Service Law

Supreme Court Upholds Tribunal Decision on Promotion Based on Relaxed Qualification: Vijay Bala Bhanot vs. Government of NCT Delhi (2008)

/ Dr. Mukundakam Sharma, Judges, R.V. Raveendran, Recruitment Rules, Service Law, Service Law with Relaxation Rules

Introduction Date of the Judgment: September 03, 2008 The Supreme Court of India addressed the legality of promotions granted by relaxing educational qualifications, questioning whether such relaxations can be applied to individuals rather than a class or category of employees. The case revolves around Lab Technicians promoted to Technical Assistants based on relaxed criteria. The […]

Supreme Court Upholds Tribunal Decision on Promotion Based on Relaxed Qualification: Vijay Bala Bhanot vs. Government of NCT Delhi (2008) Read Post »

Supreme Court sets aside High Court order regarding regularization of Khalasis: Union of India vs. Laxman Singh Champalal (01 September 2008)

/ Administrative Law, Central Administrative Tribunal, Cyriac Joseph, Judges, Judicial Review, Reasoned Judgments, Regularization, Reversion, S.B. Sinha, Service Law, Tribunal Orders

Date of the Judgment: 01 September 2008 Judges: S.B. Sinha and Cyriac Joseph, JJ. Can a High Court judgment be sustained if it lacks reasoning? The Supreme Court addressed this question in a case concerning the regularization of employees in the post of Khalasis. The Court emphasized the necessity for the High Court to provide

Supreme Court sets aside High Court order regarding regularization of Khalasis: Union of India vs. Laxman Singh Champalal (01 September 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 seniority rules for Direct Recruits and Departmental Promotees in AFHQ Civil Services: AFHQ/ISOs SOs (DP) Association & Ors vs. Union of India & Ors (2008)

/ Altamas Kabir, Constitutional Law, H. K. Sema, Judges, Lokeshwar Singh Panta, Seniority, Service Law, Service Rules

Date of the Judgment: 19th February 2008 Citation: Appeal (civil) 1384 of 2008 Judges: H. K. Sema, Altamas Kabir, Lokeshwar Singh Panta Can the government alter seniority rules to favor one group of employees over another? The Supreme Court addressed this question in a dispute between Direct Recruits (DRs) and Departmental Promotees (DPs) within the

Supreme Court settles seniority rules for Direct Recruits and Departmental Promotees in AFHQ Civil Services: AFHQ/ISOs SOs (DP) Association & Ors vs. Union of India & Ors (2008) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies the rights of candidates in waiting lists for public service appointments: U.P. Public Service Commission vs. Uday Kumar Upadhyaya (2008)

/ Appointment, Constitutional Law, H.K. Sema, Judges, Markandey Katju, Service Law, Waiting List, Writ of Mandamus

Date of the Judgment: 14th February 2008 Citation: [Citation details will be added when available] Judges: H.K. Sema and Markandey Katju, JJ. Does being on a waiting list for a government job guarantee you the position? The Supreme Court addressed this important question in a case involving the U.P. Public Service Commission. The court clarified

Supreme Court clarifies the rights of candidates in waiting lists for public service appointments: U.P. Public Service Commission vs. Uday Kumar Upadhyaya (2008) Read Post »

Supreme Court settles age limit rules for direct recruitment in civil posts: Union of India vs. Shri Ramesh Singh Rajput (2007)

/ Aftab Alam, Arijit Pasayat, Central Civil Services Rules, Judges, Service Law, Service Law with Age Limit

Date of the Judgment: December 14, 2007 Judges: Dr. Arijit Pasayat, J., Aftab Alam, J. Can the government deny appointment to a selected candidate based on a discrepancy in their date of birth records? The Supreme Court addressed this issue in a case where a candidate’s school certificate and affidavit showed different dates of birth,

Supreme Court settles age limit rules for direct recruitment in civil posts: Union of India vs. Shri Ramesh Singh Rajput (2007) Read Post »

Supreme Court settles the importance of civil court findings in departmental proceedings: Jasbir Singh vs. Punjab & Sind Bank (2006)

/ Banking Law, Departmental Proceedings, Embezzlement, Fraud, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 201, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 409, Judges, Markandey Katju, Reinstatement, S.B. Sinha, Service Law

Introduction Date of the Judgment: 31st October 2006 Citation: Appeal (civil) 8046 of 2004 Judges: S.B. Sinha and Markandey Katju What happens when a bank employee is accused of fraud, acquitted in criminal court, but then faces departmental proceedings? The Supreme Court addressed this critical intersection of civil and service law in the case of

Supreme Court settles the importance of civil court findings in departmental proceedings: Jasbir Singh vs. Punjab & Sind Bank (2006) Read Post »

Draughtsmen Pay Scale Revision: Supreme Court clarifies applicability of OMs in Union of India vs. S.D. Bandhopadhyay (2006)

/ Conditions of Service, Dalveer Bhandari, Government Orders, Judges, OM 13.3.1984, OM 19.10.1994, Pay Scale Revision, S.B. Sinha, Service Law

Introduction Date of the Judgment: 19/10/2006 The Supreme Court of India addressed a dispute regarding the revision of pay scales for draughtsmen working in Ordnance Factories. The central question revolved around whether these employees, having received benefits under an Office Memorandum (OM) of 1984, were further entitled to benefits under a subsequent OM of 1994.

Draughtsmen Pay Scale Revision: Supreme Court clarifies applicability of OMs in Union of India vs. S.D. Bandhopadhyay (2006) Read Post »

Supreme Court sets aside dismissal order after exoneration in departmental inquiry: Prithipal Singh vs. State of Punjab (2006)

/ Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 311, Dalveer Bhandari, Departmental Inquiry, Dismissal, Judges, S.B. Sinha, Service Law

Introduction Date of the Judgment: 19th October 2006 Citation: Appeal (civil) 5226 of 2004 Judges: S.B. Sinha, J. and Dalveer Bhandari, J. Can an employee’s dismissal be upheld when they were later cleared of the charges in a departmental inquiry? The Supreme Court of India addressed this critical question in the case of Prithipal Singh

Supreme Court sets aside dismissal order after exoneration in departmental inquiry: Prithipal Singh vs. State of Punjab (2006) Read Post »

Supreme Court sets aside High Court order regarding correction of date of birth in service records: State of Gujarat & Ors. vs. Vali Mohmed Dosabhai Sindhi (2006)

/ Arijit Pasayat, Bombay Civil Services Rules, 1959, Judges, Lokeshwar Singh Panta, Service Law, Service Rules

Date of the Judgment: 19th July 2006 Citation: [Not provided in the document] Judges: Arijit Pasayat and Lokeshwar Singh Panta, JJ. Can a government employee change their date of birth in their service record late in their career? The Supreme Court of India addressed this question in an appeal from the Gujarat High Court. The

Supreme Court sets aside High Court order regarding correction of date of birth in service records: State of Gujarat & Ors. vs. Vali Mohmed Dosabhai Sindhi (2006) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Amendment Act on Seniority of Orissa Administrative Service Officers: Prafulla Kumar Das vs. State of Orissa (2003)

/ B.N. Agrawal, Dr. A.R. Lakshmanan, Judges, Orissa Administrative Service Rules, Orissa Administrative Service, Class-II (Appointment of Officers Validation) Act, 1987, Orissa Administrative Service, Class-II (Recruitment) Rules, 1959, R.C. Lahoti, Recruitment, S.B. Sinha, Seniority, Service Law, V.N. Khare

Introduction Date of the Judgment: 07/10/2003 Judges: V.N. Khare (CJI), R.C. Lahoti, B.N. Agrawal, S.B. Sinha, Dr. A.R. Lakshmanan. In cases concerning government service, seniority disputes often arise from the complex interplay of recruitment rules, merger of services, and legislative amendments. The Supreme Court of India addressed such a dispute in Prafulla Kumar Das and

Supreme Court Upholds Amendment Act on Seniority of Orissa Administrative Service Officers: Prafulla Kumar Das vs. State of Orissa (2003) Read Post »

Supreme Court settles the requirement of passing the Accounts Test for Senior Assistant post: S.P. Badrinath vs. Govt. of A.P. (2003)

/ Andhra Pradesh Ministerial Service Rules, 1966, Brijesh Kumar, Judges, Promotion, S.B. Sinha, Seniority, Service Law, V.N. Khare

Introduction Date of the Judgment: 16/09/2003 The Supreme Court of India addressed the question of whether passing the Accounts Test is a mandatory requirement for promotion to the post of Senior Assistant in the Andhra Pradesh government services. This issue arose in the context of the Andhra Pradesh Ministerial Service Rules, 1966, and its applicability

Supreme Court settles the requirement of passing the Accounts Test for Senior Assistant post: S.P. Badrinath vs. Govt. of A.P. (2003) Read Post »

Scroll to Top