Category: Service

Service Matters

Reference of wrong provision of law— If an authority has a power under the law merely because while exercising that power the source of power is not specifically referred to or a reference is made to a wrong provision of law, that by itself does not vitiate the exercise of power so long as the power does exist and can be traced to a source available in law.

  2007(3) LAW HERALD (SC) 2289 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Before The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Arijit Pasayat The Hon’ble Mr. Justice P.P. Naolekar Civil Appeal No. 2951 of…

Service Matters

Court has construed the provisions of Section 7 of the Punjab Privately Managed Recognised Schools Employees (Security of Service) Act, 1979 and has laid down that under the said section in the matter of pay scales and dearness allowance parity has been granted to teachers working in the privately managed schools with the teachers working in the government schools and that other conditions of services relating to the teachers working in the government schools were not extended to teachers employed in privately managed schools.

  (1998) 9 JT 460 : (1997) 11 SCC 202 : (1998) SCC(L&S) 113 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. SATISH KUMAR DUGGAL AND…

Service Matters

There is a stipulation that an appeal or representation, as the case may be, from the order of the Chairman shall lie to the UPSEB. The Regulation clearly provides that in case of an Assistant Engineer the Chairman is the competent authority to pass the order of punishment and by virtue of the order passed by the UPSEB remedy of appeal was denied to the delinquent employee

  (2013) 10 AD 598 : (2014) 140 FLR 531 : (2013) 13 JT 394 : (2013) LabIC 4442 : (2013) LLR 1233 : (2013) 12 SCALE 390 : (2013)…

Service Matters

The criminal charge and the charge in the departmental enquiry were entirely different. The appellate court in the criminal case came to the conclusion that since the two ladies had not supported the prosecution case, the charges against the appellant were not proved – It is a settled proposition of law that strict rules of evidence are not applicable to departmental enquiries.

  (1998) 8 SCC 723 : (1999) SCC(L&S) 257 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA STATE OF T.N. — Appellant Vs. M.A. WAHEED KHAN — Respondent ( Before : Kuldip Singh, J;…

You missed

Andhra Pradesh Electricity Regulatory Commission (Distribution Licence) Regulations, 2013 – Special Economic Zones Act, 2005 – Sections 3 and 4 – Electricity Act – Section 14(b) – Whether a Special Economic Zone (SEZ) developer, deemed to be a distribution licensee under the Electricity Act, is required to make an application for a distribution license and comply with the conditions set out in the Electricity Rules and Regulations. – The appeal challenges the Appellate Tribunal for Electricity’s decision to require an appellant to infuse additional capital as a condition for being identified as a deemed distribution licensee – The court questioned whether a SEZ developer is ipso facto a deemed distribution licensee, obviating the need for an application under section 14 of the Electricity Act – The appellant argued that they are automatically a deemed distribution licensee by virtue of the 2010 Notification and that the conditions imposed by TSERC were in excess of jurisdiction – The respondents argued that the appellant must comply with the 2005 and 2013 Regulations and that TSERC is empowered to impose conditions to assess credit-worthiness – The Supreme Court partially allowed the appeal, setting aside the condition of additional capital infusion imposed by TSERC – The court reasoned that the appellant must apply to be recognized as a deemed licensee but is not subject to the additional capital requirements of regulation 12 and rule 3(2) – The court concluded that the appellant is required to make an application as per the 2013 Regulations, and the condition to infuse additional capital is not justified.