Latest Post

Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 (POSH Act) — Section 11 — Internal Complaints Committee (ICC) — Jurisdiction against employee of different department — The ICC constituted at the workplace/department of the “aggrieved woman” has jurisdiction to entertain and inquire into a complaint of sexual harassment against a “respondent” who is an employee of a different department/workplace — The phrase “where the respondent is an employee” in Section 11 refers to a procedural condition (directing the ICC to apply the service rules applicable to the respondent as an employee) rather than a jurisdictional constraint limiting a particular ICC to hear the complaint. (Paras 2, 25, 27, 36-46, 72(i)) Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Section 11(4) — Appointment of Arbitrator — Existence of Arbitration Agreement — Non-Signatory/Third Party — The Referral Court (Appointing Authority) is required to inspect and scrutinize the dealings between the parties to prima facie examine the existence of an arbitration agreement, including whether a non-signatory is a “veritable party” to the agreement. (Paras 24, 25, 27, 28, 35) Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 482 — Quashing of First Information Report (FIR) — Abuse of process of law — When civil dispute is masked as criminal complaint — Allegations in FIR (claiming criminal conspiracy, forcible occupation, and caste abuse) found inconsistent with contemporaneous civil suit filed by the informant regarding the same property and on the same day — Suit’s cause of action traced to earlier dates and did not mention the specific criminal incident alleged in the FIR — Absence of relief to set aside primary sale deeds in the suit suggests the criminal allegations are an afterthought or exaggerated — FIR quashed as a clear abuse of the process of law. (Paras 3, 6, 8, 9, 10) Service Law — Resignation — Forfeiture of past service — Central Civil Service (Pension) Rules, 1972 — Rule 26(1) — Distinction between Resignation and Voluntary Retirement — An employee who resigns from service forfeits past service as per Rule 26(1) of the 1972 Rules, regardless of the length of service completed (20 years or more) — The act of resignation cannot be re-classified as voluntary retirement to claim pensionary benefits, as this would nullify the distinction between the two concepts and render Rule 26 nugatory — Claim for pension correctly denied where the employee resigned from service. (Paras 3, 4, 6, 9, 9.1, 9.5, 9.6, 12) Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code, 2006 — Section 30 — Maintenance of Map and Field Book — Correction of Revenue Map — Scope of Section 30 — Section 30 allows the Collector to record annual changes in boundaries or correct errors or omissions detected in the map or field book (khasra) — It does not permit reopening an issue settled previously between parties regarding the location or extent of plots, especially when the earlier decision attained finality and was based on determined possession and ownership — Efforts to change the location of a purchased plot, which has already been subject to final determination under the predecessor law (Uttar Pradesh Land Revenue Act, 1901), do not fall within the scope of “correction of errors or omissions” under Section 30. (Paras 5.1, 8, 9, 10, 12, 13, 14, 15)
Service Matters

HELD As per the Government letter Centre has been merged with Institute of Distance Education, what are the consequences of merger of Centre with Institute of Distance Education have neither been explained by the appellant nor there are any material to come to the conclusion that by such merger the Centre shall become Centre maintained by the University. Appeal dismissed.

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH P. GOPINATHAN PILLAI — Appellant Vs. UNIVERSITY OF KERALA AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Ashok Bhushan and M.R. Shah, JJ. ) Civil…

Service Matters

[Haryana PTI Selections] Principle Of Estoppel Does Not Apply When There Were Glaring Illegalities In Candidate Selection Procedure: SC HELD that the preposition that a candidate, who participates in a selection without a demur taking a calculated chance to get selected cannot turn around and challenge the criteria of selection and the constitution of the selection committee is well settled.

[Public Employment] Principle Of Estoppel Does Not Apply When There Were Glaring Illegalities In Candidate Selection Procedure: SC [Read Judgment] LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK 9 April 2020 12:42 PM The Supreme…

IMP :: COVID-19 outbreak – Supreme Court of India and High Courts have adopted measures to reduce the physical presence of lawyers, litigants, court staff, para legal personnel and representatives of the electronic and print media in courts across the country and to ensure the continued dispensation of justice. HELD Words and Phrases – ‘Evidence’ – Term ‘evidence’ includes electronic evidence and that video conferencing may be used to record evidence.

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH IN RE: GUIDELINES FOR COURT FUNCTIONING THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING DURING COVID-19 PANDEMIC ( Before : S.A. Bobde; CJI, D.Y. Chandrachud and L. Nageswara Rao,…

[COVID-19] SC Issues Slew Of Directions To Implement Video Conferencing In All Courts Across The Country HELD “Every individual and institution is expected to cooperate in the implementation of measures designed to reduce the transmission of the virus. The scaling down of conventional operations within the precincts of courts is a measure in that direction.”

[COVID-19] SC Issues Slew Of Directions To Implement Video Conferencing In All Courts Across The Country [Read Order] LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK 6 April 2020 5:10 PM “Every individual and institution…

COVID-19 pandemic – Distribution of surgical /n95 masks and also the sale and distribution of hand sanitizers and liquid soap and to make such items available to the public at large at reasonable prices – Helpline to be provided at the control rooms responding to complaints by persons who are not able to secure surgical/n95 masks and the hand sanitizers and liquid soaps at the prices fixed by the Government of India.

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS DIVISION BENCH JUSTICE FOR RIGHTS FOUNDATION AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : L. Nageswara…

You missed