Created byFuzzy Cloud

Supreme Court of India

D A DESAI

196 judgments delivered by benches including this judge.

BABAJI KONDAJL GARAD ETC.versusTHE NASIK MERCHANTS CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD., NASIK & ORS. ETC.

1983 INSC 16931 October 1983Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined two appeals challenging the elections to the Boards of Directors of Nasik Merchants Co‑operative Bank Ltd. and Parbhani District Co‑operative Bank Ltd. The election programmes issued by the Collectors failed to specify that two seats were reserved under Section 73B of the Maharashtra Cooperat

ZAFAR KHAN AND ORS.versusBOARD OF REVENUE, U.P. & ORS.

1984 INSC 13331 July 1984Dismissed

The appellants, Zafar Khan and others, claimed possession of land based on a decree under the U.P. Tenancy Act and later asserted they were bhumidars under the U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950. The respondents, having become adhivasis under the same Act, regained possession through an order of the Ad

KHILLI RAMversusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN

1984 INSC 20530 October 1984Appeal(s) allowed

Khilli Ram, a Head Constable, was convicted under IPC s.161 and the Prevention of Corruption Act (sections 5(1)(d) and 5(2)) for allegedly accepting a bribe in a police‑trap. The prosecution relied on a decoy witness, two panch witnesses and several police officers, but many of these witnesses turned hostile or gave st

VISHWA MITTERversusO. P. PODDAR AND OTHERS

1983 INSC 13730 September 1983Appeal(s) allowed

Vishwa Mitter, a dealer and constituted attorney of the owners of a registered trademark for beedies, filed a criminal complaint before a Sub‑Divisional Magistrate alleging offences under Sections 78 and 79 of the Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 and Section 420 of the IPC against several respondents. The magistra

SUNEEL JATLEY ETC.versusSTATE OF HARYANA ETC .

1984 INSC 13230 July 1984Case Allowed

The State of Haryana, through Maharshi Dayanand University, reserved 25 MBBS seats for candidates who had studied up to class 8 in a common rural school. The petitioners challenged this reservation as violative of Articles 14, 15(4) and 29(2) of the Constitution, arguing that the classification was arbitrary, lacked in

SMT. BIMLA DEWANversusLIEUTENANT GOVERNOR OF DELHI

1982 INSC 6030 July 1982Case Allowed

The Supreme Court examined a writ petition under Article 32 challenging the detention of Shri Dev Raj Dewan under Section 3(2) of the National Security Act, 1980. The petitioner's counsel argued that the grounds of detention included several criminal cases in which the detenu had been acquitted, and that the alleged ac

SMT. POONAMAL ETC. ETC.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

1985 INSC 11130 April 1985Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned widows of Government servants who, because their husbands had not agreed to make a two‑month contribution under the 1964 family pension scheme, were denied family pension even after the scheme was made non‑contributory on 22 September 1977. The petitioners argued that this denial violated the equalit

SMT. USHA RANI DATTA, AAYA/ ATTENDANT AND OTHERSversusSTATE INDUSTRIAL COURT, INDORE & ORS.

1985 INSC 11230 April 1985Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined whether the Urban Family Planning Clinic set up by the Government of India at Bhilai Steel Plant was an independent undertaking or an integral part of the plant. The petitioners, who were attendants at the clinic, claimed continuous service from 1964 for purposes of gratuity, retrenchment and

UPENDRA CHANDRA CHAKRABORTY AND ANR.versusUNITED BANK OF INDIA

1985 INSC 11030 April 1985Dismissed

Two employees of United Bank of India claimed that the annual bonus paid on the eve of Pooja had become a customary bonus, unrelated to the bank's profits, and thus a condition of service giving them a legal right under Section 33‑C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The bank contended that the bonus varied in ra

LAKSHMI CHARAN SEN AND ORS ETC.versusA.K.M. HASSAN UZZAMAN AMO ORS. ETC.

1982 INSC 4330 March 1982Disposed off

The Calcutta High Court entertained a writ petition under Article 226 challenging the Chief Election Commissioner, the Chief Electoral Officer and the Election Commission of India for allegedly issuing vague and arbitrary directions for a de novo revision of West Bengal's electoral rolls and for proceeding with electio

ANSARI & ORS.versusSTATE TRANSPORT APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, LUCKNOW & ORS.

1980 INSC 20329 October 1980Case Allowed

The appellants, Praveen Ansari and others, applied for temporary permits to ply passenger vehicles on an inter‑regional route under section 68‑F(1‑C) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939. The State Transport Authority granted three temporary permits to the Uttar Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation, which had applied fo

MANSARAMversusS. P. PATHAK AND OTHERS

1983 INSC 13529 September 1983Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a former government telephone employee, had taken a house on lease in 1954 and continued to occupy it after retirement in 1967. Respondent S.P. Pathak applied to the House Allotment Officer for possession, alleging the appellant occupied the premises in violation of Clause 22(2) of the Central Provinces

JAI BHAGWANversusTHE MANAGEMENT OF THE AMBALA CENTRAL COOPERATIVE BANK LIMITED AND ANOTHER

1983 INSC 13429 September 1983Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a clerk‑cum‑cashier of Ambala Central Co‑operative Bank, was suspended and later terminated after a customer alleged a bogus cheque. No charge‑sheet or notice to show cause was served, and the internal enquiry did not find him guilty. The Industrial Tribunal upheld the termination despite the lack of evi

GURU NANAK FOUNDATIONversusRATTAN SINGH & SONS

1981 INSC 17529 September 1981Case Allowed

The parties entered into a building contract containing an arbitration clause. After a series of applications and a change of arbitrator, the Supreme Court appointed the final arbitrator and gave directions for the conduct of the arbitration. The arbitrator made an award on 11 November 1977 and, on advice of a court of

S. KANNAN & OTHERS ETC.versusSECRETARY, KARNATAKA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT AUTHORITY

1983 INSC 10729 August 1983Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined whether a Regional Transport Authority or a State Transport Authority could issue temporary All‑India tourist permits under Section 62 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939. The State of Karnataka had issued 36 regular All‑India tourist permits under Section 63(7) and rejected applications for temp

THE COLLECTOR (DISTT. MAGISTRATE) ALLAHABAD AND ANR.versusRAJA RAM JAISWAL ETC.

1985 INSC 10929 April 1985Disposed off

Raja Ram Jaiswal purchased land (Plot No. 26) to build a cinema theatre. The Hindi Sahitya Sammelan, opposing the cinema, sought acquisition of the same land for the purported public purpose of extending its Sangrahalaya, leading to a notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The notification w

Y. RAMANJANEYULUversusSTATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH & ORS.

1985 INSC 7529 March 1985Case Partly allowed

The appellant, a civil servant in the Cooperative Societies department, claimed that Government Order No. 559 (May 4, 1961) entitled him to a promotion to Deputy Registrar in 1965 under the principle of reservation extended to all cadres. He filed a representation petition in 1977, which the Administrative Tribunal dis

SHIROMANI GURUDWARA PRABHANDHAK COMMITTEE, AMRITSARversusMAHANT KIRPA RAM & ORS.

1984 INSC 7229 March 1984Appeal(s) allowed

A group of villagers applied to the Punjab Government to have a local religious institution declared a Sikh Gurdwara under the Sikh Gurdwaras Act, 1925. The application was referred to the Sikh Gurdwara Tribunal, which held that the institution was a Sikh Gurdwara and that the respondent was the hereditary Mahant. The

DEVJI VALLABHBHAI TANDEL ETC.versusTHE ADMINISTRATOR OF GOA, DAMAN & DIU & ANR.

1982 INSC 4229 March 1982Dismissed

The petitioners, detained under Section 3 of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 (COFEPOSA), challenged the order of detention issued by the Administrator of Goa, Daman & Diu, arguing that the Administrator could not act without the advice of the Council of Ministers an

VIKLAID COAL MERCHANT, PATIALA, ETC. ETC.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

1983 INSC 16728 October 1983Dismissed

The petitioners, coal merchants, challenged a series of orders issued by the Ministry of Railways—including the addition of the abbreviation 'GX' to station codes and a Preferential Traffic Schedule under Section 27A of the Indian Railways Act—that restricted the outward booking of coal in wagon‑loads from way‑side sta

JATINDER KUMAR & ORSversusSTATE OF PUNJAB & ORS.

1984 INSC 18428 September 1984Dismissed

The petitioners were candidates selected by the Subordinate Service Selection Board for the post of Assistant Sub‑Inspector of Police. The Board recommended 144 names, but only 57 vacancies existed and the anticipated 170 vacancies never materialised because the Government rejected the proposal to disband the Punjab Ar

KABIDI VENKU SAHversusSYED ABDUL HAI AND OTHERS

1983 INSC 13128 September 1983Dismissed

The appellant, a simple mortgagee who obtained a decree on a 1948 mortgage and later purchased the mortgaged property, sought to have an attachment made on 24‑September‑1964 (by the respondent creditor) raised under Order 21 Rule 58 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The trial court allowed the claim, holding that the ent

WORKMEN EMPLOYED BY HINDUSTAN LEVER LTD.versusHINDUSTAN LEVER LIMITED

1984 INSC 16028 August 1984Appeal(s) allowed

The workmen of Hindustan Lever Ltd. sought confirmation in the higher grades in which they had been acting for more than three months, claiming that they should be made permanent and receive retrospective benefits. The employer contended that the dispute was not an industrial dispute because it related to promotion, a

SLTAL PRASAD SAXENA (DEAD) BY LRS.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

1984 INSC 16128 August 1984Appeal(s) allowed

Sita Prasad Saxena sued the Union of India for salary arrears; his appeal was pending in the Madhya Pradesh High Court when he died. His son Mahendra Kumar Saxena filed applications for substitution of heirs, to set aside the abatement of the appeal, and for condonation of delay under Section 5 of the Limitation Act. T

PATEL SURESHBHAI JASHBHAIversusPATEL SATABHAI MATHURBHAI

1983 INSC 5228 April 1983Dismissed

The case concerned a dispute under the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 concerning land deemed purchased by a tenant on the tillers' day (1 April 1957). The respondent, who had failed to appear before the Agricultural Lands Tribunal under s.320 and whose sale was declared ineffective, later applied under

MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI AND OTHERSversusMOHD. YASIN ETC.

1983 INSC 5328 April 1983Appeal(s) allowed

The Delhi Municipal Corporation raised the slaughtering fee from Rs.0.25 paise to Rs.2 for small animals and from Rs.1 to Rs.8 for buffaloes in 1968. Butchers challenged the increase, claiming it was disproportionate to the cost of services and therefore a tax, not a fee. The High Court, relying on a budget item showin

HASMAT RAJ & ANR.versusRAGHUNATH PRASAD

1981 INSC 10428 April 1981Appeal(s) allowed

The landlord filed two eviction suits seeking possession of a non‑residential building, claiming he needed the premises to start a medicine shop and to carry out reconstruction, and that he had no other suitable accommodation. The tenant argued that the landlord already possessed a major portion of the building (vacate

WORKMEN OF THE FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIAversusM/S. FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA

1985 INSC 4028 February 1985Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned 464 labourers at the Food Corporation of India's Siliguri depot who were originally employed through a contractor. In 1973 the corporation abolished the contractor and introduced a direct payment system, paying wages directly to the workers via Sardar/Mondal agents. The corporation later, in 1975, re

RAJINDER KUMAR KINDRAversusDELHI ADMINISTRATION THROUGH SECRETARY (LABOUR) AND ORS.

1984 INSC 18327 September 1984Appeal(s) allowed

Rajinder Kumar Kindra, a salesman, was dismissed after a domestic enquiry found him guilty of misconduct for allegedly negligently keeping his private cheque‑book unattended, which the employer claimed enabled the manager‑cum‑cashier to defraud the company. The dispute was referred to an arbitrator under Sec. 10(A)(1)

S. SIVASWAMLversusV. MALAIKANNAN AND OTHERS

1983 INSC 12827 September 1983Dismissed

In the 1980 Tamil Nadu Assembly election for the Ilayangudi constituency, the appellant was declared winner by a margin of 56 votes. The first respondent filed an election petition alleging that the Returning Officer had wrongly rejected ballot papers where the voter's mark was partially in the candidate's column and p

SHAMBU NATH GOYALversusBANK OF BARODA AND OTHERS

1983 INSC 13027 September 1983Appeal(s) allowed

Shambhu Nath Goyal, a clerk of Bank of Baroda, was dismissed after a departmental enquiry in 1965 conducted by Sen Gupta, who was appointed as Enquiry Officer. Goyal challenged the dismissal, alleging bias and procedural irregularities; the dispute was deemed industrial and referred to an Industrial Tribunal, which set

U.P. CO-OPERATIVE CANE UNION FEDERATION LTD. & ANOTHERversusLILADHAR & OTHERS

1980 INSC 16627 August 1980Dismissed

The respondent, a supervisor in a co‑operative sugarcane development society, was dismissed after disciplinary proceedings and sued the society in a civil court for reinstatement and back wages. The society argued that the suit was barred because, under Rule 115 of the U.P. Co‑operative Societies Rules, 1936, any dispu

SUDHIR CHANDRA SARKARversusTATA IRON & STEEL CO. LTD. AND OTHERS.

1984 INSC 6927 March 1984Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a permanent uncovenanted employee of Tata Iron & Steel Co., rendered 29 years of continuous service and resigned, thereby becoming eligible for retiring gratuity under the 1937 Retiring Gratuity Rules. The company refused payment, invoking Rule 10 which purported to give it absolute discretion to pay or

M. P. IRRIGATION KARAMCHARI SANGHversusTHE STATE OF M. P. AND ANR.

1985 INSC 3827 February 1985Appeal(s) allowed

The M.P. Irrigation Karamchar Sangh, a trade union, demanded a special Chambal allowance, dearness allowance equal to Central Government employees, and payment of strike wages from 1966. After settlement attempts failed, the dispute was reported under Section 12(4) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, but the State Go

THE TULSIPUR SUGAR CO. LTD.versusTIIE NOTIFIED AREA COMMITTEE, TULSIPUR

1980 INSC 3827 February 1980Dismissed

The Tulsipur Sugar Co. Ltd., whose factory lay in Shitlapur village, was brought within the jurisdiction of the Tulsipur Town Area Committee by a 1955 notification under Section 3 of the U.P. Town Area Act. Later, octroi was levied on goods entering the factory through a draft (Oct 1959) and final (Dec 1959) notificati

MEET SINGHversusSTATE OF PUNJAB

1980 INSC 3927 February 1980Dismissed

Meet Singh was convicted under Section 161 of the IPC and Section 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 and sentenced to one year rigorous imprisonment on each count, to run concurrently, together with a fine. The Punjab & Haryana High Court, while upholding the conviction, reduced the imprisonment term to the

SMT. KANWAL SOODversusNAWAL KISHORE AND ANOTHER

1982 INSC 8726 November 1982Appeal(s) allowed

R.C. Sood gifted a house to Anand Mayee Sangh with a stipulation that he could occupy it during his lifetime and, after his death, his widow could remain. The appellant, the widow of Sood's brother, was invited by Sood to live in the house in 1967 and continued to reside there after his death in 1973. The Sangh served

HANS RAJversusSTATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS.

1984 INSC 19926 October 1984Appeal(s) allowed

Hans Raj, a clerk who began service in 1949, was prematurely retired by the Deputy Commissioner of Bhatinda on 20 August 1975 under Rule 3(1)(a) of the Punjab Civil Services (Premature Retirement) Rules, 1975, on the ground that he had completed more than 25 years of service. He challenged the order, arguing that the b

SHRADHA DEVIversusKRISHNA CHANDRA PANT & OTHERS

1982 INSC 7926 October 1982Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, an unsuccessful candidate in a Rajya Sabha election conducted by single transferable vote, filed an election petition under section 81 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 seeking scrutiny and recount on the ground that several valid votes had been wrongly rejected and that the Returning Officer

GWALIOR DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE CENTRAL BANK LTD. GWALIORversusRAMESH CHANDRA MANGAL AND ORS.

1984 INSC 17926 September 1984Dismissed

The Gwalior District Co‑operative Central Bank Ltd., whose board had been superseded by the Registrar of Cooperative Societies and placed under the control of the Madhya Pradesh State Cooperative Bank (the Apex Bank), dismissed employee Ramesh Chandra Mangal for allegedly overstaying leave. The dismissal was ordered by

TRANSPORT COMMISSIONER, ANDHRA PRADESHversusSARDAR ALI, BUS OWNER

1983 INSC 10526 August 1983Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined whether Section 129‑A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939, which authorises police or other state‑appointed persons to seize and detain a motor vehicle used without registration or permit, infringes the fundamental right to practice any trade or profession under Article 19(1)(g) of the Constituti

BHAIYA RAMANUJ PRATAP DEOversusLALU MAHESHANUJ PRATAP DEO & ORS. AND VICE-VERSA

1981 INSC 15126 August 1981Disposed off

Bhaiya Rudra Pratap Deo, holder of the impartible Nagaruntari estate, executed an unregistered maintenance (khorposh) deed in 1952 granting eight villages to his brother’s son, Lalu Maheshanuj. The plaintiff alleged fraud and that the deed was void under Section 12A of the Chota Nagpur Encumbered Estates Act and the Bi

AZAD SINGH & OTHERSversusBARKAT ULLAH KHAN & OTHERS

1983 INSC 4626 April 1983Dismissed

The plaintiffs, who were Thekedars, claimed that the Theka granted to them was for personal cultivation, which under Section 12 of the Uttar Pradesh Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950 made them hereditary tenants entitled to retain possession. The defendants, lessees of the Zamindars, argued that they were

A. JANARDHANAversusUNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

1983 INSC 4726 April 1983Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a promotee in the Military Engineer Services (MES) Class I, challenged a 1974 seniority list that, applying a 9:1 quota between direct recruits and promotees, rendered him surplus and denied him a berth. The Court examined the validity of the earlier seniority lists of 1963 and 1967/68, the statutory cha

DR. RAMJI DWIVEDIversusSTATE OF U. P. & OTHERS

1983 INSC 4826 April 1983Dismissed

Ramji Dwivedi was appointed principal of a non‑government aided college after a selection committee chose him on 12 April 1981 and the college management issued an appointment order on 27 April 1981. However, the Uttar Pradesh Government had issued an order on 7 April 1981, under Section 9(4) of the Intermediate Educat

COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS & CENTRAL EXCISE & ANR.versusM/S. ORIENTAL TIMBER INDUSTRIES

1985 INSC 6926 March 1985Appeal(s) allowed

M/s Oriental Timber Industries, a manufacturer of plywood circles for packing, was previously assessed excise duty on the finished circles. After an audit objection, the Central Excise authorities issued notices demanding assessment on the plywood at the panel (block) stage under Item 16B of the First Schedule of the C

PHILIPS INDIA LTD.versusLABOUR COURT, MADRAS & ORS.

1985 INSC 7026 March 1985Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined whether an employer who prescribes working hours below the statutory maximum under the Tamil Nadu Shops and Establishments Act, 1947 must pay overtime at the statutory rate for work beyond those prescribed hours up to the statutory ceiling. Philips India Ltd. and the State Bank of India had f

CITY CORPORATION OF CALICUTversusTHACHAMBALATH SADALINAN & ORS.

1985 INSC 3526 February 1985Appeal(s) allowed

The Calicut City Corporation levied a licence fee under Schedule IV of the municipal act for the use of land to soak coconut husks. The respondents, who were conducting the soaking without a licence, challenged the fee, arguing that no specific service was conferred and that the levy was either an invalid fee (lacking

KRISHI UTPADAN MANDI SAMITI KANPUR, ETCversusGANGA DAL MILL AND CO. AND ORS. ETC.

1984 INSC 17525 September 1984Appeal(s) allowed

The Uttar Pradesh Mandi Samiti levied market fees on the sale of dal (split legumes) produced by Ganga Dal Mill, arguing that dal was a specified agricultural produce under the U.P. Krishi Utpadan Mandi Adhiniyam, 1964. The respondents contended that only whole‑grain legumes were specified and that dal, being a process

P. VENKAIAHversusG. KRISHNA RAO & OTHERS.

1981 INSC 14725 August 1981Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined an appeal concerning the grant of stage‑carriage permits under Rule 212 of the Andhra Pradesh Motor Vehicles Rules, 1964. The dispute centered on whether the proviso that an applicant may receive marks for either residential or sector qualification (whichever is more advantageous) infringed A

HARBANS SINGHversusSTATE OF PUNJAB

1984 INSC 12925 July 1984Dismissed

Harbans Singh was convicted under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 and the trial court imposed a sentence exceeding the statutory minimum. The Punjab and Haryana High Court, exercising its discretion under Section 5(2), reduced the sentence to the period already served, citing reasons it deemed sufficient. The pe

BHAGWAN DASS ARORAversusFIRST ADDL. DISTT. JUDGE, RAMPUR

1983 INSC 8325 July 1983Appeal(s) allowed

Bhagwan Dass obtained an ex‑parte decree in a small causes suit and, within the limitation period, applied for security under the proviso to s.17(1) of the Provincial Small Cause Courts Act, 1887. He furnished a surety bond stamped with a court‑fee of Rs 2, which the court later held was not duly stamped under the Indi

NARCINVA V. KAMAT AND ANR. ETC.versusALFREDO ANTONIO DOE MARTINS AND ORS.

1985 INSC 10525 April 1985Appeal(s) allowed

A pick‑up van owned by a partnership firm was involved in a road accident that killed one passenger and injured another. The victims' heirs claimed compensation, and the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal awarded Rs.75,000 and Rs.3,000 respectively. The insurer argued that the policy was void because the driver, a partner

BATA SHOE CO. (P) LTD. & OTHERSversusTHE COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE & ORS.

1985 INSC 10425 April 1985Disposed off

Bata Shoe Co. Ltd. manufactured footwear sold at a wholesale price of Rs 6.25 per pair. A 1967 notification exempted footwear under Item 36 of the Central Excise and Salt Act, 1944 if its "value" did not exceed Rs 5 per pair. The company argued that, under Section 4 of the Act, the value—after deducting trade discount

RAM NATH & ORS.versusUNION OF INDIA

1984 INSC 9225 April 1984Dismissed

The petitioners, owners of land acquired under the Resettlement of Displaced Persons (Land Acquisition) Act, 1948, challenged two provisos in Section 7(1)(e) that fixed compensation based on the market value as of September 1, 1939 plus 40 percent, arguing that they violated Section 299(2) of the Government of India Ac

SEBASTIAN M. HONGRAYversusUNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

1983 INSC 20524 December 1983Appeal(s) allowed

The petitioner, a student, filed a writ of habeas corpus under Article 32 of the Constitution on behalf of C. Daniel and C. Paul, who were allegedly taken by jawans of the 21st Sikh Regiment from Huining village to Phungrei camp on 10 March 1982 and thereafter disappeared. The respondents (Union of India, State of Mani

JOGDHAYANversusBABU RAM AND OTHERS

1982 INSC 8523 November 1982Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a decree‑holder in a pre‑emption suit, was required to deposit the purchase price and costs in court. He deposited the full amount except for a shortfall of 25 paise, which he later paid after obtaining permission, claiming a bona‑fide mistake. The executing court condoned the shortfall, but the first ex

K.C. JOSHIversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

1985 INSC 9823 April 1985Appeal(s) allowed

K.C. Joshi was appointed as Store Keeper in the Oil and Natural Gas Commission (ONGC) and, after completing his probation, was placed on the regular establishment. He was an active trade‑union worker and, following union actions, his services were terminated on 29 December 1967 with one month’s pay in lieu of notice, t

V.J. THOMAS AND ORS.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

1985 INSC 9923 April 1985Dismissed

The appellants, Junior Engineers recruited in 1973, sought promotion to Assistant Engineer under the Telegraphic Engineering Service rules. The 1966 Rules required a qualifying departmental examination after five years of service, but the 1981 Rules introduced a qualifying‑cum‑competitive exam and a note that the first

MOHD. AZEEMversusDISTRICT JUDGE, ALIGARH AND ORS.

1985 INSC 10123 April 1985Case Allowed

Manzoor Hussain, a tenant of a residential premises in Aligarh, died in 1969 leaving a widow, three sons and a daughter who continued to occupy the premises and pay rent. One son, Nairn, built a separate house in the same city in 1978‑80. The Prescribed Authority, relying on section 12(3) of the Uttar Pradesh Urban Bui

SEBASTIAN M. HONGRAYversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS

1984 INSC 8823 April 1984Directions issued

The Supreme Court entertained a writ of habeas corpus filed by Sebastian M. Hongray seeking the production of two missing persons, C. Daniel and C. Paul, who were alleged to be unlawfully detained. The respondents – the Union of India, the Ministry of Defence and the commanding officer of the 21st Sikh Regiment – faile

WELCOME HOTEL AND OTHERSversusSTATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH AND OTHERS

1983 INSC 10022 August 1983Dismissed

The State of Andhra Pradesh issued orders fixing maximum prices for certain cooked food items served by catering establishments under the Essential Commodities Act, 1955. Several hoteliers challenged the orders, arguing that the term "foodstuffs" in the Act does not cover cooked food and that the price fixation was arb

N. R. SRINIVASA IYERversusNEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO., LTD.

1983 INSC 8222 July 1983Appeal(s) allowed

The plaintiff's motor car was damaged in an accident and, under the terms of his insurance policy, was taken to a repair workshop where the insurer approved the repair estimate and agreed to pay the charges. While in the workshop the car was destroyed by fire. The plaintiff sued the insurer claiming that, by virtue of

DEVAKI NANDAN PRASADversusSTATE OF BIHAR & ORS.

1983 INSC 4522 April 1983Case Allowed

The petitioner, a former member of the Bihar Education Service, sought enforcement of a 1971 Supreme Court mandamus directing the State to compute his pension based on his promotions to Class II and Class I. Despite the Chief Minister’s orders in 1974, the State computed his pension as if he retired from Class I only,

BIBI RAHMANI KHATOON & ORS.versusHARKOO GOPE & ORS.

1981 INSC 10022 April 1981Case Partly allowed

Bibi Rahmani Khatoon and others sued Harkoo Gope and others for declaration of title and possession of two agricultural land parcels (khata Nos. 458 and 459). The trial court and the first appellate court declared the plaintiffs owners of both parcels. While a second appeal was pending, the State Government issued a no

G.S. LAMBA & ORS.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

1985 INSC 6622 March 1985Case Allowed

The petitioners, recruited to the Indian Foreign Service (Branch B) through limited departmental examinations, were promoted to integrated Grades II and III and placed in seniority lists dated June 1979 and June 1983. They challenged these lists, arguing that the lists were prepared on a quota‑rotation system that gave

STATE OF ORISSA AND ORS.versusSHIVA PARASHAD DAS AND ORS.

1985 INSC 3222 February 1985Appeal(s) allowed

Shiva Prasad Das, a forester appointed by the Conservator of Forests, was suspended by the District Forest Officer pending a disciplinary enquiry into alleged negligence. He challenged the suspension before the Orissa High Court, arguing that it violated Article 311(1) of the Constitution and Rule 12 of the Orissa Civi

V. S. MURTY & OTHERSversusTHE DEPUTY CHIEF ACCOUNTS OFFICER & OTHERS

1983 INSC 1522 February 1983Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, originally Upper Division Clerks in the Chief Engineer's office, were transferred in 1964 to the Deputy Chief Accounts Officer (DCAO) of the Nagarjuna Sagar Project and later regularised and permanently absorbed in Upper Division Clerk posts. Respondents, who had been serving in the DCAO's accounts orga

BALMER LAWRIE WORKERS' UNION, BOMBAY AND ANR.versusBALMER LAWRIE AND CO. LTD. AND ORS.

1984 INSC 24121 December 1984Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined a challenge by the Balmer Lawrie Workers Union (a non‑recognised union) to the constitutional validity of Section 20(2)(b) of the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971 and to Clause 17 of a settlement that required a 15 % deduction from ar

BHAGIRATH SINGH S/O MAHIPAT SINGH JUDEJAversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

1983 INSC 17821 November 1983Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant was charged under Section 307 IPC for stabbing a victim and was granted bail by the Sessions Judge. The State appealed, and the Gujarat High Court cancelled the bail, citing the victim's status as a social and political worker and the seriousness of the offence. The Supreme Court held that cancellation of

SHER SINGH & ORS.versusUNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

1983 INSC 15521 October 1983Dismissed

Sher Singh, a private operator holding stage‑carriage permits on an inter‑state route, applied for renewal of his permits under Section 58 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939. The Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation applied for a fresh permit on the same route. The Regional Transport Authority, invoking Section 47(1

RAMA KANT MISRAversusSTATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS

1982 INSC 7721 October 1982Appeal(s) allowed

Rama Kant Misra, a workman with over 14 years of service and secretary of the workers' union, was charged on 18 November 1971 with using abusive and threatening language towards a senior officer over a wage deduction. An inquiry found the charge proved and recommended dismissal, which was effected on 6 April 1972 befor

MOHD. IBRAHIM KHAN & ORS.versusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH & ORS.

1979 INSC 19421 September 1979Dismissed

The petitioners, residents of a locality, claimed that they were denied a hearing when the State Government granted a quasi‑permanent cinema licence to the third respondent, alleging a breach of natural justice. The dispute arose after the District Magistrate, acting as licensing authority, refused to renew a temporary

DELHI CLOTH AND GENERAL MILLS ETC.versusUNION OF INDIA ETC.

1983 INSC 7921 July 1983Dismissed

The petitioners, a group of companies, challenged the constitutional validity of Section 58A of the Companies Act, 1956 and Rule 3A of the Companies (Acceptance of Deposits) Rules, 1975, arguing that the mandatory 10% liquid asset requirement for deposits maturing in a year violated Articles 14 and 19(1)(g) of the Cons

STATE OF PUNJABversusHINDSONS (P) LTD.

1984 INSC 17320 September 1984Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent, Hindsons (PJ Ltd.), a dealer in tractors and spare parts, claimed a deduction for sales of belt‑pulley attachments on the ground that they were agricultural implements exempt from sales tax under Entry 34 of Schedule B of the Punjab General Sales Tax Act, 1948. The assessing authority rejected the claim

GHANSHYAM DASS AND OTHERSversusDOMINION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

1984 INSC 6220 March 1984Appeal(s) allowed

The plaintiff's father, Seth Lachhman Dass Gupta, had a contract with the Government for supplying charcoal and, due to a price escalation clause, served a notice under Section 80 of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) demanding the higher price. He died before filing a suit, and his three sons filed the suit as his lega

NARAIN KHAMMANversusPARDUMAN KUMAR JAIN

1984 INSC 19719 October 1984Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, N. Khamman, was a tenant of P. K. Jain, a former government servant who had been allotted government residential accommodation. A 1975 government order required servants who owned a dwelling in Delhi to vacate such accommodation or pay market rent. The respondent vacated the government house and moved in

COTTON CORPORATION OF INDIAversusUNITED INDUSTRIAL BANK

1983 INSC 12319 September 1983Appeal(s) allowed

The United Industrial Bank sued the Cotton Corporation of India seeking a declaration that the bank’s branch manager lacked authority to co‑accept usance bills and also obtained an interim injunction restraining the corporation from filing a winding‑up petition against the bank. The Bombay High Court’s Division Bench u

RAVINDRA ISHWARDAS SETHNA AND ANR.versusOFFICIAL LIQUIDATOR, HIGH COURT, BOMBAY AND ANOTHER

1983 INSC 9919 August 1983Appeal(s) allowed

The Official Liquidator, appointed to wind up Chit Centre Pvt. Ltd., took possession of the company's office premises and sought the court's direction on how to dispose of them. The Bombay High Court directed that the premises be let on a caretaker basis, leading the liquidator to enter a caretaker agreement with Smt.

MANOHAR NATH KAULversusSTATE OF JAMMU & KASHMIR

1983 INSC 4219 April 1983Dismissed

Manohar Nath Kaul, a Regional Officer of the Directorate of Field Publicity, obtained air tickets in lieu of exchange orders and, contrary to rules, included the ticket costs in his travel allowance bills, receiving payment. He was prosecuted for cheating under IPC s.420 and argued that prosecution required prior sanct

N.C. SHINGHALversusUNION OF INDIA

1980 INSC 4719 March 1980Dismissed

The appellant, Dr. N.C. Shinghal, a senior ophthalmologist, claimed that he should have been promoted to Supertime Grade II on 18 February 1971 when a vacancy was created by converting an unspecified specialist post at Willingdon Hospital, and that the subsequent promotion of other doctors (respondents 4‑24) violated R

VEERABHADRA RAOversusTEK CHAND

1984 INSC 19618 October 1984Dismissed

M. Veerabhadra Rao, a junior advocate, attested a forged affidavit (Ex. A‑1) on behalf of respondent Tek Chand, enabling the procurement of an income‑tax clearance certificate and registration of a sale deed. The State Bar Council’s Disciplinary Committee found him guilty of professional misconduct for attesting the af

DEVI LAL MAHTOversusSTATE OF BIHAR AND ANR.

1982 INSC 7518 October 1982Case Allowed

Devi Lal Mahto was arrested on March 2, 1982 and remained in jail when the District Magistrate, Dhanbad, issued a preventive detention order under the National Security Act on April 20, 1982. The petitioner challenged the order on three grounds: (i) the order was invalid because he was already in custody and could not

MERUGU SATYANARAYANA ETC. ETC.versusSTATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH AND OTHERS

1982 INSC 7618 October 1982Case Allowed

The Supreme Court examined two writ petitions under Article 32 filed by Merugu Satyanarayana and Bandela Ramulu, who were already in judicial custody when the District Magistrate of Adilabad issued preventive detention orders under the National Security Act, 1980. The petitioners argued that a person already detained c

RASHTRIYA MILL MAZDOOR SANGH, NAGPURversusTHE MODEL MILLS, NAGPUR AND ANR.

1984 INSC 17118 September 1984Appeal(s) allowed

The Rashtriya Mill Mazdoor Sangh filed four references under the Bombay Industrial Relations Act seeking bonus for workmen of Model Mills, Nagpur for the years 1964‑68, alleging the employer was liable under the Payment of Bonus Act, 1965. The employer contended that a notified order under Section 18A of the Industries

V. S. KUTIAN PILLAIversusRAMAKRISHNAN & ANR.

1979 INSC 18618 September 1979Dismissed

The petitioners, office bearers of a charitable Sabha, challenged a search warrant issued under Section 93(1)(c) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, on the ground that it violated the constitutional protection against self‑incrimination under Article 20(3). The Supreme Court examined whether a general search of pr

G.P. DOVAL AND OTHERSversusTHE CHIEF SECRETARY GOVERNMENT OF U.P. AND ORS.

1984 INSC 12418 July 1984Case Allowed

Petitioners, appointed as Khandsari Inspectors in 1960‑64 under temporary posts, challenged a provisional seniority list dated 22 March 1971 that placed them below later recruits. They argued that, since their appointments were later regularised by the Uttar Pradesh Public Service Commission, their seniority should be

GANESH PRASAD SAH KESARI & ANR.versusLAKSHMI NARAYAN GUPTA

1985 INSC 9518 April 1985Appeal(s) allowed

In a suit for eviction under the Bihar Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1947, the landlord sought to have the tenant's defence struck off for failing to deposit rent as ordered under Section 11A. The trial judge refused to strike off the defence, but the High Court reversed that decision, holding that

INDER PAL YADAV AND ORS. ETC.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS ETC.

1985 INSC 9618 April 1985Dismissed

Project casual labourers of Indian Railways, who had served continuously for years, were terminated when their projects ended. They filed writ petitions invoking Articles 41, 42 and 14 of the Constitution, seeking security of employment. The Railway Ministry issued a scheme treating such workers as temporary after 360

S. SHAMSHUDDIN & ORS. ETC.versusSTATE OF KARNATAKA & ORS.

1984 INSC 8718 April 1984Dismissed

The petitioners challenged the Central Government's fixation of a uniform quota of 50 all‑India tourist permits per State under Section 63(7) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (as amended by the 1969 Amendment), alleging that the quota was arbitrary and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution. The Court examined whet

VISHNU DAYAL JHUNJHUNWALA & ANR.versusUNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

1984 INSC 8618 April 1984Dismissed

The appellant owned a sugar mill that had been permanently shut down before the Central Government issued an order under Rule 125A of the Defence of India Rules, 1962, taking over its management and appointing an authorised controller. The appellant argued that because the mill was closed and not engaged in production,

STATE OF PUNJABversusNOHAR CHAND

1984 INSC 11217 May 1984Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Punjab prosecuted Nohar Chand, a fertilizer manufacturer in Ludhiana, for producing sub‑standard fertilizer that was marketed through his agent, Sachdeva Enterprises, in Kapurthala. A sample taken from the agent’s premises was found sub‑standard, leading to a criminal complaint under the Essential Commodit

ABDUL REHMAN ANTULAYversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS. ETC.

1984 INSC 8517 April 1984Dismissed

The petitioners filed a writ petition under Article 32 of the Constitution challenging the validity of an order and judgment previously passed by this Court. The central issue was whether the Supreme Court could entertain a writ petition against its own order or judgment. The Court held that a writ petition cannot be u

ANANT KIBE & ORS.versusPURUSHOTTAM RAO & ORS

1984 INSC 8317 April 1984Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned a family dispute over a 15.62‑acre inam garden granted in 1837, which had become part of the joint Hindu family estate. After the Madhya Pradesh Land Revenue Code, 1959 came into force, the inam holder became a bhumiswami under s.158(1)(b), and the question arose whether this conversion gave him excl

VIJAY KUMARversusSTATE OF J & K & OTHERS

1982 INSC 3917 March 1982Case Allowed

Vijay Kumar was arrested on 26 June 1981 and detained under the Jammu & Kashmir Public Safety Act, 1978 on 11 July 1981. He filed a representation against the detention on 29 July 1981, which reached the State Government on 12 August 1981 and was finally rejected on 31 August 1981, a delay of 19 days after receipt. The

P.K.RAMACHANDRA IYER & ORS.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

1983 INSC 20416 December 1983Appeal(s) allowed

The case arose from several writ and review petitions filed by senior scientists of the Indian Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR) and its affiliates alleging discrimination in pay scales, illegal selection procedures, and denial of statutory rights. The petitioners claimed that ICAR, though registered as a society

GENERAL LABOUR UNION (RED FLAG) BOMBAYversusB. V. CHAVAN AND ORS.

1984 INSC 21416 November 1984Disposed off

The General Labour Union (Red Flag) Bombay filed two complaints alleging that the employers, Delta Wires Pvt. Ltd. and Delta Spokes Manufacturing Co., had imposed a lock‑out in violation of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 and the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1

GOA, DAMAN AND DIU BOARD OF SECONDARY EDUCATIONversusKUMARI HEMA LAAD AND ORS.

1984 INSC 14416 August 1984Appeal(s) allowed

A batch of students filed writ petitions challenging clauses (1) and (2) of Rule 37 of the Goa, Daman and Diu Secondary and Higher Secondary Education Rules, 1975, which barred inspection and re‑valuation of answer books. The Bombay High Court, relying on its earlier decision in Paritosh Bhupesh Kumarsheth v. Maharasht

SUDARSAN CHITS (I) LTD.versusO. SUKUMARAN PILLAI & ORS .

1984 INSC 14316 August 1984Appeal(s) allowed

Sudarsan Chits (India) Ltd. was ordered to be wound up under the Companies Act, 1956, but the High Court held the winding‑up order in abeyance while a scheme of compromise was being implemented. The company sought a direction that the provisional liquidator file claim petitions under section 446(2)(b) to recover debts

S.A. KINI & ANOTHERversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

1985 INSC 9016 April 1985Dismissed

The petitioners, senior officers of the Canara Bank Officers' Association, alleged that senior bank officials forced bank staff to collect donations and sell greeting cards for the Canara Bank Relief and Welfare Society and the Association's Trust Fund, claiming coercion and victimisation. The Bombay High Court dismiss

RAFIQ & ANR.versusMUNSHILAL & ANR.

1981 INSC 9516 April 1981Appeal(s) allowed

Rafiq appealed to the Allahabad High Court, but his appointed advocate failed to appear, resulting in the dismissal of the appeal. Rafiq filed an application seeking recall of the dismissal and permission to participate, which the High Court rejected due to the advocate's delay in filing an affidavit. The Supreme Court

R. S. NAYAKversusA.R. ANTULAY

1984 INSC 3216 February 1984Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant R.S. Nayak filed a private complaint against the respondent A.R. Antulay, then Chief Minister of Maharashtra, alleging corruption under Sections 161, 164, 165 IPC and Section 5 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947. The complaint was initially dismissed for lack of a sanction under Section 6 of the 19

A.R. ANTULAYversusRAMDAS SRINIWAS NAYAK AND ANOTHER

1984 INSC 3316 February 1984Dismissed

The appellant, A.R. Antulay, challenged the jurisdiction of a Special Judge who had taken cognizance of corruption offences under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947, based on a private complaint filed by the respondent, R.S. Nayak. The issues were whether a Special Judge could entertain a private complaint under th

L. ROBERT D'SOUZAversusTHE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER SOUTHERN RAILWAY & ANR.

1982 INSC 2116 February 1982Appeal(s) allowed

L. Robert D'Souza, who had served continuously in Southern Railway since 1948, was transferred as punishment for union activities and later reinstated. In September 1974, while on a fast, he was deemed to have unauthorisedly absent himself and his service was terminated retrospectively from 18‑September 1974. He challe

PRITAM DASS MAHANTversusSHIROMANI GURUDWARA PRABANDHAK COMMITTEE

1984 INSC 1216 January 1984Appeal(s) allowed

Sixty‑five persons claiming to be Sikhs applied to the Punjab Government under Section 7(1) of the Sikh Gurdwara Act, 1925 to have the Dera Bhai Bhagtu in Ramgarh declared a Sikh Gurdwara. The State Government issued a notification, after which the appellant, Pritam Dass, filed a petition under Sections 8 and 10 assert

DR. ASIM KUMAR BOSEversusUNION OF INDIA & OTHERS

1982 INSC 9915 December 1982Appeal(s) allowed

Dr. Asim Kumar Bose, a Specialist Grade II radiologist attached to Irwin Hospital (a teaching hospital of Maulana Azad Medical College), claimed eligibility for appointment as Associate Professor (and later Professor) of Radiotherapy based on his ex‑officio role as Associate Professor of Radiology. The Ministry of Heal

MAQSOODAN & OTHERSversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH [AND VICE-VERSA]

1982 INSC 9815 December 1982Dismissed

The case concerned the murder of Jadoo and injuries to three others during a waylaying by twelve accused. The trial court convicted eleven of the accused, including Maqsoodan, under sections 302, 307 and related provisions, sentencing Maqsoodan to death. On appeal, the Allahabad High Court reduced Maqsoodan's sentence

SARDAR GOVINDRAO MAHADIK & ANR.versusDEVI SAHAI & ORS.

1981 INSC 20615 December 1981Appeal(s) allowed

The mortgagor, Sardar Govindrao Mahadik, mortgaged his house to Devi Sahai and later agreed to sell it to the mortgagee, but the sale deed was never registered. The mortgagee claimed protection under Section 53A of the Transfer of Property Act, arguing that his possession and a Rs 1,000 payment for stamp duties constit

BIRU MAHATOversusDISTRICT MAGISTRATE, DHANBAD.

1982 INSC 7415 October 1982Appeal(s) allowed

Biru Mahato was arrested in January 1982 for offences under the IPC and was already in jail when the District Magistrate, Dhanbad, on 5 February 1982 issued a preventive detention order under Section 3(2) of the National Security Act, 1980, to prevent him from acting prejudicial to public order. The order was served wh

JAGDISH PRASADversusSMT. ANGOORI DEVI

1984 INSC 6015 March 1984Appeal(s) allowed

Jagdish Prasad, a tenant, was evicted by his landlord Angoori Devi on the allegation that he had sub‑let the premises to Pavan Trading Company. The trial court presumed sub‑letting solely from a photograph showing the son of the trading company’s proprietor in the shop, and ordered eviction. The Additional District Jud

JITENDRA SINGH RATHORversusSHRI BAIDYANATH AYURVED BHAWAN LTD. & ANR.

1984 INSC 6115 March 1984Appeal(s) allowed

Jitendra Singh Rathor, a librarian, was terminated for misconduct and filed a complaint before the Industrial Tribunal under Section 33A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The Tribunal held that although misconduct was proved, termination was unwarranted and ordered reinstatement with half of the back wages. The emp

SHAYAM BABUversusDISTRICT JUDGE, MORADABAD & OTHERS

1983 INSC 19714 December 1983Appeal(s) allowed

The landlords of a shop applied under section 21 of the Uttar Pradesh Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 for release of the premises for personal use, invoking the fourth proviso which requires consideration of comparative hardship. The shop had been let to Krishan Kumar, who, with the

FOOD INSPECTOR, MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, BARODAversusMADANLAL RAMLAL SHARMA AND ANOTHER

1982 INSC 9614 December 1982Dismissed

The Food Inspector of the Baroda Municipal Corporation purchased curd from the respondents' shop and sent samples for analysis, which showed marginal adulteration. The trial court convicted the respondents under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954, but the Sessions Judge acquitted them on the ground that the

KISHAN CHAND MANGALversusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN

1982 INSC 7214 October 1982Dismissed

Kishan Chand Mangal, a factory inspector, demanded a Rs.150 bribe from factory owner Rajendra Dutt, who filed a complaint. The Anti‑Corruption Department set a trap, marking the money with phenolphthalein and having two witnesses, Ram Babu and Keshar Mal, observe the hand‑over. The accused’s hands turned pink when dipp

D. P. MAHESHWARIversusDELHI ADMN. & ORS.

1983 INSC 12014 September 1983Appeal(s) allowed

D.P. Maheshwari was terminated from his employment in 1969 and raised an industrial dispute that was referred to the Additional Labour Court under sections 10(1)(c) and 12(5) of the Industrial Disputes Act. The Labour Court examined the evidence and held that Maheshwari was a "workman" under section 2(s) because his du

RASIKLAL VAGHAJIBHAI PATELversusAHMEDABAD MUNICIPAL CORPORATION AND ANOTHER

1985 INSC 314 January 1985Dismissed

The petitioner, a former Sales Tax Inspector removed for proven misconduct, applied for a Head Clerk position with Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation and falsely claimed he had resigned voluntarily, suppressing the fact of his removal. Upon discovery, he was charge‑sheeted and removed again, and his challenges before the

STATE OF ASSAMversusMAFIZUDDIN AHMED

1983 INSC 314 January 1983Dismissed

The State of Assam charged Sub‑Inspector Mafizuddin Ahmed with murder for allegedly pouring kerosene on his wife and setting her on fire. The prosecution relied on the victim's dying declaration recorded by a magistrate, an oral statement to her uncle, and the testimony of her 7‑year‑old son. The trial court convicted,

FATEH SINGH AND ANOTHER ETC.versusSEWA RAM AND OTHERS ETC.

1983 INSC 11813 September 1983Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined a dispute arising from the acquisition of 196 bighas of land under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, where the owners, a mortgagee, a tenant and a sub‑tenant (Sewa Ram) each claimed compensation. The owners argued that, having redeemed the mortgage under Section 15 of the Delhi Land Reforms Act

MATHURALALversusBHANWARLAL & ANR.

1979 INSC 18013 September 1979Dismissed

The appellant Mathuralal disputed a house with Bhanwarlal, prompting the Sub‑Divisional Magistrate to issue a preliminary order under s.145(1) CrPC 1973 and subsequently attach the property under s.146(1) on the ground of emergency. The appellant contended that once the attachment was made, the magistrate lost jurisdic

VISHUNDAS HUNDUMAL, ETC.versusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH & ORS.

1981 INSC 6713 March 1981Case Allowed

The petitioners, holders of stage‑carriage permits under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939, challenged Scheme No. 50‑M which reserved certain routes for exclusive operation by the Madhya Pradesh Road Transport Corporation. When the scheme came into force, the permits of some operators whose routes overlapped the reserved ro

WORKMEN OF HINDUSTAN STEEL LTD. AND ANR.versusHINDUSTAN STEEL LTD. AND ORS.

1984 INSC 23712 December 1984Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined the dismissal of an assistant of Hindustan Steel Ltd. who was removed from service under Standing Order 32 on the ground that his continued employment was "inexpedient". The employer dispensed with the disciplinary enquiry prescribed in Standing Order 31 and did not record any specific reason

CHAND KUMAR KAPURversusCHIEF SETTLEMENT COMMISSIONER PUNJAB & ORS.

1983 INSC 19512 December 1983Dismissed

The appellant, a displaced person from West Pakistan, was allotted about six standard acres of land in a semi‑urban village under the quasi‑permanent scheme of the East Punjab Administration of Evacuee Property Act, 1947. In 1952 the Director of Rehabilitation proposed, and the Governor approved, a 50% premium cut for

S. K. BHATIA & OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. & OTHERS

1983 INSC 9212 August 1983Dismissed

The petitioners, owners of mini‑buses, challenged Condition No. 18 attached to their contract‑carriage permits, which limited the age of the vehicle (originally four years, later seven). They argued that the condition violated Article 14 because omnibuses were not subject to a similar restriction, that it was ultra‑vir

KAMALUDDIN ANSARI & CO.versusUNION OF INDIA

1983 INSC 9112 August 1983Dismissed

The Directorate General of Supplies & Disposals (DGS&D) entered into a standard form contract with Kamaluddin for timber supply, which contained Clause 18 allowing the Government to recover any claimed sum by appropriating amounts due under other contracts, and Clause 24 providing for arbitration. Kamaluddin failed to

B. A. JAYARAM AND OTHERS ETC.versusUNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

1983 INSC 9412 August 1983Dismissed

The petitioners, operators of tourist vehicles holding all‑India permits issued under Section 63(7) of the Motor Vehicles Act, challenged Karnataka's withdrawal of a tax exemption that had previously been granted to such vehicles. The exemption was intended to avoid double taxation of tourist vehicles when they operate

GOPI NATH GHOSHversusSTATE OF WEST BENGAL

1983 INSC 17311 November 1983Appeal(s) allowed

Gopinath Ghosh was convicted by a Sessions Court and sentenced to life imprisonment for murder under IPC sections 302 and 34. He later contended before the Supreme Court that he was a "child" under the West Bengal Children Act, 1959, being only 16‑17 years old at the time of the offence. The Court ordered a medical age

VED GUPTAversusAPSARA THEATRES

1983 INSC 9011 August 1983Appeal(s) allowed

Ved Gupta obtained a licence to exhibit films at Apsara Theatre in his personal capacity, while the cinema was operated by a partnership that included him and two others. The partners claimed that the licence was the property of the partnership and that they were entitled to notice and a hearing before the licensing au

AMRIT BHIKAJI KALE & ORS.versusKASHINATH JANARDHAN TRADE & ANR.

1983 INSC 6611 May 1983Dismissed

The case concerned a 16‑acre agricultural plot in Ahmednagar where, under Section 32 of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948, the tenant Janardhan became a "deemed purchaser" on the tiller's day of 1 April 1957. The landlord Tarachand Chopra later died leaving a will in favour of his minor son Ashoklal,

RAM AVTAR SHARMA & ORS. ETC.versusSTATE OF HARYANA AND ANR. ETC.

1985 INSC 8611 April 1985Case Allowed

The petitioners, workmen dismissed after domestic enquiries, raised industrial disputes and sought reinstatement. Conciliation failed and the State of Haryana (for four workmen) and the Central Government (for one workman) refused to refer the disputes to an Industrial Tribunal under Section 10(1) of the Industrial Dis

STATE OF U.P.versusLAXMI BRAHMAN & ANR.

1983 INSC 2211 March 1983Appeal(s) allowed

The respondents, Laxmi Brahman and Naval Garg, were arrested for murder (IPC s.302) and surrendered before a magistrate on 2 November 1974. The investigating officer failed to file the charge‑sheet within the 60‑day limit prescribed by the then Section 167(2) of the Cr.P.C., and the respondents did not apply for bail u

RAM PYARE CHAUDHARY & ANR.versusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ORS.

1982 INSC 1711 February 1982Appeal(s) allowed

The District Co-operative Federation, Basti held a poll on 11 September 1978 to elect its Committee of Management, but an injunction prevented the declaration of results until 28 January 1980. The elected members' term, as per Rule 445(1) of the U.P. Cooperative Societies Rules, is three cooperative years including the

CHINNAMARKATHIAN ALIAS MUTHU GOUNDER & ANOTHERversusAYYAVOO ALIAS PERIANA GOUNDER & OTHERS

1981 INSC 20210 December 1981Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants were cultivating tenants occupying land owned by the respondents, who sought eviction on the ground of rent arrears for 1958‑59, 1959‑60 and 1960‑61. The Revenue Divisional Officer (RDO) determined the arrears, granted the tenants six weeks to pay, and in the same order stipulated that failure to pay wou

MURARI MOHAN DEBversusTHE SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF INDIA & ORS.

1985 INSC 8210 April 1985Appeal(s) allowed

Murari Mohan Deb, a Class IV forester of the Tripura Government, was compulsorily retired in 1962 by the Chief Forest Officer. He challenged the order, alleging denial of a fair hearing and violation of natural‑justice principles. The respondents contended that compulsory retirement is not a dismissal under Art. 311(2)

M/S SHENOY AND CO. REPRESENTED BY ITS PARTNER BELE SRINIVASA RAO STREET, BBNGALORE AND OTHERSversusTHE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, CIRCLE II BANGALORE AND OTHERS

1985 INSC 8310 April 1985Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined whether its earlier judgment in Hansa Corporation’s case, which upheld the Karnataka Tax on Entry of Goods Act, 1979, was binding on a large group of traders who had obtained mandamus from the Karnataka High Court but whose writs were not appealed against. The petitioners argued that, because

AJIT SINGH & OTHERS ETC.versusSTATE OF PUNJAB & ANOTHER

1983 INSC 2110 March 1983Case Allowed

The petitioners were appointed as Trust Executive Officers under the Punjab Town Improvement Act, 1922, with a contractual clause stating a one‑year probation period. After completing that year and receiving an increment, the State Government dissolved the improvement trusts and, invoking Rule 9 of the Punjab Trust Ser

JODH SINGHversusUNION OF INDIA & ANR.

1980 INSC 1989 October 1980Dismissed

Flt Lt. Panj Rattan Singh, an Indian Air Force officer, died in service. He had executed a will bequeathing his property to his father and had nominated his parents and siblings for provident fund and pension benefits, but not his wife. The widow, Hardev Kaur, was granted a special family pension under Rule 74 of the A

SANT RAJ & ANR.versusO.P. SINGLA & ANR.

1985 INSC 819 April 1985Case Partly allowed

Two loaders, Sant Raj and Itwari Lal Sherya, were terminated by their employer, a foreign air‑transport company. The Labour Court held the termination to be retrenchment and illegal because the employer had not complied with Section 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, and awarded them one year's wages as compensa

STATE OF GUJARATversusDHRANGADHRA CHEMICAL WORKS LTD.

1985 INSC 799 April 1985Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Gujarat (successor to the State of Bombay) sued Dhrangadhra Chemical Works Ltd. for unpaid royalty under a 1950 agreement that required payment at Rs.0-2-3 per Bengal Maund on salt sold, a minimum annual production of 50,000 tons, and a guaranteed minimum royalty if production fell short. The company argue

HARI DATT KAINTHLA & ANR.versusSTATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH & ORS.

1980 INSC 709 April 1980Dismissed

The appellants, junior subordinate judges in Himachal Pradesh, challenged the promotions of three officers to District/Additional District & Sessions Judge (DSJ/ADSJ) and two officers to a selection‑grade subordinate judge post, arguing that such promotions are selection posts that must be based solely on merit and not

INDER MAL JAIN & ANR. ETCversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS. ETC.

1983 INSC 1948 December 1983Dismissed

The petitioners, who operated as railway travel agents serving middle‑ and lower‑middle‑class passengers, challenged the constitutionality of Section 114A of the Indian Railways Act, 1890 and the Railway Tourist Agent Rules, 1980, alleging that the provisions imposed unreasonable and arbitrary restrictions on their rig

PRASAD & ORS.versusV. GOVINDASWAMI MUDALIAR & ORS.

1981 INSC 2008 December 1981Appeal(s) allowed

The Karta of a joint Hindu family, K.V. Purushotham, incurred large debts in a personal fungi business and, together with his brother, executed a sale deed on 22 August 1955 transferring almost the entire family property for a nominal Rs.16,500, purportedly to discharge those debts. The sons of the Karta and his brothe

RAM AND SHYAM COMPANYversusSTATE OF HARYANA AND ORS.

1985 INSC 1358 May 1985Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Ram & Shyam Co., submitted the highest bid for a minor‑mineral quarry in Haryana, but the State Government, invoking Rule 30(4) of the Punjab Minor Mineral Concession Rules, declined to confirm the bid and instead awarded the lease to a fourth respondent who had made a secret higher offer to the Chief Mi

AMRIT NAHATAversusUNION OF INDIA

1985 INSC 1298 May 1985Disposed off

Amrit Nahata filed a writ petition challenging sections of the Cinematograph Act and Censorship Rules and seeking certification of his film ‘Kissa Kursee Ka’. The Supreme Court ordered the film’s negatives and prints to be preserved and screened before five judges, but the film was not made available. The Solicitor Gen

VED PRAKASH GUPTAversusDELTON CABLE INDIA (P) LTD.

1984 INSC 568 March 1984Disposed off

Ved Prakash Gupta, employed as a security inspector at Delton Cable India, was dismissed after a domestic enquiry found him guilty of abusing a worker. The Labour Court initially held he was not a "workman" under s.2(s) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, rendering the reference invalid, but the Supreme Court directe

KAMLAKAR PRASAD CHATURVEDIversusSTATE OF M. P. & ANR

1983 INSC 1467 October 1983Case Allowed

The petitioner, Kamlakar Prasad Chaturvedi, was detained under Section 3(2) of the National Security Act, 1980 on seven grounds, two of which related to incidents that occurred in 1978 and 1980, more than five and two years respectively before the detention order dated 6 May 1983. The petitioner challenged the order on

PRECISION STEEL AND ENGINEERING WORKS AND ANOTHERversusPREM DEVA NIRANJAN DEVA TAYAL

1982 INSC 697 October 1982Appeal(s) allowed

The landlord, a Hindu Undivided Family, sought eviction of the tenant, Precision Steel & Engineering Works, under clause (e) of the proviso to Section 14(1) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, claiming bona‑fide personal need for the premises. The tenant filed an affidavit seeking leave to contest, denying the landlord's cl

SARDAR GOVINDRAO & ORS.versusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH & ORS.

1982 INSC 537 May 1982Dismissed

The appellants, members of the Bhuskute family of Timarni, claimed they were descendants of a former ruling chief and therefore entitled to a grant of money or pension under section 5(3)(ii) of the Central Provinces and Berar Revocation of Land Revenue Exemptions Act, 1948. The State Government rejected the claim, hold

STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS.versusAJUDHIA NATH AND ANR.

1981 INSC 1107 May 1981Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Punjab sought recovery of still‑head duty from liquor vendors Ajudhia Nath and others who had failed to lift the quota of country liquor and to deposit the duty as required by Condition 8 of their licences. The vendors contended that still‑head duty was an excise duty that could be levied only on manufactu

JAGRUP SINGHversusSTATE OF HARYANA

1981 INSC 1137 May 1981Appeal(s) allowed

Jagrup Singh struck his uncle Chanan Singh on the head with the blunt side of a gandhala during a marriage ceremony, causing a fatal head injury. The trial court convicted him of murder under s.302 IPC, a decision affirmed by the High Court, which held that the prosecution had proved intention to cause a bodily injury

M.M. QUASIMversusMANOHAR LAL SHARMA & ORS.

1981 INSC 837 April 1981Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a tenant, was sued for eviction by the respondents under the Bihar Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1947 on grounds of personal requirement (to open a clinic) and alleged rent default for three months. The trial court ordered eviction, and the appellate court dismissed the appeal, ignori

GANGABAI W/O RAMBILAS GILDAversusCHHABUBAI W/O PUKHARAJJI GANDHI

1981 INSC 1906 November 1981Dismissed

The respondent borrowed money from the appellant and executed a nominal sale deed and rent note for a house, claiming the documents were a sham and that the rent represented interest. The appellant sued in the Court of Small Causes for rent recovery, which decreed that the documents were a genuine sale deed, making the

GLAXO LABORATORIESversusTHE PRESIDING OFFICER, LABOUR COURT MEERUT & ORS.

1983 INSC 1416 October 1983Dismissed

Glaxo Laboratories, a multinational employer, charged a striking worker and his co‑workers with misconduct under clauses 10, 16 and 30 of Standing Order 22, alleging they boarded a company bus and assaulted "loyal" workmen. The worker sought interpretation of the standing order under s.11‑C of the U.P. Industrial Dispu

U.P. STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD AND ANOTHERversusTHE LABOUR COURT (I) U.P., KANPUR AND OTHERS

1983 INSC 1436 October 1983Appeal(s) allowed

The second respondent, a former coolie of the Kanpur Electricity Supply Corporation, was retired on 31 March 1979 upon attaining the age of 58. He claimed the retirement was invalid because the original service conditions, under the Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946, did not prescribe an age of superann

FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA & ANR.versusYADAV ENGINEER & CONTRACTOR

1982 INSC 626 August 1982Appeal(s) allowed

The dispute arose from a contract between Food Corporation of India and Yadav Engineer that contained an arbitration clause. Yadav Engineer filed a suit seeking a declaration that the contract was subsisting and an interim injunction against the corporation. The corporation appeared, sought time to reply to the injunct

ARKAL GOVIND RAJ RAOversusCIBA GEIGY OF INDIA LTD., BOMBAY

1985 INSC 1236 May 1985Appeal(s) allowed

Arkal Govind Raj Rao was employed by Ciba Geigy of India Ltd. as a stenographer‑cum‑accountant, later promoted to Assistant and designated Group Leader. After his termination, the employer argued that he was not a "workman" under Section 2(s) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, claiming he performed supervisory and a

LAKSHMAN AND ORS.versusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

1983 INSC 636 May 1983Case Allowed

The petitioners, nomadic graziers from Gujarat and Rajasthan, challenged a Madhya Pradesh notification that imposed higher grazing charges on "foreign cattle" (cattle owned by persons from other states), prescribed a specific transit route, and limited the period of transit to 45 days. They argued that these measures v

STATE OF MYSORE ETC.versusM. L. NAGADE AND GADAG & ORS.

1983 INSC 656 May 1983Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Mysore and its officers appealed against High Court orders that had set aside demands for non‑agricultural (N.A.) assessment levied under Rule 71 of the Hyderabad Land Revenue Rules (amended 4 July 1958) and Rule 81 of the Bombay Land Revenue Rules (amended 27 March 1958). The petitioners argued that the r

KOSHAL KUMAR GUPTA & ORS.versusSTATE OF J. & K. AND ORS.

1984 INSC 776 April 1984Dismissed

The petitioners challenged the admission process to the Regional Engineering College, Srinagar, alleging that the viva‑voce test, its method of questioning and the allocation of 15 marks were arbitrary and could affect merit. The selection procedure required candidates to appear for a written entrance exam (85 marks) a

TARAPORE & COMPANYversusCOCHIN SHIPYARD LTD. COCHIN & ANR.

1984 INSC 556 March 1984Appeal(s) allowed

Tarapore & Co. entered into a works contract with Cochin Shipyard Ltd. for the construction of a building dock, which included a clause (Clause 40) referring all disputes to a sole arbitrator. The contractor later claimed compensation for the increased cost of imported pile‑driving equipment and technical know‑how, and

DIRECTOR OF INDUSTRIES, U.P. AND ORS.versusDEEP CHAND AGGARWAL

1980 INSC 216 February 1980Appeal(s) allowed

The Director of Industries, U.P. advanced a loan of Rs.15,000 to Deep Chand Aggarwal for setting up a cottage industry, secured by a mortgage on his house. When Aggarwal defaulted, the State used Section 3 of the Public Moneys (Recovery of Dues) Act, 1965, read with the Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, to trea

GAMON INDIA LIMITEDversusNIRANJAN DASS

1983 INSC 1885 December 1983Dismissed

Niranjan Dass, a senior clerk of Gammon India Ltd., was served notice of termination on the ground of a recession in business, effective 14 October 1967. The dispute was referred to an Industrial Tribunal, which held that the termination was an illegal retrenchment and declared Dass to remain in service with entitlemen

KRISHNABAI ANAJI GHULE AND OTHERSversusNIVRUTTI RAMCHANDRA RAYKAR AND ANOTHER

1983 INSC 1125 September 1983Dismissed

The case concerned a certificated landlord who, after obtaining an exemption certificate under s.88-C of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948, sought possession of land from excluded tenants under s.33-B, claiming he needed it for personal cultivation. The tenants challenged the landlord's claim, arguing

GOPALAKRISHNA MENON AND ANOTHERversusD. RAJA REDDY AND ANOTHER

1983 INSC 1135 September 1983Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, a father and son, entered into a printing‑press agreement with the first respondent and later filed a civil suit for recovery of a deposit and damages, producing the original contract and a money receipt. The respondent complained that the signature on the receipt was forged, alleging offences under Sec

SMT. DIPOversusWASSAN SINGH & OTHERS

1983 INSC 595 May 1983Appeal(s) allowed

Smt. Dipo sued to recover possession of her deceased brother Bua Singh's properties, claiming to be his nearest heir. The trial court held that she could inherit only the non‑ancestral lands, as under local custom a sister is excluded from ancestral property in favor of collaterals. On appeal, the Supreme Court examine

DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICERversusBISHWANATH TEA CO. LTD.

1981 INSC 1085 May 1981Appeal(s) allowed

Bishwanath Tea Co. Ltd., a corporate lessee of a tea plantation lease, sought to cut timber from the leased grant for constructing staff houses in other tea estates and challenged the Divisional Forest Officer's demand for royalty, filing a writ petition under Art. 226 for refund and a mandamus to waive royalty. The Hi

R. S. NAYAKversusA.R. ANTULAY

1984 INSC 765 April 1984Disposed off

The Supreme Court dealt with two criminal matters transferred from the Special Judge, Greater Bombay, to a sitting High Court Judge. The issues were the procedural law to be applied to the trial after transfer and who would act as public prosecutor when cognizance was taken under Section 8(1) of the Criminal Law (Amend

WORKMEN OF M/S HINDUSTAN LEVER LTD. & ORS.versusMANAGEMENT OF M/S HINDUSTAN LEVER LTD.

1984 INSC 55 January 1984Appeal(s) allowed

The case arose when two salesmen, who were also union office‑bearers, were disciplined and terminated by Hindustan Lever Ltd. The union claimed the dismissals were illegal and that the employer was retaliating for trade‑union activity. The employer argued that the salesmen were not "workmen" under the Industrial Disput

BABULAL NAGAR AND ORS.versusSHREE SYNTHETICS LTD. & ORS.

1984 INSC 1054 May 1984Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, five trade‑union workmen of Shree Synthetics Ltd., were dismissed after a domestic enquiry that found them guilty of assaulting a co‑worker. They challenged the dismissal before the Labour Court under Section 61 of the Madhya Pradesh Industrial Relations Act, 1960, which upheld the enquiry. The Industri

STATE OF UTTAR PRADESHversusZAVAD ZAMA KHAN

1984 INSC 1064 May 1984Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent was detained under the National Security Act, 1980, and made a representation under Article 22(5) of the Constitution, which was forwarded to the Advisory Board. He also filed a separate representation for revocation of his detention under section 14 of the Act to the Prime Minister. The Central Governme

UNION OF INDIA & ANRversusAVTAR SINGH & ANR .

1984 INSC 754 April 1984Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned the Punjab Refugees (Registration of Land Claims) Act, 1948 and the scope of the Central Government's revisional power under its Section 33. Harnam Singh, a displaced person, and his family had obtained land allotments which were later challenged. The Central Government first sent a D.O. letter on 31

AMITABH SHRIVASTAVAversusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH & ORS.

1982 INSC 144 February 1982Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a son of a military personnel, secured 43.6% marks in the pre‑medical examination for admission to one of the six medical colleges in Madhya Pradesh. Under the statutory Rules, the minimum qualifying aggregate was 50% (reducible to 45% by Rule 20), and vacant seats after this reduction were to be filled

SMT. RUKHAMANBAIversusSHIVRAM & ORS.

1981 INSC 1583 September 1981Dismissed

Rukhamanbai, a life‑tenant under a 1930 deed of settlement, leased agricultural land to five tenants. The tenants sought price determination from the Agricultural Lands Tribunal under Section 32G of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948, claiming they were "deemed tenants" under Section 4 and would become

MANGE RAMversusBRIJ MOHAN AND OTHERS

1983 INSC 873 August 1983Appeal(s) allowed

Mange Ram, the petitioner, challenged the election of Brij Mohan to the Haryana Legislative Assembly by filing an election petition under the Representation of the People Act, 1951. During the trial he sought to examine a large number of witnesses he had kept present in court, but whose names were not included in the l

VUAYSINGH RATHOREversusMURARILAL & ORS.

1979 INSC 1413 August 1979Case Partly allowed

The appellant, a practising advocate, certified the solvency of a surety for his client in a bailable offence, violating Rule 10 of the Bar Council of India’s professional conduct rules. The Disciplinary Tribunal of the Bar Council suspended him for one month, and his appeal to the Supreme Court was dismissed by the Tr

SMT. RAJ RANIversusCHIEF SETTLEMENT COMMISSIONER DELHI AND ORS.

1984 INSC 1033 May 1984Appeal(s) allowed

Nanak Chand, a displaced person from West Pakistan, disappeared in December 1954. His brother Dewan Chand claimed that Nanak Chand had died and produced a death certificate issued by respectable persons of the place where the family had resided. The Additional Settlement Commissioner, relying on that certificate, subst

SUKHNANDAN SARAN DINESH KUMAR & ANOTHER ETC. ETC.versusUNION OF INDIA & ANOTHER ETC. ETC.

1982 INSC 293 March 1982Dismissed

The petitioners, manufacturers of khandsari sugar, challenged a Uttar Pradesh Government notification that allowed a rebate of 0.625 kg per quintal for the binding material when sugarcane was brought in bundles. They argued that the power to prescribe such a rebate was conditional on fixing a minimum price, that the ra

ROOP LAL SINGHversusNACHHATTAR SINGH

1982 INSC 802 November 1982Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant Roop Lal challenged the election of Nachhattar Singh to the Punjab Legislative Assembly on the ground that the Election Commission’s re‑allocation of the party symbol ‘hand’ to the respondent violated the Election Symbols (Reservation & Allotment) Order, 1968 and the provisions of the Representation of th

S. K. VERMAversusMAHESH CHANDRA AND ANOTHER

1983 INSC 1092 September 1983Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, S.K. Verma, a Development Officer in the Life Insurance Corporation of India, was dismissed and the dispute was referred to an Industrial Tribunal. The Tribunal held that Development Officers were not "workmen" under s.2(s) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, rendering the reference non‑maintainable. V

WORKMEN EMPLOYED BY INDIAN OXYGEN LTD.versusINDIAN OXYGEN LTD.

1985 INSC 1192 May 1985Case Partly allowed

The case involved workmen of Indian Oxygen Ltd.'s Kanpur unit represented by the Karamchari Union demanding an upward revision of dearness allowance linked to the consumer price index for Kanpur, while the company had unilaterally imposed a scheme linking allowance to the all‑India average CPI after a settlement with t

MUKESH ADVANIversusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

1985 INSC 1202 May 1985Disposed off

The Supreme Court entertained a writ petition filed by Mukesh Advani on behalf of bonded labourers from Tamil Nadu working in stone quarries at Raisen, Madhya Pradesh, alleging exploitation through advance payments, piece‑rate wages below minimum, and denial of statutory protections. An investigative report and a Distr

STATE OF HARYANA & ORS.versusLAL CHAND & ORS

1984 INSC 992 May 1984Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Haryana auctioned a licence to vend country liquor; the highest bidders, Lal Chand and others, were provisionally accepted but failed to deposit the required security and later argued that a neighbouring Punjab licence breached inter‑state conditions. The State re‑auctioned the licence at a lower price and

A. L. KALRAversusTHE PROJECT & EQUIPMENT CORPORATION OF INDIA LIMITED

1984 INSC 971 May 1984Appeal(s) allowed

A.L. Kalra, a former Deputy Finance Manager of the Project & Equipment Corporation of India Ltd., was disciplined for allegedly misusing two advances granted under the corporation's House Building and Conveyance Advance Rules. The corporation withheld his salary and, after a disciplinary inquiry that lacked reasons and

ASHUTOSH SWAIN ETC. ETC.versusSTATE TRANSPORT AUTHORITY & ORS.

1985 INSC 441 March 1985Appeal(s) allowed

The State Transport Authority of Orissa advertised for applications for all‑India tourist permits in 1974. The appellants applied directly for such permits, were granted them, and their subsequent appeals to the State Transport Appellate Tribunal were dismissed. The High Court, however, quashed the permits on the groun

FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA WORKERS' UNIONversusFOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

1985 INSC 461 March 1985Case Allowed

The Food Corporation of India (FCI) employs contract labour through contractors. Contract labourers, organized by the Food Corporation of India Workers' Union, filed a writ petition under Article 32 seeking departmentalisation or, alternatively, the extension of benefits under the Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolit

COL. D.D. JOSHI AND OTHERSversusUNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

1983 INSC 171 March 1983Dismissed

The petitioners, commissioned officers of the Army Medical Corps, challenged Army Instruction No. 78/78 which limited the enlarged period of ante‑dating of commission to officers commissioned on or after 1 April 1978, alleging discrimination violating Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution. The Court examined the langu

Search Indian case law

Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.

Search by issue, statute, judge or citationSign in to search