Tag: Special Leave Petition

Nomination vs. Succession: Supreme Court Clarifies Who Gets GPF Funds After Death
3Mar By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Nomination vs. Succession: Supreme Court Clarifies Who Gets GPF Funds After Death

This Supreme Court judgment clarifies that a nomination under the General Provident Fund Rules only authorizes receipt of funds and does not confer absolute title. When a nomination becomes invalid due to the subscriber acquiring a family, the amount must be distributed equally among all eligible family members, regardless of any unmodified nomination. Facts Of The Case: The dispute arose from the death of Bolla Mohan, a government employee who died in service on July 4, 2021. Upon joining service in 2000, the deceased had nominated his mother, B. Suguna (respondent No. 1), as the recipient of his General Provident Fund (GPF), Central Government Employees Group Insurance Scheme (CGEIS), and Death cum Retirement Gratuity (DCRG). However, on June 20, 2003, he married Bolla Malathi (the app...
Read More
Degree Name vs. Subject Study: Supreme Court Orders Reinstatement of Employee Wrongfully Terminated
2Mar By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Degree Name vs. Subject Study: Supreme Court Orders Reinstatement of Employee Wrongfully Terminated

The Supreme Court held that employer decisions cannot be purely mechanical, insisting only on a degree's title while ignoring the actual curriculum studied. Relying on a committee report prepared without affording a hearing violates natural justice. Furthermore, an expert authority's eligibility opinion must be considered; ignoring it renders a termination order arbitrary and unsustainable. Facts Of The Case: The appellant, Laxmikant Sharma, was appointed on a contractual basis as a Monitoring and Evaluation Consultant in Madhya Pradesh's Public Health & Engineering Department on April 26, 2013, after responding to an advertisement that required a "Postgraduate degree in Statistics." He held an M.Com. degree, completed in 1999, which included Business Statistics and Indian Economic S...
Read More
Supreme Court: Disputed No-Dues Certificate Can’t Be Ground to Quash Criminal Proceedings
2Mar By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Supreme Court: Disputed No-Dues Certificate Can’t Be Ground to Quash Criminal Proceedings

The Supreme Court held that criminal proceedings cannot be quashed where allegations prima facie disclose essential ingredients of an offence. The power under Section 482 CrPC is sparing; disputed documents like No-Dues Certificate cannot be relied upon at pre-trial stage. Civil remedy coexistence doesn't bar prosecution if allegations support criminal liability. Facts Of The Case: The dispute in this case arose from contractual and financial dealings between the appellant (accused no. 2) and respondent no. 2 (complainant) concerning construction work undertaken between 2008 and 2010. A No Dues Certificate was issued by respondent no. 2 on 10.06.2010 and acknowledged on 12.06.2010, recording that no payments were outstanding. Subsequently, disputes emerged between the parties, leading to...
Read More
Supreme Court Clarifies: No Fresh SLP Allowed After Unconditional Withdrawal of Earlier Petition
27Feb By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Supreme Court Clarifies: No Fresh SLP Allowed After Unconditional Withdrawal of Earlier Petition

The Supreme Court held that a second Special Leave Petition challenging the same judgment is not maintainable after an earlier SLP was dismissed and a subsequent recall petition was withdrawn without liberty to approach the Court again. The principle of finality in litigation bars re-agitating the same issue inter-partes, even if questions of law are kept open. Facts Of The Case: The litigation originated from a judgment dated May 15, 2012, passed by a learned Single Judge of the Himachal Pradesh High Court in CWP No.1679/2010, concerning pensionary benefits payable by the Kangra Central Cooperative Bank Limited to its retirees. This judgment was subsequently upheld by a Division Bench of the High Court on February 26, 2024, in LPA No.316/2012. The Bank challenged this Division Ben...
Read More
Supreme Court: High Court Approval Must for Withdrawing Cases Against MPs and MLAs
27Feb By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Supreme Court: High Court Approval Must for Withdrawing Cases Against MPs and MLAs

The Supreme Court held that for withdrawing prosecution against sitting or former MPs/MLAs, the State must seek the High Court's permission under the mandate of Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay. The Public Prosecutor must disclose all reasons for seeking withdrawal, enabling the High Court to apply its judicial mind and pass a reasoned order. Facts Of The Case: The appellant, Bal Kumar Patel @ Raj Kumar, was the subject of multiple First Information Reports (FIRs) registered in June 2007 at Police Station Kotwali Nagar, Raebareli. These included Case Crime No. 656/07 and others under Sections 25, 27, 30 of the Arms Act, as well as Sections 420, 467, 468, and 471 of the Indian Penal Code concerning an arms license. Following investigation, a chargesheet was filed, and the Chief Judicial Magistrate,...
Read More
Compromise Between Parties Leads to Early Release as Supreme Court Modifies Sentence in Criminal Appeal
26Feb By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Compromise Between Parties Leads to Early Release as Supreme Court Modifies Sentence in Criminal Appeal

The Supreme Court partially allowed the appeal, reducing the sentence to the period already undergone (two years and three months) while upholding the conviction. Notice had been limited to quantum of sentence. The Court considered the compromise between parties and the incarceration period served, modifying the sentence accordingly with direction for immediate release if not required in other cases. Facts Of The Case: The appellants, Venkatesh and another individual, were originally convicted by the learned III-Additional District and Sessions Judge, Salem, in S.C. No.460/2016 on November 3, 2020. The charges stemmed from Crime No.103/2016, under which they were found guilty of offenses under Section 326 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), which pertains to voluntarily causing g...
Read More
Supreme Court Clears Way for Occupation Certificate, Bans Construction on Recreational Plot
21Feb By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Supreme Court Clears Way for Occupation Certificate, Bans Construction on Recreational Plot

The Supreme Court set aside the concurrent convictions, holding that non-compliance with Section 313 CrPC vitiates a fair trial. The trial court's failure to put each material circumstance individually to the appellants caused prejudice. The Court remanded the matter for de novo examination from the stage of recording Section 313 statements, emphasizing this mandatory procedural requirement. Facts Of The Case: The case originated from an incident on March 31, 2016, when the informant, Kachan Pasi, along with his father Ghughali Pasi, mother Kouta Devi, and sister-in-law Dharmsheela Devi, were returning from their fields. They were allegedly surrounded by several accused persons, including the three appellants before the Supreme Court—Chandan Pasi, Pappu Pasi, and Gidik Pasi. The accu...
Read More
Errors Do Not Change Decision – Supreme Court Dismisses Konkan Railway’s Review Plea in Resignation Dispute
12Feb By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Errors Do Not Change Decision – Supreme Court Dismisses Konkan Railway’s Review Plea in Resignation Dispute

The Supreme Court held that apparent errors in factual findings do not warrant review unless they materially alter the decision. Justice and equity may override strict contractual principles where long, unblemished service exists. Settled “no work, no pay” rule is not absolute; back-wages can be reduced proportionately without disturbing reinstatement. No review lies for re-argument. Facts Of The Case: Konkan Railway Corporation Ltd. approached the Supreme Court by way of a review petition against the judgment dated 13th September, 2024 passed in Civil Appeal No. 10567 of 2024. In the original appeal, the respondent-employee, S.D. Manohara, had challenged the decision of the High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru, which had held that he could not withdraw his resignation. The employe...
Read More
Law is a Force for Justice, Not Absurdity: Supreme Court on Rent Arrears Eviction Case
9Feb By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Law is a Force for Justice, Not Absurdity: Supreme Court on Rent Arrears Eviction Case

The Supreme Court held that in appeals challenging eviction orders under Section 12(3) of the Kerala Buildings Act, the Appellate Authority is not required to mandatorily re-initiate the entire Section 12 procedure. The deposit of admitted arrears, as determined by the Rent Controller, is a precondition to contest the appeal, unless supervening events warrant a fresh application. Facts Of The Case: The appellants are landlords who filed eviction petitions against the respondent-tenant for two shops in Kochi, alleging non-payment of rent since early 2020. The Rent Controller, relying on a prior money decree for arrears, passed orders under Section 12(1) of the Kerala Buildings Act, directing the tenant to pay substantial outstanding and future rents. Upon the tenant's failure to comply, e...
Read More