Delhi High Court - The Legal Chamber

Supreme Court Mandates Timely Promotions and Cadre Review for CAPF Officers

11Jun

By The Legal ChamberNo Comments

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Mandates Timely Promotions and Cadre Review for CAPF Officers

The Supreme Court affirmed Central Armed Police Forces (CAPFs) as 'Organized Group-A Services,' entitling officers to Non-Functional Financial Upgradation. It directed a six-month cadre review and recruitment rule revision. The Court also suggested progressively reducing IPS deputation posts in CAPFs to address officer stagnation and grievances Facts Of The Case: The case originated from a long-standing grievance of officers belonging to the Central Armed Police Forces (CAPFs) – including CRPF, BSF, SSB, ITBP, and CISF. These officers sought recognition of their services as 'Organized Group-A Services' (OGAS), a crucial classification for ensuring parity with other Group-A services and entitlement to benefits such as Non-Functional Financial Upgradation (NFFU). A primary co...

Supreme Court Upholds Life Sentence in Acid Attack Case but Reduces Term for Elderly Accused

The Supreme Court upheld the conviction of two appellants under Section 326A IPC for an acid attack, affirming the High Court’s ruling. While maintaining life imprisonment for the advocate (Accused No.2), it reduced the sentence of the elderly co-accused (Accused No.1) to 10 years, considering his age and health. The Court reiterated that concurrent findings of fact require no interference unless perverse or legally flawed, emphasizing strict scrutiny in acid attack cases. Procedural lapses in investigation were deemed non-fatal, and medical evidence conclusively established the victim’s injuries. The judgment underscores parity in sentencing while balancing aggravating and mitigating factors. Facts Of The Case: On June 8, 2014, at approximately 8:00 PM near Govind Nagar railway crossing...

Supreme Court Clarifies: When Does a Dispute Resolution Clause Qualify as Arbitration? Mediation or Arbitration

The Supreme Court ruled that Article 20 of the Concession Agreements between MCD and private contractors did not constitute a valid arbitration clause under Section 7 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The Court emphasized that clauses lacking mutual intent, impartial adjudication, and procedural fairness cannot be enforced as arbitration agreements, directing parties to pursue alternative remedies. The judgment reiterated the essential elements of arbitration clauses from K.K. Modi v. K.N. Modi (1998) and upheld precedent in SDMC v. SMS AAMW Tollways (2019). Facts Of The Case: The case involved three separate appeals before the Supreme Court concerning Concession Agreements between the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD) and private contractors (SMS Ltd., DSC Ltd., and CCC ...