Supreme Court Orders Reinstatement with Modified Pay for KVS Employee: Mangilal Kajodia vs. Union of India (2020) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether an employee of Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan (KVS) can be removed from service for not joining a transfer location, and what relief can be granted if the removal is deemed too harsh. CASE TYPE: Service Law […]
Can a Higher Authority Impose Penalties? Supreme Court Clarifies in Canara Bank vs. Kameshwar Singh (2020) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a higher authority can impose penalties in disciplinary proceedings. CASE TYPE: Service Law, Disciplinary Proceedings Case Name: Canara Bank and Ors. vs. Kameshwar Singh Judgment Date: 08 January 2020 Date of the Judgment: 08 January 2020
Supreme Court Upholds Denial of Pension for Interrupted Service: Surinder Nath Kesar vs. Board of School Education (2020) Date of the Judgment: January 6, 2020 Citation: 2020 INSC 14 Judges: Ashok Bhushan, J., M.R. Shah, J. Can a break in service, even if condoned by an employer, guarantee pension benefits if the relevant service rules
Supreme Court Clarifies Pay Scales for Tamil Nadu Drivers: P. Singaravelan vs. The District Collector, Tiruppur (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Interpretation of pay scale rules for government employees. CASE TYPE: Service Law Case Name: P. Singaravelan & Ors. Etc. Etc. vs. The District Collector, Tiruppur and DT & Ors. Etc. Etc. Judgment Date: 18 December 2019
Supreme Court Upholds Appointment of Junior Accounts Clerk: Rana Pratap Singh vs. Vittiye Evam Lekha Adhikari (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether an appointment made by a duly constituted selection committee after calling names from the Employment Exchange can be deemed invalid due to procedural irregularities, and what is the effect of dismissal of a writ petition
Supreme Court Upholds JPSC’s Right to Set Cut-off Marks Post-Exam: Jharkhand Public Service Commission vs. Manoj Kumar Gupta (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the Jharkhand Public Service Commission (JPSC) can fix minimum qualifying marks for Paper III of the Jharkhand Eligibility Test (JET) after the examination process has commenced. CASE TYPE: Service Law Case Name: Jharkhand
Supreme Court Expands Definition of ‘Government Hospital’ for Doctor Recruitment in Bihar Date of the Judgment: 17 December 2019 Citation: (2019) INSC 978 Judges: Deepak Gupta, J., Surya Kant, J. Can work experience in any non-private hospital be considered for recruitment of doctors in Bihar? The Supreme Court of India addressed this question in a
Supreme Court Orders Fresh Inquiry in Disciplinary Case Against Brigadier L.I. Singh Date of the Judgment: 17 December 2019 Citation: Not Available Judges: L. Nageswara Rao, J., Ajay Rastogi, J. Can disciplinary proceedings against a retired army officer be continued based on a flawed initial inquiry? The Supreme Court of India addressed this question in
Supreme Court Upholds Requirement of NIELIT CCC Certificate for Technician Posts in Uttar Pradesh Power Corporation Recruitment (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether self-certification of computer qualifications is sufficient for recruitment to public posts, and the validity of equivalent computer qualifications to the CCC certificate. CASE TYPE: Service Law/Recruitment Case Name: Mukul Kumar Tyagi vs. The State
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 Resignation Withdrawal Rules for Tamil Nadu Police: Director General of Police vs. M Jeyanthi (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a police constable can withdraw their resignation after it has been accepted by the appointing authority, but before the expiry of the notice period. CASE TYPE: Service Law Case Name: The Director General of
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
