Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud

Supreme Court mandates Invalidating Medical Board for discharge on medical grounds: Smt. Sulekha Rani vs. Union of India (2019) INSC 690 (16 July 2019)

/ Armed Forces Tribunal, Army Rules, 1954, Army Rules, 1954 with Rule 13, Army Rules, 1954 with Rule 14, Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, Indira Banerjee, Judges

Supreme Court Rules Invalidating Medical Board Mandatory for Discharge on Medical Grounds Date of the Judgment: 16 July 2019 Citation: (2019) INSC 690 Judges: Dr. Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, J and Indira Banerjee, J. Can a member of the armed forces be discharged from service on medical grounds without an Invalidating Medical Board? The Supreme Court […]

Supreme Court mandates Invalidating Medical Board for discharge on medical grounds: Smt. Sulekha Rani vs. Union of India (2019) INSC 690 (16 July 2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court settles pension eligibility for cooperative bank employees: Issac T M vs. Idukki District Co-operative Bank Ltd (2019) INSC 596

/ Cooperative Bank Employees Pension, Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, Indira Banerjee, Judges, Pension Arrears, Pension Eligibility, Pension Law, State Co-operative Bank and District Co-operative Bank Employees Self Financing Pension Scheme 2005, State Co-operative Bank and District Co-operative Bank Employees Self Financing Pension Scheme 2005 with Para 19, State Co-operative Bank and District Co-operative Bank Employees Self Financing Pension Scheme 2005 with Para 5

Supreme Court rules on pension eligibility for cooperative bank employees: Issac T M vs. Idukki District Co-operative Bank Ltd (2019) INSC 596 Date of the Judgment: 12 July 2019 Citation: (2019) INSC 596 Judges: Dr. Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, J and Indira Banerjee, J Can a delay by a cooperative bank in remitting an employee’s pension

Supreme Court settles pension eligibility for cooperative bank employees: Issac T M vs. Idukki District Co-operative Bank Ltd (2019) INSC 596 Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies consumer status under the Consumer Protection Act in REP license claims: The Secretary, Ministry of Commerce & Ors. vs. M/s Vinod and Company (2019)

/ Consumer, Consumer Protection Act, 1986, Consumer Protection Act, 1986 with Section 2(1)(d), Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, Judges, M.R. Shah, Service

Supreme Court clarifies consumer status under the Consumer Protection Act in REP license claims (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a person making a claim under an REP license is a consumer under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. CASE TYPE: Consumer Law Case Name: The Secretary, Ministry of Commerce & Ors. vs. M/s Vinod and Company [Judgment

Supreme Court clarifies consumer status under the Consumer Protection Act in REP license claims: The Secretary, Ministry of Commerce & Ors. vs. M/s Vinod and Company (2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Dismissal for Negligent Weapon Handling in CRPF: Union of India vs. Sitaram Mishra (2019)

/ Central Reserve Police Force Act, 1949, Central Reserve Police Force Act, 1949 with Section 11(1), Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, Disciplinary Proceedings, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 304, Indira Banerjee, Judges, Negligence, Service Law

Supreme Court Upholds Dismissal for Negligent Weapon Handling in CRPF: Union of India vs. Sitaram Mishra (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a member of the Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF) can be dismissed for negligently handling a weapon, resulting in a co-worker’s death, despite being acquitted in a criminal trial for the same incident. CASE TYPE:

Supreme Court Upholds Dismissal for Negligent Weapon Handling in CRPF: Union of India vs. Sitaram Mishra (2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court Orders Disclosure of APAR Entries for Promotion Consideration: Pankaj Prakash vs. United India Insurance Co Ltd (2019)

/ Annual Performance Appraisal Report (APAR), Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 226, Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, Indira Banerjee, Judges, Promotion, Service Law, Service Law with APAR

Supreme Court Orders Disclosure of APAR Entries for Promotion Consideration: Pankaj Prakash vs. United India Insurance Co Ltd (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether non-communication of Annual Performance Appraisal Report (APAR) entries to an employee affects their promotion prospects. CASE TYPE: Service Law Case Name: Pankaj Prakash vs. United India Insurance Co Ltd & Anr [Judgment Date]:

Supreme Court Orders Disclosure of APAR Entries for Promotion Consideration: Pankaj Prakash vs. United India Insurance Co Ltd (2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Termination of Headmistress After Disciplinary Inquiry: Shri Yogiraj Shikshan Prasarak Mandal vs. Vidya (2019)

/ Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, Disciplinary Inquiry, Indira Banerjee, Judges, Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Service) Rules, 1981, Rule 37(6), Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Service) Rules, 1981, Service Law

Supreme Court Upholds Termination of Headmistress After Disciplinary Inquiry: Shri Yogiraj Shikshan Prasarak Mandal vs. Vidya (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the inquiry committee followed the correct procedure in a disciplinary inquiry against an employee. CASE TYPE: Service Law Case Name: Shri Yogiraj Shikshan Prasarak Mandal & Ors. vs. Vidya (Dead) Thru Lrs. & Anr. Judgment

Supreme Court Upholds Termination of Headmistress After Disciplinary Inquiry: Shri Yogiraj Shikshan Prasarak Mandal vs. Vidya (2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies the competency of child witnesses in murder cases: Ramesh vs. State (2019)

/ Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 with Section 164, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 with Section 374, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 with Section 386, Competency of Witnesses, Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, Indian Evidence Act, 1872, Indian Evidence Act, 1872 with Section 118, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 302, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 498A, Indira Banerjee, Judges, Offences Against Human Body

Supreme Court Clarifies Child Witness Competency in Murder Trial: Ramesh vs. State (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Determining the competency of child witnesses in criminal trials. CASE TYPE: Criminal Case Name: P. Ramesh vs. State Rep by Inspector of Police [Judgment Date]: July 9, 2019 Date of the Judgment: July 9, 2019 Citation: 2019 INSC 678 Judges:

Supreme Court clarifies the competency of child witnesses in murder cases: Ramesh vs. State (2019) Read Post »

Summary Court Martial Powers: Supreme Court clarifies procedure in Randhir Singh vs Union of India (2019)

/ Army Act, 1950, Army Act, 1950 with Section 120, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 142, Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, Indira Banerjee, Judges, Summary Court Martial

Supreme Court on Summary Court Martial: Randhir Singh vs Union of India (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a Summary Court Martial (SCM) was validly convened when there was no grave reason for immediate action. CASE TYPE: Armed Forces Law Case Name: Randhir Singh vs. Union of India & Ors. Judgment Date: July 8, 2019 Date of

Summary Court Martial Powers: Supreme Court clarifies procedure in Randhir Singh vs Union of India (2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies rules for ad-hoc teacher appointments in aided schools: Raman Singh Case (2019)

/ Ad-hoc Appointments, Aided Schools, Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, Education Law, Indira Banerjee, Judges, Regular Appointments, Service Law, Teacher Appointments, UP Secondary Education Services Selection Board Act 1982, UP Secondary Education Services Selection Board Act 1982 with Section 18

Supreme Court Rules on Ad-Hoc Teacher Appointment: Raman Singh Case (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether an ad-hoc appointment in a leave vacancy can be converted to a substantive appointment upon the death of the regularly appointed candidate. CASE TYPE: Education Law, Service Law Case Name: Raman Singh vs. The District Inspector of Schools, Jalaun at Orai

Supreme Court clarifies rules for ad-hoc teacher appointments in aided schools: Raman Singh Case (2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court permits Airman to continue Bank Job despite procedural lapse: Amit Kumar Roy vs. Union of India (2019)

/ Armed Forces, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 142, Constitutional Law with Article 33, Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, Fundamental Rights, Hemant Gupta, Judges, Service Law, Service Law with Air Force Act 1950, Service Law with Air Force Order 14/2008

Supreme Court permits Airman to continue Bank Job despite procedural lapse: Amit Kumar Roy vs. Union of India (2019) Date of the Judgment: 03 July 2019 Citation: Amit Kumar Roy vs. Union of India & Ors, Civil Appeal Nos 4605 – 4606 of 2019 (D No 27372/2015) Judges: Dr. Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, J and Hemant

Supreme Court permits Airman to continue Bank Job despite procedural lapse: Amit Kumar Roy vs. Union of India (2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court on Consumer Complaint Dismissal for Technical Reasons: Vibha Bakshi Gokhale vs. Gruhashilp Constructions (2019)

/ Consumer Complaint, Consumer Law, Consumer Protection Act, 1986, Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, Hemant Gupta, Judges

Supreme Court on Consumer Complaint Dismissal for Technical Reasons: Vibha Bakshi Gokhale vs. Gruhashilp Constructions (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) can dismiss a consumer complaint on technical grounds without considering the merits of the case. CASE TYPE: Consumer Law Case Name: Vibha Bakshi Gokhale & Anr. vs. M/s Gruhashilp

Supreme Court on Consumer Complaint Dismissal for Technical Reasons: Vibha Bakshi Gokhale vs. Gruhashilp Constructions (2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Karnataka Reservation Act 2018: B.K. Pavitra II (May 10, 2019)

/ Consequential Seniority, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 16, Constitutional Law with Article 335, Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, Fundamental Rights, Judges, Reservation in Promotions, Seniority Rules, Service Law, Uday Umesh Lalit

Supreme Court Upholds Reservation Act 2018: B.K. Pavitra II LEGAL ISSUE: Validity of the Karnataka Extension of Consequential Seniority Act, 2018. CASE TYPE: Service Law, Reservation in Promotions. Case Name: B.K. Pavitra and Ors. vs. The Union of India and Ors. Judgment Date: May 10, 2019 Date of the Judgment: May 10, 2019 Citation: Not

Supreme Court Upholds Karnataka Reservation Act 2018: B.K. Pavitra II (May 10, 2019) Read Post »

Scroll to Top