Author name: G.R. Hari

Supreme Court settles norms for sanctioning Junior Assistant posts in minority schools: State of Tamil Nadu vs. Amala Annai Higher Secondary School (28 August 2009)

/ Conditions of Service, Constitutional Law, Judges, R.M. Lodha, Sanction of Posts, Service Law, Tarun Chatterjee, Writ Petition

Introduction Date of the Judgment: 28 August 2009 Judges: Tarun Chatterjee, R.M. Lodha Imagine a school struggling to get approval for a staff member. Does the government have the final say, even years after the initial request? The Supreme Court of India addressed this very issue in a case involving Amala Annai Higher Secondary School, […]

Supreme Court settles norms for sanctioning Junior Assistant posts in minority schools: State of Tamil Nadu vs. Amala Annai Higher Secondary School (28 August 2009) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies conditions for stay on eviction orders during appeals: State of Maharashtra vs. M/s. Super Max International Pvt. Ltd. (27 August 2009)

/ Aftab Alam, B.N. Agrawal, Bombay Rent Act, 1947, Bombay Rent Act, 1947 with Section 13(1)(g), Bombay Rent Act, 1947 with Section 13(3)(a), Eviction Orders, G.S. Singhvi, Judges

Date of the Judgment: 27 August 2009 Citation: Where available, provide the case citation in the Indian Supreme Court (INSC) format. Judges: B.N. Agrawal, G.S. Singhvi, Aftab Alam Can a High Court impose conditions, such as requiring a tenant to pay an amount exceeding the contractual rent, for staying an eviction order during the pendency

Supreme Court clarifies conditions for stay on eviction orders during appeals: State of Maharashtra vs. M/s. Super Max International Pvt. Ltd. (27 August 2009) Read Post »

Supreme Court acquits appellant due to non-compliance of Section 13(2) of Prevention of Food Adulteration Act in milk adulteration case: Mohd. Zafar vs. State of Uttarakhand (2009) INSC 123 (18 August 2009)

/ Dr. B.S. Chauhan, Harjit Singh Bedi, Judges, Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, Prevention of Food Adulteration Act with Section 13(2), Prevention of Food Adulteration Act with Section 16(1)(a)(ii), Prevention of Food Adulteration Act with Section 7(i)

Date of the Judgment: 18 August 2009 Citation: Mohd. Zafar vs. State of Uttarakhand (2009) INSC 123 Judges: Harjit Singh Bedi, J., Dr. B.S. Chauhan, J. In a significant ruling concerning food adulteration laws, the Supreme Court addressed the critical issue of ensuring fair trial rights to an accused. The case revolves around the alleged

Supreme Court acquits appellant due to non-compliance of Section 13(2) of Prevention of Food Adulteration Act in milk adulteration case: Mohd. Zafar vs. State of Uttarakhand (2009) INSC 123 (18 August 2009) Read Post »

Railway Employee Misconduct: Supreme Court clarifies principles of natural justice in disciplinary proceedings (28th May 2009)

/ B.S. Chauhan, Judges, Mukundakam Sharma, Railway Service Conduct Rules, 1966, Retiral Benefits, Reversion, Rule 3(i)(ii), Railway Service Conduct Rules, 1966, Rule 3(i)(iii), Railway Service Conduct Rules, 1966, Service Law, Suspension

Introduction Date of the Judgment: 28th May 2009 Citation: Where available, provide the case citation in the Indian Supreme Court (INSC) format. Judges: Hon’ble Dr. Justice Mukundakam Sharma, Hon’ble Dr. Justice B.S. Chauhan Can a disciplinary inquiry be sustained on vague charges? The Supreme Court in Union of India & Ors. vs. Gyan Chand Chattar

Railway Employee Misconduct: Supreme Court clarifies principles of natural justice in disciplinary proceedings (28th May 2009) Read Post »

Supreme Court Orders Allotment of Housing Board House After Unjustified Exclusion: Umesh Pandey vs. Bihar State Housing Board (2009)

/ Administrative Law, B.N. Agrawal, Fairness, G.S. Singhvi, Judges, Natural Justice

Can a housing board deny allotment of a house based on a minor defect in an affidavit without giving an opportunity to rectify it? The Supreme Court of India addressed this question in a case where an applicant was excluded from a housing lottery due to an alleged defect in the submitted affidavit. The Court

Supreme Court Orders Allotment of Housing Board House After Unjustified Exclusion: Umesh Pandey vs. Bihar State Housing Board (2009) Read Post »

Essential Commodities Act: Supreme Court clarifies company liability in Essential Commodities Act violations (2009)

/ Arijit Pasayat, Ashok Kumar Ganguly, Criminal Procedure Code, Criminal Procedure Code with Section 173, Essential Commodities Act, 1955, Essential Commodities Act, 1955 with Section 10, Essential Commodities Act, 1955 with Section 7, Judges, Offences by Companies

Can individuals in charge of a company be prosecuted separately if the company violates the Essential Commodities Act, 1955, even if the company itself isn’t prosecuted? The Supreme Court of India addressed this question in an appeal concerning alleged violations of the Act related to misdeclaration of fiber compositions in textiles. Justices Arijit Pasayat and

Essential Commodities Act: Supreme Court clarifies company liability in Essential Commodities Act violations (2009) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Attempt to Murder Conviction in Gruesome Assault Case: State of M.P. vs. Kashiram & Ors. (2009)

/ Asok Kumar Ganguly, Attempt to Murder, Criminal Law, Criminal Procedure, Dr. ARIJIT PASAYAT, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 307, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 326, Judges, Offences Against Human Body

LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the act of chopping off a person’s leg constitutes an attempt to murder under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. CASE TYPE: Criminal Law Case Name: State of M.P. vs. Kashiram & Ors. Judgment Date: 2nd February 2009 Date of the Judgment: 2nd February 2009 Citation: 2009 INSC 191 Judges:

Supreme Court Upholds Attempt to Murder Conviction in Gruesome Assault Case: State of M.P. vs. Kashiram & Ors. (2009) Read Post »

Supreme Court settles the protection of retiral benefits from attachment in execution of decree: Radhey Shyam Gupta vs. Punjab National Bank (2008)

/ Altamas Kabir, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 with Section 60, Judges, Markandey Katju

Date of the Judgment: 4th November, 2008 Judges: Altamas Kabir, J., Markandey Katju, J. The Supreme Court addressed the question of whether retiral benefits, specifically pension and gratuity, can be attached for the satisfaction of a court decree, even after these benefits have been converted into fixed deposits. This appeal arose from a case where

Supreme Court settles the protection of retiral benefits from attachment in execution of decree: Radhey Shyam Gupta vs. Punjab National Bank (2008) Read Post »

Supreme Court settles Railway Employee Seniority Dispute in Non-Technical Clerical Category Selection (21st October 2008)

/ Administrative Law, Administrative Law with Central Administrative Tribunal (Procedure) Rules, 1987, Rule 17, Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT), Central Administrative Tribunal (Procedure) Rules, 1987, Employee Seniority, J.M. Panchal, Judges, K.G. Balakrishnan, Limitation Act, 1963, Limitation Act, 1963 with Section 5, P. Sathasivam, Railway Law, Railway Law with Rule 303, Railway Recruitment Board (RRB)

Date of the Judgment: 21st October 2008 Judges: K.G. Balakrishnan, P. Sathasivam, J.M. Panchal Can seniority be claimed retroactively by railway employees appointed years after the initial selection process due to alleged malpractices? The Supreme Court addressed this issue in a set of appeals concerning the selection of Non-Technical Popular Clerical Category employees in the

Supreme Court settles Railway Employee Seniority Dispute in Non-Technical Clerical Category Selection (21st October 2008) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Abolishment of Media Prabhari Post: State of U.P. vs. Diwakar Khare (2008)

/ Abolition of Post, Aftab Alam, Interim Relief, Judges, Service Law, Tarun Chatterjee

Introduction Date of the Judgment: October 03, 2008 Citation: [Not Available in Source] Judges: Tarun Chatterjee, J., Aftab Alam, J. Can a High Court grant interim relief allowing someone to continue in a post that has already been abolished by the government? The Supreme Court of India addressed this critical question in the case of

Supreme Court Upholds Abolishment of Media Prabhari Post: State of U.P. vs. Diwakar Khare (2008) Read Post »

Supreme Court settles criteria for Professor appointment in Universities: B.C. Mylarappa vs. Dr. R. Venkatasubbaiah (2008)

/ Appointment, Education Law, Harjit Singh Bedi, Judges, Professor Eligibility, Research Experience, Seniority, Service Law, Tarun Chatterjee, University Appointments

“`html Date of the Judgment: October 03, 2008 Citation: [Not Available in Source] Judges: Tarun Chatterjee, J., Harjit Singh Bedi, J. Can prior experience as a Research Assistant be considered equivalent to postgraduate teaching experience when applying for the post of Professor in a University? The Supreme Court of India addressed this critical question in

Supreme Court settles criteria for Professor appointment in Universities: B.C. Mylarappa vs. Dr. R. Venkatasubbaiah (2008) Read Post »

Scroll to Top