Service Law

Supreme Court Clarifies the Importance of ACRs in Promotions: Sivanandi vs. Rajeev Kumar (2017)

LEGAL ISSUE: Whether an Annual Confidential Report (ACR) is a part of an officer’s service record and if delays in writing it can be grounds for ignoring it for promotion purposes. CASE TYPE: Service Law Case Name: P. Sivanandi vs. Rajeev Kumar & Ors. Judgment Date: 2nd February 2017 Introduction Date of the Judgment: 2nd […]

Supreme Court Clarifies the Importance of ACRs in Promotions: Sivanandi vs. Rajeev Kumar (2017) Read Post »

Supreme Court Clarifies Necessary Parties in Writ Petitions Challenging Tribunal Orders: M.S. Kazi vs. Muslim Education Society (2016)

LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a tribunal is a necessary party in a writ petition challenging its order. CASE TYPE: Service Law Case Name: M.S. Kazi vs. Muslim Education Society & Ors. [Judgment Date]: 22 August 2016 Date of the Judgment: 22 August 2016 Citation: (2016) INSC 798 Judges: T.S. Thakur, CJI, A.M. Khanwilkar, J, Dr. D.Y.

Supreme Court Clarifies Necessary Parties in Writ Petitions Challenging Tribunal Orders: M.S. Kazi vs. Muslim Education Society (2016) Read Post »

Voluntary Retirement Scheme: Supreme Court Upholds Bank’s Right to Discipline Employees Post Application (08 February 2016)

Can a bank initiate disciplinary proceedings against an employee who has applied for voluntary retirement but whose application is still pending? The Supreme Court of India addressed this question in a recent case, clarifying the interplay between voluntary retirement schemes and disciplinary actions. This judgment clarifies that banks can take disciplinary action against employees even

Voluntary Retirement Scheme: Supreme Court Upholds Bank’s Right to Discipline Employees Post Application (08 February 2016) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Appointments Made 25 Years Ago in Bihar Gazetted Cadre Selection: Mirza Ali Raza & Ors. vs. State of Bihar & Ors. (2016) INSC 36 (03 February 2016)

Can a State government alter the appointment of civil servants after 25 years based on a changed interpretation of reservation policies? The Supreme Court of India addressed this question in a case concerning appointments made in Bihar’s Gazetted Cadre in 1991. The Court’s decision focused on upholding the appointments of candidates who had been serving

Supreme Court Upholds Appointments Made 25 Years Ago in Bihar Gazetted Cadre Selection: Mirza Ali Raza & Ors. vs. State of Bihar & Ors. (2016) INSC 36 (03 February 2016) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies disability pension rules for armed forces: Union of India vs. Rajbir Singh (13 February 2015)

LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a disability is attributable to or aggravated by military service for the purpose of disability pension. CASE TYPE: Service Law, Pension Case Name: Union of India & Anr. vs. Rajbir Singh Judgment Date: 13 February 2015 Introduction Date of the Judgment: 13 February 2015 Citation: (2015) INSC 75 Judges: T.S. Thakur, J.

Supreme Court clarifies disability pension rules for armed forces: Union of India vs. Rajbir Singh (13 February 2015) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Recruitment Rules: Ad-hoc Service Not Equivalent to Regular Service in Promotion

LEGAL ISSUE: Whether ad-hoc service can be counted towards regular service for promotion eligibility. CASE TYPE: Service Law Case Name: Union of India & Ors. vs. Shri G.R.Rama Krishna & Anr. Judgment Date: 23rd August, 2013 Date of the Judgment: 23rd August, 2013 Citation: (2013) INSC 586 Judges: K.S. Radhakrishnan, J. and A.K. Sikri, J.

Supreme Court Upholds Recruitment Rules: Ad-hoc Service Not Equivalent to Regular Service in Promotion Read Post »

Supreme Court Clarifies Disciplinary Inquiry Rules for Minor Penalties: D.H.B.V.N.L. vs. Yashvir Singh Gulia (30 July 2013)

Date of the Judgment: 30 July 2013 Citation: (2013) INSC 536 Judges: K. S. Radhakrishnan, J. and Pinaki Chandra Ghose, J. Can a disciplinary authority impose a minor penalty after issuing a charge-sheet for a major penalty, without conducting a full departmental inquiry? The Supreme Court of India addressed this question in a case concerning

Supreme Court Clarifies Disciplinary Inquiry Rules for Minor Penalties: D.H.B.V.N.L. vs. Yashvir Singh Gulia (30 July 2013) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Cut-off Date for Eligibility in Teacher Recruitment: Rakesh Kumar Sharma vs. Govt. of NCT of Delhi (29 July 2013)

Date of the Judgment: 29 July 2013 Citation: Civil Appeal No. 6116 of 2013 Judges: Dr. B.S. Chauhan, J. and S.A. Bobde, J. Can a candidate be appointed to a government job if they did not possess the required educational qualification on the last date for submitting applications? The Supreme Court of India addressed this

Supreme Court Upholds Cut-off Date for Eligibility in Teacher Recruitment: Rakesh Kumar Sharma vs. Govt. of NCT of Delhi (29 July 2013) Read Post »

Compassionate Appointment: Supreme Court Upholds Physical Test Requirement in State of UP vs. Pankaj Kumar Vishnoi (25 July 2013)

Date of the Judgment: 25 July 2013 Citation: [Not Available in Source] Judges: Dipak Misra, J., Vikramajit Sen, J. Can a person seeking compassionate appointment be exempted from a physical test? The Supreme Court of India addressed this question in a case concerning the Uttar Pradesh Police Department. The court clarified that while compassionate appointments

Compassionate Appointment: Supreme Court Upholds Physical Test Requirement in State of UP vs. Pankaj Kumar Vishnoi (25 July 2013) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Partial Refund for Uncompleted PhD Study Leave: Sant Longowal Institute vs. Suresh Chandra Verma (2013)

LEGAL ISSUE: Whether an educational institute can demand a full refund of salary and allowances from an employee who failed to complete their PhD during a study leave. CASE TYPE: Service Law Case Name: Sant Longowal Institute of Engineering & Technology & Anr. vs. Suresh Chandra Verma Judgment Date: 18 July 2013 Introduction Date of

Supreme Court Upholds Partial Refund for Uncompleted PhD Study Leave: Sant Longowal Institute vs. Suresh Chandra Verma (2013) Read Post »

Supreme Court Allows Re-evaluation of Answer Sheets, But Protects Jobs: Vikas Pratap Singh vs. State of Chhattisgarh (2013)

Date of the Judgment: July 9, 2013 Citation: 2013 INSC 487 Judges: H.L. Dattu, J., Jagdish Singh Khehar, J. Can a selection board re-evaluate answer sheets after a merit list is published? The Supreme Court of India addressed this question in a case regarding the recruitment of Subedars, Platoon Commanders, and Sub-Inspectors in Chhattisgarh. The

Supreme Court Allows Re-evaluation of Answer Sheets, But Protects Jobs: Vikas Pratap Singh vs. State of Chhattisgarh (2013) Read Post »

Supreme Court settles procedure for Disciplinary Authority disagreement with Enquiry Officer in service law cases: S.P. Malhotra vs. Punjab National Bank (2013) INSC 451 (4 July 2013)

Date of the Judgment: 4 July 2013 Citation: (2013) INSC 451 Judges: Dr. B.S. Chauhan and S.A. Bobde, JJ. Can a disciplinary authority impose punishment by disagreeing with the findings of the Enquiry Officer without giving the delinquent employee a chance to respond? The Supreme Court of India addressed this critical question in a service

Supreme Court settles procedure for Disciplinary Authority disagreement with Enquiry Officer in service law cases: S.P. Malhotra vs. Punjab National Bank (2013) INSC 451 (4 July 2013) Read Post »

Scroll to Top