when a person takes a chance and participates, thereafter he cannot, because the result is unpalatable, turn around to contend that the process was unfair or the selection committee was not properly constituted. In case where the petitioner had appeared at an open interview, as the Appellant too had taken a calculated chance in spite of the stakes, that too without protest, and then has belatedly raised the plea of bias and prejudice only when he was not recommended.

Nov 21, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH MOHD. MUSTAFA — Appellant Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : L. Nageswara Rao, Sanjiv Khanna and B.R. Gavai, JJ.…

Service

Qualifications/conditions for selection to the post of Anganwadi Sevika – Clause 3(E) – Appointment – Post of Anganwadi Sevika – No distinction can be drawn between a married daughter and unmarried daughter for the purpose of considering the eligibility as per the guidelines

Nov 21, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH KUMARI REKHA BHARATI — Appellant Vs. THE STATE OF BIHAR AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : R. Subhash Reddy and Hrishikesh Roy, JJ.…

Service

Service Law – Promotion – Requirement of passing of SAS Part II examination for the promotion from the post of Superintendent (D/A) to the post of AAO (Assistant Accounts Officers) only and consequently shall not be applicable for promotion to the post of AO (Accounts Officers)

Nov 21, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH RAMESH KUMAR AND OTHERS ETC. — Appellant Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AND OTHERS ETC. — Respondent ( Before : M.R. Shah and Sanjiv…

Service

Service Law – Appointment – There cannot be appointment of two persons on one sanctioned post – There will be financial burden on the State of two persons on one sanctioned post.

Nov 21, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH WAHAB UDDIN AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. KM. MEENAKSHI GAHLOT AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : M.R. Shah and A.S. Bopanna, JJ. )…

Service

Service Law – Misconduct – Quantum of punishment – Scope of judicial review on the quantum of punishment is available but with a limited scope – Where the punishment imposed by the disciplinary authority is found to be shocking to the conscience of the Court, normally the disciplinary authority or the appellate authority should be directed to reconsider the question of imposition of penalty – after setting aside the penalty order, it is to be left to the disciplinary/appellate authority to take a call

Nov 13, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. EX. CONSTABLE RAM KARAN — Respondent ( Before : Ajay Rastogi and Abhay S. Oka, JJ.…

Service

University Grants Commission Act, 1956 – Section 12(b) – Abolition of post – Appeal against – University had the power to abolish any department but not the post sanctioned under the Tenth Plan by the UGC – Post held by the appellant was sanctioned and financially supported by the UGC under the Tenth Plan, and the same would not have been automatically abolished at the end of the Plan – Termination of services of the appellant was illegal and not in accordance with law – Appeal allowed

Nov 4, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH DR. SUSHIL KUMAR TRIPATHI — Appellant Vs. JAGADGURU RAM BHADRACHARYA HANDICAPPED UNIVERSITY AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : Dr. Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud, Vikram…

Service

Service Law – Termination – HELD the respondent-University is directed to reinstate the appellant as Assistant Professor in the Department of Political Science and also grant him the benefit of continuity of services only for the purpose of pension and retiral benefits, if any. The appellant will not, however, be entitled to any disbursement of salary for the period from 31st March, 2007, till the date of reinstatement as he has not worked for the said period on the principle of “no work, no pay”.

Oct 31, 2021 sclaw

Service

Military Engineering Service (Non-Industrial Class III and IV Posts) Rules, 1971 – Seniority – Determination of – In the matter of adjudging seniority of the candidates selected in one and the same selection, placement in the order of merit can be adopted as a principle for determination of seniority but where the selections are held separately by different recruiting authorities, the principle of initial date of appointment/continuous officiation may be the valid principle to be considered for adjudging inter se seniority of the officers in the absence of any rule or guidelines in determining seniority to the contrary.

Oct 30, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SUDHIR KUMAR ATREY — Appellant Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Ajay Rastogi and Abhay S. Oka, JJ. )…

Service

Service Law – Respondent is a club in strict sense and not public, ‘restaurant and eating place’ the conclusion appears to be inevitable that the respondent club cannot be characterized as premises which was ‘wholly or principally’ used for the business of supply of meals and refreshment to the public. In the first place as already noticed, the members of the Club and their guests and family members cannot be described as the ‘public’ . HELD There is no finding also that the club was providing lodging. In such circumstances, the question that should have been asked was, whether, being a club, which was not residential in nature, it stood exempted. This was not done. Appeal dismissed.

Oct 30, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH P.B. NAYAK AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. MANAGING DIRECTOR, BHILAI STEEL PLANT AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : K.M Joseph and Pamidighantam Sri…

You missed

Arbitration

Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Sections 5, 34, and 37 — Scope of Judicial Intervention — Minimum intervention of judicial authority in domestic arbitration matters is required under Section 5 — Challenge to an arbitral award under Section 34 is limited to specific grounds, including patent illegality or conflict with the public policy of India — Scope of interference by the Appellate Court under Section 37 is akin to and cannot travel beyond the restrictions laid down under Section 34 — Appellate Court cannot undertake an independent assessment of the merits of the award or re-interpret contractual clauses if the interpretation by the Arbitral Tribunal was a plausible view and upheld under Section 34 — Setting aside an arbitral award under Section 37, which was upheld under Section 34, based on providing a different interpretation of contractual clauses is unsustainable in law. (Paras 24, 25, 30, 31, 36, 37, 39, 50, 51)

Jan 11, 2026 sclaw

Limitation

Limitation Act, 1963 — Article 54 — Suit for specific performance — Commencement of limitation period — Where the defendant subsequently executed an affidavit ratifying the agreement to sell and conveying no-objection to the transfer, the period of limitation commences from the date of the admitted affidavit, as this is the stage at which the executant finally refused to execute the sale deed to the extent of her share — Trial court and High Court erred in dismissing the suit on the ground of limitation calculated from an earlier disputed date. (Paras 13, 35, 36, 37)

Jan 11, 2026 sclaw

Arbitration

Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Section 9(2) read with Rule 9(4) of 2001 Rules — Setting aside High Court judgment — High Court erroneously treated the date of filing of the Section 11 petition (28.06.2024) as the commencement date, leading to the conclusion that proceedings commenced beyond the statutory period — Where the arbitration notice was served (on 11.04.2024) well within the 90-day period from the ad-interim injunction order (17.02.2024), proceedings commenced in time as per Section 21 — High Court’s finding unsustainable, resulting in the restoration of the Trial Court’s initial ad-interim injunction order. (Paras 28, 31, 32) E. Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Section 9 — Interim injunction — Dispute regarding existence

Jan 11, 2026 sclaw

Corporate

Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Section 2(28) — Definition of “motor vehicle” — Components — Definition has two parts: an inclusive part (mechanically propelled vehicle adapted for use upon roads) and an exclusive part — The second part expressly excludes “a vehicle of a special type adapted for use only in a factory or in any other enclosed premises” — Although Dumpers, Loaders, etc., may fall under the first part of the definition, they are excluded if their nature of use is confined to factory or enclosed premises, being special type vehicles/Construction Equipment Vehicles. (Paras 36, 37, 38, 39)

Jan 11, 2026 sclaw

Category: Service

You missed