Supreme Court Orders Regularization of Ad-hoc Employees: Rajnish Kumar Mishra vs. State of Uttar Pradesh (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether ad-hoc employees who have worked for more than 10 years are entitled to regularization. CASE TYPE: Service Law Case Name: Rajnish Kumar Mishra & Ors. vs. State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors. Judgment Date: 13 December […]
Supreme Court Clarifies Regularization and Promotion Rights for Ad-Hoc Employees: Siraj Ahmad vs. State of Uttar Pradesh (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether prior ad-hoc service of an employee appointed through a selection process can be counted for promotion after regularization, even if the initial appointment lacked formal concurrence from the Public Service Commission. CASE TYPE: Service
Supreme Court Orders Grace Marks in Haryana Civil Judge Exam: Pranav Verma & Ors vs. High Court of Punjab and Haryana (2019) Date of the Judgment: 13 December 2019 Citation: (2019) INSC 982 Judges: S. A. Bobde, CJI., B.R. Gavai, J., Surya Kant, J. Can a flawed evaluation process justify awarding grace marks to candidates?
Supreme Court grants parity in land acquisition compensation despite delay: Ningappa Thotappa Angadi vs. Special Land Acquisition Officer (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a land owner who did not appeal a High Court order in a timely manner can receive the same compensation as other land owners who did appeal promptly in the same land acquisition
Supreme Court Orders Fresh Delimitation for Newly Formed Tamil Nadu Districts: Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) vs. Secretary, Governors Secretariat (06 December 2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the creation of new districts in Tamil Nadu necessitates a fresh delimitation exercise before local body elections can be conducted. CASE TYPE: Election Law, Constitutional Law Case Name: Dravida Munnetra
Supreme Court Upholds Sales Tax on Time Charter Agreements: Great Eastern Shipping Co. Ltd. vs. State of Karnataka (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a time charter agreement constitutes a transfer of the right to use goods, thereby attracting sales tax. CASE TYPE: Tax Law, Sales Tax Case Name: The Great Eastern Shipping Co. Ltd. vs. State
Supreme Court Upholds APERC’s Power to Determine Wheeling and Grid Support Charges: Transmission Corporation of Andhra Pradesh Limited vs. M/S Rain Calcining Limited & Others (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the Andhra Pradesh Electricity Regulatory Commission (APERC) has the authority to determine wheeling charges and grid support charges under the Andhra Pradesh Electricity Reforms Act, 1998.
Supreme Court Upholds Conviction in Homicidal Death Case: Kalu vs. State of Madhya Pradesh (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the death was homicidal or suicidal in nature and the burden of proof in cases of unnatural death within the matrimonial home. CASE TYPE: Criminal Case Name: Kalu alias Laxminarayan vs. State of Madhya Pradesh Judgment Date:
Supreme Court Halts Housing Project Near Sukhna Wildlife Sanctuary Date of the Judgment: 5 November 2019 Citation: 2019 INSC 1151 Judges: Arun Mishra, J., M.R. Shah, J., B.R. Gavai, J. (authored by Arun Mishra, J.) Can a housing project be allowed to proceed when it is located a mere 123 meters from a wildlife sanctuary?
Supreme Court Clarifies Applicability of Limitation Act in Himachal Pradesh VAT Revisions LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the High Court can condone delays in filing revisions under Section 48 of the Himachal Pradesh Value Added Tax Act, 2005. CASE TYPE: Tax Law Case Name: Superintending Engineer/ Dehar Power House Circle Bhakra Beas Management Board (PW) Slapper &
Supreme Court Upholds Possession Despite Irregular Police Assistance in Execution: Om Parkash vs. Amar Singh (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether delivery of possession of a property to a decree holder with police assistance is invalid if the court did not specifically order such police assistance. CASE TYPE: Civil Execution Case Name: Om Parkash and Another vs.
Supreme Court Clarifies Land Acquisition Rights of Subsequent Purchasers: Shiv Kumar vs. Union of India (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Can a person who purchases land after a notification for acquisition under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, claim the benefits of Section 24 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition,
