Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1972 – Rule 88 – Grant of pension – The services rendered by the respondents as GDS or other ExtraDepartmental Agents cannot be factored in for computing their qualifying services in regular posts under the postal department on the question of grant of pension.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. GANDIBA BEHERA — Respondent ( Before : Ranjan Gogoi, CJI, Deepak Gupta and Aniruddha Bose, JJ.…
Constitution of India, 1950 – Article 311(2)(b) – Dismissal of the judicial officers dispensing with the departmental inquiry. HELD The appeals are dismissed and the stay order is vacated, albeit we clarify that the respondents, in terms of the judgment passed by the Division Bench, would be required to proceed in accordance with law.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH HARI NIWAS GUPTA — Appellant Vs. STATE OF BIHAR AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : Indu Malhotra and Sanjiv Khanna, JJ. ) Civil…
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 – Sections 34 and 37 – Levy of liquidated damages – the Division Bench of the High Court rightly set aside the order of the learned Arbitrator with regard to claim No.6 by holding that levy of liquidated damages/compensation is adjustable against the final bill payable to the appellant.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH M/S. MITRA GUHA BUILDERS (INDIA) COMPANY — Appellant Vs. OIL AND NATURAL GAS CORPORATION LIMITED — Respondent ( Before : R. Banumathi, A.S. Bopanna…
Air Force Rules, 1969 – Rules 15(2), 15(2)(g)(ii) and Rule 15(2)(k) – Habitual offender -The show cause notice issued to the Respondent is in accordance with the Habitual Offenders Policy. A second warning letter is not required when it is decided to pass a final order without giving another chance. There is no violation of the procedure prescribed by the Policy –
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. 794898 T. EX. CORPORAL ABHISHEK PANDEY — Respondent ( Before : L. Nageswara Rao and Hemant…
Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Sections 300 302, 304, 304 Part I, 307, 504 and 506/34 – Murder – Common intention -intention is a matter of inference and when death is as a result of intentional firing, intention to cause death is patent unless the case falls under any of the exceptions.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH AWADHESH KUMAR — Appellant Vs. STATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : Arun Mishra, M. R. Shah and S. Ravindra Bhat,…
Ayodhya Case verdicat – Constitution of India, 1950 – Article 142 – Inherent powers of the Supreme Court – Destruction of the mosque and the obliteration of the Islamic structure was an egregious violation of the rule of law – A wrong committed must be remedied.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CONSTITUTION BENCH M SIDDIQ (D) THROUGH LRS — Appellant Vs. MAHANT SURESH DAS AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Ranjan Gogoi, C.J.I, S. A,…
Lacuna Left By Legislature Cannot Be Filled By Judicial Interpretation: “It is not for the Courts to remedy the defect in the Statute.”
Lacuna Left By Legislature Cannot Be Filled By Judicial Interpretation: SC “It is not for the Courts to remedy the defect in the Statute.” The Supreme Court has observed that…
Section 164 CrPC: Presence Of Advocate Not Mandatory When Confession Of Accused Before Magistrate Is Not Recorded By Audio-Video Means
Section 164 CrPC: Presence Of Advocate Not Mandatory When Confession Of Accused Before Magistrate Is Not Recorded By Audio-Video Means : SC [Read Judgment] The Supreme Court has observed that…
Interim Mandatory Injunctions Can Be Granted After Giving Opportunity Of Hearing To Opposite Side
Interim Mandatory Injunctions Can Be Granted After Giving Opportunity Of Hearing To Opposite Side: SC BY: ASHOK KINI8 Nov 2019 5:12 PM The Supreme Court has observed that, the Civil…
Read Judgment – Breaking: Ayodhya Verdict- Key Observations In SC Judgment
Breaking: Ayodhya Verdict- Key Observations In SC Judgment [Read Judgment] BY: ASHOK KINI9 Nov 2019 12:16 PM The Five judge bench of the Supreme Court has pronounced the judgment in…






