Supreme Court Stays Judgment on Gratuity Act Amendment: Birla Institute of Technology vs. State of Jharkhand (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Retrospective application of the amended definition of “employee” under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972. CASE TYPE: Service Law/Gratuity Case Name: Birla Institute of Technology vs. The State of Jharkhand & Ors. Judgment Date: 9 January […]
Supreme Court Restores Civil Suit Dismissed for Default: Kusumben Indersinh Dhupia vs. Sudhaben Biharilalji Bhaiya (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a suit dismissed for default should be restored when the plaintiff demonstrates consistent effort to pursue the case. CASE TYPE: Civil. Case Name: Kusumben Indersinh Dhupia vs. Sudhaben Biharilalji Bhaiya & Anr. Judgment Date: January 9,
Supreme Court Restricts Vehicle Alterations: Regional Transport Officer vs. K. Jayachandra (2019) Date of the Judgment: January 9, 2019 Citation: 2019 INSC 14 Judges: Arun Mishra, J., Vineet Saran, J. Can a vehicle owner modify their vehicle in any way they choose, or are there restrictions? The Supreme Court of India addressed this question in
Supreme Court Holds Hospital Negligent for Lack of Monitoring in Dengue Case Date of the Judgment: 9 January 2019 Citation: Civil Appeal Nos. 227-228 of 2019 (@SLP (C) Nos. 30119-30120 of 2016) Judges: Dr. Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, J. and Hemant Gupta, J. Can a hospital be held liable for negligence if it fails to adequately
Supreme Court Restores Status Quo in Monsanto Patent Dispute: Monsanto Technology LLC vs. Nuziveedu Seeds Ltd. (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Patentability of a man-made DNA construct and its implications on plant varieties. CASE TYPE: Patent Law, Intellectual Property Rights Case Name: Monsanto Technology LLC vs. Nuziveedu Seeds Ltd. [Judgment Date]: January 08, 2019 Date of the
Supreme Court Reinstates CBI Director, Emphasizes Independence: Alok Kumar Verma vs. Union of India (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the Central Vigilance Commission (CVC) and the Union Government can divest the Director of the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) of his powers without the prior consent of the High-Powered Committee. CASE TYPE: Service Law, Public Interest
Supreme Court clarifies the scope of “Gypsum in all its forms” under Rajasthan VAT Act: Additional Commissioner vs. Lohiya Agencies (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Interpretation of the term “Gypsum in all its forms” under the Rajasthan Value Added Tax Act, 2003. CASE TYPE: Tax Law Case Name: The Additional Commissioner (Legal), Commercial Taxes, Rajasthan & Anr.
Supreme Court Directs Regularization Based on Seniority: Union of India vs. Sant Lal LEGAL ISSUE: Whether casual workers are entitled to regularization based on seniority, especially when juniors have been regularized. CASE TYPE: Service Law Case Name: Union of India & Ors. vs. Sant Lal & Ors. Judgment Date: 8 January 2019 Date of the
Supreme Court Upholds Dismissal of Airman for Misconduct: Yogesh Pathania vs. Union of India (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the Armed Forces Tribunal’s decision to uphold the dismissal of an airman for misconduct was legally sound. CASE TYPE: Armed Forces Disciplinary Matter Case Name: Ex. LAC Yogesh Pathania vs. Union of India & Ors. Judgment Date:
Supreme Court Denies Pay Parity for Internal Auditors: Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd. vs. Rajesh Kumar Jindal (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether Internal Auditors are entitled to pay parity with Head Clerks solely based on being in the same group, irrespective of different recruitment methods, qualifications, and duties. CASE TYPE: Service Law Case Name: Punjab State
Supreme Court Denies Pay Parity for Sub Fire Officers: Punjab State Electricity Board vs. Thana Singh (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether Sub Fire Officers are entitled to the same pay scale as other employees within the same group, specifically Head Clerks, Head Clerk-cum-Divisional Accountants, and Internal Auditors. CASE TYPE: Service Law Case Name: Punjab State Electricity
Supreme Court Upholds Commissioner’s Authority, Sets Aside High Court’s Remarks in Liquor License Case (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a High Court can pass adverse remarks against an appellate authority and issue anticipatory directions in a matter related to liquor licenses. CASE TYPE: Excise Law, Administrative Law Case Name: Manish S. Pardasani (M/s Wine Kornder) etc.
