P. Sathasivam

Supreme Court Upholds Dismissal for Employee Convicted of Moral Turpitude Despite Probation: Sushil Kumar Singhal vs. Punjab National Bank (2010)

/ B.S. Chauhan, Banking Regulation Act, 1949, Banking Regulation Act, 1949 with Section 10(1)(b)(i), Dismissal from Service, Judges, Moral Turpitude, P. Sathasivam, Probation of Offenders Act, 1958, Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 with Section 12, Service Law

LEGAL ISSUE: Whether an employee convicted of an offense involving moral turpitude can be dismissed from service, despite being granted probation under the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958. CASE TYPE: Service Law Case Name: Sushil Kumar Singhal vs. The Regional Manager, Punjab National Bank Judgment Date: 10 August 2010 Date of the Judgment: 10 August […]

Supreme Court Upholds Dismissal for Employee Convicted of Moral Turpitude Despite Probation: Sushil Kumar Singhal vs. Punjab National Bank (2010) 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 Conviction in Bribery Case: State of A.P. vs. P. Satyanarayana Murthy (2008)

/ Aftab Alam, Arijit Pasayat, Bribery, Corruption, Criminal Law, Judges, P. Sathasivam, Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 with Section 13(1)(d)(i), Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 with Section 13(2), Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 with Section 20

Introduction Date of the Judgment: October 3, 2008 Citation: [INSC Citation to be added when available] Judges: Dr. Arijit Pasayat, J., P. Sathasivam, J., Aftab Alam, J. Can a High Court overturn a trial court’s conviction based on a differing view of evidence when a public servant is caught red-handed accepting a bribe? The Supreme

Supreme Court Upholds Conviction in Bribery Case: State of A.P. vs. P. Satyanarayana Murthy (2008) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies medical college admission rules in Maharashtra: State of Maharashtra & Ors. vs. Sneha Satyanarayan Agrawal & Ors. (2008)

/ Education Law, Education Law with Rule 1.4, Judges, K.G. Balakrishnan, Medical Admissions, P. Sathasivam

Introduction Date of the Judgment: October 1, 2008 Citation: Where available, provide the case citation in the Indian Supreme Court (INSC) format. Judges: K.G. Balakrishnan, CJI, P. Sathasivam, J. When a student seeks admission to a medical college, how should the rules regarding state and regional quotas be applied? The Supreme Court of India addressed

Supreme Court clarifies medical college admission rules in Maharashtra: State of Maharashtra & Ors. vs. Sneha Satyanarayan Agrawal & Ors. (2008) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies scope of Section 149 IPC in unlawful assembly case: Maranadu and Anr. vs. State of Tamil Nadu (2008)

/ Aftab Alam, Dr. ARIJIT PASAYAT, Indian Explosives Act, 1884, Indian Explosives Act, 1884 with Section 9(b)1(b), Indian Penal Code, 1860, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 149, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 302, Judges, Offences Against Public Tranquillity, P. Sathasivam

Introduction Date of the Judgment: September 15, 2008 Citation: [Not Available in Source] Judges: Dr. Arijit Pasayat, J., P. Sathasivam, J., Aftab Alam, J. When can presence in an unlawful assembly lead to conviction, even without direct participation in the crime? The Supreme Court of India addressed this question in Maranadu and Anr. v. State

Supreme Court clarifies scope of Section 149 IPC in unlawful assembly case: Maranadu and Anr. vs. State of Tamil Nadu (2008) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies the scope of appellate court powers in acquittal appeals: State of U.P. vs. Awdhesh (2008)

/ Aftab Alam, Arijit Pasayat, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 395, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 396, Judges, P. Sathasivam

Introduction Date of the Judgment: September 9, 2008 Judges: Dr. Arijit Pasayat, J., P. Sathasivam, J., Aftab Alam, J. Can an appellate court overturn an acquittal? The Supreme Court of India addressed this critical question in the case of State of U.P. v. Awdhesh, concerning the scope of powers vested in appellate courts when reviewing

Supreme Court clarifies the scope of appellate court powers in acquittal appeals: State of U.P. vs. Awdhesh (2008) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Amended Promotion Rules for UP Higher Judicial Service: V.K. Srivastava vs. Govt. of U.P. (2008)

/ Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 233, J.M. Panchal, Judges, K.G. Balakrishnan, Merit-cum-Seniority, P. Sathasivam, Promotion Rules, Retrospective Application, Service Law

Introduction Date of the Judgment: 4th September 2008 The Supreme Court of India, in V.K. Srivastava & Ors. vs. Govt. of U.P. & Anr., addressed a critical question regarding the retrospective application of amended service rules concerning promotions within the Uttar Pradesh Higher Judicial Service. This case highlights the conflict between established seniority rights and

Supreme Court Upholds Amended Promotion Rules for UP Higher Judicial Service: V.K. Srivastava vs. Govt. of U.P. (2008) Read Post »

Supreme Court Review: Re-examining the Appointment of Teachers in Aided Institutions: State of West Bengal vs. Brahmo Samaj Education Society (31st July 2008)

/ Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 19(1)(6), Constitutional Law with Article 19(1)(g), Education Law, Fundamental Rights, J.M. Panchal, Judges, K.G. Balakrishnan, P. Sathasivam, West Bengal College Service Commission Act, 1978

Introduction Date of the Judgment: 31st July 2008 The Supreme Court of India decided to review its earlier judgment in Brahmo Samaj Education Society & Ors. Vs. State of West Bengal & Ors., (2004) 6 SCC 224. The central question revolved around the extent of autonomy that aided minority institutions have in appointing teachers, particularly

Supreme Court Review: Re-examining the Appointment of Teachers in Aided Institutions: State of West Bengal vs. Brahmo Samaj Education Society (31st July 2008) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Acquittal in 1986 Assault Case Due to Delayed FIR: State of Punjab vs. Mohinder Singh (26 June 2008)

/ Criminal Procedure Code, First Information Report, Indian Penal Code, Indian Penal Code with Section 307, Judges, P. Sathasivam, R.V. Raveendran

Was a four-day delay in filing a First Information Report (FIR) fatal to the prosecution’s case? The Supreme Court of India addressed this question in an appeal concerning an assault that occurred in 1986. The Court upheld the acquittal of the accused, emphasizing the lack of satisfactory explanation for the delay in registering the FIR.

Supreme Court Upholds Acquittal in 1986 Assault Case Due to Delayed FIR: State of Punjab vs. Mohinder Singh (26 June 2008) Read Post »

Supreme Court Restores Order of Land Reforms Appellate Authority in Karnataka Land Reforms Act Case: Arun Kumar vs. State of Karnataka (2008)

/ Dr. ARIJIT PASAYAT, Judges, Karnataka Land Reforms Act, 1961, Karnataka Land Reforms Act, 1961 with Section 121(A), Karnataka Land Reforms Act, 1961 with Section 41, Karnataka Land Reforms Act, 1961 with Section 7, P. Sathasivam

Date of the Judgment: April 7, 2008 Judges: Dr. Arijit Pasayat, J., P. Sathasivam, J. In a dispute concerning land rights under the Karnataka Land Reforms Act, 1961, the Supreme Court of India addressed the legality of the High Court of Karnataka’s order that had overturned the decision of the Land Reforms Appellate Authority, Dharwad.

Supreme Court Restores Order of Land Reforms Appellate Authority in Karnataka Land Reforms Act Case: Arun Kumar vs. State of Karnataka (2008) Read Post »

Supreme Court Denies Parity in Service Benefits between Army Personnel and GREF Officers: Ramesh Singh vs. Union of India (2008)

/ Aftab Alam, Arijit Pasayat, Constitution of India, Constitution of India with Article 32, Fundamental Rights, Judges, P. Sathasivam, Parity in Service Benefits, Pay Commission Recommendations, Service Law

Introduction Date of the Judgment: March 11, 2008 Judges: Dr. Arijit Pasayat, J., P. Sathasivam, J., Aftab Alam, J. Should employees of the Border Roads Organisation (BRO) receive the same service benefits as members of the Armed Forces? The Supreme Court of India addressed this question in Ramesh Singh v. Union of India, a case

Supreme Court Denies Parity in Service Benefits between Army Personnel and GREF Officers: Ramesh Singh vs. Union of India (2008) Read Post »

Supreme Court settles the maintainability of Section 33-C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 for daily wagers claiming bonus: H.P. State Electricity Board vs. Ranjeet Singh (2008)

/ Dr. ARIJIT PASAYAT, Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 with Section 33-C(2), Judges, P. Sathasivam, Payment of Bonus Act, 1965, Payment of Bonus Act, 1965 with Section 10, Payment of Bonus Act, 1965 with Section 2(11), Payment of Bonus Act, 1965 with Section 8

Introduction Date of the Judgment: March 5, 2008 Judges: Dr. Arijit Pasayat, J., P. Sathasivam, J. Can daily wage employees claim statutory bonus through an application under Section 33-C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947? The Supreme Court addressed this question in a batch of appeals concerning the Himachal Pradesh State Electricity Board’s denial of

Supreme Court settles the maintainability of Section 33-C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 for daily wagers claiming bonus: H.P. State Electricity Board vs. Ranjeet Singh (2008) Read Post »

Scroll to Top