Search Judgments
Search by legal issue, facts, citation, statute, or case name
Union of India v. Biswabijoyee Panigarihi
The Court held that UPSC advice in disciplinary cases must be supplied only with the final penalty order and not with the Inquiry Officer’s report, resolving conflicting Supreme Court precedents in favor of the reasoned view in UOI vs. T.V. Patel.
Union of India v. Biswabijoyee Panigarihi
The Court held that UPSC advice must be supplied to the charged officer along with the final penalty order, not with the Inquiry Officer's report, and that the Disciplinary Authority need not record elaborate reasons if it agrees with the Inquiry Officer's report.
Deepak Kumar v. Commissioner of Police & Anr.
The Delhi High Court held that acquittal in a criminal trial does not conclusively establish innocence for public employment, and the Screening Committee may consider the circumstances of acquittal and antecedents to assess suitability for police recruitment.
Ramjas Foundation v. Dheer Singh
The Delhi High Court held that illegal retrenchment due to non-compliance with Section 25F does not mandate reinstatement where no work exists, awarding compensation in lieu instead.
Ramjas Foundation v. Dheer Singh
The Delhi High Court held that illegal retrenchment due to non-compliance with Section 25F does not mandate reinstatement where work has ceased to exist, awarding compensation in lieu thereof.
Ramjas Foundation v. Dheer Singh
The Delhi High Court held that illegal retrenchment due to non-compliance with Section 25F does not mandate reinstatement when work ceases, awarding compensation instead.
Ramjas Foundation v. Dheer Singh
The Delhi High Court held that illegal retrenchment due to non-compliance with Section 25F and Rule 77 does not mandate automatic reinstatement where work ceased to exist, awarding compensation in lieu of reinstatement.
Ramjas Foundation v. Dheer Singh
The Delhi High Court held that illegal retrenchment due to non-compliance with Section 25F does not mandate automatic reinstatement where work ceased to exist, awarding compensation in lieu of reinstatement.
Ramjas Foundation v. Dheer Singh
The Delhi High Court held that illegal retrenchment due to non-compliance with Section 25F does not mandate reinstatement where no work exists, awarding compensation in lieu of reinstatement to retrenched employees.
Ramjas Foundation v. Dheer Singh
The Delhi High Court held that illegal retrenchment due to non-compliance with Section 25F does not mandate reinstatement where work ceased to exist, awarding compensation in lieu of reinstatement.
Ramjas Foundation v. Dheer Singh
The Delhi High Court held that illegal retrenchment due to procedural lapses does not mandate reinstatement where work has ceased, awarding compensation in lieu of reinstatement.
Ramjas Foundation v. Dheer Singh
The Delhi High Court held that illegal retrenchment due to non-compliance with Section 25F does not mandate reinstatement where work ceases to exist, awarding compensation instead.
Ramjas Foundation v. Dheer Singh
The Delhi High Court held that illegal retrenchment due to non-compliance with Section 25F and Rule 77 does not mandate reinstatement where work has ceased and separate establishments lack functional integration, awarding compensation in lieu of reinstatement.
State of NCT of Delhi v. Jamil @ Kalu
The High Court upheld the acquittal of accused in a murder case due to failure of prosecution to establish a complete chain of circumstances and lack of compelling reasons to overturn the trial court's judgment.
Ramjas Foundation v. Dheer Singh
The Delhi High Court held that illegal retrenchment due to non-compliance with Section 25F and Rule 77 does not mandate reinstatement where work has ceased, awarding compensation in lieu of reinstatement.
Ramjas Foundation v. Dheer Singh
The Delhi High Court held that illegal retrenchment due to non-compliance with Section 25F and Rule 77 does not mandate reinstatement where work ceased to exist, awarding compensation in lieu thereof.
Ramjas Foundation v. Dheer Singh
The Delhi High Court held that illegal retrenchment due to non-compliance with Section 25F does not mandate reinstatement where work ceases, awarding compensation in lieu of reinstatement.
Lazer v. State of Tamil Nadu
The Supreme Court held that life imprisonment means imprisonment for the convict’s natural life, but remission can be granted by the State Government under Section 432 CrPC, and directed the petitioner to seek remission accordingly.
Bhagwati Developers Pvt. Ltd. v. Peerless General Finance & Investment Company Ltd
The Supreme Court held that unlisted shares of a public limited company are securities under the Securities Contracts (Regulation) Act, 1956, and a delayed payment contract is not a spot delivery contract, rendering the share transfer illegal under Sections 13 and 16 of the Act.
Rohit Chauhan v. Surinder Singh & Ors.
The Supreme Court held that property allotted to a sole coparcener on partition remains his separate property until the birth of a son, after which it revives as coparcenary property, restricting alienation rights without legal necessity.