Tripura State Rifles Act, 1983 and Tripura State Rifles (Recruitment) Rules, 1984 — Recruitment of Enrolled Followers — Cancellation of ongoing recruitment process midway due to a new policy decision — Held, executive instructions cannot override statutory rules or the Act — Cancellation of recruitment process under executive instructions without amending the Act and Rules is arbitrary and illegal — New Recruitment Policy (NRP) stating that recommendations would be applicable prospectively cannot be applied to an ongoing process where interviews were already conducted.
2025 INSC 1049 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH PARTHA DAS AND OTHERS Vs. THE STATE OF TRIPURA AND OTHERS ( Before : J.K. Maheshwari and Rajesh Bindal, JJ. )…
Boilers Act, 1923 — Sections 2(c), 28, 28A, 29 — Chief Inspector, Deputy Chief Inspector and Inspector (Qualification and Experience) Rules, 2012; Recruitment Rules, 2013 — Recruitment for Inspector of Boilers — Cancellation of ongoing recruitment process due to new recruitment policy framing weightage for interview — Held, new policy, being an executive instruction, cannot override statutory rules governing recruitment — Change of rules mid-game impermissible — Candidate has legitimate expectation of fair completion of recruitment — New policy, in absence of express retrospective application, applied prospectively and not to ongoing recruitment — Cancellation arbitrary and unjust.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH THE STATE OF TRIPURA AND OTHERS Vs. ARUNABHA SAHA AND ANOTHER ( Before : J.K. Maheshwari and Rajesh Bindal, JJ. ) Civil Appeal No.…
Constitution of India, 1950 — Article 309 — Tripura Civil Service Rules, 1967 and Tripura Police Service Rules — Recruitment Rules framed under Article 309 have statutory force — Executive instructions (New Recruitment Policy) cannot override statutory rules unless rules are amended — Cancellation of a recruitment process at an advanced stage (after main examination) based on an executive policy change without amending statutory rules is unjustified and arbitrary.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH THE STATE OF TRIPURA AND ANOTHER Vs. SAMUDRA DEBBARMA AND OTHER ( Before : J.K. Maheshwari and Rajesh Bindal, JJ. ) Civil Appeal Nos.…
Income Tax Act, 1961 — Section 276C(1) — Wilful attempt to evade tax — Prosecution for wilful attempt to evade tax requires proof of mens rea — Settlement Commission granted immunity from penalty after full disclosure, finding no suppression of facts or wilful evasion — Continuation of prosecution despite settlement order and lack of mens rea amounts to abuse of process of law.
025 INSC 1048 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH VIJAY KRISHNASWAMI @ KRISHNASWAMI VIJAYAKUMAR Vs. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (INVESTIGATION) ( Before : J.K. Maheshwari and Vijay Bishnoi,…
Andhra Pradesh Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, 1963 — Section 3 — Levy of tax — Requirement of motor vehicle being used or kept for use in a ‘public place’ — ‘Public place’ defined under Section 2(34) of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 as a road, street, way or other place to which public has a right of access — Visakhapatnam Steel Plant premises, being a restricted area with controlled access, not a public place — Tax not leviable on vehicles used exclusively within such premises.
025 INSC 1052 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH M/S. TARACHAND LOGISTIC SOLUTIONS LIMITED Vs. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH AND OTHERS ( Before : Manoj Misra and Ujjal Bhuyan, JJ.…
Disciplinary Proceedings — Charges — Proof — Constable found 12 kms from camp when permitted to visit hospital — Detained by civilians due to unwarranted activities affecting reputation of Force — Charge of leaving camp without permission not proved, but being found at distant residential colony instead of hospital and subsequent detention sufficiently proved conduct unbecoming of member of Armed Forces.
2025 INSC 1055 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH CONST. AMAR SINGH Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHER ( Before : Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha and Atul S. Chandurkar, JJ. )…
Evidence Act, 1872 — Appreciation of Evidence — Testimony of victim’s family witnesses admitted no dowry demand until examination-in-chief in court — Neighbour’s testimony stating no dowry demand, although brushed aside by lower courts, is relevant and gains credibility when other evidence is lacking — Reason for discarding neighbour’s testimony as speculative was erroneous, as information about dowry harassment can spread widely.
2025 INSC 1051 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SMT. BHAGWATI DEVI Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND ( Before : Aravind Kumar and N.V. Anjaria, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal No. 2616…
Police Service — Discipline — Unauthorized Absence — Dismissal justified — Unauthorized absence from duty, especially in a disciplined force, constitutes gross indiscipline. When a member of a disciplined force remains absent without permission or intimation for a considerable period, dismissal from service is justified, provided due procedure is followed.
2025 INSC 1056 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS Vs. EX. C. SATPAL SINGH ( Before : J.K. Maheshwari and Vijay Bishnoi, JJ. ) Civil…
Electricity Regulatory Commissions Act, 1998 — Electricity Act, 2003 —Tariff Determination — Supplementary PPA — Execution of Supplementary PPA and Stipulation of Enhanced Tariff without Seeking Commission’s Approval and Review is Unlawful — Parties are Bound to Approach Commission for Approval.
2025 INSC 1057 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH M/S. KKK HYDRO POWER LIMITED Vs. HIMACHAL PRADESH STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD LIMITED AND OTHERS ( Before : Sanjay Kumar and N.V.…
Service Law — Employee’s Plea for Mercy — An employee’s statement pleading innocence and seeking forgiveness for any mistake indirectly admits guilt and warrants mercy. Evidence in Departmental Inquiry — Findings in a departmental inquiry are based on preponderance of probabilities, not strict proof beyond reasonable doubt, and the High Court’s view that findings were based on conjecture and surmises was legally unsustainable if evidence supported the findings
2025 INSC 1010 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH STATE BANK OF INDIA AND OTHERS Vs. RAMADHAR SAO ( Before : Rajesh Bindal and Manmohan, JJ. ) Civil Appeal No.…