Created byFuzzy Cloud

Supreme Court of India

K RAMASWAMY

1,805 judgments delivered by benches including this judge — showing 801–1,000.

UNION OF INDIAversusSH. SHIVKUMAR BHARGAVA AND ORS.

1995 INSC 4817 January 1995Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent filed a writ petition seeking an alternative site after his land was acquired for public purpose, arguing that he was the owner when the acquisition was finalized. The Single Judge had allowed the petition, but the Division Bench dismissed the appeal on limitation grounds, which the Supreme Court condone

STATE OF KERALA AND ANR.versusBETTY W/O L.J. MANI AND ANR.

1995 INSC 4917 January 1995Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Kerala appealed a Kerala High Court order that had granted statutory benefits under the Land Acquisition (Amendment) Act, 1984 to respondents whose land was acquired. The land was notified for acquisition in 1974, possession taken in 1977, and compensation enhanced by a subordinate judge in 1980. The High

BALBIR CHANDversusTHE FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA LTD. AND ORS.

1996 INSC 148916 December 1996Dismissed

The petitioner, a manager of the Food Corporation of India, was removed from service after a joint disciplinary enquiry found him guilty of dereliction of duty for failing to verify a fraudulent transport contract obtained by a notorious contractor impersonating another person. The petitioner challenged the validity of

P. THAMPANversusSTATE OF KERALA AND ANR.

1996 INSC 149016 December 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a Reserved Police Constable, applied for recruitment to the post of Sub‑Inspector under Government Order No. G.O. Ms. No. 55/66/HOME dated 11 February 1966, which permitted graduates employed in any branch of the police department and within the age limit to apply. He was rejected on the ground that he w

UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.versusN.R. BANERJEE AND ORS.

1996 INSC 149116 December 1996Dismissed

The case concerned promotion to the post of Senior General Manager in the Indian Ordinance Factories under the Indian Ordinance Factories Service Rules. The Union of India argued that the Central Administrative Tribunal erred by directing the government to ignore the Annual Confidential Reports (ACRs) of 1994 and to co

THE VICE CHANCELLOR, UNIVERSITY OF ALLAHABAD AND ORS.versusDR. ANAND PRAKASH MISHRA AND ORS.

1996 INSC 149216 December 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The Allahabad University had begun recruitment for two Reader posts before the U.P. Public Services (Reservation of Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Backward Classes) Act, 1994 came into force. After the Act became effective (retrospectively from 11 December 1993), the Chancellor directed the Vice‑Chancellor to a

STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS.versusDHARAM SINGH

1996 INSC 149316 December 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Punjab initiated disciplinary action against Dharm Singh for failing to report for duty during his suspension from 21 November 1991 to 31 October 1992. An inquiry concluded that his absence was wilful, leading to his removal from service. The Punjab & Haryana High Court set aside the removal on the ground

KARMALL SINGH AND ANR.versusDARSHAN SINGH AND ORS.

1994 INSC 62216 December 1994Appeal(s) allowed

The Haryana Government, exercising power under Section 4 of the Punjab Gram Panchayat Act, 1952, issued a notification on 18‑12‑1991 amalgamating the Bhorakh and Harigarh Gram Sabhas to curb alleged misuse of office by the Sarpanch of Harigarh, who had illegally appropriated Panchayat land. The amalgamation was challen

HINDALCO INDUSTRLES LTD.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

1993 INSC 39116 December 1993Dismissed

Hindalco Industries Ltd. complained that the Indian Railways continued to levy freight charges based on an inflated distance of 714 km even after a new line reduced the actual distance to 568 km. The company filed a complaint under Section 36(b) of the Railways Act, 1989 seeking a declaration that the rates were unreas

STATE OF KARNATKAversusKRISHNAJI SRINIVAS KULKARNI AND ORS.

1993 INSC 39216 December 1993Appeal(s) allowed

The respondents, owners of agricultural lands in Bijapur district, had leased the lands to M/s Sugarcane Products and Industries Ltd. for 30 years, a lease that expired on 31 March 1973 but the company continued to occupy the land. After the Karnataka Land Reforms Act, 1961 was amended in 1974, Section 79‑B prohibited

DALPAT KUMAR AND ANR.versusPRAHLAD SINGH AND ORS.

1991 INSC 34116 December 1991Appeal(s) allowed

The first appellant, Dalpat Kumar, entered into a contract to purchase a house and obtained a decree for specific performance, after which the sale deed was executed by the court. The respondent's family repeatedly sought temporary injunctions to prevent the appellant from taking possession, which were denied by the tr

ASHWANI KUMAR AND ORS. ETC. ETC.versusSTATE OF BIHAR AND ORS. ETC. ETC.

1995 INSC 74316 November 1995Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined the massive appointment of over 6,000 Class III and IV employees by Dr. A.A. Mallick, Deputy Director of the Tuberculosis Scheme, without written orders and in violation of the 1980 and 1982 recruitment circulars. The appellants claimed that their casual appointments were not to any post, tha

AMITA KAUSHISH AND ORS.versusSANJAY KAUSHISH AND ORS.

1995 INSC 74816 November 1995Disposed off

The Supreme Court entertained an appeal under Article 136 seeking special leave to direct the Delhi High Court to fix an early date for the final hearing of a pending appeal. The High Court had earlier ordered the matter to be listed for hearing on October 17, 1994, but the date had lapsed and the appeal remained undec

JAI NARAIN RAMversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ORS.

1995 INSC 74916 November 1995Appeal(s) allowed

In 1988 the Uttar Pradesh government advertised fifteen Treasury Officer‑Accounts Officer posts, four of which were reserved for Scheduled Caste (SC) candidates. The State Public Service Commission (PSC) recommended four names, but those candidates never joined the service. The appellant, Jai Narain Ram, was the fourth

STATE OF M.P. AND ORS.versusSHYAMA PARDHI ETC. ETC.

1995 INSC 75016 November 1995Appeal(s) allowed

The Madhya Pradesh Public Health and Family Welfare Department’s 1989 recruitment rules for Auxiliary Nurse‑cum‑Midwife (ANM) required a 10+2 qualification with Physics, Chemistry and Biology. The respondents, who lacked this qualification, were nevertheless selected by the District Medical Officer for training and sub

STATE OF TAMIL NADU AND ANR. ETC.versusMAHALAKSHMI AMMAL AND ORS. ETC.

1995 INSC 75116 November 1995Appeal(s) allowed

The State acquired land under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, publishing a notification in 1978, making an award in 1986 and taking possession later that year. The respondents challenged the acquisition on grounds of alleged discrimination under Article 14, the effect of an errata notification, irregular service of not

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

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

STATE OF KERALA ETC.versusT.R. UDAY SANKARAN AND ORS. ETC.

1995 INSC 46416 August 1995Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Kerala acquired land under the Kerala Land Acquisition Act, 1961, issuing a notification on 22 June 1976 and an award in 1977. The Additional Subordinate Judge enhanced the compensation on 24 June 1980. The claimants sought the benefit of the 1984 amendment to the Central Land Acquisition Act, 1894, specif

SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICERversusSHARANABASAPPA SHIVAYOGAPPA TYAPAL AND ORS.

1995 INSC 46516 August 1995Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court heard appeals filed by the State Government against a Karnataka High Court judgment concerning awards made by a Land Acquisition Officer on 12 October 1978 and a Reference Court on 31 March 1980. The issue was whether the claimants were entitled to the enhanced compensation benefits under Sections 23(

SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICERversusN.S. TAKKALAKI AND ORS.

1995 INSC 46716 August 1995Appeal(s) allowed

The State Government appealed a Karnataka High Court decision concerning lands acquired under a notification issued on 23 January 1980 under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The Land Acquisition Officer had made an award on 28 March 1980, and the claimants later sought an additional amount calculated at

SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICERversusPUTTAIAH AND ORS.

1995 INSC 46816 August 1995Appeal(s) allowed

The Special Land Acquisition Officer (the State) awarded compensation under Section 11 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, but a dispute arose over its apportionment. The Collector referred the matter to a civil court under Section 30, depositing the compensation amount in that court as required by Section 31. The civil

THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER, MALAPRABHA DAM PROJECT, SAUNDATTI ETC.versusMADIVALAPPA BASALINGAPPA MELAVANKI ETC.

1995 INSC 46916 August 1995Appeal(s) allowed

The Special Land Acquisition Officer determined compensation for land acquired from the respondents at Rs 3,000 per acre. The reference court enhanced it to Rs 15,000 per acre using a 15‑year multiplier, an award dated 14 December 1981. The High Court held that a 15‑year multiplier was illegal and that a 10‑year multip

P V. SANAKARA KURUPversusLEELAVATHY NAMBIAR

1994 INSC 32016 August 1994Dismissed

The petition challenged a Kerala High Court judgment that had set aside earlier findings that the petitioner, P.V. Sankara Kurup, was merely an agent and holder of a power of attorney for the respondent, Leelavathy Nambiar, and had purchased a Thavazhy property in his own name using the respondent’s funds. The central

ABHIRAM SINGHversusC.D. COMMACHEN AND ORS.

1996 INSC 52916 April 1996

The appeal arose from a Bombay High Court election petition that declared the election of a BJP candidate, Abhiram Singh, void on the ground of corrupt practices under Sections 123(3) and 123(3A) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951. The High Court had issued a show‑cause notice under Section 99(1) to the appe

SRI SAMIR SOBHAN SANYALversusTRACKS TRADE PRIVATE LTD. AND ORS.

1996 INSC 53416 April 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, S. S. Sanyal, was occupying premises as a tenant of India Foils Ltd. when the landlady sold the property to Habitat Developers, who obtained a decree for specific performance and possession. Although the decree was against the landlady, the appellant was not impleaded nor was any eviction order passed ag

IMPROVEMENT TRUST, MOGA ETC.versusMANCHANDA SOAP WORKS AND ORS.

1996 INSC 53516 April 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The Improvement Trust, Moga initiated a truck diversion scheme under Section 36 of the Punjab Town Improvement Act, 1922, acquiring 15.5 acres for a new market. Notices of the scheme and objections were published in newspapers and the Gazette as required by the Act, and the scheme was approved under Section 40. The res

UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.versusNANDLAL RAIGAR

1996 INSC 53616 April 1996Appeal(s) allowed

Nandlal Raigar, an accountant in the Rajasthan Telephones Department, was dismissed on May 9, 1973 for alleged fabrication of records. After exhausting departmental appeals, he filed a suit in 1980 seeking a declaration that his dismissal was illegal. The trial court dismissed the suit on limitation grounds but noted p

PUNJAB STATE ELECTRICITY BOARDversusBASSI COLD STORAGE, KHABAR AND ANR.

1994 INSC 11716 March 1994Appeal(s) allowed

Bassi Cold Storage, a consumer of electricity supplied by the Punjab State Electricity Board, claimed that its supply was wrongfully disconnected and sought damages. The consumer invoked Condition 29 of the Board's Abridged Conditions of Supply, which provided that disputes not determinable under the conditions could b

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

T. SHANTHARAMversusSTATE OF KARNATAKA AND ORS.

1995 INSC 4016 January 1995Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a revenue department clerk, was deputed to the Food and Civil Supplies Department in a post higher than his parent‑department rank and remained there for over three decades. When the department sought to repatriate him, he applied to the Karnataka Administrative Tribunal, which ordered his absorption in

DEEPversusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ORS.

1995 INSC 90815 December 1995Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Deepa, was originally accepted as a tenant of a parcel of land that formed part of a former jagir. The respondent, Ram Chandra, sought her eviction under Section 177 of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act, 1955, but the suit was dismissed because the jagir had been abolished by the Rajasthan Land Reforms and Resum

STATE OF KERALAversusM.M. ABDUL KHADER

1995 INSC 90915 December 1995Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Kerala appealed a Kerala High Court judgment that had allowed claimants to receive additional compensation under Section 23(1-A) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The sole question was whether the respondents were entitled to this additional amount given that the Collector's award was dated 21 April 1980.

CONSTABLE DAVINDER SINGH AND ORS.versusSTATE OF HARYANA AND ORS.

1995 INSC 91015 December 1995Dismissed

The appellants, six of the forty candidates who appeared for the constable selection, challenged the selection process alleging lack of fairness, ministerial interference, and that some selected candidates had previously served as gunmen for VIPs. The selection committee, comprising three officers, conducted a written

UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.versusB.N. SINGH AND ORS.

1995 INSC 91115 December 1995Dismissed

The Union of India appealed to the Supreme Court under Article 136 against an order of the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) that had given certain directions to the respondent officer. The Court examined the service record of the first respondent, noting that his career was outstanding both before and after the pe

UNION OF INDIAversusDULAL CHANDRA GHOSH AND ORS.

1995 INSC 91215 December 1995Dismissed

The land in question was notified for acquisition under Section 7 of the Requisition and Acquisition of Immovable Property Act, 1952 and an award was made by the Collector in 1973. The respondents refused to accept the award and, under Section 8(3) read with Rule 9, applied for the appointment of an arbitrator in 1977.

MAHESH KUMAR AGALversusDIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE AND ANR.

1995 INSC 91315 December 1995Dismissed

The appellant, Mahesh Kumar Agal, a police officer, sought seniority based on his passing of the mandatory Hindi proficiency test, which was a prerequisite for promotion under the service rules. The Madhya Pradesh Administrative Tribunal rejected his claim, holding that his seniority should not be backdated. Agal appea

KAVERI ENGINEERING INDUSTRIES LTD.versusUNITED SHIPPING CORPORATION LTD. AND ANR.

1995 INSC 91415 December 1995Appeal(s) allowed

Kaveri Engineering Industries Ltd entered into a contract with United Shipping Corporation Ltd for the transshipment of 400 MT of fabricated steel structures from Madras to Chittagong for a fixed freight of Rs 2 lakhs, irrespective of cargo volume. The shipping agent later demanded Rs 10.70 lakhs based on volume, refus

STATE OF ORISSA AND ANR.versusSRI DAMODAR DAS

1995 INSC 90415 December 1995Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Orissa appealed against the appointment of an arbitrator under Sections 8 and 20 of the Arbitration Act, 1940, filed by contractor Sri Damodar Das. The Supreme Court examined whether Clause 25 of the water‑supply contracts, which made the decision of the Public Health Engineer final, amounted to an arbitra

UNION OF INDIA (RAILWAY BOARD) AND OTHERSversusJ.V. SUBHAIAH AND OTHERS ETC.

1995 INSC 90515 December 1995Appeal(s) allowed

The respondents, employed by Railway Employees' Consumer Co-operative Stores registered under the Andhra Pradesh Co-operative Societies Act, 1964, sought declaration from the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) that they were regular railway employees in Class‑III posts entitled to salary, promotions and other benefi

CHAMELI SINGHversusTHE STATE OF U.P.

1995 INSC 90615 December 1995Dismissed

The appellants, owners of land in Bairam Nagar, Uttar Pradesh, challenged a notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 dated 23 July 1983, which, together with a declaration under Section 6, invoked the urgency clause of Section 17(4) and dispensed with the inquiry required by Section 5‑A, for the p

SMT. SNEH PRABHAversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANR.

1995 INSC 73715 November 1995Dismissed

The State of Uttar Pradesh published a notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 to acquire land for development. The State later issued a Land Policy offering alternate plots to owners whose land was acquired, categorising owners by land size. Government Orders clarified that persons who purcha

BIBIJAN AND ORS.versusMURLIDHAR AND ORS.

1994 INSC 51915 November 1994Dismissed

The respondents filed a suit for redemption of a usufructuary mortgage which the trial court dismissed as barred by limitation; the High Court reversed and granted a preliminary decree for redemption, holding that the mortgage was acknowledged and a fresh cause of action arose. The appellants filed an appeal, but durin

MAROTIversusTULSIRAM AND ANR

1994 INSC 52015 November 1994

The Managing Trustee of Hanuman Deosthan filed a civil suit for possession of a property, alleging that the plaintiff Trust was the owner. The defendant appealed, claiming he had purchased the property from a predecessor and was therefore the owner. During cross‑examination and before municipal authorities, the defenda

STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR.versusPOOJA BREW-CHEM INDUSTRIES P. LTD. AND ANR.

1995 INSC 57615 September 1995Appeal(s) allowed

Maharashtra State and others appealed a Bombay High Court order that directed the issuance of a D.S.V. licence and release of an alcohol quota to Pooja Brew‑Chem Industries Ltd. The company had applied for a licence under Rule 26 of the Bombay Denatured Spirit Rules, 1959, to manufacture certain chemicals and was assur

STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESHversusKORUKONDA SURYANARAYANA CHOWDHARY

1995 INSC 57715 September 1995Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Andhra Pradesh sued Korukondasuryanarayana Chowdhary alleging that lands he had sold were to be counted towards his agricultural‑holding ceiling under the Andhra Pradesh Land Reforms (Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings) Act, 1973. Chowdhary submitted an affidavit stating that the sale dated 16 October 1971 w

SUDIP MAZUMDARversusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

1996 INSC 73715 July 1996Disposed off

The petitioners alleged that test firing exercises at a range near Itarsi in Madhya Pradesh were endangering the lives of tribal people who entered the area to collect firewood, resulting in injuries and deaths, thereby violating their right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution. The Supreme Court, recalling its

THE SECRETARY (ESTT.) RAILWAY BOARD AND ANR. ETC.versusSH. D. FRANCIS PAUL ETC.

1996 INSC 73815 July 1996Dismissed

The petitioners, recruited as legal assistants in 1963 and 1964, retired after 25 years of service and claimed an additional five years of qualifying service for pension computation under Rule 2423-A of the Railway Establishment Manual II. The Central Administrative Tribunal allowed their claim, but the petitioners app

RUDRADHAR R. TRIVEDIversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH THE SECRETARY AND ANR.

1996 INSC 73915 July 1996Dismissed

The petition challenged a land acquisition made in 1953 for the establishment of an Indian Institute of Technology, where 60.8 acres were later transferred to the National Institute of Technology (NITIE) by a government resolution. The petitioner, a sub‑lessee, claimed that he was not given notice under Section 5‑A of

G. NARAYAN RAOversusTHE LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER

1996 INSC 74015 July 1996Dismissed

G.N. Rao challenged the compensation awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer for 7 acres of land in Nizamabad acquired under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The High Court had fixed compensation at Rs 32,000 per acre, relying on sale deeds of adjacent lands and a claim of potential value. Rao argued tha

BIHAR STATE ELECTRICITY BOARDversusM/S. BIJOY MINING COMPANY LTD. AND ORS .

1996 INSC 74115 July 1996

The Bihar State Electricity Board (BSEB) entered into a supply agreement with M/s Bijoy Mining Co. Ltd. which required the consumer to pay an annual minimum guarantee charge. The consumer objected to a bill on the ground that erratic supply prevented it from taking the contracted amount, invoking clause 13 of the agree

KASHMIR CHANDversusFINANCIAL COMMISSIONER, HARYANA AND ORS.

1996 INSC 74215 July 1996Disposed off

The appellant, Kashmir Chand, bought a plot in an open auction in July 1971 for Rs 46,000 but paid only Rs 11,500, leaving a balance of Rs 34,500. Over more than 21 years he failed to pay the balance, and the authorities demanded a larger sum of Rs 3,78,000, which he also defaulted on. He filed a writ petition in the P

UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.versusVINOD KUMAR AND ORS.

1996 INSC 74315 July 1996Dismissed

The Union of India appealed against a promotion order that deviated from the rule of granting 50% of the quota and an additional two‑year benefit to Upper Division Clerks under the Employees Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952. Section 5‑D(7)(a) of the Act requires prior approval of the Central Govern

VASANT GANGARAMSA CHANDANversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS.

1996 INSC 74415 July 1996Appeal(s) allowed

Vasant Gangaram Sa Chandan was appointed as Peon‑cum‑Watchman in the Hyderabad Agricultural Committee on 1 April 1957 and, after the reorganisation of states, transferred to the Krishi Utpadan Bazar Samiti, retiring on 1 April 1991 after about 35 years of service. The pension scheme of the Market Committee stipulated t

NEW INDIA PUBLIC SCHOOL AND ORS. ETC.versusHUDA AND ORS. ETC.

1996 INSC 74515 July 1996

The Haryana Urban Development Authority (HUDA) invited applications for school sites in Panchkula and allotted 11 of 23 plots, denying eight applicants. The denied applicants challenged the allotment procedure, leading to a single judge finding procedural faults but upholding the allotments because schools were already

M.C. MEHTA ETC. ETC.versusUNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS ETC. ETC.

1992 INSC 16715 May 1992Hearing Adjourned

The Supreme Court entertained writ petitions filed by environmental activist M.C. Mehta under Article 32, seeking relief from severe air pollution caused by mechanical stone crushers operating in Delhi and adjoining areas of Haryana. The petitioners alleged that the stone‑dust and smoke emitted by the crushers endanger

KANTA PRASAD D. PATELversusMUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF GREATER BOMBAY AND ORS.

1996 INSC 52215 April 1996Dismissed

Kanta Prasad D. Patel purchased a site in 1965 and erected sheds, claiming the structures existed before April 1, 1962 based on a lease from the previous owner. The Municipal Corporation of Greater Bombay issued a demolition notice; the Deputy Municipal Commissioner initially allowed retention of a 30'x30' shed in 1983

STATE OF MAHARASHTRAversusMARUTI LAXMAN

1996 INSC 52315 April 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Maharashtra appealed a High Court order that had granted enhanced compensation to Maruti Laxman under the Land Acquisition (Amendment) Act, 1984. The original acquisition notice was issued in 1969 and the Land Acquisition Officer awarded Rs.1,000 per acre in 1972. A civil court enhanced this award to Rs.2,

SYED ABDUL ALAM AND ORS.versusTHE GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AND ORS.

1996 INSC 52415 April 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, Head Constables, had passed a merit‑based written test for promotion to Sub‑Inspector under the Andhra Pradesh State Police Subordinate Service Rules, which require promotion on the basis of merit and ability. The Government later issued a G.O. (No. 585) amending the Police Standing Orders to prescribe

KANSHI RAMversusOM PRAKASH JAWAL AND ORS.

1996 INSC 52515 April 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The parties entered into a sale agreement on 7 April 1969 for a 100‑square‑yard plot in Delhi, with a price of Rs 16,000 and Rs 2,500 paid as earnest money. The buyer (appellant) failed to execute the sale deed, and the seller (respondent) sued on 13 July 1970 for specific performance, alternatively claiming damages of

STATE OF MADHYA PRADESHversusSURBHAN

1996 INSC 52615 April 1996Dismissed

The State of Madhya Pradesh charged O.P. Surbhan with murder after a child eyewitness (PW‑2) claimed the accused struck the deceased from behind with a bladed weapon. Medical examination, however, revealed three separate incised wounds on the neck, mandible and elbow, which could not have been caused by a single blow a

UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.versusSHER SINGH AND ANR.

1996 INSC 52715 April 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The respondents' 50.55 acres of land in Pathankot were requisitioned for defence under the Requisition and Acquisition of Immovable Property Act, 1952. The Land Acquisition Officer fixed compensation at Rs. 201 per canal, but the respondents invoked Section 8 and obtained an arbitrator’s award of Rs. 1,000 per canal to

NABHIRAJ AND ORS.versusJAYAVATIBAI @SHANTHA BAI AND ORS.

1996 INSC 52815 April 1996Dismissed

The first respondent filed a suit on 30 October 1981 seeking a declaratory decree that she was the absolute owner of 6 acres 25 gunthas of land at Raichur. The appellants were later impleaded as respondents under Order 1 Rule 10 of the CPC but, despite repeated adjournments, failed to file a written statement, leading

STATE OF GOA AND ANR.versusSMT. S.A. ABDUL KARIM ETC. ETC.

1996 INSC 39315 March 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Goa appealed a Bombay High Court order concerning land acquisition under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The appeal raised issues already decided in the Supreme Court’s judgment in Babua Ram & Ors. v. State of U.P. & Anr., which the Court affirmed applied to the present case. After condoning delay and gran

MASIPATLA RAGHAVULUversusTHE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, LAO, PEDDAPALLI

1996 INSC 39415 March 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The National Thermal Power Corporation acquired a large tract of land under a notification issued under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The Land Acquisition Officer initially fixed compensation at Rs 3,000 per acre, which the Sub‑Judge enhanced to Rs 6,500 per acre, a decision affirmed by the Andhra Pra

M. RAMJAYARAMversusGENERAL MANAGER, SOUTH CENTRAL RAILWAY AND ORS.

1996 INSC 39515 March 1996Appeal(s) allowed

M. Ramjayaram applied for the post of Law Assistant in South Central Railway and scored over 60% in the written test and performed well in the viva. Two other candidates were awarded an additional 15 marks for seniority under Rule 320 of the Railway Establishment Code, which gave them a higher total score and led to th

SEETHAMMALversusSENTHIL FINANCE AND ANR.

1996 INSC 39615 March 1996Appeal(s) allowed

In execution of a money decree, a mortgaged property valued at Rs 75,000 (later reduced to Rs 50,000) was auctioned and sold for Rs 15,100, with the mortgagee himself submitting the winning bid. The appellant, the judgment debtor, challenged the validity of the sale under Order 21 Rule 97 of the CPC, arguing that the s

SMT. BASAVVA AND ORS. ETC.versusTHE SPL. LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER, AND ORS.

1996 INSC 39715 March 1996Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined an appeal by landowners whose 33 acres of a 194‑acre industrial acquisition near Dharwad had been valued at Rs 56,000 per acre by the Karnataka High Court after a series of enhancements and reductions. The appellants argued that the High Court erred by applying a 65% deduction for development

V.G. KULKARNIversusTHE SPL. LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER

1996 INSC 39915 March 1996Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined an appeal by V.G. Kulkarni challenging the Karnataka High Court’s reduction of compensation for land acquired under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The notification dated 21 January 1982 acquired 20 acres and 4 gunthas for industrial development, with the Land Acquisition Offi

ISHWARLAL PREMCHAND SHAH AND ORS.versusSTATE OF GUJARAT AND ORS.

1996 INSC 40015 March 1996Dismissed

The State of Gujarat acquired land in Sarigam for industrial purposes under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The land owners had entered into agreements with the Gujarat Industrial Development Corporation (GIDC) in 1980 and 1985, accepting a compensation of Rs. 22,857 per hectare inclusive of solatium and other benefits

JAIN MOTOR CAR CO., DELHIversusSMT. SWAYAM PRABHA JAIN AND ANR

1996 INSC 25515 February 1996Dismissed

The tenant, Jain Motor Car Co., was served an eviction petition by the landlord, S.P. Jain, for defaulting on rent payment and alleged sub‑letting. The Rent Controller ordered the tenant to pay arrears within one month and to continue depositing monthly rent by the 15th, but the tenant paid the February rent late, on 3

MUNICIPAL COMMITTEE SIRHINDversusPARSHOTAM DASS AND ORS.

1996 INSC 25615 February 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The respondents, who were the khewatdars of land classified as “Shamlat deh” in village Brahman Majra, claimed that the land reverted to them after the Gram Sabha was abolished, invoking Rule 3 of the Punjab Gram Panchayat Rules, 1965. The Municipal Committee of Sirhind argued that the land had vested in it when a noti

RITESH R. SHAHversusDR. Y.L. YAMUL AND ORS.

1996 INSC 25815 February 1996Case Allowed

Ritesh R. Shah, a reserved‑category candidate, applied for admission to the MBBS course in Maharashtra for 1995‑96 but was denied because other reserved‑category applicants were admitted against the reserved quota despite being eligible on open‑merit grounds. He challenged the state’s selection rules, arguing that coun

STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERSversusRAMASH-YRAYA YADAV AND ANOTHER

1996 INSC 25915 February 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The respondents were appointed as temporary Investigators‑cum‑Computer under a scheme that was later cancelled, but they were allowed to continue in service by an interim order of the Allahabad High Court. While still serving, they filed a writ petition seeking the same salary as regular investigators, invoking the pri

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 PUNJAB AND ANR.versusHANS RAJ (DEAD) BY LRS./SOHAN SINGH AND ORS.

1994 INSC 7315 February 1994Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Punjab acquired land under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 and the Land Acquisition Officer initially awarded Rs.29.46 per marla as compensation. The District Judge enhanced this to Rs.50 per marla, and the High Court single judge further raised the market value to Rs.375 per marla and allowed Rs.17,000 for

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

BALKRISHNA PANDEYversusSTATE OF BIHAR AND ORS.

1995 INSC 89414 December 1995Disposed off

Balkrishna Pandey, a Junior Statistical Supervisor, was appointed on deputation to a temporary post of Senior Statistical Assistant in the Directorate of Special Employment and Planning. When the temporary post was made permanent, Pandey was reverted to his parent department, while another employee (the fifth responden

STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ORS.versusRAMESHWAR LAL GAHLOT

1995 INSC 89514 December 1995Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent was appointed on a temporary basis for three months or until a regular incumbent assumed office, but his appointment was terminated after 240 days. A writ petition challenged the termination, and a Single Judge held that the termination violated Section 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, ordering

STATE OF U.P. ETC.versusMADHO KUMAR SWARUP AND ORS. ETC.

1995 INSC 89614 December 1995Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined two appeals filed by the State of Uttar Pradesh and aggrieved persons challenging the ceiling area determined under Section 10 of the U.P. Imposition of Ceiling on Land Holdings Act, 1960. The appeals arose while proceedings to determine surplus land were pending. Before the appeals were file

KARANPURA DEVELOPMENT COMPANY LTD.versusUNION OF INDIA

1995 INSC 89814 December 1995Appeal(s) allowed

Karanpura Development Company Ltd obtained a 999‑year mining lease in 1946, which was terminated when the Bihar Land Reforms Act, 1950 came into force. The company claimed compensation under Section 4(1) of the Coal Bearing Areas (Acquisition & Development) Act, 1957, relying on a 1963 notification issued under Section

UNION OF INDIA AND ANR.versusPRATAP SINGH AND ORS. ETC.

1994 INSC 60614 December 1994Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned civilian employees of the Ministry of Defence who participated in Operations Blue Star and Wood Rose. A Government order dated 20 December 1985 directed that ration allowance in lieu of free rations be payable retrospectively to the entitled categories of defence civilian employees. The respondents c

SH. P.G.GUPTA ETC. ETC.versusSTATE OF GUJARAT AND ORS.

1994 INSC 60714 December 1994Dismissed

The Gujarat government converted 396 lower‑income group houses from a rental scheme to a hire‑purchase scheme and set eligibility criteria requiring five years continuous residence, excluding retired servants. Category III employees, who had vacated their Pahari houses for better accommodation in Gandhinagar, and Categ

GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AND ANR.versusA.V. VENUGOPALA RAO

1994 INSC 51614 November 1994

The Government of Andhra Pradesh had, pending the finalisation of a seniority list for promotion to Executive Engineer, appointed the senior-most officers in the provisional list as In‑charge to avoid administrative hardship. The Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal later revoked these interim In‑charge appointments,

THE STATE TRADING CORPORATION OF INDIA LTD.versusJAINSONS CLOTHING CORPORATION AND ANR.

1994 INSC 38914 September 1994Appeal(s) allowed

The State Trading Corporation (STC) entered into a contract to supply basmati rice to Abu Dhabi Municipality and, concurrently, a back‑to‑back agreement with Jainsons Clothing Corporation requiring Jainsons to supply a portion of the rice and to furnish an irrevocable bank guarantee. After STC cancelled the export cont

SATGURU SHARAN SHRIVASTAVAversusDWARKA PRASAD MATHUR (DEAD) THROUGH LRS. AND ORS.

1996 INSC 88814 August 1996Dismissed

The petitioner had agreed to purchase a house from the first respondent, Dwarka Prasad Mathur, and paid the consideration. Before taking possession, the second respondent obtained a decree of specific performance in a separate suit, which the petitioner challenged in suit 121‑A of 1984 on the ground of fraud. Both resp

J. JAISHANKARversusTHE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA AND ANR.

1996 INSC 88914 August 1996Dismissed

The petitioner, a government employee, was convicted under Section 509 of the Indian Penal Code and fined Rs.200, a conviction that was final and involved moral turpitude. He sought a reference to the Industrial Tribunal under Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 to contest his dismissal. The High Court init

STATE OF HARYANA AND ANR.versusJAIPAL SINGH AND ORS.

1996 INSC 89014 August 1996Disposed off

The State of Haryana issued a notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 to acquire land in Rewari district. The respondents argued that a government policy excluded lands on which buildings had been constructed and that their shops were built before the notification, seeking exemption and compen

KAILASH POTLIAversusTHE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

1995 INSC 45714 August 1995Appeal(s) allowed

Kailash Potlia was convicted of murder (section 302 IPC) and robbery (section 380 IPC) on the basis of circumstantial evidence, including a hotel clerk’s sighting, a finger injury, an alleged extra‑judicial confession to PW‑13, and a recovery statement by PW‑22. On appeal, the Supreme Court examined the reliability of

SHARADCHANDRA GANESH MULEYversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS.

1995 INSC 45814 August 1995Dismissed

Sharadchandra Ganesh Muley, a landowner, challenged a notification under section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. After the Bombay High Court dismissed his first writ petition in 1992, the Land Acquisition Officer made an award on March 30, 1994. Muley appealed, contending that the award was beyond the two‑year

JAYASHREEversusM. SRINIVASA MURTHY

1995 INSC 45914 August 1995Disposed off

In a transfer petition filed by the wife seeking to transfer her pending divorce petition, the court directed the parties to attempt reconciliation. The husband and wife settled their differences and the wife agreed to join her husband within two years after resolving her property issues in another city. The court cons

STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS. ETC.versusRAMAN RAI AND ORS. ETC.

1995 INSC 46014 August 1995Dismissed

The State of Punjab acquired 58 acres of land in 1979 and the Land Acquisition Officer fixed compensation at Rs 50,000 per acre for Block A and Rs 36,000 per acre for Block B. The Civil Court and subsequently the High Court enhanced the compensation to Rs 1,00,000 and Rs 60,000, and then to Rs 1,60,000 per acre respect

UNION OF INDIAversusS.B. MISRA

1995 INSC 46114 August 1995Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent, a lecturer in the College of Military Engineering, was compulsorily retired following a departmental inquiry and challenged the order on the ground that he was not supplied with a copy of the inquiry report. The Central Administrative Tribunal set aside the retirement order and directed the department t

STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS.versusGOPAL CHANDRA PAUL AND ORS. ETC.

1995 INSC 39914 July 1995Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined whether the West Bengal inspecting staff in the Education Department were entitled to the same superannuation age of 60 years granted to teaching staff under Rule 75 of the West Bengal Service Rules. The State argued that inspecting staff are a distinct cadre with no statutory provision makin

GHAZIABAD DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY AND ORS.versusSRI VIKRAM CHAUDHARY AND ORS.

1995 INSC 40114 July 1995Disposed off

The Ghaziabad Development Authority (GDA) engaged several workers on daily‑wage contracts for its development projects. The workers filed a writ petition seeking regularisation of their services and parity in pay with regular employees. The Allahabad High Court single judge denied regularisation but directed the GDA to

STATE OF UP AND ORS.versusRAJIV GUPTA AND ANR. ETC.

1994 INSC 26014 July 1994

The State of Uttar Pradesh issued a notification under s.4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 in April 1990 to acquire land for a sub‑station, and a declaration under s.6 in December 1990. Under s.11A the Collector was required to make the award within two years of the declaration, i.e., by 21 December 1992. The resp

V.K.SOODversusSECRETARY, CIVIL AVIATION AND ORS.

1993 INSC 20714 May 1993Dismissed

V.K. Sood applied for the post of Examiner of Personnel in the Department of Civil Aviation but was not selected. He challenged the qualifications prescribed in the 1989 advertisement, alleging that the amendments to the 1969 rules were tailor‑made to exclude him. The issue was whether the President’s rule‑making power

THE STATE OF BIHAR AND ORSversusBATESHWAR SHARMA

1997 INSC 27214 March 1997Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent, Bateshwar Sharma, was serving as an ad‑hoc Superintending Engineer while several departmental misconduct proceedings were pending against him. The Departmental Promotion Committee (DPC) examined his suitability for promotion from Executive Engineer and found him unfit for promotion up to 16‑Jan‑1994. Th

STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS.versusKRISHAN NIWAS

1997 INSC 27314 March 1997Appeal(s) allowed

Krishan Niwas, a government employee, was convicted under Section 302 IPC and sentenced to life imprisonment, leading to his removal from service under Article 311(2). The conviction was later modified to Section 325 IPC with a 1½‑year sentence. After serving the term, a departmental appeal reduced his penalty to a low

SRI DOKKA SAMUELversusDR. JACOB LAZARUS CHELLY

1997 INSC 27414 March 1997Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant filed a suit for declaration of ownership and possession of two plots, which was dismissed by the trial court and affirmed by the appellate court. The High Court, in a review, reversed the appellate decree, claiming that relevant precedents were not cited, and held the transaction to be a genuine sale. Th

SAMBHOO NATH MISRAversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ORS.

1997 INSC 27514 March 1997Appeal(s) allowed

Sambhoo Nath Misra filed a private complaint against R.D. Tripathi, a government servant, alleging offences under IPC sections 409, 420, 465, 468 and 477A for forging his signature and misappropriating Rs.443.90. The magistrate dismissed the complaint on the ground that sanction under Section 197 of the CrPC had not be

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,

SH. MOHD. AYUB KHANversusPROF. BHIM SINGH AND ORS.

1996 INSC 38214 March 1996Dismissed

The Election Commission issued a notification for a bye‑election to the Udhampur Parliamentary Constituency and, after a reference by the Returning Officer, directed a repoll at certain polling stations, which was carried out. The election result was challenged before an election petition, and the High Court set aside

HOOKIYAR SINGH ETC. ETC.versusSPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER, MORADABAD AND ANR.

1996 INSC 38314 March 1996Disposed off

The case concerned acquisition of 171.46 acres of agricultural land in Moradabad for UPSIDC. The Land Acquisition Officer initially fixed compensation at Rs 15,500 per acre, which was later increased by the District Court to Rs 40,000 and by the High Court to Rs 50,000 per acre based on sale deeds and oral evidence. Bo

SH. A. CHINNAPPAversusSH V. VENKATAMUNI AND ORS.

1996 INSC 38414 March 1996Dismissed

Sh. A. Chinnappa contested the Bethamangala Assembly seat in Karnataka, which was reserved for Scheduled Castes, claiming he belonged to the Mundala caste listed in the Presidential notification under Article 341. The Karnataka High Court held that he actually belonged to the Mondy/Mondigaru caste, which is not include

Y. H. PAWARversusSTATE OF KARNATAKA AND ANR.

1996 INSC 38514 March 1996Dismissed

Y.H. Pawar was appointed as a Class III employee on an ad‑hoc basis on 22 March 1960 after being called from the Employment Exchange. When the Ministerial Recruitment Rules were later framed, he was regularised on 6 May 1968 with seniority from the date of selection under the new rules. Pawar contended that his seniori

NIRMALA JAGDISHCHANDRA KABRAversusTHE TRANSPORT COMMISSIONER AND ORS.

1997 INSC 14414 February 1997Dismissed

Petitioner Nirmala Jagdishchandra Kabra held a contract carriage permit but was alleged to be operating the vehicle as a stage carriage by collecting individual fares, violating the permit conditions. The Motor Vehicle Inspector seized and detained the vehicle under Section 207(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. Kabra

CALCUTTA MUNICIPAL CORPORATION AND ANR.versusSUJIT BARAN MUKHERJEE AND ORS. ETC.

1997 INSC 14514 February 1997Appeal(s) allowed

The respondents, all junior copyists appointed on the same day, sought parity of pay with a colleague, Shankar Bose, who had been transferred to the Secretariat Department and received a special overtime allowance of Rs. 50, which later merged into his revised pay scale, giving him a higher salary than his seniors. The

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

PUTTU LAL (DEAD) BY LRS.versusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANR.

1996 INSC 24714 February 1996Dismissed

The land originally owned by Smt. Kokilla was acquired by the State under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, with a notification on 15 April 1928 and a declaration on 28 July 1928 for a public purpose. Compensation was paid and, under Section 16 of the Act, the land vested in the State free of all encumbrances, extinguish

BALMOKAND KHATRI EDUCATIONAL AND INDUSTRIALTRUST, AMRITSARversusSTATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS.

1996 INSC 24914 February 1996Dismissed

The Balmokand Khatri Educational and Industrial Trust challenged the acquisition of its land by the State of Punjab, arguing that the government illegally dispensed with the enquiry required under Section 5-A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 by invoking the urgency clause in Section 17(4) for the purpose of providing

J.R. JANI AND ORS.versusAHMED EBRAHIM OF RANGOON

1996 INSC 25014 February 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned a claim by Ahmed Ebrahim, a Burmese citizen, that he had purchased six lakh shares of Khatiawad Industries Ltd., a company declared an evacuee property in 1959, and that the declaration was illegal because notice under Section 7 read with Rule 6 of the Administration of Evacuee Property Act, 1950, ha

THE STEEL AUTHORITY OF INDIA AND ORS.versusNEW MARINE COAL CO. (PVT.) LTD.

1996 INSC 25114 February 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The Steel Authority of India sued New Marine Coal Co. to recover Rs 1,13,000 for coal supplied under an agreement that required Grade‑I coal between Dec 1962 and June 1967. Instead, Grade‑II coal was delivered but the plaintiff collected the price of Grade‑I, and the contract contained a clause permitting adjustment of

SANT SINGHversusTHE ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, JHANSI AND ORS.

1996 INSC 25214 February 1996Dismissed

Sant Singh appealed against a notice issued under Section 5 of the U.P. Imposition of Ceiling on Land Holdings Act, 1960, contending that a sale of 10 acres 33 cents to his minor daughter before the appointed day (24 January 1971) and a transfer of 13.47 acres to a private temple after that date should be excluded from

ABDUL QADIR (DEAD) BY LRS.versusSMT. MAIMOONA KHATOON (DEAD) BY LRS. AND ORS.

1996 INSC 25314 February 1996Dismissed

Abdul Qadir, as successor of an evacuee property declared under the Custodian of Evacuee Property Act, 1950, claimed adverse possession over land and sought to be recorded as sirdar and bhumidar in two khatas. The Consolidation Officer and Settlement Officer initially upheld his claim, but the Deputy Director reversed,

RAGHUNATHversusPOPAT LAL AND ORS.

1996 INSC 25414 February 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The land originally owned by Lilachand Bhandari was hypothecated to Hirachand in 1942. Hirachand leased the land to respondents No.2 and No.3 in 1947‑48, making them tenants under the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948. Respondent No.2 purchased the equity of redemption on 27 December 1949, thereby becomin

STATE BANK OF PATIALA AND ANR.versusHARBANS SINGH

1994 INSC 6914 February 1994Dismissed

The landlord obtained a loan from State Bank of Patiala to construct a building which he would lease back to the bank for its commercial use. The loan agreement stipulated a 16% interest rate with quarterly rests, which the landlord contested. The trial court reduced the rate to 15% and eliminated the quarterly rests,

INDIAN TUBE CO. (P) LTDversusCOMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CALCUTTA

1992 INSC 514 January 1992Dismissed

Indian Tube Co. transferred Rs 90 lakh to a dividend reserve in 1963, of which Rs 76 lakh was paid out as dividend and Rs 14 lakh remained. The issue was whether the transferred amount, or any part of it, should be treated as a reserve for computing the company's capital under the Companies (Profits) Sur‑tax Act, 1964,

SHRI JAI KISHANversusSHRI KESHA V RAM AND ORS.

1996 INSC 147813 December 1996Dismissed

The petitioner sought special leave to challenge a Himachal Pradesh High Court order that appointed a Local Commissioner (Tehsildar) to re‑measure a disputed land parcel and relied on the Commissioner’s report indicating encroachment by the respondent. The High Court, after examining the report, upheld the appellate co

STATE OF GUJARAT AND ORS.versusRAMA RANA AND ORS.

1996 INSC 147913 December 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Gujarat acquired 68 hectares of land for an irrigation scheme under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The initial compensation award was later enhanced, but the Reference Court, lacking sale deeds, relied on oral evidence of yield and deducted one‑third of the market value. The High Court affirmed this award

SHER SINGH AND ORS.versusGAMDOOR SINGH

1996 INSC 148013 December 1996Dismissed

The appellants filed a suit in 1978 seeking a declaration that they owned five‑sixths of an agricultural plot, asserting that the land was ancestral joint Hindu family property. The defendant in that suit admitted the property was joint family property and a decree was passed accordingly. The respondent, Gamdoor Singh,

THE MANIPUR TEA CO. PVT. LTD.versusTHE COLLECTOR OF HAILAKANDI

1996 INSC 148113 December 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The Manipur Tea Co. Pvt. Ltd. challenged the compensation awarded for 123 Bighas of its tea estate acquired under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 for railway construction. The Supreme Court examined whether sale statistics and three sale deeds relating to agricultural land could be used to determine compensation for tea

VISWANATH (DEAD) BY LR.versusCHANDRA BHAN AND ORS.

1995 INSC 88813 December 1995Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Viswanath (deceased) by LRs, sought ejectment of the respondent who occupied land under a mortgage executed by Hanuman Singh, the brother‑in‑law of a minor, before the U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950 came into force. The Assistant Collector and Board of Revenue held the mortgage void

UNION OF INDIA & ORS.versusMRS. SAROJ BALA

1995 INSC 89013 December 1995Appeal(s) allowed

Mrs. Saroj Bala, a civil servant, had her date of birth recorded as 4 April 1949 in university records and consequently in her service record when she joined the All India Revenue Service in 1972. After 18 years of service, she sought to correct her date of birth to 5 April 1950, obtaining a birth certificate and other

KALYANversusGORAKH

1995 INSC 89113 December 1995Disposed off

The appellant purchased agricultural land from the erstwhile landlord, who was a protected tenant under the Hyderabad Tenancy and Agricultural Land Act, 1950. The respondent, the protected tenant, filed a suit claiming rights over the land. The High Court appointed a receiver and ordered the appellant to deposit a sum

KALIDAS UMEDRAM AND ORS.versusSTATE OF GUJARAT AND ANR.

1995 INSC 89213 December 1995Dismissed

The appellants were allotted 2 acres 9 guntas of land for agricultural purposes on the condition that it could not be used for any other purpose without written permission. They sold a portion of the land for building purposes and applied for permission to use the land for non‑agricultural purposes, but no order was pa

CENTRAL COALFIELDS LTD.versusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND ORS.

1994 INSC 60313 December 1994Dismissed

Central Coalfields Ltd. constructed office buildings and staff quarters in the Singrauli area without obtaining permission from the Special Areas Development Authority (SADA) under the Madhya Pradesh Nagar Tatha Gram Nivesh Adhiniyam, 1973. SADA ordered the demolition of the structures under section 26 of the Adhiniyam

V. LAKSHMANANversusB. R. MANGALAGIRI AND ORS.

1994 INSC 60413 December 1994Dismissed

The appellant entered into an agreement to purchase six acres of land, paying Rs. 50,000 as earnest money (labelled as an advance) and agreeing to register the sale deed within six months, making time of the essence. He took possession, levelled the land and sought a layout plan, which the Gram Panchayat refused, after

JAGDISH PRASADversusTHE STATE OF BIHAR AND ANR.

1995 INSC 72513 November 1995Dismissed

Jagdish Prasad, who was four years old when his father, a government employee, died in harness in 1971, filed a writ petition after attaining majority in 1994 seeking a compassionate appointment. The High Court dismissed the petition, and the appellant appealed to the Supreme Court. The Court held that compassionate ap

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

MADHUKAR BAKRU PINGALversusSHRI RAJENDRA D. GAIKWAD AND ORS.

1995 INSC 56713 September 1995Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Madhukar B. Pingal, was selected and appointed as Police Patil based on a selection scheme that allotted 50 % of the total marks to a written test and 50 % to a viva‑voce. An unsuccessful candidate (Respondent‑I) challenged the appointment before the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal, which held that t

DILAWAR SINGH (DEAD) THROUGH LRS.versusADDL. DISTRICT JUDGE, GHAZIABAD

1995 INSC 56813 September 1995Dismissed

The appellant, Dilawar Singh (deceased) through his legal representatives, filed a return under Section 10(2) of the U.P. Imposition of Ceiling on Land Holdings Act, 1960, claiming that he had gifted several parcels of land to his grand‑nephew. The Prescribed Authority and the lower appellate court held that the gift d

G. SRIDHARAMURTIversusHINDUSTAN PETROLEUM CORPORATION LTD. AND ANR.

1995 INSC 56913 September 1995Dismissed

The landlord leased premises to Esso Company in 1969. When Esso merged into Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd (HPC) in 1974, the landlord filed an eviction suit under the Karnataka Rent Control Act, 1961 alleging sub‑letting. The lower courts dismissed the suit, holding that under the Esso (Acquisition of Undertaking

SMT. RAMA DUBEY (DEAD) BY LRS.versusDEPUTY DIRECTOR OF CONSOLIDATION AND ORS.

1994 INSC 38713 September 1994Appeal(s) allowed

Two brothers, Gajadhar and Harjeet, gifted eleven plots of land to their niece, Smt. Rama Dube, by a registered deed in 1960, and Harjeet later bequeathed two additional plots to her by will. Rama initiated consolidation proceedings in 1971 to have her name entered in the land records; notice was served on Harjeet, who

SH. V.K RAMAMURTHYversusUNION OF INDIA AND ANR.

1996 INSC 87413 August 1996Dismissed

The petitioner, a railway employee who retired in July 1972, was given several opportunities to switch from the Contributory Provident Fund (CPF) scheme to the Railway Pension Scheme but consistently chose to remain in the CPF and received the lump‑sum settlement on retirement. After a lapse of 24 years he filed a writ

STATE OF U.P.versusRAMESH PRASAD MISRA AND ANR.

1996 INSC 88113 August 1996Case Partly allowed

The case concerned the murder of Urmila Devi, aged 19, who was strangulated and her body subsequently burnt. The trial court convicted her husband, Ramesh Prasad Misra, under IPC sections 302, 201 and 498‑A and sentenced him to death, while his mother was convicted under sections 201 and 498‑A; the Allahabad High Court

SURAT SINGH (DEAD) BY LRS. AND ORS ETCversusUNION OF INDIA

1996 INSC 88213 August 1996Dismissed

The case concerns the award of compensation for land acquired under a notification issued under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The Land Acquisition Officer initially fixed compensation at Rs. 2,000 per bigha, which was later enhanced by the Additional District Judge to Rs. 2,000‑3,000 per bigha, and fi

STATE OF U.P. AND ORS.versusSMT. GAYATRI DEVI PANDEY

1996 INSC 88313 August 1996Appeal(s) allowed

Smt. Gayatri Devi Pandey, originally appointed as a School Psychologist and later regularised as an L.T. Grade teacher, was subsequently appointed on an ad‑hoc basis as Assistant Psychologist and promoted to Vocational Guidance Counsellor. She sought regularisation in these posts, but her representation was rejected. T

SMT. ANAR DEVIversusNATHU RAM

1994 INSC 21713 May 1994Appeal(s) allowed

The tenant, Nathu Ram, occupied a shop owned originally by Banarsidas. After Banarsidas died, his widowed daughter‑in‑law, Anar Devi, claimed ownership and sought possession of the shop for the bona‑fide requirement of starting a business for her sons, invoking clause (b) of Section 23A of the Madhya Pradesh Accommodat

ALL INDIA IMAM ORGANISATION AND ORS.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

1993 INSC 20013 May 1993Appeal(s) allowed

The All India Imam Organisation filed a writ petition under Article 32 seeking basic wages for imams serving in mosques, alleging exploitation and a disparity between their duties and remuneration. The Union of India and various State Wakf Boards contended that imams are appointed by mutawallis or local communities, pe

STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESHversusT.G. LAKSHMAIAH SETTY AND SONS

1994 INSC 15713 April 1994Appeal(s) allowed

The assessee, T.G. Lakshmaiah Setty & Sons, a dealer in groundnut oil and cotton seeds, was assessed under the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957 for the years 1967‑68, 1970‑71 and 1971‑72 on cotton lint at 3% as an unclassified good. Relying on Alimchand Topandas Oil Mills, they argued that cotton lint should

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

RAM JANAMversusRADHAKRISHNA CHAUBE AND ORS.

1996 INSC 38013 March 1996Appeal(s) allowed

Ramjanam filed a suit under Sections 59 and 61 of the Uttar Pradesh Tenancy Act, 1939, claiming hereditary tenancy rights after possessing the land for more than 50 years. The trial court and the appellate court held that he was a tenant and had acquired title by adverse possession, but the Allahabad High Court set asi

M/S. SOUTH EAST ASIA SHIPPING CO. LTD.versusM/S. NAV BHARAT ENTERPRISES PVT. LTD. AND ORS.

1996 INSC 38113 March 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The plaintiff, M/s South East Asia Shipping Co. Ltd., filed a suit in the Delhi High Court seeking a perpetual injunction against the enforcement of a bank guarantee dated 16 July 1977. The underlying contract was executed in Bombay and required performance (transport of livestock) to be carried out in Bombay. The defe

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

STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND ORS.versusDR. ANUPAM GUPTA ETC.

1992 INSC 4513 February 1992Appeal(s) allowed

The petitioners, three medical graduates, had completed their MBBS and appeared for the Post‑Graduate Medical Entrance Examination in 1990‑91 but were denied admission to postgraduate courses because they did not obtain the statutorily prescribed minimum of 50% marks in the entrance test. The Allahabad High Court enter

A.P. SAREEN AND ORS.versusSTATE OF U.P. AND ORS.

1997 INSC 1813 January 1997Disposed off

The appellants challenged the validity of a land acquisition proceeding where the government, invoking urgency, issued a notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 on 27 July 1995 and later dispensed with the inquiry required under Section 5‑A by exercising power under Section 17(1). The declarat

SHIV KUMARI DEVENDRA OJHAversusRAMAJOR SHITLA PRASAD OJHA AND ORS.

1997 INSC 1913 January 1997Disposed off

The petitioner, a lady, filed a transfer petition seeking to move a succession application pending before the Civil Judge, Senior Division, Valsad, Gujarat, to the Civil Judge, Sadar, Pratapgarh, Uttar Pradesh, alleging difficulty in traveling and meeting expenses. The respondents offered to bear her travel and stay co

MIS INDIAN MAIZE AND CHEMICALS LTD.versusSTATE OF U.P. AND ORS.

1997 INSC 2013 January 1997Dismissed

Indian Maize and Chemicals Ltd obtained electricity supply from the Uttar Pradesh State Electricity Board under an agreement governed by the Indian Electricity Act, 1910. The company accrued arrears of Rs 49.95 lakh and, to avoid disconnection, agreed to pay the amount in twelve monthly instalments, a plan accepted by

S. NAGARAJANversusTHE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, SALEM AND ORS.

1997 INSC 2113 January 1997Dismissed

The appellant claimed Scheduled Tribe (Konda Reddy) status to obtain reservation benefits in the Central Civil Services Examination, but the Union Public Service Commission doubted his claim and ordered an enquiry. Multiple authorities—including the Deputy Tehsildar, Tehsildar, R.D.O., and the District Collector—examin

INDIAN TRIATHLON FEDERATIONRYAND ANR. ETC.versusPONDY TRIATHLON ASSOCIATION AND ORS. ETC.

1997 INSC 2313 January 1997Disposed off

The Supreme Court dismissed a Special Leave Petition filed by the Indian Triathlon Federation against an order of the Assistant Judge, City Civil Court, Madras, as the petition was withdrawn. The Court also dismissed a transfer petition seeking to move the appeal from the City Civil Court to the Arbitration Board under

DHARAM PAL GOEL (DEAD) BY LRS.versusSTATE OF HARYANA AND ORS.

1997 INSC 2413 January 1997Dismissed

Dharam Pal Goel purchased about one bigha of land in Gurgaon and built a school on it in 1985. The State of Haryana issued a notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 to acquire the land for the public purpose of developing sectors, followed by a declaration under Section 6. Goel challenged the

STATE OF ORISSAversusDUTI SAHU AND ORS.

1997 INSC 2513 January 1997Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Orissa appealed against an Orissa High Court order that directed the issuance of timber transit permits to displaced persons who had been assigned land in a reserved forest for cultivation between 1982 and 1985. The assignment was conditioned that the standing trees on the land remained the property of the

P.L. KANTHA RAO AND ORS.versusSTATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

1995 INSC 3413 January 1995Dismissed

The petitioners obtained a favorable order from the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal (established under the Presidential Order 1985) and sought its enforcement. After obtaining a certificate, they filed an execution petition in the City Civil Court, Hyderabad, which was challenged in the High Court. The High Cour

COLLECTOR OF MADRAS AND ANR.versusK. RAJAMANICKAM

1995 INSC 3513 January 1995Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent, K. Rajamanickam, entered Madras service in 1958 with a recorded date of birth of 15‑01‑1935 and later applied in 1986 to have it corrected to 12‑01‑1936. The Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal upheld the corrected date and ordered his continuation in service until 31‑01‑1994, but the Collector reinstate

STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESHversusKORRAPATI SUBRAHMANYAM AND ORS.

1995 INSC 3613 January 1995Appeal(s) allowed

On the night of 14-15 February 1978, forest officials seized 28 logs of red sandalwood loaded on a lorry and 118 logs waiting on the roadside for loading in Cuddapah district. The accused were charged under Section 20 read with Section 29 of the Andhra Pradesh Forest Act, 1967 and Rule 3 of the Andhra Pradesh Sandalwoo

UNION OF INDIAversusB.V. SAROJA AND ANR.

1995 INSC 3713 January 1995Appeal(s) allowed

The Union of India acquired land belonging to B.V. Saroja and another person under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The acquisition notification was issued on 30 March 1972, the award was made on 15 September 1976 and possession taken on 15 October 1976. After the award, the respondents claimed an additional amount unde

STATE OF HARYANA AND ANR.versusJAGDISH CHANDER

1995 INSC 3813 January 1995Appeal(s) allowed

Jagdish Chander, appointed as a constable on 30 October 1985, was discharged on 1 June 1992 under Rule 12.21 of the Punjab Police Rules for alleged habitual absenteeism, negligence and indiscipline. He challenged the discharge before the High Court, which set aside the order and directed his reinstatement with full ben

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