Constitutional Law with Article 311(2)

Supreme Court Reinstates Terminated Women Judicial Officers, Emphasizes Fair Probation Assessment: Sarita Choudhary vs. High Court of Madhya Pradesh (28 February 2025)

/ B. V. Nagarathna, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 311(2), Judges, Madhya Pradesh Judicial Service Rules, 1994, Madhya Pradesh Judicial Service Rules, 1994 with Rule 11, Nongmeikapam Kotiswar Singh

Date of the Judgment: 28 February 2025 Judges: B. V. Nagarathna, Nongmeikapam Kotiswar Singh The Supreme Court of India addressed the termination of two women judicial officers during their probation period, examining whether the High Court’s actions were punitive or arbitrary. The Court considered the importance of fair probation assessments and the need for a […]

Supreme Court Reinstates Terminated Women Judicial Officers, Emphasizes Fair Probation Assessment: Sarita Choudhary vs. High Court of Madhya Pradesh (28 February 2025) Read Post »

Supreme Court quashes penalty for Senior Medical Officer: Bhupinderpal Singh Gill vs. State of Punjab (20 January 2025)

/ Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 14, Constitutional Law with Article 311(2), Dipankar Datta, Disciplinary Proceedings, Fundamental Rights, Judges, Manmohan, Pension, Punjab Civil Services (Punishment & Appeal Rules, 1970), Punjab Civil Services (Punishment & Appeal Rules, 1970) with Rule 8, Retirement Benefits, Service Law

Supreme Court quashes penalty for Senior Medical Officer: Bhupinderpal Singh Gill vs. State of Punjab (2025) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether disciplinary proceedings initiated against a public servant just before retirement and the subsequent penalty imposed were justified. CASE TYPE: Service Law Case Name: Bhupinderpal Singh Gill vs. State of Punjab and Others [Judgment Date]: 20 January

Supreme Court quashes penalty for Senior Medical Officer: Bhupinderpal Singh Gill vs. State of Punjab (20 January 2025) Read Post »

Supreme Court Allows Voluntary Retirement for Absentee Doctors, Denies Back Pay (2024)

/ Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 142, Constitutional Law with Article 311(2), Service Law, Service Law with Termination of Employment, Voluntary Retirement Scheme

Supreme Court Allows Voluntary Retirement for Absentee Doctors, Denies Back Pay (2024) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the termination of employment of doctors who remained absent from duty, without deciding on their pending Voluntary Retirement Scheme (VRS) applications, was justified under Article 311(2)(b) of the Constitution of India. CASE TYPE: Service Law Case Name: State of U.P.

Supreme Court Allows Voluntary Retirement for Absentee Doctors, Denies Back Pay (2024) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Dismissal of ISRO Scientist Without Inquiry for Security Reasons: Dr. V.R. Sanal Kumar vs. Union of India (2023)

/ C.T. Ravikumar, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 311(2), Department of Space Employees’ (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1976, Department of Space Employees’ (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1976 with Rule 16(iii), Dismissal of Employee, Judges, Judicial Review, M.R. Shah, National Security, Service Law

Supreme Court Upholds Dismissal for Security Reasons in ISRO Case (2023) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the dismissal of a government employee without a formal inquiry is justified in the interest of state security. CASE TYPE: Service Law, involving national security concerns Case Name: Dr. V.R. Sanal Kumar vs. Union of India & Ors. [Judgment Date]: May

Supreme Court Upholds Dismissal of ISRO Scientist Without Inquiry for Security Reasons: Dr. V.R. Sanal Kumar vs. Union of India (2023) Read Post »

Supreme Court reinstates judicial officer discharged during probation: Abhay Jain vs. High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan (2022)

/ Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 14, Constitutional Law with Article 311(2), Judges, Probation, Rajasthan Judicial Service Rules, 2010, Service Law, Uday Umesh Lalit, Vineet Saran

Supreme Court reinstates judicial officer discharged during probation: Abhay Jain vs. High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the discharge of a judicial officer during probation was a simple discharge or punitive action. CASE TYPE: Service Law Case Name: Abhay Jain vs. The High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan and Anr. Judgment

Supreme Court reinstates judicial officer discharged during probation: Abhay Jain vs. High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan (2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court Clarifies Procedure for Imposing Major Penalties in Bank Service Rules: State Bank of India vs. B.R. Saini (2017)

/ Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 311(2), Disciplinary Proceedings, Judges, L. Nageswara Rao, Principles of Natural Justice, Rule 68(3), State Bank of India Officers Service Rules, S.A. Bobde, Service Law, State Bank of India Officers Service Rules

LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a second show-cause notice is required before imposing a major penalty on a bank employee after the disciplinary authority has already provided the inquiry report and an opportunity to respond. CASE TYPE: Service Law Case Name: State Bank of India & Ors. vs. B.R. Saini Judgment Date: 15 December 2017 Date of

Supreme Court Clarifies Procedure for Imposing Major Penalties in Bank Service Rules: State Bank of India vs. B.R. Saini (2017) Read Post »

Supreme Court Quashes Removal Order for Lack of Documents: State of U.P. vs. Saroj Kumar Sinha (2010)

/ Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 311(2), Disciplinary Proceedings, Judges, Natural Justice, Service Law, Surinder Singh Nijjar, U.P. Government Servant (Discipline & Appeal) Rules, 1999, U.P. Government Servant (Discipline & Appeal) Rules, 1999 with Rule 7, V.S. Sirpurkar

LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a disciplinary inquiry is valid if the charged employee is not provided with the necessary documents relied upon in the charge sheet. CASE TYPE: Service Law Case Name: State of U.P. & Ors. vs. Saroj Kumar Sinha [Judgment Date]: 2nd February 2010 Date of the Judgment: 2nd February 2010 Citation: (2010) INSC

Supreme Court Quashes Removal Order for Lack of Documents: State of U.P. vs. Saroj Kumar Sinha (2010) Read Post »

Scroll to Top