Filter by Date
Supreme Court of India (Division Bench (DB)- Two Judge)

K.RADHIKA Vs. T.RAJYA LAXMI & ORS.

Appeal (Civil), 4201 of 2015, Judgment Date: May 05, 2015

It consists of innumerable errors. We only hope that it is not the desire of the High Court that such candidates are required to be appointed merely because they have the higher grade qualification. We, therefore, allow the appeal and set aside the judgment under appeal. Full Judgment

Supreme Court of India (Division Bench (DB)- Two Judge)

M/S ARIANE ORGACHEM PVT.LTD. Vs. WYETH EMPLOYEES UNION & ORS

Appeal (Civil), 246 of 2015, Judgment Date: Apr 29, 2015

“When a question of law is raised for the first time in a court of last resort, upon the construction of a document, or upon facts either admitted or proved beyond controversy, it is not only competent but expedient, in the interests of justice, to entertain the plea.” Therefore, with regard to the above mentioned aspect regarding the plea of the competency of the Deputy Labour Commissioner to pass an Full Judgment

Supreme Court of India (Division Bench (DB)- Two Judge)

KHUB RAM Vs. DALBIR SINGH & ORS.

Appeal (Civil), 2734 of 2015, Judgment Date: Apr 29, 2015

  Mr. Patwalia has rightly placed reliance to support the aforesaid submissions, on a judgment of this Court in the case of Meghmala v. G. Narasimha Reddy (2010) 8 SCC 383. The law relating to effect of fraud upon a competent authority to get an appointment/office as well as effect of fraud upon court has been discussed in detail in paragraphs 28 to 36 Full Judgment

Chhatisgarh High Court (Single Judge)

Ashish Kumar Sahu Vs State Of Chhattisgarh & ors

WPS->WRIT PETITON SERVICE MATTER, 1182 of 2015, Judgment Date: Apr 08, 2015

The issue with which this Court is required to deal is whether nondisclosure of registration of a criminal case, in which the petitioner has already been acquitted would make him eligible for remaining in employment? 8. In the matter of Devendra Kumar Vs. State of Uttaranchan And Others1, the Supreme Court has held that issue of obtaining appointment by misrepresentation is no more res integra. The question is not whether the applicant is suitable for the post. Pendency of criminal Full Judgment

Supreme Court of India (Division Bench (DB)- Two Judge)

UMRALA GRAM PANCHAYAT Vs. THE SEC.MUNICIPAL EMPLOYEE UNION & ORS

Appeal (Civil), 3209-3210 of 2015, Judgment Date: Mar 27, 2015

They have also been working for similar number of hours, however, the discrepancy in the payment of wages/salary between the permanent and the non-permanent workmen is alarming and the same has to be construed as being an unfair labour practice as defined under Section 2(ra) of the ID Act r/w Entry No.10 of the Fifth Schedule to the ID Act, which is prohibited under Section 25(T) of the ID Full Judgment

Supreme Court of India (Division Bench (DB)- Two Judge)

A. RAGHU, SON OF RAJAIAH Vs. GOVT. OF A.P. & ORS.

Appeal (Civil), 5862 of 2007, Judgment Date: Mar 26, 2015

The judgments cited pertain to the particular rule of seniority, which was subject matter of consideration. None of the seniority rules which were taken into consideration is akin to rule 15 which is to be applied for determining the inter se seniority of Sub- Inspectors of Police, in the present case. Full Judgment

Supreme Court of India (Division Bench (DB)- Two Judge)

T.NADU TERMD.FULL TIME TEM.LIC EMP.ASSN. Vs. LIFE INSURANCE CORP.OF INDIA & ORS.

Appeal (Civil), 6950 of 2009, Judgment Date: Mar 18, 2015

The concerned workmen are the members of the appellant-Associations, Federation of Employees Association, Workers Association and other concerned individual workmen who were working in the branches of the Corporation at various places in the country have raised the existing industrial dispute between the concerned workmen and the management of Full Judgment

Supreme Court of India (Division Bench (DB)- Two Judge)

STATE OF MP. & ORS. Vs. MALA BANERJEE

Appeal (Civil), 2944 of 2015, Judgment Date: Mar 17, 2015

3 Very briefly stated, the dispute pertains to the eligibility of the Respondents, all of whom are Lecturers/Teachers in the employment of the Education and Tribal Welfare Department, Government of Madhya Pradesh, for increased pay scales. The Respondents claim the benefits of the Kramonnati Scheme with effect from 19.4.1999, whereas the Appellants assert that they are willing to grant the benefit of the Kramonnati Scheme Full Judgment

Supreme Court of India (Division Bench (DB)- Two Judge)

K.P. Manu Versus Chairman, Scrutiny Committee for Verification of Community Certificate

Appeal (Civil), 7065 of 2008, Judgment Date: Feb 26, 2015

As we perceive, the controversy fundamentally has three arenas, namely, (1) whether on conversion and at what stage a person born to Christian parents can, after reconversion to the Hindu religion, be eligible to claim the benefit of his original caste; (ii) whether after his eligibility is accepted and his original community on a collective basis takes him within its fold, he still can be denied the Full Judgment

Supreme Court of India (Division Bench (DB)- Two Judge)

UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Vs. DILEEP KUMAR SINGH

Appeal (Civil), 2466 of 2015, Judgment Date: Feb 26, 2015

These appeals raise an interesting question as to  the  interpretation of a proviso contained in  Section  47  of  the  Persons  with  Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of  Rights  and  Full  Participation)  Act, 1995 (in short the "1995 Act"). It is well settled that the provisions  of  a  statute  must  be  read harmoniously together.  However, if this is not possible then it is  settled law that where there is a conflict between  two  Sections,  and  you  cannot reconcile the two, you have to determine which is the leading provision  Full Judgment

Allahabad High Court (Single Judge)

M/S Hotel Yamuna View Ltd. Unit Agra Ashok, Vs Presiding Officer, Industrial Tribunal (4) U.P. Agra And Anr

WRIT - C, 11369 of 2015, Judgment Date: Feb 25, 2015

Full Judgment

Supreme Court of India (Division Bench (DB)- Two Judge)

M. SURENDER REDDY Vs. GOVT. OF A.P. AND ORS.

Appeal (Civil), 5099 of 2006, Judgment Date: Feb 18, 2015

The questions that arise for determination in this case are: (a)whether G.O.Ms.124 dated 7th March, 2002 is retrospective in nature in order to make it applicable to the posts for which selection process has already started pursuant to 1999 advertisement, and (b) If the said G.O.Ms. is retrospective, whether it is required to review the entire select Full Judgment

Supreme Court of India (Division Bench (DB)- Two Judge)

UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Vs. V.K.KRISHNAN & ORS.

Appeal (Civil), 2532 of 2010, Judgment Date: Feb 17, 2015

As stated hereinabove, seniority list for employees working in different grades should be different and there cannot be any common seniority list for all the employees working in one particular group. We, therefore, set aside the impugned judgment affirming the order of the Tribunal and also direct that according to the provisions of the aforestated paras contained in the Manual, the appellants Full Judgment

Supreme Court of India (Division Bench (DB)- Two Judge)

NAWAL KISHOR MISHRA & ORS. Vs. HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ALLAHABAD &ORS

Appeal (Civil), 1956-1957 of 2015, Judgment Date: Feb 17, 2015

Having heard learned counsel for the respective parties, the questions that arise for consideration in these appeals are as under: Whether the appellants have the locus standi to challenge the appointments made by the High Court in the filling up of the unfilled vacancies of the reserved categories in the Direct Recruitment Posts by way of promotion of the 'in service candidates'? Whether the High Court could have validly adopted the Reservation Act of 1994 Full Judgment

Supreme Court of India (Division Bench (DB)- Two Judge)

AJAY KUMAR CHOUDHARY Vs. UNION OF INDIA THR ITS SECRETARY & ANR

Appeal (Civil), 1912 of 2015, Judgment Date: Feb 16, 2015

Learned Senior Counsel for the Appellant, however, has rightly relied on a series of Judgments of this Court, including O.P. Gupta v. Union of India 1987 (4) SCC 328, where this Court has enunciated that the suspension of an employee is injurious to his interests and must not be continued for an unreasonably long period; that, therefore, an order of suspension should not be lightly passed. Suspension, specially preceding Full Judgment

Supreme Court of India (Division Bench (DB)- Two Judge)

KHURSHEED AHMAD KHAN VERSUS STATE OF U.P. & ORS.

Appeal (Civil), 1662 of 2015, Judgment Date: Feb 09, 2015

In absence thereof the second marriage  is a misconduct under the Conduct Rules- Polygamy  was  not  integral  part  of  religion  and monogamy was a reform within the power of the State under Article 25.- Even if bigamy be regarded as an  integral  part of Hindu religion, Rule 27 of the U.P. Government  Servants'  Conduct  Rules requiring permission of the  Government  before  contracting  such  marriage must be held to come  under  the  protection  of  Article  25(2)(b)  of  the Constitution- What  is permitted or not prohibited by  a  religion  does  not  become  Full Judgment

Supreme Court of India (Division Bench (DB)- Two Judge)

RAMESH CHANDRA Vs. UNIVERSITY OF DELHI & ORS.

Appeal (Civil), 8224 OF 2012 Judgment Date: Feb 06, 2015

In view of the law laid down by this Court, we are of the view that if any person who is or was a legal practitioner, including a retired Hon'ble Judge is appointed as Inquiry Officer in an inquiry initiated against an employee, the denial of assistance of legal practitioner to the charged employee would be unfair. Full Judgment

Supreme Court of India (Division Bench (DB)- Two Judge)

UNION OF INDIA THR.SECRETARY & ORS. Vs. ANJU JAIN & ANR

Appeal (Civil), 50 of 2015, Judgment Date: Jan 06, 2015

Full Judgment

Supreme Court of India (Division Bench (DB)- Two Judge)

DIWAN SINGH Vs. L.I.C. & ORS.

Appeal (Civil), 3655 of 2010, Judgment Date: Jan 05, 2015

This Court in a catena of judgments held that the loss of confidence is the primary factor and not the amount of money misappropriated and that the sympathy or generosity cannot be a factor which is impermissible in law. When an employee is found guilty of pilferage or of misappropriating the Corporation's funds, there is nothing wrong in the Corporation losing confidence or faith in such an employee Full Judgment

Supreme Court of India

STATE OF M.P. & ORS. VERSUS PARVEZ KHAN

AA, CIVIL APPEAL NO. 10613 OF 2014 Judgment Date: Dec 01, 2014

Full Judgment