Created byFuzzy Cloud

Supreme Court of India

G B PATTANAIK

713 judgments delivered by benches including this judge — showing 201–400.

JUNJARAMversusBHAURAO AND ORS.

1996 INSC 29822 February 1996Appeal(s) allowed

Junjaram, a protected tenant under the Berar Regulation of Agricultural Leases Act, 1951, surrendered his lease by an unregistered deed in 1956 and within a year applied for restoration of possession. The initial authorities held the surrender illegal and ordered restitution, but the Deputy Commissioner set aside that

ASSOCIATION OF CHEMICAL WORKERSversusS.D. RANE AND ORS.

1996 INSC 29922 February 1996Dismissed

The Association of Chemical Workers, a rival union at Chemicals & Fibers of India Ltd., challenged the recognition of the respondent union by the Industrial Court, alleging that the investigating officer had illegally used spot verification and alternate numbers to count members. The High Court examined whether the off

PARSINI (DEAD) THROUGH LRS.versusATMA RAM AND ORS.

1996 INSC 30022 February 1996Dismissed

The Supreme Court heard a civil appeal (No. 1608 of 1979) challenging the genuineness of a will executed by Bhagwana on 15 October 1957, which left his property to Atma Ram. The appellant, Bhagwana's daughter, claimed that the will was not genuine and sought relief, arguing that she was not a party to the earlier suit

HIRA LAL (DEAD) BY LRS. ETCversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR.

1996 INSC 30122 February 1996Dismissed

The appellant filed a return under Section 12 of the Maharashtra Agricultural Land (Ceiling of Holdings) Act, 1961, claiming he had three sons and three daughters, and argued that the family was therefore entitled to two additional units of land under Section 6. He produced school certificates for the daughters but nev

SANJEEV KUMARversusSTATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

1999 INSC 2122 January 1999Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined a murder case where Sanjiv Kumar was seen entering and exiting the victim's house with a knife, was found with blood‑stained clothes, and a knife bearing human blood was recovered from his residence. The prosecution relied on circumstantial evidence, including the recovery of blood‑stained cl

UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.versusSMT. DARSHNA DEVI

1996 INSC 11222 January 1996IA disposed

The Supreme Court had earlier disposed of an appeal and dismissed review petitions filed against its order. Subsequently, the parties filed applications seeking clarification and modification of that order, claiming the Court's inherent power. The Court examined whether such applications could be entertained when a rev

THE CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (ADMINSITRATION) BANGALOREversusV.K. GURURAJ AND ORS.

1996 INSC 11322 January 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The Chief Commissioner of Income Tax (Administration) appealed against a Central Administrative Tribunal order that directed payment of a special allowance of Rs.35 per month to all Upper Division Clerks (UDCs) in non‑secretariat administrative offices. The government had earmarked 10% of UDC posts for special duties i

M/S ELECTRONICS TRADE AND TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT CORPN., LTD., SECUNDERABADversusM/S. INDIAN TECHONOLOGISTS AND ENGINEERS (ELECTRONICS) PVT. LTD. ANR.

1996 INSC 11422 January 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant filed a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 alleging that a cheque dated 30‑06‑1990 was dishonoured due to insufficient funds and that the drawer had instructed the bank to stop payment, as indicated by the bank’s endorsement. A notice demanding payment was sent to the draw

KONKAN RAILWAY CORPORATIONversusM/S. MEHUL CONSTRUCTION CO.

2000 INSC 40721 August 2000Dismissed

The Supreme Court considered several Special Leave Petitions and a writ petition challenging orders of various High Court Chief Justices or their nominees made under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 to appoint or refuse to appoint an arbitrator. It held that such orders are administrative in

RAMESH DUTTversusSTATE OF PUNJAB

1996 INSC 91321 August 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined an appeal by Ramesh Dutt, whose 180 acres of land in Bhatinda had been acquired under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. Dutt claimed compensation for the land and for loss of his poultry business. The trial court awarded market value compensation for the land and the High Court added compensati

THE UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD.versusM/S M.K.J. CORPORATION

1996 INSC 91421 August 1996Disposed off

The United India Insurance Company appealed against an order of the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission directing it to pay Rs.5,04,453.23 to M.K.J. Corporation for leather spoiled during an employees' strike, together with interest. The insurer contended that a clause (b) of Section 2 of the Fire Policy C,

THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICERversusVIRUPAX SHANKAR NADAGOUDA

1996 INSC 91521 August 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The Special Land Acquisition Officer awarded compensation for agricultural land and a separate sum for a well. On reference, the civil judge increased the compensation, and the Karnataka High Court affirmed it. The appellant challenged the use of a 15‑year multiplier in calculating compensation under Section 23(1) of t

RAMLALversusUNION OF INDIA

1996 INSC 91621 August 1996Dismissed

Ram Lal was appointed on an ad‑hoc basis as a casual railway worker in 1962 and was illegally terminated in 1964. A civil court set aside the termination and reinstated him in 1971, granting regular status effective from September 1971 after he passed a medical examination. He claimed that he should be treated as a reg

THE STATE OF GUJARATversusGOPALBHAI BECHARBHAI ETC.

1996 INSC 91721 August 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Gujarat obtained a land acquisition award on 26 June 1981 under Section 11 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, and a notice under Section 12(2) was issued on 18 September 1981. An application for reference to a civil court under Section 18 was filed only on 30 July 1985, more than three years after the awar

STATE OF U.P. AND ORS. ETC.versusSMT. MALTI KAUL AND ANR. ETC.

1996 INSC 92021 August 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined whether the Uttar Pradesh Urban Planning and Development Act, 1973 empowers a development authority to levy a development fee on applicants for plan sanction. The High Court had held that no such power existed, but the Supreme Court read Sections 14, 33, 41, 56 and related provisions as confe

S. RENUKA AND ORS.versusSTATE OF A.P. AND ANR.

2002 INSC 16421 March 2002Dismissed

The State of Andhra Pradesh created Family Courts and Mahila Courts and, lacking sufficient women judges in the District & Sessions Judges Grade‑II cadre, sanctioned ten additional posts exclusively for women by relaxing Rule 2 of the Special Rules for the A.P. State Higher Judicial Service. An advertisement was issued

V.S. MALLIMATHversusUNION OF INDIA AND ANR.

2001 INSC 15621 March 2001Dismissed

V.S. Mallimath, a retired Chief Justice of the Kerala High Court, was appointed Chairman of the Central Administrative Tribunal and later a Member of the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) until he turned 70. He challenged three deductions: the deduction of his judicial pension from his NHRC salary under Rule 3(b)

RAM SAHAN RAIversusSACHIV SAMANAYA PRABANDHAK AND ANR.

2001 INSC 10121 February 2001Disposed off

The appellant, a clerk of a District Cooperative Bank, was dismissed without a charge‑sheet, show‑cause notice or hearing. He filed a suit seeking a declaration that the dismissal was illegal and that he should be reinstated with consequential benefits. The lower appellate court held the dismissal void for violation of

AMBIKA PRASAD AND ANR.versusSTATE (DELHI ADMINISTRATION, DELHI)

2000 INSC 2721 January 2000Dismissed

The case arose from a land dispute in which the appellants, armed with deadly weapons, allegedly attacked the complainant party, resulting in the death of Virender Singh and injuries to several witnesses. The trial court convicted the appellants under Sections 302/34, 341/34 and 307/34 of the IPC and the High Court aff

STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS.versusNANDED- PARBHANI Z.L.B.M.V., OPERATOR SANGH

2000 INSC 2821 January 2000Dismissed

The State of Maharashtra appealed a Bombay High Court order that had declared the seizure and detention of luxury buses illegal and awarded Rs.10,000 compensation to the bus operators. The police had seized the buses under Section 207(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, alleging that they were carrying passengers in ex

COLGATE PALMOLIVE (INDIA) LTD .versusM.R.T.P. COMMISSION AND ORS.

2002 INSC 48020 November 2002Appeal(s) allowed

Colgate Palmolive (India) Ltd ran a newspaper contest that required consumers to purchase two toothbrushes to enter, offering various prizes. A complaint was filed with the MRTP Commission alleging that the contest was an unfair trade practice under Section 36A(3)(b) of the Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices Ac

HINDUSTAN CIBA GEIGYversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

2002 INSC 47620 November 2002Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Hindustan Ciba Geigy, placed an advertisement claiming its product Aerocol was manufactured by it and was a market leader in the UK. A complaint was filed alleging unfair trade practice under Section 36A of the Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices Act, 1969, leading the MRTP Commission to issue a n

R.D. GOYAL AND ANR.versusRELIANCE INDUSTRIES LTD.

2002 INSC 47720 November 2002Dismissed

The appellants R.D. Goyal and others challenged the MRTP Commission’s finding that the issue of equity shares linked with redeemable non‑convertible debentures, before allotment, did not constitute "goods" under Section 2(e) of the Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices Act, 1969. They argued that shares (including

RAMESH KUMAR CHOUDHA AND ORS.versusSTATE OF M.P. AND ORS.

1996 INSC 108820 September 1996Disposed off

The appellants and respondents were employees of the Madhya Pradesh Irrigation Engineering Service governed by the 1968 Recruitment Rules. The Rules stipulated that eligibility for promotion to Assistant Engineer be determined as of 1 January each year, requiring either 8 years of service for graduate engineers or 12 y

STATE OF U.P. AND ANR.versusT.P. LAL SRIVASTAVA

1996 INSC 109020 September 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent, a Senior Marketing Inspector, was served a charge‑sheet on 23 November 1984 alleging gross irregularities in the movement of wheat. He failed to submit a reply despite several letters, and the employer dismissed him on 26 June 1987. The High Court set aside the dismissal, holding that the employee had n

ALL ORISSA ELECTRICAL WORKERS UNIONversusSTATE OF ORISSA AND ORS.

1996 INSC 109120 September 1996Dismissed

The All Orissa Electrical Workers Union filed a Special Leave Petition challenging the State of Orissa's service rules that required Class III and higher employees, even if skilled or highly skilled, to retire at 58 instead of 60. The petition argued that various categories of workers such as electricians, plumbers, an

C.K. LOKESHversusP.E. PANDURANGA NAIDU

1996 INSC 109220 September 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent filed a suit for declaration of title and injunction against the appellant, but personal service was not effected and substitute service by newspaper failed to reach the appellant. An ex‑parte decree was passed on March 30, 1985. Upon learning of the decree in 1990, the appellant filed an application und

STATE OF ORISSA AND ORS.versusGOPAL CHANDRA RATH AND ORS.

1995 INSC 58520 September 1995Appeal(s) allowed

All the respondents were appointed as junior teachers between 1961 and 1973 by a Selection Committee that was not constituted by the State Government, leading the Orissa Administrative Tribunal to quash their gradation list. The State Legislature subsequently enacted the Orissa Medical Education Service (Validation of

AP. SRIVASTAVA (DEAD) BY LRS.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

1995 INSC 58620 September 1995Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a temporary government servant, had rendered over 20 years of service but was compulsorily retired by the Government under Rule 56(J)(ii) of the Fundamental Rules while a disciplinary appeal was pending. He challenged the retirement order before the Central Administrative Tribunal, which held that compul

STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESHversusNAGOTIVENKATARAMANA

1996 INSC 90920 August 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Andhra Pradesh prosecuted N. Venkatramana, a video shop owner, for possessing 90 video cassettes that lacked the statutory particulars required under Section 52-A of the Copyright Act, 1957. The trial court convicted him under Section 63, imposing six months' imprisonment and a fine of Rs.3,000, a sentence

M/S. FAIR AIR ENGINEERS PVT. LTD. AND ANR.versusN.K. MODI

1996 INSC 91020 August 1996Appeal(s) allowed

M/s. Fair Air Engineers Pvt. Ltd. entered into a contract with N.K. Modi to install a centrally air‑conditioned plant in his house. After alleged breach, the respondent filed a complaint before the State Consumer Commission, which stayed the proceedings and ordered the parties to arbitrate under clause 12 of the agreem

RAJANKUMAR SHANKARRAO TAWARE AND ANR.versusAJIT ANANTRAO PAWAR

2002 INSC 16220 March 2002Dismissed

The petitioners challenged the election of Ajit Pawar to the Baramati Assembly seat, alleging that the Returning Officer shifted ballot boxes from a high school to a recreation hall without informing candidates, with the motive of substituting genuine ballot papers with fakes. They also claimed missing Presiding Office

ASHUTOSH GUPTAversusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ORS.

2002 INSC 15620 March 2002Dismissed

The appellant, a direct recruit to the Rajasthan Administrative Service under the 1954 Rules, challenged Rule 25 of the Rajasthan Administrative Service (Emergency Recruitment) Rules 1976, which gave emergency recruits a notional year of allotment for seniority, alleging discrimination under Articles 14 and 16 of the C

DIRECTOR OF SETTLEMENTS A.P. AND ORS.versusM.R. APPARAO AND ANR.

2002 INSC 15720 March 2002Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Andhra Pradesh, as Director of Settlements, appealed against a Division Bench of the Andhra Pradesh High Court that had issued a mandamus directing the State to make interim compensation payments to estate holders under the Andhra Pradesh Estates (Abolition and Conversion into Ryotwari) Act, 1948. The High

STATE OF U.P. AND ORS.versusCHANDRA PRAKASH PANDEY AND ORS.

2001 INSC 15420 March 2001Dismissed

The respondents, appointed as Kurk Amins on commission basis by District Magistrates/Collectors of Uttar Pradesh, were tasked with recovering outstanding dues of cooperative societies. The State of Uttar Pradesh contended that such Kurk Amins, being appointed under a scheme of the Registrar of Cooperative Societies, we

DELHI STOCK EXCHANGE ASSOCIATION LTD.versusCOMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NEW DELHI

1997 INSC 29720 March 1997Dismissed

The Delhi Stock Exchange Association Ltd., a company limited by shares, claimed exemption from income tax under Section 11 read with Section 2(15) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, asserting that its income was derived from property held in trust for charitable purposes. The claim pertained to assessment years before Decemb

NARYAN PRASAD LOHIAversusNIKUNJ KUMAR LOHIA AND ORS.

2002 INSC 9020 February 2002Disposed off

The parties agreed to resolve their family business disputes by arbitration with two arbitrators and an award was rendered. The respondents later applied to the Calcutta High Court to set aside the award, arguing that the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 forbids an even number of arbitrators, making the tribunal

BAKHATAWARversusSHRI SATNARAIN ATID ORS.

1996 INSC 152319 December 1996Appeal(s) allowed

Shri Neki, a tenant of demised agricultural land for over 50 years, paid one‑third of the crop produce as rent to the landlord's agent. In 1978 the rabi crop failed and he could not pay the share, but later paid the amount. The landlord's General Power of Attorney (GPA) filed an eviction application under Section 9 of

JAGANNATHversusSHRI YUGAL NARAIN PUROHIT, ADV. AND ORS.

1996 INSC 152419 December 1996Dismissed

The appellant Jagannath challenged a sale of property made by the insolvent Bhadarmal to the respondent Yugal Narain Purohit on May 17, 1958, seeking a declaration under Section 53 of the Provincial Insolvency Act that the transfer was fraudulent. The trial court, a single judge and a division bench of the Rajasthan Hi

STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESHversusTARA DUTT AND ANR.

1999 INSC 52619 November 1999Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Himachal Pradesh charged Tara Dutt and others under IPC sections 468, 420, 120‑B and the Prevention of Corruption Act for forging receipts in 1983. The charge‑sheet was filed in 1987 and cognizance was taken the same year. The Special Judge acquitted them of the charged offences but convicted them under se

THE STATE OF PUNJABversusSARWAN SINGH

1996 INSC 134219 November 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The case arose from a land dispute that escalated into a fight between two groups on 25 October 1985, during which the victim Santokh Singh sustained eight injuries, five on the head, inflicted by the respondent Sarwan Singh with a heavy weapon (gandasa). The trial court and the Punjab & Haryana High Court convicted th

V. PURUSHOTHAM RAOversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

2001 INSC 52619 October 2001Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined appeals against the Delhi High Court’s cancellation of petrol pump, LPG and SKO dealership allotments made by the Minister of Petroleum under a discretionary quota. The Court held that the 1995 Supreme Court guidelines did not tacitly approve prior allotments, and that the principle of constr

STATE OF HARYANAversusHARYANA VETERINARY AND A.H.T.S. ASSOCIATION AND ANR.

2000 INSC 44919 September 2000Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent, originally appointed as Assistant Engineer on an ad hoc basis in 1980, was later regularised in 1982 after selection by the Haryana Public Service Commission. He sought selection‑grade pay under Government of Haryana circulars dated 2 June 1989 and 16 May 1990, claiming that his continuous service from

KUMUD LATA DASversusINDU PRASAD

1996 INSC 107619 September 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a daughter-in-law, was in possession of a property when her mother‑in‑law filed a suit for possession. The appellant was set ex parte and sought restoration of the decree. The Delhi High Court ordered that the appellant deposit mesne profits of Rs 2,000 per month from the date of the ex‑parte decree as a

P.A.THOMAS AND ANR.versusM. MOHAMMED TAJUDDIN AND ANR.

1996 INSC 107719 September 1996Dismissed

The appellant, P.A. Thomas, was let an open land under a lease and later converted his sole proprietorship into a partnership named 'P.A. Thomas and Co.' with his son and another partner. The Supreme Court examined whether, under Section 2(4)(ii)(a) of the Tamil Nadu City Protection Act, 1922, the appellant remained a

DR. CHIITARANJAN SHARMA AND ORS.versusTHE STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AND ANR.

1996 INSC 107819 September 1996Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined the absorption of staff from the H.I.M. Ayurvedic Degree College, which had been taken over by the Himachal Pradesh government. The college employees were to be regularised only if they satisfied qualifications, age, and were appointed before the takeover, as per the agreement and a screening

THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER, DHARWADversusSMT. TAJAR HANIFABI

1996 INSC 89919 August 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The Special Land Acquisition Officer acquired six acres of agricultural land near Chikodi municipality for industrial development under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The Land Acquisition Officer initially awarded compensation on an acreage basis, but the reference court and the Karnataka High Court re‑valued the land

UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.versusSHRI PARMANAND

1996 INSC 90019 August 1996Dismissed

The respondent, originally appointed as a Junior Engineer in the Central Public Works Department (CPWD) in 1977, was later selected as an Assistant Engineer by the U.P.S.C. in 1982 and appointed in 1987. The dispute concerned whether, after 18 years of service in CPWD, he should be absorbed in that department or alloca

SOHAN SINGHversusSARWAN SINGH AND ORS.

1996 INSC 90119 August 1996Dismissed

The petitioner and respondent entered into a sale agreement for land on June 14, 1986, with a total price of Rs.85,000 per killa, Rs.6,000 paid as earnest money and the balance of Rs.64,000 to be paid in cash at registration by July 15, 1987. At registration, the respondent presented a bank draft for the balance, but t

HIRABAIversusHANUMANTH KRISHNAJI BHIDE AND ORS.

1996 INSC 90219 August 1996Dismissed

The petitioner, Hirabai, challenged the sale of her 8 acres of agricultural land that had been attached and sold under execution of a money decree. She argued that the proclamation of sale under Order 21 Rule 66 of the CPC was invalid because it did not contain a valuation of the property and alleged material irregular

STATE OF PUNJABversusMANINDER SINGH

1996 INSC 90319 August 1996Dismissed

The State of Punjab filed a Special Leave Petition challenging the Punjab & Haryana High Court's order that quashed the FIR against Maninder Singh for alleged misappropriation of Rs. 1.61 crore of public funds. The Supreme Court directed the State to produce the charge‑sheet and statements of witnesses under Section 16

AVTAR SINGHversusSTATE OF HARYANA AND ANR.

2002 INSC 8619 February 2002Dismissed

Avtar Singh, a convicted prisoner, applied to have the period of his parole counted towards his total sentence. The Punjab and Haryana High Court rejected his claim, holding that Section 3(3) of the Haryana Good Conduct Prisoners (Temporary Release) Act, 1988 excludes parole periods from the total sentence. He appealed

UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.versusO. CHAKRADHAR

2002 INSC 8819 February 2002Appeal(s) allowed

The Railway Recruitment Board (RRB) Bangalore advertised for Junior Clerk‑cum‑Typist posts and appointed candidates, including the respondent. A CBI investigation later uncovered widespread irregularities—absence of a mandatory typing test, tampering of answer sheets, and procedural violations—rendering the entire sele

M. KRISHNAversusSTATE OF KARNATAKA

1999 INSC 7419 February 1999Disposed off

M. Krishna, a Class‑I officer of the Karnataka Administrative Service, was investigated in 1989 for possession of disproportionate assets under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, resulting in a ‘B’‑form that was accepted by a Special Judge and his attached properties were released. In 1995 a fresh FIR was lodged a

STATE OF U.P.versusRANJIT SINGH

1999 INSC 7219 February 1999Appeal(s) allowed

Ranjit Singh, a stenographer of a High Court judge, forged a bail order that was never signed by the judge to obtain bail for an accused. He was convicted under IPC Sections 466 and 468 for making a false document and for forgery of a court record, while the Sessions Court granted him probation under Section 4 of the U

ASHOK KUMAR SINGHAL AND ORS.versusSTATE OF M.P. AND ANR.

1996 INSC 28119 February 1996Appeal(s) allowed

Gyaso Bai executed a will in 1964 bequeathing land to Ram Swaroop, and a probate was granted in 1965. The government later acquired the land and, under the Land Acquisition Act, a reference court directed compensation to be paid in the ratio of two‑thirds to the appellants and one‑third to the respondents as per the wi

DEV RAJ (DEAD) THROUGH L.RS.versusHARBANS SINGH (DEAD) THROUGH L.RS.

1996 INSC 28219 February 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, the original owner of a parcel of land, sold the property to the respondent on the condition that the respondent would discharge an existing mortgage of Rs.5,000. The appellant himself paid all installments and ultimately discharged the mortgage, while the respondent never did so nor obtained mutation of

BANK OF BARODAversusRAJENDER PAL SONI

1996 INSC 28319 February 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent, an employee of Traders Bank, tendered his resignation on the same day the bank sought to terminate his service by offering three months' pay in lieu of notice and returned the cheque. Traders Bank was later amalgamated with Bank of Baroda under Section 45 of the Banking Companies Regulation Act, 1949, w

AMBALAL SARABHAI ENTERPRISES LTD. AND ORS.versusPRAKASH CHANDRA ARYA

1996 INSC 151018 December 1996Disposed off

Ambalal Sarabhai Enterprises Ltd. and others appealed against a decree appointing a Receiver over premises occupied by the respondent, Prakash Chandra Arya. The Calcutta High Court Division Bench had declined to interfere with the single judge’s order appointing the Receiver. The Supreme Court, exercising its special l

JASP AL SINGH AND ANR.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ANR.

1996 INSC 151118 December 1996Dismissed

The Supreme Court heard an appeal by Jaspal Singh and another against the Union of India concerning compensation awarded under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 for land acquired for a cantonment extension in Amritsar. The appellants claimed loss of earnings from their poultry business under clause fourthly of Section 23(

KALIKA PRASAD AND ANR.versusCHHATRAPAL SINGH (DEAD) BY LRS.

1996 INSC 151218 December 1996Dismissed

The appellant filed a suit for declaration of title and possession of agricultural land, while the respondent claimed title by adverse possession. The trial court held that the respondent had acquired title by adverse possession after more than twelve years of uninterrupted possession, but the district court reversed t

V.S. CHARATIversusHUSSEIN NHANU JAMADAR (DEAD) BY L.RS.

1998 INSC 43518 November 1998Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a landlord who was a minor when he applied under Section 31(1) of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 for possession of land for personal cultivation, had his application dismissed, making the tenant a deemed purchaser. Subsequent proceedings under Section 32‑G to determine the purchase p

STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS.versusLAL SINGH AND ORS.

1996 INSC 132318 November 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, who were JBT Teachers appointed temporarily as Head Teachers, claimed an advance increment for the period of their temporary promotion. The dispute centered on which pay‑scale the advance increment should be drawn from – the scale of the temporary post (Head Teacher) or that of their substantive post (J

NIVARTI GOVIND INGALE AND ORS.versusRAVANAGOUDA BHIMANGOUDA PATIL

1996 INSC 132418 November 1996Appeal(s) allowed

Radhabai, the mother of the appellants, owned a parcel of land and obtained a loan from the respondent's father on the condition that she execute a sale deed in the name of his minor son, accompanied by an agreement of reconveyance. After receiving the loan, the father failed to execute the reconveyance deed, prompting

PUNJAB STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, PATIALA AND ANR.versusSURJIT SINGH BRAR

1996 INSC 132518 November 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent, an ex‑army officer who served from 1963 to 1973, was appointed to a civil post in 1979 under the ex‑servicemen quota and was granted pay increments and seniority under the Punjab Government National Emergency (Concession) Rules, 1965 (Rules 2 and 4). The State later realised that he was not entitled to

PARSHOTAM SINGH (DEAD) THROUGH LRS.versusHARBANS KAUR AND ANR.

1996 INSC 132718 November 1996Appeal(s) allowed

Bakhtawar Singh died leaving his son Harsukhjit Singh and widow Pritam Kaur. Harsukhjit succeeded to property inherited from his grandfather and to a portion of his mother's self‑acquired property, which he later blended. After Harsukhjit’s death, his sons Parshotam Singh (appellants) and Lakhmir Singh (respondents) di

BRIG. SAWAI BHAWANI SINGHversusM/S. INDIAN HOTELS COMPANY LTD.

1996 INSC 132818 November 1996Dismissed

The respondents, Indian Hotels Co. Ltd., claimed they were in possession of a hotel property under an agreement and sought a perpetual injunction to prevent the appellant, Brig. Sawai Bhabwan Singh, from interfering with their possession. The appellant, asserting exclusive ownership, applied for the appointment of a re

UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.versusMAHENDER SINGH AND ORS.

1996 INSC 132918 November 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The respondents, who served as temporary drivers (Security Assistants Motor Transport) in the Intelligence Bureau from April 24, 1986 to October 5, 1988, filed an application for regularisation of their services. The Central Administrative Tribunal directed that they be regularised with relaxation of age and educationa

GOVERNMENT OE INDIA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARYversusK.V. SWAMINATHAN

1996 INSC 133018 November 1996Appeal(s) allowed

K.V. Swaminathan applied for a freedom‑fighter pension, which was pending for a long period. The government, after giving him the benefit of doubt, granted the pension on 18 November 1989. Swaminathan filed a writ petition seeking the pension to be backdated to the date of his application. The Madras High Court ordered

RAMARAVALUGAVADEversusSATABA GAVADU GAVADE (DEAD) THROUGH LRS. AND ANR.

1996 INSC 133118 November 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, an illiterate farmer, sought to bring his legal representatives on record after his uncle, a party to a civil suit, died pending appeal, causing the original appeal to abate. The High Court dismissed the application to condone the delay, citing lack of proper explanation, and upheld the abatement. The ap

BIHAR STATE ELECTRICITY BOARDversusAKHIL KRISHNA MITRA AND ORS.

1996 INSC 133218 November 1996Disposed off

The employee was appointed as a Bihar Government servant in June 1950 and was sent on deputation to the Bihar State Electricity Board (BSEB) in August 1959, later being absorbed by the Board in 1970 and retiring in 1984. The dispute concerned whether the BSEB was liable to pay the employee's pension for the deputation

STATE OF KERALA ETC.versusGURUVAYUR DEVASWOM MANAGING COMMITTEE AND ORS. ETC.

1996 INSC 133318 November 1996Dismissed

The State of Kerala challenged a Kerala High Court order that sanctioned Rs 7,10,212 spent by Shri Raghavan, the Administrator of the Guruvayur Devaswom, on a clerk recruitment examination whose question paper had leaked, and also directed payment of Rs 35,000 as monetary consideration for his exemplary work. The petit

KUMAON MANDAL VIKAS NIGAM LTD.versusGIRJA SHANKAR PANT AND ORS.

2000 INSC 49018 October 2000Dismissed

The appellant, Kumaon Mandal Vikas Nigam Ltd., terminated the respondent, General Manager G.S. Pant, after a departmental enquiry that was conducted without providing charge‑sheet documents, without a proper hearing, without a presenting officer, and without allowing cross‑examination. The respondent alleged bias and m

SMT. SHANTI RANI DAS DEWANJEEversusDINESH CHANDRA DAY (DEAD) BY LRS.

1997 INSC 66218 September 1997Dismissed

The appellant challenged a lower court order that rejected her claim that filing a counter‑claim under Order VIII Rule 6A of the Code of Civil Procedure after the written statement was barred. The suit (Civil Case No. 248/82) was instituted on 15‑July‑1982 and the application for a counter‑claim was filed on 22‑June‑19

JAIPUR DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITYversusMAHAVIR HOUSING CO-OP., SOCIETY, JAIPUR ETC.

1996 INSC 106918 September 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The Jaipur Development Authority acquired land for an urban development scheme under the Rajasthan Land Acquisition Act, 1953. The Land Acquisition Officer initially awarded compensation of Rs 5,000 per bigha to Jai Ambe Co‑op Housing Society and Rs 7,500 per bigha to Mahavir Co‑op Housing Society. The civil court enha

UNION OF INDIA AND ANR.versusMADHAV S/0. GAJANAN CHAUBAL AND ANR.

1996 INSC 107018 September 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The Government created a single post of Secretary in the National Savings Scheme Service and applied a 40‑point roster and rule of rotation to reserve vacancies for Scheduled Tribes. When a vacancy at point No. 4 arose, a Scheduled Tribe candidate was to be promoted from the Superintendents, but the Central Administrat

K. RAMAKRISHNAN UNNITHANversusSTATE OF KERALA

1999 INSC 11718 March 1999Disposed off

K. Ramakrishnan Unnithan was charged with offences arising from a violent altercation that culminated in the stabbing death of Kesava Pillai, the father of a witness. The trial court acquitted him, finding the prosecution had not proved the case beyond reasonable doubt. The Kerala High Court reversed the acquittal, con

N.K. OGLEversusSANWALDAS @ SANWALMAL AHUJA

1999 INSC 11818 March 1999Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a Tehsildar, was ordered by the District Collector to recover lease money from the respondent and, after issuing a demand notice, seized the respondent's scooter when the latter objected to the demand. The scooter was auctioned and the respondent filed a complaint under IPC s.379 alleging theft. The Tehs

NIRMAL SINGH AND ANR.versusSTATE OF HARYANA

1999 INSC 11518 March 1999Disposed off

The appellants, Dharampal and his brother Nirmal, murdered five members of the family of Punam, a witness who had testified against Dharampal in a prior rape case. After being granted bail following his conviction for rape, Dharampal, who had previously threatened to kill anyone giving evidence, carried out the killing

SUBHASHGIR KHUSHALGIR GOSAVI AND ORS.versusSPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER AND ORS.

1996 INSC 40218 March 1996Dismissed

The petitioners challenged a notification issued under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 for acquiring land in Pandharpur to extend an existing state transport bus stand and depot. They argued that the land, reserved for residential use under the Maharashtra Regional Town Planning Act, 1966, could not be u

DR. G.N. KHAJURIA AND ORS.versusD.D.A. AND ORS.

1996 INSC 40318 March 1996IA disposed

The petitioners, Dr. G.N. Khajuria and others, challenged the continued occupation of a school built on land originally earmarked for a park by the Delhi Development Authority (DDA). The Supreme Court had directed the dismantling and vacation of the school, but the DDA sought to delay compliance. The Delhi High Court,

TELECOM DISTRICT MANAGER, GOA AND ORS.versusV.S. DEMPO & CO. AND ORS.

1996 INSC 40418 March 1996Dismissed

The case concerned two telephone billing disputes (Rs. 99,196 and Rs. 71,280) between the telecom authority and V.S. Dempo & Co. The Union of India argued that, under its administrative instructions, a subscriber must first obtain a court direction before the dispute can be referred to an arbitrator under Section 7B of

STATE OF ORISSAversusDIVISIONAL MANAGER, LIC AND ANR.

1996 INSC 40518 March 1996Appeal(s) allowed

Haribandhu Setha, a government servant, filed a consumer complaint under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 seeking damages from the State of Orissa. The State Commission and later the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission awarded Rs.1,00,000 against the State. The State appealed to the Supreme Court, arguing

DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE AND ORS.versusMRITYUNJOY SARKAR AND ORS.

1996 INSC 40618 March 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The respondents were appointed as constables in the State Armed Police in April 1985 based on a list supplied by the Katwa Employment Exchange. The Labour Commissioner later declared that the list was fabricated and directed the authorities to take action, leading to the respondents' discharge effective 1 January 1986

M/S. MURLIDHAR SHYAMLAL AND ANR .versusSTATE OF ASSAM

1996 INSC 9718 January 1996Dismissed

Murlidhar Shyamlal, a vendor, was charged under Section 7 read with Section 16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 for selling adulterated mustard oil. The trial court acquitted him, but the Assam High Court convicted him, relying on the absence of a proper warranty. The vendor argued that Section 19(2) of

RADHIKA DEVIversusBAJRANGI SINGH AND ORS.

1996 INSC 9818 January 1996Dismissed

The appellant filed a partition suit in 1988, after which the respondents claimed ownership of the property by virtue of a gift deed executed and registered in 1978. In 1992 the appellant sought to amend the plaint under Order 6 Rule 17 of the CPC to obtain a declaration that the gift deed was fraudulent and therefore

SH. S.V. BHIMA BHATIA AND ANR. ETC.versusSTATE OF KARNATAKA AND ORS.

1996 INSC 9918 January 1996Disposed off

The appellants, government servants who continued in service beyond the normal superannuation age due to a fluctuation in the retirement age, claimed that their pension should be calculated on the basis of the age of 60, including the residue period they served. The State argued that pension should be computed as of th

CELLULAR OPERATORS ASSOCIATION OF INDIA AND ORS.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

2002 INSC 54217 December 2002Appeal(s) allowed

The Cellular Operators Association of India (appellants) challenged the Government's decision to permit Fixed Service Providers to offer Wireless in Local Loop (WLL) with limited mobility, arguing that the Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal (TDSAT) failed to consider the level‑playing‑field issue, viola

M/S INDIAN CHARGE CHROME LTD. AND ANR.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

2002 INSC 54317 December 2002Disposed off

The dispute concerned the legality of the Orissa State Government's recommendation to grant a mining lease of 84.881 hectares of chromite to Nava Bharat Ferro Alloys Ltd. (respondent ‘N’) and the subsequent approval of that recommendation by the Central Government. The appellant, Indian Charge Chrome Ltd., challenged t

BANK OF INDIA AND ORS.versusO.P. SWARANAKAR ETC.

2002 INSC 54717 December 2002Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined the validity of Voluntary Retirement Schemes (VRS) introduced by State Bank of India and other nationalised banks, focusing on whether an employee’s application for retirement could be withdrawn before the bank’s acceptance despite a clause stating the request was irrevocable. The Court held

SATNAM SINGHversusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN

1999 INSC 56917 December 1999Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a truck driver, was originally convicted of murder under Section 302 IPC for allegedly crushing the deceased with his truck. On appeal, the Supreme Court examined the reliability of three eye‑witness statements, noting material omissions and the three‑day delay in recording them under Section 161 Cr.P.C.

MOHD. ANWARversusSTATE OF DELHI

1999 INSC 57117 December 1999Case Partly allowed

The case concerns the murder of informer Khalil during a police chase of three boys, where appellants Mohd. Anwar and Tasleem were convicted under Sections 302, 307, 34 of the IPC and Section 5 of the TADA Act. The prosecution relied on eyewitness testimony, seizure of Anwar's .32 bore revolver and Tasleem's pistol, an

STATE OF U.P.versusSHER SINGH AND ORS.

1996 INSC 150417 December 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Uttar Pradesh filed a suit under Section 6 of the Urban Land (Ceiling & Regulation) Act, 1976 seeking a declaration that the respondent, Ram Het, held vacant urban land in excess of the prescribed ceiling. The competent authority found an excess of 1,146.0430 sq m and the matter was appealed before the Dis

SANWAT SINGHversusZAIL SINGLF AND ORS.

1996 INSC 150517 December 1996Appeal(s) allowed

Dalip Kaur sold her land to Jeet Kanwar in 1967. Zail Singh obtained a decree of pre-emption and attempted to take possession of the property, which was then occupied by the appellant who claimed to be a tenant of the vendor since before 1957. The trial court granted a perpetual injunction in favor of the appellant, bu

STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS.versusMOHINDER SINGH CHAWLA ETC.

1996 INSC 150617 December 1996Disposed off

A government servant suffering from a heart ailment was permitted to obtain specialized treatment at AIIMS/Escorts Heart Institute because such facilities were unavailable in Punjab state hospitals. He submitted his medical bills for reimbursement, including the actual room rent paid during his inpatient stay, but the

MANOHAR M. GALANIversusASHOK N. ADVANI

1999 INSC 52317 November 1999Appeal(s) allowed

Manohar M. Galan filed criminal complaints alleging that Kishore Keswani had lodged false FIRs against him and his family, leading to their arrest. A social activist filed a public interest petition (PIP) in the Gujarat High Court, which directed an inquiry into alleged scandal in a subordinate court at Dakor. While th

MAROTI AND ORS.versusDEVRAO AND ORS.

1998 INSC 43017 November 1998Dismissed

The dispute concerned the right of a respondent (Dadarao) to retain his status as a protected tenant under the Hyderabad Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1950, after the 1955 amendment introduced Section 37A. The appellant (Nivrutti) claimed that the amendment extinguished the respondent's rights because he was not

ABDUL WAHAB ANSARIversusSTATE OF BIHAR AND ANR.

2000 INSC 48317 October 2000Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a public servant appointed as a duty magistrate, ordered open firing to disperse a mob at an encroachment site, resulting in one death and injuries. A private complaint was filed alleging multiple offences under the IPC and the Arms Act, and the Chief Judicial Magistrate took cognizance and issued non‑ba

UNION OF INDIAversusM/S. POPULAR BUILDERS, CALCUTTA

2000 INSC 48217 October 2000Case Partly allowed

The Union of India entered into a construction contract with M/s Popular Builders, who after completing the work, accepted a final bill without objection and received payment. The builder later claimed additional work not covered in the final bill and, at its request, an arbitrator was appointed who awarded the claim i

SAURASHTRA CEMENT AND CHEMICAL INDUSTRIESversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

2000 INSC 48717 October 2000Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined the constitutional validity of Section 9(3) of the Mines and Minerals (Regulation and Development) Act, 1957, which authorises the Central Government to fix, alter or reduce royalty rates on minerals. The appellants argued that royalty is not a tax and that Parliament lacks power under Entry 

WEST BENGAL STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD AND ORS.versusSAMIR K. SARKAR

1999 INSC 42117 September 1999Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent, Samir K. Sarkar, applied for a compassionate appointment after his father, an employee of the West Bengal State Electricity Board, died within two years of his scheduled superannuation. The Board rejected the application citing an office order dated 15 March 1993, which imposes an embargo on appointment

M/S. SHAPERS CONSTRUCTION (P) LTD. AND ANR.versusAIRPORT AUTHORITY OF INDIA AND ANR.

1996 INSC 106317 September 1996Dismissed

The petitioners, Shapers Construction (P) Ltd. and another, applied for tender forms from the Airport Authority of India, invoking a tender condition that required having satisfactorily completed at least two runway or national highway works of specified value within the last five years. They claimed that they had exec

M/S. KALYANJI VITHALDAS AND SONSversusTHE STATE OF M.P. AND ORS.

1996 INSC 106417 September 1996Dismissed

The appellant firm had a three‑year agreement with the Government of Madhya Pradesh for the purchase of tendu leaves, which was renewable annually. The appellant offered renewal on 7 December 1968; the Government accepted the offer on 31 January 1969, but the acceptance was communicated to the appellant only on 7 Febru

JAYKUMAR GANPATI WAIKARversusNIVRITTI SAKHARAM TITWE AND ORS.

1996 INSC 106517 September 1996Dismissed

The appellant, a minor who succeeded his adoptive mother (a widow) as landlord, was involved in eviction proceedings under Section 31(3) of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948. The mother died during the suit, which was later dismissed, and the appellant attained majority on 19 March 1968. The tenant is

D.K. CHHANGANI AND ORS.versusNITYA RANJAN MUKHERJEE AND ORS.

1996 INSC 106617 September 1996Disposed off

The appeal arose from a Calcutta High Court order concerning the recognition of a rival union of Geological Survey of India employees. The dispute centered on whether the High Court had jurisdiction to review an Industrial Tribunal's decision in Maharashtra regarding the membership and recognition of that union. The Su

GHEEVARGHESE MATHEW ETC.versusSTATE OF KERALA AND ANR. ETC.

1996 INSC 106717 September 1996Dismissed

The petitioners challenged the compensation awarded for land acquired by the Greater Cochin Development Authority under the Kerala Land Acquisition Act, 1950 (equivalent to the Land Acquisition Act, 1894). The acquisition officer initially fixed compensation at Rs 280 per cent, the civil court raised it to Rs 1800, and

M/S. ESTER INDUSTRIES LTD.versusU.P. STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD AND ORS.

1996 INSC 106817 September 1996Dismissed

The Government of Uttar Pradesh issued a policy on 16 July 1986 granting a 10% developmental rebate on electricity to newly set‑up industries, valid until 1990. Ester Industries Ltd., having established a plant, claimed the rebate, but the Uttar Pradesh State Electricity Board issued a tariff without it, prompting a wr

GANGA RAM MOOLCHANDANIversusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ORS.

2001 INSC 29817 July 2001Case Partly allowed

The Supreme Court examined the validity of Rules 8(ii) and 15(ii) of the Rajasthan Higher Judicial Service Rules, 1969, which required that candidates for direct recruitment to the Higher Judicial Service must have practiced for at least seven years in the Rajasthan High Court or its subordinate courts. The petitioners

SUDHAKAR AND ANR.versusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2000 INSC 33717 July 2000Appeal(s) allowed

A school teacher alleged that the headmaster and a co‑teacher of her school gang‑raped her on 9 July 1994. She reported the incident to her family and later to the police, who recorded her statement eleven days after the incident. She subsequently committed suicide in December 1994. The trial court and the High Court c

DAYA SINGH LAHORIAversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

2001 INSC 21217 April 2001Disposed off

Daya Singh Lahoria was extradited from the United States to India under an extradition decree that listed specific offences. After his return, Indian authorities sought to try him for additional offences, including those under the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, which were not part of the extradit

STATE OF KERALA AND ORS. ETC.versusO.C. KUTTAN AND ORS. ETC.

1999 INSC 6717 February 1999Appeal(s) allowed

On July 23, 1996 a FIR was lodged under IPC sections 366A, 372, 376 and 344 r/w 34 and the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act based on a victim's detailed statement of exploitation and sexual assault. Five influential accused filed writ petitions in the Kerala High Court seeking quashing of the FIR, and the High Court, a

RAJKOT MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONversusMANJULBEN JAYANTILAL NAKUM AND ORS.

1997 INSC 3417 January 1997Appeal(s) allowed

The deceased Jayantilal was killed when a roadside tree, planted by the Rajkot Municipal Corporation, fell on him while he was walking on a footpath. His widow and children sued the corporation for damages, alleging negligence in failing to maintain the tree in a safe condition. The trial court and the Gujarat High Cou

RAMESH S/O LAXMAN GAVLIversusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND ORS.

1999 INSC 41616 September 1999Dismissed

The case involved the murder of Kanhaiyalal, a member of a rival Gawli faction, for which Ramesh (senior) and others were convicted under IPC sections 302 and 34. The prosecution relied on eye‑witnesses PW1, PW2 and PW4, whose testimonies were corroborated by a doctor’s post‑mortem report. The appellant challenged the

STATE OF MAHARASHTRAversusTAPAS D. NEOGY

1999 INSC 41716 September 1999Appeal(s) allowed

Tapas D. Neogy, a town planner, was accused of corruptly altering zoning maps to benefit landowners, leading to charges under the IPC and the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. During investigation, the police sealed lockers and instructed banks not to allow operation of Neogy's bank account, citing Section 102 of the

DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITYversusKANWAR KUMAR MEHTA AND ORS. ETC.

1996 INSC 105816 September 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The Delhi Development Authority (DDA) allotted 5,000 plots in Rohini, Delhi, but a stay ordered by the High Court on land acquisition delayed issuance of allotment letters. After the stay was vacated, the DDA recalculated plot costs using a cost‑of‑living index escalation of 16.62% per annum, whereas the High Court had

LATA WADHWA AND ORS.versusSTATE OF BIHAR AND ORS.

2001 INSC 37016 August 2001Disposed off

A fire during a Tata Iron and Steel Company celebration in Jamshedpur killed 60 and injured 113. The victims filed a writ petition under Articles 21 and 32 seeking compensation from the State of Bihar and the company. The Supreme Court appointed former CJI Y.V. Chandrachud to determine compensation using the multiplier

JASBIR SINGHversusVIPIN KUMAR JAGGI AND ORS.

2001 INSC 37116 August 2001Dismissed

The appellant, Jasbir Singh, was tried for offences under the NDPS Act alongside co‑accused Vipin Kumar Jaggi (Respondent No. I). Jaggi applied for a pardon under Section 307 CrPC, which the Sessions Judge rejected, after which the Narcotics Control Bureau granted him immunity under Section 64 of the NDPS Act. The Sess

SRI M.A. RAJASEKHARversusTHE STATE OF KARNATAKA.AND ANR.

1996 INSC 89316 August 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a Tehsildar, challenged an adverse remark in his 1988‑89 Annual Confidential Report that he "does not act dispassionately when faced with dilemma." The Supreme Court held that adverse remarks must be based on specific instances and the officer must be given an opportunity to respond. Since the remark was

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BOMBAYversusT.P. KUMARAN

1996 INSC 89416 August 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent, an Income‑Tax Officer, was dismissed from service and filed a suit challenging his dismissal. The suit was decreed, resulting in his reinstatement, but the arrears of salary were not paid, prompting a writ petition in the High Court which ordered payment of all arrears. After the arrears were paid, the

MAULVI ISSA QURESHIversusDISTRICT JUDGE, DEORIA AND ORS.

1996 INSC 89516 August 1996Appeal(s) allowed

Ram Nihore filed a suit on April 25, 1988, impleading Mansari as co‑plaintiff for a perpetual injunction restraining the appellant from possession and enjoyment of the schedule property. The suit was dismissed for default on May 27, 1988. The appellant objected that Ram Nihore had died on September 4, 1979, rendering t

STATE OF KARNATAKAversusG.M. HAYATH

1996 INSC 89716 August 1996Dismissed

The State of Karnataka initiated disciplinary proceedings against G.M. Hayath under Rule 6(1) of the Karnataka State Police Disciplinary Proceedings Rules, 1965, alleging that he had submitted a false income certificate at recruitment, claiming his father's income exceeded the Rs 1,000 per annum ceiling. The Tribunal h

M.S. CHAWLA AND ORS.versusSTATE OF PUNJAB AND ANR.

2001 INSC 21016 April 2001Dismissed

The appellants, retired District Judges, were appointed as Presidents of District Consumer Forums under Section 10 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. The Punjab Government issued an order on 25‑January‑1996 directing that the pension they received as retired judges be deducted from the salary payable as Forum Presid

P. MOHAN REDDY ETC.versusE.A.A. CHARLES AND ORS.

2001 INSC 9216 February 2001Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned the inter‑se seniority of Deputy Tehsildars in Andhra Pradesh appointed between 10 April 1980 and September 1992. The direct‑recruit appointees argued that their seniority must be fixed according to Rule 4(e) of the 1961 Revenue Subordinate Service Rules, as it stood before the 1992 amendment, wherea

M/S A-ONE GRANITESversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ORS.

2001 INSC 9516 February 2001Case Partly allowed

The dispute concerned the grant of a mining lease over a 10‑acre granite area in Mahoba, Uttar Pradesh. Respondent No.4 (the earlier lessee) applied for re‑grant of the lease after the area was withdrawn from an auction/tender regime (Chapter IV) and returned to the normal lease procedure (Chapter II). Rule 72 of the U

SANSHIN CHEMICALS INDUSTRYversusORIENTALS CARBONS AND CHEMICALS LTD. AND ORS.

2001 INSC 9316 February 2001Dismissed

Sanshin Chemicals entered into a technical collaboration agreement with Orientals Carbons that contained Clause 8.4, providing that if the parties could not agree on the place of arbitration within 30 days, a Joint Arbitration Committee (JAC) would decide the venue. The JAC determined the venue on 15 July 1998. Sanshin

VIJAYAN@ RAJANversusSTATE OF KERALA

1999 INSC 6516 February 1999Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, Vijayan and Sadanandan, were convicted by the Kerala High Court for murder and conspiracy under Sections 302 and 120B IPC based largely on circumstantial evidence, identification testimony, a dying declaration, and bullets recovered from the second accused's house. The Supreme Court held that the identi

J. JOSE DHANAPAULversusS. THOMAS AND ORS.

1996 INSC 27116 February 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, J. Jose Dhanapoul, challenged an order of the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal that annulled the appointment of S. Thomas without the appellant being made a party to the proceedings. The Tribunal had issued the impugned order on June 15, 1993, cancelling Thomas's appointment, but the appellant was neit

DR. GHANSHYAM JAISWALversusKAMAL SINGH

1996 INSC 27216 February 1996Appeal(s) allowed

In a suit for ejectment filed on 5 April 1984, the respondent entered into a compromise and a decree for eviction was subsequently recorded. The respondent failed to deliver possession, prompting the appellant to file an execution petition. The respondent first challenged the validity of the compromise decree under Sec

UNION OF INDIA AND ANR.versusRANCHI MUNICIPAL CORPN. RANCHI AND ORS.

1996 INSC 27316 February 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The Ranchi Municipal Corporation demanded Rs 1,01,501 as service charges from the Railways for the years 1993‑94 and 1994‑95. The Union of India challenged the demand, and the Patna High Court upheld it. On appeal, the Supreme Court examined whether the municipality could levy such charges under Section 135 of the Rail

BABULALversusRAJ KUMAR AND ORS.

1996 INSC 27416 February 1996Appeal(s) allowed

Babulal obtained a decree for specific performance of a contract for sale of immovable property, but the decree did not grant possession. When the decree‑holder sought to execute the decree, Raj Kumar (the appellant), who was not a party to the decree, claimed a right in the property and obtained an injunction. He obje

SMT. INDRANI RAJA DURAI AND ORS.versusMADRAS MOTOR AND GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY AND ORS.

1996 INSC 7716 January 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The deceased, Rajadurai, was riding a motorcycle when a bus collided with him after he swerved to avoid a car, resulting in his death. The Tribunal awarded Rs. 1,00,000 compensation, reducing it by 40% for the deceased's contributory negligence, leaving Rs. 60,000 payable. The Madras High Court reversed this, holding t

THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER, BANGALOREversusV.T. VELU AND ORS.

1996 INSC 7816 January 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The Special Land Acquisition Officer sought to acquire 1 acre 6 guntas of land for defence purposes. The land was requisitioned in 1965 and rentals were fixed at Rs 4 per sq ft under the Acquisition and Requisition of Immovable Property Act, 1952. The Collector’s award under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 was Rs 24,250

KOCHUKAKKADA ABOOBACKER (DEAD) BY LRS. AND ORS.versusATTAH KASIM AND ORS.

1996 INSC 7916 January 1996Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined a civil appeal challenging a preliminary decree for partition of the Konchukakkada property. The trial court had placed the burden of proof on the plaintiffs, a view corrected by the appellate court, but the appellate court failed to properly consider key documentary evidence establishing the

KSHETRIYA KISAN GRAMIN BANKversusD.B. SHARMA AND ORS.

2000 INSC 52715 November 2000Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant Kshetriya Kisan Gramin Bank, an RRB sponsored by Uttar Pradesh Co‑operative Bank, challenged a High Court order that directed its officers to receive the same pay scales as officers of other RRBs sponsored by nationalised banks. The dispute originated from employees' petitions for pay parity with national

DR. (MRS.) SANDHYA JAINversusDR. SUBHASH GARG AND ANR.

1999 INSC 48215 October 1999Dismissed

The appeal concerned the promotion of Dr. Subhash Garg, a lecturer in the Madhya Pradesh College of Dentistry, to the post of Reader. The MP Medical Education (Gazetted) Service Recruitment Rules, 1987 provided five Reader posts but specified promotion criteria for only four, leaving the fifth post undefined. The State

MOHD. YUNUSversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

1997 INSC 69415 October 1997Disposed off

Mohd Yunus was charged under Sections 3 and 5 of the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1987. Section 20A(1) of the Act requires prior written approval of the District Superintendent of Police before recording any information about an offence. The prosecution claimed an oral permission was given by t

STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH AND ORS. ETC. ETC.versusBOLLARPRAGADA SURYANARAYANA AND ORS. ETC. ETC.

[1997] SUPP. 2 S.C.R. 71515 July 1997Dismissed

The respondents were part‑time Village Officers in Andhra Pradesh whose posts were abolished by an Ordinance on 6 January 1984, later replaced by the Part‑time Village Officers Abolition Act, 1985 (sections 3 and 5). Prior to abolition they had contributed to a Family Benefit Scheme (G.O. No. 3420, 1 August 1980) and w

UNION OF INDIA AND ANR.versusMOTI LAL AND ORS.

1996 INSC 26115 February 1996Dismissed

The respondents, who had been directly appointed as casual mates in Class III of the Northern Railway, were later regularised as gangmen (Class IV) by the railway authorities. They contended that their long‑term service as mates and the temporary status conferred upon them entitled them to be regularised as mates. The

UNION OF INDIAversusRAM SUA SHARMA

1996 INSC 26215 February 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The case involves Ram S. Sharma, a government servant who discovered, after 25 years of service, that his date of birth recorded in the service records was incorrect. He claimed that his correct date of birth was January 2, 1939, instead of the recorded December 16, 1934, and sought correction. The Central Administrati

J.L. JAINversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

1996 INSC 26315 February 1996Appeal(s) allowed

In this civil appeal, the appellant J.L. Jain challenged the decision of the Central Administrative Tribunal that denied a reopening of a departmental inquiry against him. The appellant sought a one‑time opportunity to participate in the inquiry, present his defence, and cross‑examine witnesses. The respondents argued

UNION TERRITORY OF CHANDIGARHversusCHARANJIT KAUR

1996 INSC 26415 February 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent was convicted of murder and sentenced to life imprisonment, having been in custody since September 1983. She filed an application in the High Court seeking premature release, and the High Court ordered her release on the ground that the State had failed to file a counter‑affidavit despite multiple adjour

SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, PROHIBITION AND EXCISE DEPARTMENTversusL. SRINIVASAN

1996 INSC 26515 February 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent, L. Srinivasan, an Assistant Section Officer in the Prohibition and Excise Department, was suspended and a departmental inquiry was ordered while a charge‑sheet for embezzlement and fabrication of false records was filed and a criminal trial was pending. The Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal set aside t

SINGHAI LAL CHAND JAIN (DEAD)versusRASHTRIYA SWAYAM SEWAK SANGH, PANNA AND ORS.

1996 INSC 26615 February 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant sought eviction of the Rashtriya Swayam Sewak Sangh (RSS Sangh) from premises it occupied. The Sangh was represented in the suit by its manager, president and a member, and the trial court dismissed the suit. The Madhya Pradesh High Court, on appeal, decreed ejectment in favour of the appellant, but the r

THE STATE OF PUNJABversusDARSHAN SINGH

1996 INSC 26715 February 1996Appeal(s) allowed

Darshan Singh, a bus conductor employed by the State of Punjab, was removed from service on 26 May 1989 for alleged misconduct of collecting fares without issuing tickets, which was deemed fraud. The removal order also listed his earlier punishments, leading the trial court to hold that the authority had considered tho

ABDUL AZIZ ABDUL RATAK AND ANR.versusTHE MUNICIPAL CORPN. OF GREATER BOMBAY AND ANR.

1996 INSC 26815 February 1996Dismissed

The appellants, whose land was acquired under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, entered into an agreement with the municipal corporation to receive two‑thirds of the compensation at a rate of Rs.40 per square yard, with interest fixed at 4% per annum from possession. The compensation award was later enhanced to Rs.300 pe

STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH ETC.versusSMT. RAM KUMARI DEVI ETC.

1996 INSC 26915 February 1996Case Partly allowed

The State of Uttar Pradesh acquired 13.75 acres of land for a government college and the Land Acquisition Officer initially fixed compensation at Rs 11,887.78 per acre. A District Judge later awarded Rs 5 per square foot and the High Court reduced it to Rs 3.30 per square foot, relying on sale deeds of small parcels th

STATE OF HARYANAversusSTATE OF PUNJAB AND ANR.

2002 INSC 2615 January 2002Directions issued

After the bifurcation of Punjab in 1966, the Government of India allocated 3.5 MAF of Ravi‑Beas water to Haryana under a 1976 notification. Haryana could not draw its share through the existing Bhakra Main Line Canal and therefore proposed the Sutlej‑Yamuna Link (SYL) Canal, completing its portion in 1980 while Punjab

S.K.G SUGAR LTD.versusSTATE OF BIHAR AND ORS.

1997 INSC 2915 January 1997Dismissed

S.K.G. Sugar Ltd., a sugar factory with a reserved area under the Bihar Sugarcane (Regulation of Supply and Purchase) Act, 1981, paid the Central Government‑fixed minimum price of Rs.13.92 per quintal for sugarcane as prescribed in the Sugarcane (Control) Order, 1966. The State Government, acting in its statutory capac

DR. K. RAMULU AND ANR. ETC.versusDR. S. SURYAPRAKASH RAO AND ORS.

1997 INSC 3015 January 1997Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent, a Veterinary Assistant Surgeon in the Andhra Pradesh Animal Husbandry Department, filed an application seeking a promotion panel for the post of Assistant Director under the then‑applicable Rule 4 of the A.P. Subordinate Service Rules. The Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal directed the Government t

SARDAR MOHAR SINGH THROUGH POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER, MANJIT SINGHversusMANGILAL @ MANGTYA

1997 INSC 3115 January 1997Dismissed

The petitioner entered into a contract to sell agricultural land to the respondent, who defaulted, leading to a decree for specific performance directing the respondent to pay earnest money and damages within three months. After a delay of about seven and a half years, the respondent applied to rescind the decree and s

THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESHversusHLRALAL AND ORS.

1996 INSC 6615 January 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Madhya Pradesh acquired land belonging to Hiralal and others and the respondents claimed compensation under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 as amended by Act 68 of 1984, which purported to provide enhanced compensation and solatium. The High Court had allowed their claim, but the State appealed. The Supreme

M. V. K.GUNDARAOversusREVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, (L.A.O.), NARASARAOPET

1996 INSC 6715 January 1996Dismissed

The case concerned compensation for land acquired under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 for a telephone exchange in Narasaraopet. The acquisition officer initially awarded Rs 40 per square yard, which was enhanced to Rs 75 per square yard by the Subordinate Judge on the basis of four sale deeds executed in 1978 at rates

RAMESH SINGH (DIED) BY L.RS. AND ORS.versusSTATE OF HARYANA AND ORS.

1996 INSC 6815 January 1996Dismissed

The State acquired land in Etmadpur Village under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 and the Collector awarded compensation under Section 11. Ramesh Singh and Hari Singh sought a reference under Section 18, which was dismissed, while Ruma Singh obtained a higher award after a reference and a decree under Section 26. The pe

IMPROVEMENT TRUST, SANGRURversusGURJJT SINGH SANDHU AND ORS.

1996 INSC 6915 January 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned an appeal by Improvement Trust, Sangrur against Gurjjt Singh Sandhu and others under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The dispute centered on whether the respondents were entitled to the additional amount provided under Section 23(1A) of the Act, as amended by Act 68 of 1984. The Collector’s award was

MEDICAL COUNCIL OF INDIA AND ANR.versusTHE STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ANR.

1996 INSC 7015 January 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The second respondent, who held an M.Sc. in Medical Biochemistry and worked as a professor, applied to be entered in the State Medical Register but was denied because he lacked an MBBS degree. He obtained a writ order from the Rajasthan High Court directing his registration, which was later set aside by the High Court

SMT. NUT.AN ARVINDversusUNION OF INDIA AND ANR.

1996 INSC 7115 January 1996Dismissed

The case concerned Smt. Nutan Arvind, a Central Civil Services officer who was not included in the promotion panel prepared by the Departmental Promotion Committee (DPC) for a vacancy that arose before 12 May 1988. The appellant contended that the DPC had wrongly applied the post‑May 1988 merit‑based grading system and

STATE THROUGH CBI, DELHIversusGIAN SINGH

1999 INSC 39614 September 1999Disposed off

After the signing of an accord between the Prime Minister and Sikh leader Sant Harchand Singh Longowal, an extremist group conspired to assassinate the Sant. Gian Singh and co‑assailants opened fire on the Sant during a public meeting on 20 August 1985, causing his death. They were overpowered, arrested, and convicted

HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH THRU. REGISTRAR AND ORS.versusSATYA NARAYAN JHAVAR

2001 INSC 36214 August 2001Appeal(s) allowed

The respondents were appointed as Civil Judges (Trainee) under the Madhya Pradesh Judicial Service Rules, 1955 and placed on a two‑year probation that could be extended by another two years, making a maximum of four years. After the four‑year period their services were terminated because the Full Court of the High Cour

JASBIR SINGHversusLT. GOVERNOR, DELHI AND ANR.

1999 INSC 18514 April 1999Dismissed

Jasbir Singh was detained under Section 3(1) of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 on 25 March 1994 and the grounds of detention were served on 30 March 1994. He filed representations to the Advisory Board and separately to the Central Government, the latter being disp

PUNJAB STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD AND ANR.versusASHWANI KUMAR

1997 INSC 27614 March 1997Appeal(s) allowed

The Punjab State Electricity Board supplied electricity to Ashwani Kumar, later issuing a bill of Rs.1,90,498.79 for the period Dec 1983‑Jan 1985. Kumar filed a civil suit seeking a permanent injunction to restrain the Board from recovering the amount. The trial court decreed in his favour, an appeal upheld the decree,

LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER-CUM-DSWO, A.P.versusB.V. REDDY AND SONS

2002 INSC 7914 February 2002Appeal(s) allowed

The land of the respondents was acquired under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894; the Collector awarded Rs 11,000 per acre while the claimants demanded Rs 30,000‑30,000 per acre. A reference court fixed the market value at Rs 75,000 per acre but, relying on the pre‑1984 Section 25, limited compensation to the amount claim

MICHAEL B. FERNANDESversusC.K. JAFFER SHARIEF AND ORS .

2001 INSC 8814 February 2001Dismissed

The appellant filed an election petition challenging the election of respondent No.1 to the Lok Sabha and impleaded the Election Commissioner, Returning Officer and Chief Electoral Officer as respondents. The High Court ordered their deletion, holding that Section 82 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 limits

MUKHTIAR AHMEDversusSMT. HUSAN BANO AND ORS.

1996 INSC 24614 February 1996Dismissed

Mukhtar Ahmed filed a suit seeking a declaration that he was entitled to a two‑thirds share in a house as a co‑owner. Earlier, in a suit filed by a co‑sharer, the court had determined that the co‑sharer was only entitled to a one‑fifth share, and that decree became final. The issue before the appellate court was whethe

STATE OF MANIPUR AND ORS.versusSANASAM ONGBI AND ANR.

1999 INSC 47513 October 1999Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Manipur detained Sanasam Ongbi under Section 3(3) of the National Security Act, 1980. The Gauhati High Court quashed the detention order, holding that the State had violated Section 3(5) because the report of the detention did not reach the Central Government within seven days. On appeal, the Supreme Court

SANKALCHAN JAYCHANDBHAI PATEL AND ORS.versusVITHALBHAI JAYCHANDBHAI PATEL AND ORS.

1996 INSC 105413 September 1996Dismissed

The appellants and respondent were co‑owners of a property that had been partitioned and subsequently mutated in revenue records. The respondent filed an appeal under Section 11 of the Bombay Revenue Jurisdiction Act, which was dismissed, after which the appellants instituted a civil suit for declaration of title and a

JUDHISTIR MOHANTYversusSTATE OF ORISSA AND ORS.

1996 INSC 105513 September 1996Dismissed

The appellant, a Superintendent of Jail in leave reserve (Class II), petitioned the Chief Minister for a transfer to Behrampur so he could settle before retirement. The government honored his request and transferred him to a Superintendent of Circle Jail (Class I) post, where he served from April to October 1978 before

STATE THROUGH SUPDTT. CENTRAL JAIL, NEW DELHIversusCHARULATA JOSHI AND ANR.

1999 INSC 18013 April 1999Disposed off

A news magazine sought permission from the Additional Sessions Judge to interview an under‑trial prisoner, Babloo Srivastava, in Tihar Jail. The Sessions Judge granted a blanket permission, which the High Court modified by imposing conditions that the prisoner must consent and the interview must not offend the court or

AHMED BIN SALEMversusSTATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

1999 INSC 18113 April 1999Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant was accused of throwing bombs that injured a shopkeeper and caused the deaths of two persons. His name did not appear in the FIR or in the initial police statements recorded under Section 161 of the CrPC, but was later added during trial. The prosecution’s case relied on three eye‑witnesses whose statemen

SHARDA DEVIversusSTATE OF BIHAR

2002 INSC 13713 March 2002Disposed off

Sharda Devi appealed against the State of Bihar challenging a land acquisition award. The dispute turned on whether a Letters Patent Appeal (LPA) could be filed before a Division Bench of the High Court against the judgment of a Single Judge who had decided an appeal under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894.

BHATIA INTERNATIONALversusBULK TRADING S.A. AND ANR.

2002 INSC 13813 March 2002Dismissed

Bhatia International entered into a contract with Bulk Trading containing an ICC arbitration clause, agreeing that the arbitration would be held in Paris. Bulk Trading sought an injunction under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 in an Indian court to restrain the appellant from dealing with its as

NEW BANK OF INDIA EMPLOYEES UNION AND ANR.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

1996 INSC 37613 March 1996Dismissed

The New Bank of India, a loss‑making nationalised bank, was merged with Punjab National Bank under the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1980. The Central Government, in consultation with the Reserve Bank of India, framed a Placement Scheme to determine the inter‑se seniority of the tran

RAN SINGH MALIKversusSTATE OF HARYANA AND ORS.

2002 INSC 7813 February 2002Dismissed

The appellant, appointed as Deputy Director (Feed and Fodder) in 1987, claimed that his post was a regular Class I veterinary cadre post and sought the revised pay scales of 1987 and 1988 and seniority over two respondents appointed later to cadre posts. The State argued that the post was an ex‑cadre position created w

INDIA AUTOMOBILES (1960) LTD.versusCALCUTTA MUNICIPAL CORPORATION AND ANR.

2002 INSC 7613 February 2002Disposed off

India Automobiles (1960) Ltd., the owner of a nine‑storey commercial building, leased the premises to a tenant who sub‑let parts of it. The Calcutta Municipal Corporation fixed the annual value of the property under Section 174 of the Calcutta Municipal Corporation Act, 1980, by taking into account the rent paid by the

U.P. AVAS EVAM VIKAS PARISHADversusRAM KRISHNA AND ORS.

2002 INSC 7713 February 2002Disposed off

The Uttar Pradesh Avas Evam Vikas Parishad (the Board) framed a housing scheme in a development area declared under the Uttar Pradesh Planning and Development Act, 1973. The scheme was notified under Section 28 of the Uttar Pradesh Avas Evam Vikas Parishad Adhiniyam, 1965 in 1980, and the State Government gave its appr

MRS. VISWALAKSHMI SESIDHARAN AND ORS.versusTHE BRANCH MANAGER, SYNDICATE BANK, BELGAUM

1997 INSC 13913 February 1997Dismissed

The petitioners obtained two loans from Syndicate Bank, but the bank disbursed only part of the amount. They claimed that this deficiency in service prevented them from conducting their business, leading to losses, and filed a consumer complaint for damages. The lower tribunals dismissed the complaint, holding that the

K.R. LAKSHMAN AND ORS.versusKARNATAKA ELECTRICITY BOARD AND ORS.

2000 INSC 58812 December 2000Dismissed

The Karnataka Electricity Board (KEB) amended its 1969 Recruitment and Promotion Regulations to introduce a 1:1 ratio for promotion to the post of Junior Engineer between technically qualified direct recruits and technically unqualified promotees, within a 35% promotion quota. Direct recruits challenged the amendment a

KULDEEP KUMAR GUPTA AND ORS.versusHIMACHAL PRADESH STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD AND ORS.

2000 INSC 59412 December 2000Dismissed

The Himachal Pradesh State Electricity Board framed recruitment and promotion regulations for Junior Engineers and Assistant Engineers under the Electricity (Supply) Act, allocating 95% of Junior Engineer posts to direct recruits (qualified diploma holders) and 5% to promotees (unqualified matriculates). The Board furt

STATE OF RAJASTHANversusFATEH CHAND SONI

1995 INSC 87712 December 1995Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned officers of the Rajasthan Police Service who were promoted from the Senior Scale to the Selection Scale. The respondent, Fateh Chand Soni, challenged the seniority list prepared on the basis of the date of appointment to the Selection Scale, arguing that such appointment did not constitute a promotio

SANTOSH KUMAR SINGHversusTHE STATE OF U.P. & ORS. ETC.

1995 INSC 87812 December 1995Dismissed

Santosh Kumar Singh was appointed as a lecturer in Agronomy at Durgaji Post Graduate College while still a student, first on 1 January 1984 and later on 1 October 1985, despite not possessing the minimum qualifications prescribed by the University Statute. The appellant claimed that the ad‑hoc appointments were permiss

NARINDERJIT SINGH SAHNI AND ANR.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

2001 INSC 50312 October 2001Dismissed

The petitioners, directors of several finance companies accused of large‑scale cheating, filed writ petitions under Article 32 claiming that their personal liberty under Article 21 was violated because they were detained in various jails despite obtaining bail in some cases. The Court held that while a petition under A

UNION OF INDIAversusHANSOLI DEVI & ORS.

2002 INSC 37912 September 2002Reference answered

The Supreme Court examined the scope of Section 28‑A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, which allows a fresh application for re‑determination of compensation. It considered whether a dismissal of an application under Section 18 on the ground of delay amounts to "not filing an application" within the meaning of Section

BASANT KUMAR ETC.versusUNION OF INDIA ETC.

1996 INSC 104612 September 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court considered a dispute arising from a 1961 notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, which acquired 1669 bighas of land in Posangipur. The original compensation was Rs 1400/1200 per bigha, later enhanced by the Additional District Judge to Rs 3050 per bigha. The appellants argue

THE AMALAPURAM MUNICIPAL COUNCIL AND ANR.versusU. SIMHADRI

1996 INSC 87012 August 1996Dismissed

The Amalapuram Municipal Council sought to fill the post of Chairman by calling names from the employment exchange. Initially, under Government Memorandum No. 372 (Feb 18, 1992) the Chairman could select candidates without any counter‑verification. However, Government Order No. 413 (Mar 10, 1992) was issued to curb mal

SH. BAU NATH GUPTAversusSTATE OF BIHAR AND ORS.

1996 INSC 87112 August 1996Disposed off

Sh. Bau Nath Gupta was appointed on a temporary basis as Assistant Master in the Government of Uttar Pradesh in December 1955 and served for about four years before being recruited by the Bihar Public Service Commission and joining the Bihar Government in January 1959, where he retired in December 1982. He claimed a pr

PARWATBAIversusSONABAI AND ORS.

1996 INSC 87212 August 1996Dismissed

The dispute concerned land originally owned by Punjaba. Upon his death, his widow Parwatabai obtained a limited estate in 1941 and executed a registered gift deed transferring enjoyment of the land to her husband, who thereafter possessed it. After Parwatabai’s death in 1966, her daughters claimed succession to the fat

SKYPAK COURIERS LTD. ETC. ETC.versusTATA CHEMICALS LTD. ETC. ETC.

2000 INSC 32012 May 2000

The Supreme Court examined the practice of the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) referring consumer disputes to a retired judge for "consensual adjudication" and then treating the award as its own order. It held that the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 does not empower the Commission to delegate its

UNION OF INDIAversusHIMMAT SINGH CHAHAR

1999 INSC 24212 May 1999Appeal(s) allowed

Himmat Singh Chahar, a petty officer in the Indian Navy, was convicted by a Court Martial for outraging the modesty of a woman under Section 354 IPC and Section 77(2) of the Navy Act, receiving a nine‑month imprisonment and dismissal. He appealed to the Chief of Naval Staff and the Central Government, both of which uph

MOHAN AND OTHERSversusSTATE OF TAMIL NADU

1998 INSC 22812 May 1998Case Partly allowed

The appellants conspired to kidnap a ten‑year‑old boy and demand a ransom of Rs 5 lakhs. After abducting the child, Mohan and Gopi administered poison, tied the boy’s limbs and neck, and strangled him, later disposing of the body in a TV box placed in a well. All four accused – Mohan, Gopi, Muthu and Pushparaj – were s

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