Created byFuzzy Cloud

Supreme Court of India

K RAMASWAMY

1,805 judgments delivered by benches including this judge — showing 1,001–1,200.

M/S COX AND KINGS LTD. AND ANR.versusSMT. CHANDER MALHOTRA

1996 INSC 147512 December 1996Dismissed

The premises were originally leased to Cox & Kings (Agents) Ltd., a foreign company incorporated in the United Kingdom. After the Reserve Bank of India denied permission for the foreign company to continue its business under the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973, the leasehold interest was assigned to an Indian com

G.S.I.C KARMACHARI UNION AND ORS.versusGUJARAT SMALL INDUSTRIES CORPORATION AND ORS.

1996 INSC 147612 December 1996Disposed off

The G.S.I.C. Karmachari Union filed a writ petition under Article 32 challenging the Gujarat Small Industries Corporation's resolution of 29 August 1987 that sought to implement a roster system for reservation in promotions of Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe employees retrospectively from 1 January 1976. The petiti

MALIKARJUNAPPA SHIVMURTHAPPA SINCE DECEASED BY HIS HEIRSversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

1995 INSC 88112 December 1995Dismissed

The appellant's truck was seized by police for non‑payment of tax under the Motor Vehicles Act. The trial court held the seizure illegal due to the officer's alleged incompetence but denied damages, citing the appellant's contributory negligence. The High Court reversed, finding the officer competent to seize and affir

UNION OF INDIA AND ANR.versusM/S. MURUGAN TALKIES

1995 INSC 88212 December 1995Disposed off

The Union of India challenged the validity of Sections 24 and 25 of the Cine Workers and Cinema Theatre Workers (Regulation of Employment) Act, 1981 and a 1986 notification requiring employers and employees to contribute to a provident fund. The Madras High Court upheld the Act but ordered the respondent, Mis. Murugan

DHARAMDEOversusBIJARAT AND ORS.

1995 INSC 88312 December 1995Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined the constitutional validity of the U.P. High Court (Abolition of Letters patent Appeals) (Amendment) Act, 1972, which sought to eliminate letter‑patent appeals in land‑reform matters. Petitioners contended that the Act exceeded State legislative competence, violated Article 14’s equality guar

UNION OF INDIAversusSH. GANSHYAM DASS KEDIA AND ORS.

1995 INSC 88412 December 1995Case Partly allowed

The Birla Cotton Spinning and Weaving Mill had earmarked three acres for staff quarters in 1951; after the mill became non‑functional, its employees bought the land for residential use. The land was later included in a planned‑development acquisition under sections 17(1) and 17(4) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, wit

SULTAN SINGHversusSTATE OF HARYANA AND ANR.

1995 INSC 88512 December 1995Disposed off

The appellant, a workman, was terminated and his demand for reinstatement was rejected. He applied to the State Government for a reference of the dispute under Section 10(1) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947; the first application was refused and a second application was also rejected on the ground that the earlier

MOHAN LAL (DECEASED) THROUGH HIS LRS. KACHRU AND ORS.versusMIRZA ABDUL GAFFAR AND ANR.

1995 INSC 88612 December 1995Dismissed

The appellant obtained possession of the suit lands in 1956 under a sale agreement, having paid only part of the consideration and later filed a suit for specific performance which was dismissed. The respondent purchased the lands in 1960 and sued for possession, obtaining a decree in the trial court that was reversed

STATE OF KERALA ETC.versusVARKEY MATHEW AND ORS. ETC.

1995 INSC 88712 December 1995Appeal(s) allowed

The deceased Varkey Mathew died in 1973 without filing the statement of excess land required under Sections 85(2) and 85(3A) of the Kerala Land Reforms Act, 1964. The State initiated proceedings under Section 85(7) against his successors-in-interest, but the Taluk Land Board later cancelled the order and the Kerala Hig

SMT. H.B. USHAversusD.S. RAMACHANDRA

1994 INSC 59612 December 1994Disposed off

In the civil appeal concerning a partnership dispute between Smt. H.B. Usha and D.S. Ramachandra, the parties reached an amicable settlement. The Supreme Court approved the settlement, ordering the appellant to pay a total of Rs. 3.25 crore to the respondent for relinquishing his half‑share in the partnership firm Mis

AKHIL BHARTIYA SOSHIT KARAMCHARI SANGH, THROUGH ITS SECRETARY AND ANR.versusUNION OF INDIA THROUGH ITS SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF RAILWAYS AND ORS.

1996 INSC 104812 September 1996Dismissed

The petitioners, a railway employees’ union, challenged the promotion of a reserved‑category clerk, Shri A.S. Rana, to the D.S.K.–1 post, arguing that the promotion was made on the basis of accelerated seniority and therefore could not be granted to a post meant for the general category. The Central Administrative Trib

GAJRAJ SINGH ETCversusSTATE TRANSPORT APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AND ORS. ETC.

1996 INSC 104312 September 1996Disposed off

The appellant, Gajraj Singh, held a stage‑carriage permit originally granted under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939, which was later renewed under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. After the 1988 Act came into force, the State Transport Authority granted overlapping permits to other operators, and the appellant challenged the

BIKRAM SINGH AND ORS.versusTHE LAND ACQUISITION COLLECTOR AND ORS.

1996 INSC 104412 September 1996Dismissed

The appellants, owners of land acquired compulsorily, received a notice demanding income‑tax on interest accrued due to delayed payment of compensation under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. They challenged the notice through writ petitions, which the Punjab & Haryana High Court dismissed, holding that such interest is

STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ORS.versusD.R. LAXMI AND ORS.

1996 INSC 104512 September 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Rajasthan acquired 31.28 acres of land for defence purposes, publishing a Section 4(1) notification in the Gazette on 23 March 1977 and taking possession on 19 May 1977. The High Court quashed the notification and the Section 6 declaration, holding that the notice failed to specify whether the land was was

BASANT KUMAR ETC.versusUNION OF INDIA ETC.

1996 INSC 104612 September 1996Appeal(s) allowed

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

DELHI CLOTH AND GENERAL MILLS CO. LTD.versusSTATE OF M.P. AND ORS.

1995 INSC 56012 September 1995Dismissed

The appellant, Delhi Cloth and General Mills Co. Ltd., was the manufacturer of vanaspati ghee that was found adulterated when sold by Laxmi Narain, who was prosecuted under Section 16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954. During the trial, the magistrate, on the basis of evidence that the appellant had manu

STATE OF KERALAversusMALAYALAM PLANTATION LTD.

1995 INSC 56112 September 1995Dismissed

The State of Kerala acquired 8.83 hectares of land under Section 19 of the Kerala Land Acquisition Act, 1963, to extract granite for a dam project. A commissioner was appointed to assess the quantity of granite, the extent of land, and the compensation payable, reporting 7,12,500 cubic meters of granite in 15.77 acres

SARDAR DILSHAR SINGHversusTHE LABOUR COMMISSIONER AND ANR.

1995 INSC 56212 September 1995Dismissed

The appellant, a partner in a firm, was subject to a Labour Court certificate directing the District Collector to recover Rs. 62,843.50 as arrears of land revenue under the Punjab Land Revenue Act, 1887. When a bailiff attempted to attach his movable property, the appellant promised to appear before the Collector but f

SH. JANGLI AND ORS.versusSMT. BHAGWATI AND ORS.

1995 INSC 56312 September 1995Dismissed

The appellant, a tenant of Smt. Ajudhia, sought a declaration of title over a parcel of agricultural land that had been sold in execution of a money decree against her and later transferred to an auction‑purchaser, respondent No. 11. The appellant had earlier obtained a decree under the Punjab Pre‑emption Act, 1913, as

KONDOPANTversusARJUNA AND ORS.

1995 INSC 56612 September 1995Dismissed

In a review petition arising from a civil appeal, the Bombay High Court had earlier declared the respondent a surplus holder under the Land Ceiling Act and allowed him to file a review if he was later found to be within the ceiling limit. The review petition was filed, but it raised new grounds that were not part of th

SH. KISHAN DAS AND ORS.versusTHE STATE OF U.P. AND ORS.

1995 INSC 56412 September 1995Dismissed

The appellants' land was acquired in September 1976 and possession was taken on December 16, 1976. Due to litigation, the Land Acquisition Officer could not pass the award until March 22, 1983. The appellants claimed interest at 12% per annum for the delay. The Supreme Court held that under Section 34 of the Land Acqui

CHAIRMAN, PURI GRAMYA BANK AND ANR.versusANANDA CHANDRA DAS AND ORS.

1994 INSC 38412 September 1994Disposed off

The Supreme Court heard an appeal by the Chairman of Puri Gramya Bank challenging the High Court's order that seniority among directly recruited managers should be based on the date of reporting to duty. The respondents had been selected by a Selection Board which prepared a merit list based on the ranking secured at t

THE AMALAPURAM MUNICIPAL COUNCIL AND ANR.versusU. SIMHADRI

1996 INSC 87012 August 1996Dismissed

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

SH. BAU NATH GUPTAversusSTATE OF BIHAR AND ORS.

1996 INSC 87112 August 1996Disposed off

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

PARWATBAIversusSONABAI AND ORS.

1996 INSC 87212 August 1996Dismissed

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

N. KRISHNAMACHARIversusTHE MANAGING DIRECTOR APSRTC, HYDERABAD AND ORS.

1994 INSC 31612 August 1994Dismissed

The Government of Andhra Pradesh issued a notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 to acquire land for a bus‑stand complex, followed by a declaration under Section 6. Several writ petitions were filed challenging the acquisition, and the Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation (APSRTC),

GURU AMARJIT SINGHversusRATTAN CHAND AND ORS.

1993 INSC 26012 August 1993Dismissed

Guru Amarjit Singh sued Rattan Chand and others for ejectment, alleging that a 1905 lease between his grandfather and the respondents' predecessors created a landlord‑lessee relationship and that the respondents forfeited the lease by selling the land, denying the landlord's title and claiming ownership under the Punja

GAURI SHANKAR GAUR AND ORS. ETC.versusSTATE OF U.P. AND ORS.

1993 INSC 26112 August 1993Dismissed

The Uttar Pradesh Avas Evam Vikas Parishad Act, 1965 authorised acquisition of land for a housing scheme and issued notifications under its Sections 28(1) and 32(1). The State later issued acquisition notices under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The appellants challenged whether the three‑year limitation in the first

UJJAIN VIKAS PRADHIKARAN, (UJJAIN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY)versusTARACHAND AND ANR. ETC.

1996 INSC 73012 July 1996Case Partly allowed

The Ujjain Development Authority acquired land under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 and the acquisition officer initially awarded Rs 27,500 per hectare. The District Judge enhanced the award to Rs 50,000 per hectare with solatium and interest, and the Madhya Pradesh High Court further increased compensation to Rs 1,25,

M/S. ALIJI MONOJI AND CO.versusLALJI MAVJI AND ORS.

1996 INSC 73212 July 1996Dismissed

Ali Ji Monoji & Co., a lessee, filed a suit for perpetual injunction against the Municipal Corporation of Bombay to stop demolition of alleged unauthorised structures under Section 351 of the Municipal Corporation Act. The municipal corporation issued a demolition notice, and the landlords of the property sought to be

DR. NANDA BALLABH PATHAKversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ORS.

1996 INSC 73312 July 1996Dismissed

Dr. Nanda Ballabh Pathak, a Hindi Pandit in a lower‑grade school, applied for promotion to the post of Hindu Pandit in an upgraded inter‑college. The post was prescribed to require an MA in Hindi, a BA in Sanskrit and a B.Ed. While the appellant held an MA and PhD in Hindi, he did not possess a BA in Sanskrit. He chall

G. SUNDARSANversusUNION OF INDIA AND ANR.

1995 INSC 39312 July 1995Dismissed

G. Sundarsan, appointed under the Scheduled Caste quota in the Income Tax Department, rose to the rank of Income Tax Inspector. Three years before his retirement, a departmental enquiry established that he did not belong to any Scheduled Caste and therefore was not entitled to the reserved post. Consequently, under Rul

N.P. THIRUGNANAM (D) BY L.RS.versusDR. R. JAGAN MOHAN RAO AND ORS.

1995 INSC 39412 July 1995Dismissed

The plaintiff N.P. Thirugnanam had entered into a sale agreement for a property and paid a small advance, thereafter taking possession as a tenant. He sued for specific performance, alleging the defendants had refused to execute the sale deed, while the defendants contended that the plaintiff had not paid the further a

EAST INDIA HOTELS LTD. SRINAGAR AND ANR.versusSTATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR AND ANR.

1994 INSC 23812 July 1994

The Jammu & Kashmir Hotel (Amenities and Services) Tariff Taxation Act, 1980 imposes a tax on amenities and services provided by hotels. East India Hotels Ltd. and others challenged its constitutional validity, arguing that the tax was effectively on the hotel keeper's gross receipts, i.e., income, which under the Cons

DR. BHARGAVA AND CO. AND ANR.versusSH. SHYAM SUNDER SETH BY L.RS.

1994 INSC 24112 July 1994

The predecessor-in-interest of the respondents bought an evacuee property at an auction in 1962 but failed to pay the full price, leading to cancellation of the sale. After a High Court set aside the cancellation, the full price was paid in 1980 and a sale certificate was issued on 31 March 1981, confirming title effec

B. GANGADHARversusB.G. RAJALINGAM

1995 INSC 37912 May 1995Dismissed

The petitioner, a judgment‑debtor, constructed shops on a suit property and let tenants occupy them while a suit for title and possession was pending. The trial court declared the respondent the owner and ordered the petitioner to hand over vacant possession; the decree became final. When the execution warrant was issu

UNITED BANK OF INDIAversusCOOKS AND KELVEY PROPERTIES (P) LTD.

1994 INSC 20912 May 1994Appeal(s) allowed

United Bank of India leased premises from Cook's and Kelvey Properties and allowed its employees' trade union to occupy the premises for union activities without the landlord's consent. The bank did not receive any rent from the union, maintained the premises, paid electricity charges, and retained the power to ask the

NAVALSHANKAR ISHWARLAL DAVE AND ANR.versusSTATE OF GUJARAT AND ORS.

1993 INSC 19312 May 1993Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants were detained under the Gujarat Prevention of Anti‑Social Activities Act, 1985 (PASA) as "property grabbers" and challenged the detention orders. The High Court upheld the orders, but the Supreme Court examined the constitutional validity of PASA, the legality of delegating detention power to district ma

KIKAR SINGHversusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN

1993 INSC 19412 May 1993Dismissed

Kikar Singh was convicted of murder for repeatedly striking his unarmed neighbour with a spade, causing three injuries, the third of which severed the victim's neck and was deemed sufficient to cause death in the ordinary course of nature. The appellant argued that the killing occurred in the heat of passion during a s

HARYANA UNRECOGNISED SCHOOLS ASSOCIATIONversusSTATE OF HARYANA

1996 INSC 51112 April 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The Haryana Unrecognised Schools Association challenged a Haryana Government notification that added "Employment in private coaching classes, schools including Nursery Schools and technical institutions" to the Schedule of the Minimum Wages Act, 1948 and fixed minimum wages for teachers. The Punjab & Haryana High Court

STATE OF U.P. AND ORS.versusHARISH CHANDRA AND ORS.

1996 INSC 51212 April 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The respondents, selected in a 1987 merit list for Class III and IV clerical posts under the U.P. Subordinate Officers Clerical Staff (Direct Recruitment) Rules, 1985, alleged that the State failed to appoint them and obtained a mandamus from the Allahabad High Court ordering their recruitment. The High Court held that

STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS.versusDR. HARBHAJAN SINGH GREASY

1996 INSC 51412 April 1996Appeal(s) allowed

Dr. Harbhajan Singh Greasy, a government doctor, was charged with absence from emergency flood duty and alleged private practice during suspension. An inquiry officer reported that the doctor admitted to the private practice, but no written admission was recorded and the doctor denied making any statement. The discipli

U.P. ELECT. BOARD THROUGH ITS CHAIRMAN AND ANR.versusM/S. TRIVENI ENGG. WORKS LTD.

1996 INSC 51512 April 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The U.P. Electricity Board (appeal) and M/s Triveni Engineering Works Ltd (respondent) entered into an agreement for electricity supply of 104 kW, which allowed the Board to revise tariffs under Section 48 of the Electricity Supply Act, 1948. The Board revised tariffs on 13 July 1986, deleting the LMV‑10 schedule witho

INSPECTOR GENERAL OF REGISTRATION U.P. AND ANR.versusAVDESH KUMAR AND ORS. ETC.

1996 INSC 51612 April 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court heard an appeal by the Inspector General of Registration, Uttar Pradesh, against the High Court order directing the State to continue daily‑wage appointments of registration clerks and to regularise them. The petitioners sought clarification on whether the directions given in Khagesh Kumar v. Inspecto

UNION OF INDIAversusRATTAN SINGH AND ORS. ETC.

1996 INSC 51712 April 1996Disposed off

The Union of India appealed against the award of compensation under Section 26 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, made in favour of Rattan Singh and others. The High Court had stayed execution of the award, directing the Union to deposit 50% of the enhanced compensation. The Union complied, but the respondents argued t

THE STATE OF GOA AND ANR. ETC. ETC.versusSMT. YVETTE PEREIRA A.E. COSTA ETC. ETC.

1996 INSC 51812 April 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Goa filed an appeal against a High Court order that had held that certain judicial officers appointed in 1963 were "absorbed employees" entitled to the pay scales of posts created under the Portuguese administration. The appellants argued that the definition of "absorbed employee" in Section 2(a) of the Go

M. VENKATESWARLU ETC.versusTHE GOVERNMENT ANDHRA PRADESH AND ORS. ETC.

1996 INSC 36512 March 1996Appeal(s) allowed

M. Venkat... (appellant), a Scheduled Caste employee in the Andhra Pradesh Revenue establishment, was promoted ad‑hoc as Deputy Tehsildar in 1984 but fell short of the service‑length requirements for regular promotion. He sought relief under Rule 47 of the Andhra Pradesh State and Subordinate Service Rules to retrospec

SMT. ANURADHA MUKHERJEE AND ORS. ETC. ETC.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS. ETC.

1996 INSC 36612 March 1996Disposed off

The case concerned a group of graduate clerks (Grade II) who were promoted to Grade I in the Indian Railways after a restructuring of the clerical cadres. The Railway Board had issued several letters prescribing that 20% of Grade I vacancies be filled by direct recruitment and the remainder by promotion of in‑service c

SH. BAKSHISH SINGH (DEAD) BY LRS.versusARJAN SINGH AND ORS.

1996 INSC 36912 March 1996Dismissed

A suit for dissolution of a partnership and rendition of accounts was filed by one partner against the other partners of the Modern Ice Factory. The trial court dismissed the suit, and the first appeal was also dismissed. While the second appeal was pending, two of the partners died and their legal representatives were

GURNAM SINGH AND ORS.versusTHE SUB-DIVISIONAL OFFICER (CIVIL), KAITHAL AND ORS.

1996 INSC 37012 March 1996Dismissed

The appellants had occupied certain Shamlat Deh lands as tenants for about twenty years before 1975, after which their lease expired and no new lease was granted. The lands are vested in the Gram Panchayat. The Assistant Collector, invoking Section 7 of the Punjab Common Lands (Regulation) Act, 1961 and Rules 19 and 20

SMT. AMBEY DEVIversusSTATE OF BIHAR AND ANR.

1996 INSC 37112 March 1996Dismissed

The State of Bihar acquired 25 acres of land under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 and awarded compensation equally to four co‑owners, each receiving a one‑fourth share. One co‑owner filed a reference under Section 18 of the Act, leading the civil court to enhance his compensation. The appellant, another co‑owner, did n

RAM PIARI AND ANR. ETC.versusLAND ACQUISITION COLLECTOR, SOLAN AND ORS. ETC.

1996 INSC 37212 March 1996Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined appeals by landowners against a Himachal Pradesh High Court order that reduced compensation for lands acquired under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The Collector had originally offered compensation of Rs 14,195 per bigha for Kuhal land and Rs 9,425 per bigha for Katuhal land, while the High

A. MAHUDESWARAN AND ORS.versusGOVERNMENT OF TAMIL NADU AND ORS.

1996 INSC 37312 March 1996Appeal(s) allowed

After the abolition of the Village Officer post in 1982, about 2,000 Section Writers were trained and appointed as Surveyor‑cum‑Draftsman in the Survey and Settlement Department on a contract basis, later regularised with regular pay‑scales and promotions. The Government later issued a clarification directing that thei

REV. FATHER BRAIN E FERNANDES ETC.versusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS.

1996 INSC 22312 February 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned a land acquisition under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 where the notification under Section 4(1) was published in 1965 and the declaration under Section 6 in 1969, but the award of compensation was only made in 1986. The appellants argued that an erratum notice that listed guntha numbers instead of

RAM JATAN AND ORS.versusDY. DIRECTOR OF CONSOLIDATION AND ORS.

1996 INSC 22412 February 1996Dismissed

The deceased Newaj Mal executed a registered will leaving his land to his daughter's son, a fact accepted by the Director of Consolidation and upheld by the Allahabad High Court. The brother of the deceased (appellant) claimed a preferential right to the property under Class V of Section 24 of the Agra Tenancy Act, arg

UNION OF INDIA AND ANR.versusM/S. SH. RAM RAYONS

1996 INSC 22512 February 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent, Mis. Sh. Ram Rayons, applied for a supplementary import licence and paid a fee of Rs.1 lakh under Clause 4(2) of the Imports (Control) Order, 1955. A policy change later prevented the issuance of the licence, prompting the respondent to file a writ petition seeking a refund of the fee. The Delhi High Co

UNION OF INDIAversusAJAIB SINGH AND ORS.

1996 INSC 22612 February 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The Union of India acquired land under the Requisitioning & Acquisition of Immovable Properties Act, 1952 and offered compensation to the owners, who rejected it, leading to reference to an arbitrator under section 8(1). The arbitrator awarded higher compensation with solatium and interest, and the Punjab & Haryana Hig

STATE OF RAJASTHANversusM/S. KALYAN SUNDARAM CEMENT INDUSTRIES LTD. AND ORS.

1996 INSC 22712 February 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Rajasthan sued Mis. Kalyan Sundaram Cement Industries Ltd. for recovery of sums due under an agreement after three post‑dated cheques issued in 1989 bounced. Alongside civil suits for recovery, criminal complaints were filed under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and Section 420 of the Indian

STATE OF KERALAversusGEORGE JOSEPH

1996 INSC 22812 February 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Kerala initiated acquisition proceedings against George Joseph, issuing a notice under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 on 26 September 1978. The Collector later made an award on 27 March 1981, and the respondent claimed an additional amount under Section 23(1A) of the Act. The question befor

SH. MAHESHWARI SENIOR HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL AND ANR.versusBHIKHA RAM SHARMA AND ORS.

1996 INSC 22912 February 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Maheshwari Senior Higher Secondary School, challenged the termination of Bhikha Ram Sharma, who had been appointed as a Steno‑Typist on an ad‑hoc basis on 15 July 1992. The management passed a resolution on 21 May 1994 abolishing the ad‑hoc post, and Sharma's service was terminated on 31 May 1994. The Ra

PANKAJ KUMAR SAHAversusTHE SUB-DIVISIONAL OFFICER, ISLAMPUR AND ORS.

1996 INSC 23012 February 1996Dismissed

The petitioners, Pankaj Kumar Saha and his brother, were issued Scheduled Caste certificates in 1982, which were later cancelled by the Sub‑Divisional Officer. The petitioners challenged the cancellation, claiming that they belong to the Sunri Scheduled Caste, despite the Presidential notification expressly listing Sun

UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. ETC.versusS.D. GUPTA AND ORS.

1996 INSC 23112 February 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The respondents, who were promotee Extra Assistant Directors in the Central Water Commission Engineering Class‑I Service, challenged the seniority list prepared by the Union of India which placed them below direct recruits appointed later. The dispute centered on the interpretation of the 1965 Service Rules (Rules 5, 6

SAVITRI DEVIversusSTATE OF HARYANA AND ORS.

1996 INSC 23212 February 1996Disposed off

The appellant, Savitri Devi, challenged the State of Haryana after her land was acquired under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 for residential and commercial purposes. Although compensation had been paid and the acquisition became final, the land remained unused, and she sought a plot in lieu of her loss under a governm

MAHESH CHANDRAversusREGIONAL MANAGER, U.P. FINANCIAL CORPORATION AND ORS.

1992 INSC 4212 February 1992Appeal(s) allowed

Mahesh Chandra, the managing partner of a rice mill, hypothecated his mill and adjoining plots to the Uttar Pradesh Financial Corporation (UPFC) for a loan. After defaulting on repayments, UPFC exercised its power under Section 29 of the State Financial Corporations Act, 1951, took possession of the hypothecated proper

RANGANATH PARMESWAR PANDJTRAO MALI AND ANR.versusEKNATH GAJANAN KULKARNI AND ANR.

1996 INSC 5812 January 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The plaintiffs, sons of the deceased Panditrao and his alleged wife Shevantabai, sued for an injunction to protect their possession of a 3.18‑hectare property, claiming they were legal heirs. The trial court accepted the admission that Shevantabai lived with Panditrao as his wife, applied the legal presumption of a val

UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.versusSMT. SATYAWATI AND ORS.

1996 INSC 6012 January 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court considered appeals filed by the Union of India against High Court orders directing the appointment of an arbitrator under Section 8(1)(b) of the Requisitioning and Acquisition of Immovable Property Act, 1952. The claimants had not raised any objections to the arbitrator's award within the time prescri

R.C. CHAWLAversusSTATE OF HARYANA AND ORS.

1996 INSC 6112 January 1996Disposed off

The appellant, R.C. Chawla, was allotted a residential plot by the Haryana Urban Development Authority (HUDA) on the condition that it not be used for commercial purposes. He allegedly used the premises for commercial activity, prompting HUDA to issue a resumption order. The appellant submitted an affidavit claiming th

STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS. ETC.versusO.P. GUPTA ETC.

1996 INSC 6212 January 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The respondents, engineers of the Haryana Public Works Department, were given notional promotions based on a seniority list prepared under Rule 9 of the 1970 Service Engineers Rules, with a deemed promotion date of 1 January 1983, but they only assumed the higher posts on 1 December 1992. They filed writ petitions seek

BANK OF BARODAversusR.M. PATWA AND ANR.

1996 INSC 6312 January 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The Bank of Baroda obtained a money decree against R.M. Patwa for Rs 55,000 with interest and filed an execution application. Patwa sought, under Section 151 CPC, to have amounts crediting a third‑party, G.K. Kakkani, adjusted against his decree debt. The Additional District Judge ordered such adjustment, and the High

SAM HIRING CO.versusA.R. BHUJBAL AND ORS .

1996 INSC 6412 January 1996Dismissed

The appellant, Sam Hiring Co., a tenant occupying a shed in City Survey No. 56, challenged the acquisition of its premises under the Maharashtra Housing and Area Development Act, 1976, arguing that the structure was an independent, non‑cess‑payable building and therefore exempt from demolition. It also contended that t

SMT. RAJNIBAI @ MANNUBAIversusSMT. KAMLA DEVI AND ORS.

1996 INSC 6512 January 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant filed a suit for declaration of title to a property and simultaneously applied under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 of the CPC for a temporary injunction to protect his possession. The trial court granted the injunction, but the High Court reversed the order, holding that where there is no dispute as to the corpo

BHANWAR LALversusSMT. PREM LATA & ORS.

1990 INSC 512 January 1990Appeal(s) allowed

A joint family house was auctioned to satisfy an ex‑parte money decree of Rs 5,557.10. The coparceners objected, the sale was confirmed, and they filed a suit under Order 21 Rule 63 CPC to set aside the sale, valuing the property at Rs 15,000. The trial court dismissed the suit, but the District Court allowed the appea

VIKRAM SHITOLE AND ANR.versusTHE M.P. STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION AND ORS.

1996 INSC 146911 December 1996Dismissed

The appellants, Vikram Shitole and others, held permits to operate stage carriages on the Gwalior‑Indore route, which had been notified as a frozen route under Section 68‑D(3) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939. A self‑employment scheme allowed unemployed graduates to run stage carriages on such routes subject to specific

STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS.versusM/S SURINDER KUMAR AND CO. AND ORS.

1996 INSC 147011 December 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The respondents, who held licences to sell Indian-made foreign liquor in Ludhiana, had their licences cancelled by the Excise Department on grounds of illegalities. They filed writ petitions alleging that the Minister for Excise acted mala fide in the cancellation. The Punjab & Haryana High Court directed the responden

PATEL BHUDARBHAI MAGANBHAI AND ANR.versusPATEL KHEMABHAI AMBARAM AND ORS.

1996 INSC 147111 December 1996Dismissed

The dispute arose over a property mortgaged by widow Bai Jivi in 1911; after her death in 1955 the property passed to her daughter Hati, who filed a suit for redemption of the mortgage. The trial court dismissed the suit, but the Additional District Judge decreed in favour of the respondents, holding that Hati was the

SMT. CHATRO WIDOW OF NAND RAM AND ORS.versusSAHAYAK SANCHALAK CHAKBANDI, MEERUT AND ORS.

1996 INSC 147211 December 1996Appeal(s) allowed

Jallo purchased the proprietary right of a Zamindari estate in 1933 and became the khudkhash-holder. She later inducted her husband Tunda as a tenant, who died in 1947‑48. After the enactment of the U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950, a dispute arose over who succeeded to the estate of either Tunda or

PARBATI DEVIversusPURNA PATRA AND ORS.

1996 INSC 147311 December 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant purchased a one‑fourth share of land that had been auctioned in 1938 to Babu Suryanarayan, who obtained possession and later sold the same share to Hemamali Devi, who in turn sold it to the appellant in 1950. The appellant filed a suit for partition of that share, and the trial court and the appellate cou

FARIDABAD COMPLEX ADMINISTRATIONversusYADU ETC.

1996 INSC 147411 December 1996Appeal(s) allowed

Biharilal and Mahipal constructed shops on land owned by Ballabgarh Municipality and were served notices under Section 208 of the Haryana Municipalities Act, 1973 for unauthorized construction. They later sold the land to the respondents, who sued the Faridabad Complex Administration (successor to the municipality) for

AHMEDABAD MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONversusNAWAB KHAN GULAB KHAN AND ORS.

1996 INSC 118911 October 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation sought to remove unauthorised hutments erected by pavement‑dwellers on a main road. The High Court stayed the removal until suitable accommodation was provided and required a hearing. On appeal, the Supreme Court held that pavements are public property intended for free pedestrian mo

UNION OF INDIAversusKISHAN CHAND AND ORS.

1996 INSC 119511 October 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The Union of India acquired land and initially awarded compensation of Rs.2,500 per bigha under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The Additional District Judge enhanced the compensation to Rs.5,000 per bigha in December 1973. On further appeal, the Delhi High Court raised the compensation to Rs.12,000 per bigha and grant

THE PRESIDENT, A.P.M.C., TALUKA DARWHA, DISTRICT YAVATMAL,MAHARASHTRAversusMANIKANT AND ORS.

1996 INSC 119611 October 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The President of A.P.M.C. appealed to the Supreme Court against the Bombay High Court's enhancement of compensation for land acquired under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The land, about 3 acres, was acquired for a market yard and the acquisition officer had fixed a market value of Re.0.36 per square foot, which the r

MANGLA GIRIversusREGIONAL ADMINISTRATIVE COMMITTEE VARANASI AND ANR.

1996 INSC 119711 October 1996Dismissed

The petitioner, a government employee, was charged with defalcation of several sums of money and shortage of sugar as per special audit reports for the years 1981-82 and 1982-83. He was given an opportunity to make good the loss but failed to deposit the required amount, after which an order of removal from service was

UNION OF INDIA AND ANR.versusSH. BALJIT SINGH

1996 INSC 119811 October 1996Dismissed

Sh. Baltit Singh, who enlisted in the Army in 1975 and was regularised in 1977, suffered a thigh injury in 1979 while in service. He was medically downgraded, later diagnosed with a psychiatric condition, and invalidated out of service in 1981. He filed a petition for disability pension under Rule 173 of the Army Pensi

UNION OF INDIAversusSH. PUNNILAL AND ORS.

1996 INSC 119911 October 1996Appeal(s) allowed

Sh. Punnilal filed a civil suit seeking promotion from shunter to Driver 'C' and obtained a decree in 1984, which was confirmed and led to his promotion in 1986. He then applied under Section 15 of the Payment of Wages Act for back‑wages, and the prescribed authority ordered payment of Rs. 30,220. The Union of India ap

MRS. NALINI NAVIN BHAGWATI AND ORS.versusMR. CHANDRAVADAN M. MEHTA

1996 INSC 120011 October 1996Appeal(s) allowed

Manvantrai Mehta died leaving property and a will of his wife Kamlaben. The sons, including Chandravadan Mehta, obtained probate of Kamlaben’s will in 1987. The other children, led by Nalini Navin Bhagwati, filed an application under Section 263 of the Indian Succession Act to revoke that probate. The trial court refus

JODHA RAM (DEAD) BY LRS.versusFINANCIAL COMMISSIONER, HARYANA AND ORS.

1993 INSC 32411 October 1993Dismissed

Jodha Ram, a small landowner, sought eviction of tenants Loti Ram and Rup Ram under Section 9(1)(i) of the Punjab Security of Land Tenures Act, 1953, claiming his title remained despite the land being declared surplus. The Collector and higher authorities rejected his claim, holding that surplus land is to be utilized

DEPUTY COLLECTOR, MINICOY AND ORS.versusNAVADIGOTHI MOHAMMED AND ORS.

1996 INSC 103811 September 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned the South Pandaram lands of Lakshadweep, where villagers, through their Mooppans (trustees), historically enjoyed a collective right to collect coconuts but held no ownership over the land or trees. The administration, invoking the Laccadive, Minicoy and Amindivi Islands Revenue and Tenancy Regulatio

J.S. PARIHARversusGANPAT DUGGAR AND ORS.

1996 INSC 103011 September 1996Dismissed

The Rajasthan High Court had earlier quashed a seniority list of engineers prepared with retrospective effect and directed a fresh list. Contempt proceedings were initiated under Section 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, and a single judge, while considering the merits, held that the respondents had not wilfully

SH. S.K. VAISHversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

1996 INSC 103111 September 1996Dismissed

The petitioner, S.K. Vaish, an Assistant Engineer, was suspended and subjected to disciplinary proceedings that culminated in compulsory retirement in 1986. On appeal, the department directed that the punishment be treated partly as suspension and partly as in‑service, leading to his reinstatement and treatment as on d

PRAMOD LAHUDAS MESHRAMversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS.

1996 INSC 103211 September 1996Dismissed

The petitioner, a qualified candidate from a Scheduled Caste, applied for the post of Overseer/Junior Engineer (Civil) advertised by the State of Maharashtra and was appointed on probation based on a recommendation letter from the Member Secretary of the Regional Subordinate Service Selection Board. After nine months o

BABU SINGH BAINS ETC.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS. ETC.

1996 INSC 103311 September 1996Dismissed

The petitioner, Babu Singh Bains, owned a free‑hold plot in Chandigarh and constructed a double‑storeyed building that he used partly as a guest house, violating the city’s land‑use regulations. The Estate Officer, invoking Section 8A of the Capital of Punjab (Development & Regulation) Act, 1952, resumed the property a

BHOOP SINGHversusRAM SINGH MAJOR AND ORS.

1995 INSC 55311 September 1995Dismissed

The petitioners, heirs of a common ancestor, claimed a one‑third share in land, relying on a 1973 declaratory decree that had been obtained on the basis of the defendant’s written admission of their title. The decree was never registered. The trial court held the decree illegal; the appellate courts dismissed the petit

KAMESHWAR PRASADversusSTATE OF BIHAR AND ORS.

1995 INSC 55511 September 1995Appeal(s) allowed

Kameshwar Prasad was appointed as a vaccinator under the Small Pox Eradication Scheme in 1975. The scheme was discontinued in 1985 and a resolution (No. 2215, 11‑Feb‑1985) directed that 25% of senior officers be retained and the remaining 75% be absorbed in equivalent regular posts. While awaiting absorption, Prasad ob

K. ADIVI NAIDU AND ORS.versusE. DURUVASULU NAIDU AND ORS.

1995 INSC 55611 September 1995Appeal(s) allowed

In a partition suit concerning joint family property, the trial court issued a preliminary decree dividing the schedule properties into two equal shares, one to the plaintiff and one to the first defendant. The decree was confirmed by a single High Court judge but set aside by a division bench, which remitted the matte

SANTOSH JAYASWAL AND ANR.versusSTATE OF M.P. AND ORS.

1995 INSC 55711 September 1995Disposed off

The State of Madhya Pradesh granted the appellants a right to catch fish in government tanks. The appellants argued that this right was merely a licence and therefore not subject to compulsory registration under the Indian Registration Act, 1908 or stamp duty under the Indian Stamp Act, 1899. The Supreme Court held tha

STATE OF KARNATAKA AND ORS.versusNARASIMHA MURTHY AND ORS.

1995 INSC 45311 August 1995Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Karnataka, under the Karnataka Acquisition of Land for Grant of House Sites Act, 1972, issued a notification under Section 3(1) announcing its intention to acquire land for house sites for the weaker sections. The land’s recorded owner was served notice, but the notification did not mention the name of the

R. RAMASWAMYversusGOVERNMENT OF TAMIL NADU AND ORS.

1995 INSC 45411 August 1995Appeal(s) allowed

R. Ramaswamy was appointed temporarily as Project Officer in 1979 and later regularised as a permanent Project Officer, a post deemed equivalent in status and pay to Assistant Director. When he was temporarily promoted to Assistant Director and sought promotion to Deputy Director, the question arose whether he was seni

R.V. BHUPAL PRASADversusSTATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH AND ORS.

1995 INSC 45511 August 1995Dismissed

The appellant, R.V. Bhupal Prasad, held a cinema theatre under a 20‑year lease that expired in 1983. He applied for renewal of his cinema licence under the Andhra Pradesh Cinemas (Regulations) Rules, 1970, but the landlady (Respondent No.3) objected, claiming his possession was not lawful. The licensing authority and a

THE INSTITUTE OF CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS OF INDIAversusMIS PRICE WATERHOUSE AND ANR.

[1997] SUPP. 2 S.C.R. 26711 July 1997Appeal(s) allowed

The Institute of Chartered Accountants of India (the Council) issued a notice to Price Waterhouse for alleged professional misconduct in preparing a booklet for EXIM Bank. After a written statement, the Council referred the matter to its Disciplinary Committee, which reported a finding of "not guilty". The Council then

SAMATHAversusSTATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH AND ORS.

[1997] SUPP. 2 S.C.R. 30511 July 1997Disposed off

The case concerned the validity of mining leases granted by the State of Andhra Pradesh to non-tribal persons in scheduled areas, including reserved forests. The appellant, a society, challenged these leases as violating the Andhra Pradesh Scheduled Area Land Transfer Regulation, 1959, the Forest (Conservation) Act, 19

S.S. BOLA AND ORS. ETC.versusB.D. SARDANA AND ORS. ETC.

[1997] SUPP. 2 S.C.R. 50711 July 1997Disposed off

The case involves a challenge to the Haryana Service of Engineers Act, 1995, which was enacted with retrospective effect to alter the seniority rules between direct recruits and promotees in the Haryana Public Works Department. The Supreme Court had earlier interpreted the rules in Sehgal and Chopra, but the Act change

STATE OF WEST BENGALversusGAURANGALAL CHATTERJEE

1993 INSC 18911 May 1993Dismissed

The State of West Bengal sought the appointment of an arbitrator under clause 25 of a contract, but the Chief Engineer failed to act, prompting the respondent to approach the High Court. A Single Judge of the Calcutta High Court revoked the Chief Engineer's authority and appointed Shri D.K. Roy Chowdhury as sole arbitr

GULZARA SINGH AND ORS.versusSTATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS.

1993 INSC 19011 May 1993Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined the method for fixing market value of 90 acres of land acquired under the Land Acquisition Act, 1984. The claimants relied on various sale deeds, including a recent high‑price transaction, while the State relied on mutation entries. The Court held that only bona‑fide sales of comparable land

LAXMIKANTversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

1997 INSC 41111 April 1997Dismissed

The appellant, a manufacturer of Ayurvedic toothpaste containing 4% tobacco, challenged a 1992 government notification that prohibited the manufacture and sale of any Ayurvedic drugs licensed as tooth‑pastes or tooth‑powders containing tobacco. The notification was issued under Section 33(E) of the Drugs and Cosmetics

STATE OF U.P.versusLAKHAN AND ORS.

1997 INSC 41211 April 1997Leave Granted & Allowed

On 6 March 1977, the deceased Sukhuwa and his relatives were returning from a festival when the accused, armed with lathis, suddenly attacked him on the head and other vital parts, causing injuries that led to his death. The trial court convicted the accused under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Co

DINESH MATHURversusO.P. ARORA AND ORS.

1997 INSC 41411 April 1997Leave Granted & Allowed

The dispute concerned a perpetual lease obtained in 1937 for premises used by the respondent to run a hotel. In 1991 the respondent sued the appellant alleging breach of a lease condition (clause 7(2)) and obtained an ad‑interim injunction restraining the appellant from continuing the hotel business. The Delhi High Cou

M/S. AVTAR SINGH & CO. PVT. LTD.versusM/S. S.S. ENTERPRISES AND ORS.

1996 INSC 35411 March 1996Disposed off

The parties were involved in two distribution agreements for the film 'Aag Ka Dariya', one dated 28 February 1985 with R. Venkatraman and a later one dated 7 October 1993 with M/s. Avtar Singh & Co. Pvt. Ltd. Three suits arose: a Bombay suit by Venkatraman seeking cancellation of the 1985 agreement, a Madras High Court

UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.versusJASWANT RAI KOCHHAR AND ORS.

1996 INSC 35511 March 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The Union of India issued a notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 to acquire land for a housing scheme. The government later intended to use the land for a District Centre, a commercial purpose, and the High Court quashed the notification on the ground that the change of user violated the pu

DURGA PRASADversusNAVEEN CHANDRA AND ORS.

1996 INSC 35611 March 1996Dismissed

The respondent filed a suit for specific performance which culminated in a decree on 14 January 1994. Respondent No.2 and others filed applications under Order 9 Rule 13 CPC to set aside the decree, while the appellant moved a preliminary objection challenging the maintainability of those applications. The trial court

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR.versusSHRI PRABHAKAR BHIKAJI INGLE

1996 INSC 35711 March 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent, a police officer, was removed from service by the Commissioner of Police under Article 311(2)(b) of the Constitution and challenged the removal before the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal (MAT), which confirmed the removal on March 6, 1995. He filed a Special Leave Petition (SLP) under Article 136, w

B. SHANKARANANDversusCOMMON CAUSE AND ORS.

1996 INSC 35811 March 1996Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined the interpretation of Section 4(e) of the All India Institute of Medical Sciences Act, 1956, concerning the composition of the institute's supreme body. The question was whether the five persons to be nominated by the Central Government must all be scientists, or whether only one must be a no

STATE OF U.P. AND ORS.versusNAND KISHORE SHUKLA AND ANR.

1996 INSC 35911 March 1996Appeal(s) allowed

Nano Kishore Shukla, a clerk in the Uttar Pradesh government, was removed from service after a disciplinary enquiry found five charges of selling and purchasing property without prior authority proved. The respondent did not cooperate with the enquiry, refusing to cross‑examine witnesses on several charges. The enquiry

STATE OF KERALAversusK. MOIDEENKUTTY AND ORS.

1996 INSC 36011 March 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Kerala appealed against the order of the Taluk Land Board, Kozhikode, which had first declared that declarant K. Moideenkutty possessed 3,171.53 acres of excess land under the Kerala Land Reforms Act, 1961. The Board later reopened the case and, on the basis that 877 tenants occupied 1,726.90 acres and tha

S.R. BOMMAIversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

1994 INSC 11111 March 1994

This landmark judgment concerns the scope of Article 356 of the Constitution of India, which empowers the President to impose President's Rule in states upon failure of constitutional machinery. The case consolidated challenges to proclamations dissolving legislative assemblies in Karnataka, Meghalaya, Nagaland, Madhya

STATE OF RAJASTHANversusTARACHAND AND ORS.

1997 INSC 13011 February 1997Dismissed

The petitioners challenged their promotions on the ground that their service records were not "outstanding" throughout the period considered, invoking Rule 28‑B of the Rajasthan Administrative Service Rules, 1954. The State argued that an amendment to Rule 28‑B made on 30‑Nov‑1991, which clarified the requirement, shou

RAJ KUMAR AND ORS. ETC.versusSHAKTI RAJ AND ORS. ETC.

1997 INSC 13111 February 1997Directions issued

The case concerned the recruitment of Canal Patwaris (Class III posts) in Haryana's Irrigation Department. The 1955 Patwaris Rules were amended by a 1970 notification requiring selection through the Subordinate Service Selection Board (SSSB). The Government, however, conducted examinations under the 1955 Rules, then ex

STATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIRversusDR. ASHOK KUMAR GUPTA AND ORS.

1996 INSC 5111 January 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Jammu & Kashmir appealed against a High Court order that had refused to condone a three‑month delay in filing an appeal against a promotion order for certain lecturers. The lecturers had been appointed on a regular basis but had not completed the seven years of regular service required under G.O. No. 517‑H

SH.MULKRAJversusSH. SUNDER DAS AND ORS.

1996 INSC 5211 January 1996Disposed off

The appellant, who had obtained possession of certain plots in New Delhi, filed a suit for a mandatory injunction against the third respondent, which became final. Subsequently, the appellant and the first two respondents each purchased a one‑third share of the property, leading to a partition suit that resulted in a f

STATE OF KARNATAKA AND ORS.versusB.S. NANJUNDAIAH

1996 INSC 5311 January 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Karnataka filed a land acquisition proceeding against B.S. Nanjundaiah under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. A notification under Section 4(1) was published on 6 December 1973 and a declaration under Section 6 on 3 February 1975, but the respondent challenged them for lack of an enquiry under Section 5‑A.

NARANBHAI DAYABHAI PATEL AND ANR.versusSULEMAN ISUBJI DADABHAI

1996 INSC 5411 January 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, Naranbhai Patel and another, became deemed purchasers of agricultural land under Section 32 of the Bombay Tenancy & Agricultural Lands Act, 1948, effective 1 April 1957. The respondent, the former landowner, executed a trust deed and registered it under the Bombay Public Trusts Act, 1950 without giving

SMT. AFSAR JAHAN BEGUM ETC.versusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND ORS. ETC.

1996 INSC 5511 January 1996Dismissed

The petitioners, private bus operators, sought to ply their vehicles on routes intersecting notified routes, invoking a modification under Section 102(2) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 that relaxes the distance restriction to 25 kilometres. The State Government had issued a notification allowing such relaxation but pr

STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND ORS.versusDR. RAMESH PRASAD

1996 INSC 5611 January 1996Appeal(s) allowed

Dr. Ramesh Prasad, a teacher at Moti Lal Nehru Medical College (a college maintained by the Uttar Pradesh Government), filed a writ petition seeking to remain in service until the age of 60, the superannuation age prescribed for university teachers under the U.P. State University Act. The Allahabad High Court ordered t

THE SPECIAL TEHSILDAR (LA) P.W.D. SCHEMES, VIJAYAWADAversusM.A. JABBAR

1995 INSC 2411 January 1995Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined whether a landowner, whose possession was taken in 1965, was entitled to the additional amount under section 23(1‑A) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 as amended by Amendment Act 68 of 1984. The notification under section 4(1) was published in 1980 and the award was made in 1983. The State ar

RAJ KUMAR AND ANR.versusSTATE OF PUNJAB AND ANR.

1995 INSC 2511 January 1995Dismissed

The State of Punjab acquired 56 acres of land for a grain market. The Land Acquisition Officer initially fixed the market value at Rs 24,000 per acre for the first 22 karmas (belting) and Rs 20,000 per acre for the rest. The Additional District Judge and later the Punjab & Haryana High Court enhanced the belting value

V.M. SALGOACAR AND BROTHER LTD.versusUNION OF INDIA

1995 INSC 2611 January 1995Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined an appeal by V.M. Salgoacar & Bros Ltd challenging a higher compensation of Rs 50 per square metre awarded by a District Judge for land acquired under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The Collector had fixed compensation at Rs 5 per square metre, basing it on the company's purchase price, its

SH. LOKRAJ AND ORS.versusKISHAN LAL AND ORS.

1995 INSC 2711 January 1995Appeal(s) allowed

Lokraj and others filed a civil suit for partition of lands listed in schedule B, seeking a one‑sixth share. The High Court held the lands to be Inam lands, and the division bench ruled the partition suit maintainable despite the lands having been abolished under the Andhra Pradesh (Telengana Area) Abolition of Inams A

SHEOJI MAHTO AND ORS.versusTHE ADDITIONAL MEMBER, BOARD OF REVENUE AND ORS.

1996 INSC 146110 December 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, who were raiyats holding land adjoining a parcel sold by the respondents, filed an application for pre-emption under Section 16(3)(i) of the Bihar Lands Ceiling Act within three months of the sale deed's registration. The Collector rejected the application, and the Patna High Court dismissed the appella

MAJOR YOGENDERA NARAIN YADAV ETC.versusSHRI BINDESHWAR PRASAD AND ORS. ETC.

1996 INSC 146210 December 1996Appeal(s) allowed

Major Yogendra Narain Yadav, a demobilised short‑commissioned army officer, was appointed a permanent Assistant Engineer in the Bihar Roads and Buildings Department with seniority back‑dated to 15 April 1963 under a 1969 Government circular. Several respondents, initially appointed as temporary Assistant Engineers and

MAJOR SINGHversusRATTAN SINGH (DEAD) BY LRS. AND ORS.

1996 INSC 146410 December 1996Dismissed

Daulat Singh executed a Will in 1974 bequeathing his property to his brother Rattan Singh, who died shortly thereafter. The appellant, a sister, challenged the Will and the respondents filed a suit for declaration based on it. The trial court dismissed the suit, a first appellate court affirmed, but the Punjab & Haryan

DAKSHABEN B. PATELversusTHE ADMINISTRATOR, U.T. OF DAMAN AND DIU AND 4 ORS.

1995 INSC 71210 November 1995Appeal(s) allowed

Dakshaben B. Patel appealed against the Administrator of the UT of Daman and Diu after the Central Administrative Tribunal extended her time by six months to obtain an M.Phil degree. She secured the degree within the extended period, and a notification dated 6 July 1992 confirmed her eligibility. The respondents had no

VIDESH SANCHAR NIGAM LTD.versusM. V. KAPITAN KUD AND ORS.

1995 INSC 71610 November 1995Appeal(s) allowed

Videsh Sanchar Nigam Ltd. sued the foreign vessel M.V. Kapitan Kud for damage to an international submarine cable, alleging the ship’s anchor caused a break. The Bombay High Court arrested the vessel and later ordered its release on security, a decision appealed to the Supreme Court. The Court examined whether the appe

STATE OF HARYANA AND ANR.versusRAGHUBIR DAYAL

1994 INSC 51110 November 1994Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Haryana appealed a High Court order that had set aside a land acquisition on the ground that the substance of the notification under Section 4(1) and the declaration under Section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, were not published in the locality. The Supreme Court examined whether the word “shall” in

DR. GANGA PRASAD VERMA ETC.versusSTTE OF BIHAR AND ORS. ETC.

1994 INSC 51210 November 1994Dismissed

Dr. Ganga Prasad Verma, an Assistant Professor, was promoted to Associate Professor in Neuro‑Surgery, a promotion challenged on the ground that he lacked the M.Ch. qualification required for the post. The High Court set aside the promotion and ordered a fresh consideration in light of the Supreme Court’s decision in Dr

STATE OF MADHYA PRADESHversusJAORA SUGAR MILLS LTD. AND ORS. ETC.

1996 INSC 117710 October 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Madhya Pradesh sought recovery of unpaid sugarcane prices and interest from Jaora Sugar Mills Ltd. and other factories under the Essential Commodities Act, 1955, the Sugarcane Control Order, 1966 and the M.P. Sugarcane (Regulation of Supply and Purchase) Act. The growers and factories had, in 1976, orally

INDER SINGH AND ANR.versusTHE FINANCIAL COMMISSIONER, PUNJAB AND ORS.

1996 INSC 117810 October 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, tenants of agricultural land, applied under Section 22 of the Pepsu Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1955 in 1960 but were rejected for not having twelve years' continuous possession. A second application in 1965 was allowed, and the Financial Commissioner confirmed the order. The Punjab and Haryana

DILIP KUMAR TRIPATHY AND ORS. ETC.versusSTATE OF ORISSA AND ORS.

1996 INSC 102610 September 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Orissa advertised for Sepoy recruitment and prepared a first list of 225 candidates, appointing all except six reserved‑category candidates. To fill remaining vacancies, a second list of about 200 candidates, drawn from earlier test‑takers, was prepared, but only 16 were provisionally appointed despite vac

SHATRUGHNA PRASAD SINHAversusRAJBHAU SURAJMAL RATHI AND ORS.

1996 INSC 102010 September 1996Case Partly allowed

The appellant, Shatrughna Prasad Sinha, was charged after an interview published in Stardust magazine allegedly outraged the religious feelings of the Marwari community and defamed them as a class. Complaints were filed in the magistrate courts of Pune and Nasik. The High Court held that the Pune complaint did not disc

NANDATAIversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS.

1996 INSC 102110 September 1996Dismissed

The petition arose from a land acquisition proceeding where a notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 was published and notice under Rule 1 was served on the father‑in‑law, who was the recorded owner of the land at the time. The petitioner, who had obtained the land through a divorce settlemen

NARAMADABEN MAGANLAL THAKKERversusPRANJIVANDAS MANGANLAL THAKKER AND ORS

1996 INSC 102310 September 1996Appeal(s) allowed

Motilal Gopalji owned a property and executed a gift deed on 15 May 1965 in favour of the first respondent, reserving his right to retain possession and collect rents during his lifetime. Within a month he executed a cancellation deed on 9 June 1965, stating that the conditional gift had not been accepted and that poss

SHRI ARVIND DATTATRAYA DHANDEversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS.

[1997] SUPP. 2 S.C.R. 23110 July 1997Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, an Excise Inspector, conducted a raid on a toddy contractor and seized adulterated toddy containing the poisonous substance chloral hydrate, leading to prosecution and cancellation of the contractor's licence. In retaliation, the contractor filed a complaint against the officer, which resulted in the Mah

THE STATE OF GUJARATversusANIRUDHSING AND ANR.

[1997] SUPP. 2 S.C.R. 23410 July 1997

The State of Gujarat appealed the acquittal of Anirudhsing Mahipatsingh Jadeja (Accused No.1) and Nilesh Kumar (Accused No.2) for the murder of MLA Popatbhai Sorathiya during an Independence Day ceremony. The trial court had held that the prosecution failed to prove the accused's presence, the weapon used, and the conf

PRABHAT KUMAR SHARMA AND ORS.versusSTATE OF U.P. AND ORS.

1996 INSC 72510 July 1996Dismissed

The petitioners, appointed as LT Grade teachers in a government‑aided private college, challenged the legality of their ad‑hoc appointments, alleging that the college had not complied with the procedure prescribed in Section 18 of the Uttar Pradesh Secondary Education Services Commission and Selection Board Act, 1982 a

SMT. MAQBOOL FATMA AND ORS.versusDEPUTY CUSTODIAN GENERAL, EVACUEE PROPERTY AND ANR.

1996 INSC 72610 July 1996Dismissed

The petitioners, heirs of evacuee Ashfaq Hussain, claimed rights over property vested in the Custodian under the Administration of Evacuee Properties Act, 1950. An order of the Assistant Custodian dated June 22, 1961 was communicated to shareholders, but a revision application under Section 27 was filed only on August

NATWARBHAI MAGAINBHAI PATELversusCOLLECTOR AND ORS.

1996 INSC 66410 May 1996Dismissed

Natwarbhai Magajnbhai Patel filed a Special Leave Petition challenging a Gujarat High Court order that vested excess vacant land, surrendered under Section 10(5) of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976, in the State. The petitioner argued that compensation should be paid before the government could utilize

CYCLE CORPORATION OF INDIA LTD.versusT.I. RALEIGH INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD. AND ORS.

1996 INSC 66810 May 1996Dismissed

The appellant, Cycle Corporation of India Ltd., sought rectification of the trade mark ‘Raleigh’ owned by the respondent, T.I. Raleigh Industries Pvt. Ltd., alleging that the proprietor had not used the mark bonafide for a continuous period of five years and that neither the respondent nor any registered user was using

NARINDRA KUMAR JAINversusTHE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

1996 INSC 67910 May 1996Dismissed

The appellant, Narindra Kumar Jain, served as manager of Kisan Rice Mills and was responsible for large stocks of paddy. During his tenure, 1,500 quintals of paddy were found missing, leading to charges under Sections 409 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code. The trial court acquitted him, but the Madhya Pradesh High Court

STATE OF ORISSA AND ORS.versusSLBARAM BARAL (SIMARAM BARAI)

1996 INSC 68010 May 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Orissa filed a suit for Rs.1,46,820 against S. Baram Baral, which was decreed ex parte. The appellant sought relief under Order 9 Rule 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, and the trial court set aside the ex parte decree subject to a payment of Rs.50. On revision, the Orissa High Court set aside the t

K.V. KRISHNAMANIversusLALIT ACADEMY

1996 INSC 68110 May 1996Dismissed

The appellant was initially appointed on an ad‑hoc basis and later placed on probation with a view to regularise his services. During the probation period his performance was deemed unsatisfactory and his services were terminated on 1 December 1989. He challenged the termination by filing a writ petition, arguing that

M/S ATIABIRA REGULATED MARKET COMMITIEEversusM/S GANESH RICE MILLS

1996 INSC 68210 May 1996Dismissed

The appellant, Mis Attiabira Regulated Market Committee, appealed against Mis Ganesh Rice Mills challenging the High Court's decision that the villages of Saharatikira and Bheden were outside the notified market area under the Orissa Agricultural Produce Market Act, 1956. The central issue was whether these villages fe

M/S. SHIV SHAKTI GOLD FINGERversusASSTI. COMMISSIONER, COMMERCIAL TAXES, JAIPUR

1996 INSC 68310 May 1996Appeal(s) allowed

Shiv Shakti Gold Finger applied for exemption from Rajasthan sales tax on its Gole Papad, a circular snack made of maida, salt, starch, papad soda, alum and food colour, invoking a 1970 notification that exempted "Papad and Badi (Mangori)". The Assistant Commissioner rejected the claim, holding that the exemption did n

UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.versusMIS. SHARMA COAL CO.

1996 INSC 68410 May 1996Disposed off

The Union of India (Railways) appealed a Guwahati High Court order that directed the Railways to allocate unutilised wagons to non‑priority articles after the exhaustion of all priority categories under its Preferential Traffic Scheme (PTS). The original PTS classified sponsored coal in Category C and non‑sponsored coa

DAULATRAMversusSAROOP RAM AND ANR.

1996 INSC 68510 May 1996Dismissed

Daulat Ram filed a suit seeking declaration and possession of land, alleging that a private partition had allotted the property to him and that he had singly redeemed the mortgage, thereby becoming a mortgagee by subrogation. The trial court and the Punjab & Haryana High Court held that the mortgage was redeemed jointl

RAMCHANDRA DAYARAM GAWANDEversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

1996 INSC 68610 May 1996Dismissed

The appellant, a State Police Service officer promoted to Superintendent in 1976, was placed on the select list in 1977 and given seniority from April 30, 1978. He claimed a year of allotment of 1972 under the seniority rules, which the Central Administrative Tribunal rejected. The Supreme Court examined whether the fa

SUKHBIR SINGH AND ORS.versusBRIJ PAL SINGH AND ORS.

1996 INSC 68710 May 1996Dismissed

The first petitioner purchased land from the respondent under a 1975 sale deed that included a reconveyance agreement. The respondent sued for specific performance, alleging the petitioner refused to execute the sale deed despite the respondent’s readiness and attendance at the Sub‑Registrar’s office on 9 March 1977, w

K. POSAYYA AND ORS.versusSPECIAL TAHSILDAR

1995 INSC 36610 May 1995Dismissed

The appellants, K. Posayya and others, owned 163.80 acres of rain‑fed agricultural land acquired under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 for the Vengalrayasagar project. The initial award fixed compensation at Rs 400 per acre; the Subordinate Judge enhanced it to Rs 22,000 per acre, but the Andhra Pradesh High Court reduc

LIC OF INDIA AND ANR.versusCONSUMER EDUCATION AND RESEARCH CENTRE AND ORS. ETC.

1995 INSC 36710 May 1995Dismissed

The Life Insurance Corporation (LIC) introduced a low‑premium term insurance policy (Table 58) but limited its availability to persons employed in government, semi‑government or reputed commercial firms. Several applicants were denied coverage and challenged the restriction as arbitrary and violative of Articles 14, 19

TEJ KAUR AND ANR.versusKIRPAL SINGH AND ANR.

1995 INSC 36810 May 1995Dismissed

The appellant challenged a decree confirming a lower court's finding that a 1967 will was not validly executed. The Punjab & Haryana High Court Division Bench was split, with one judge holding the will proved and the other holding it not proved; no majority opinion existed. The Supreme Court examined whether, under Sec

TEJ SINGHversusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ORS.

1994 INSC 20210 May 1994Disposed off

Tej Singh, a Gram Sewak, obtained an allotment of five bighas of government land in 1968 under the Rajasthan Colonisation (Medium & Minor Irrigation Projects Government Lands Allotment) Rules, 1968. In 1980 the Additional Collector cancelled the allotment under Rule 17‑A, alleging that Singh had concealed his employmen

THE UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.versusSHRI GURU CHARAN DASS

1997 INSC 40210 April 1997Dismissed

The respondent, a permanent U.D.C. employee of the Hirakund Project, was offered and accepted a temporary appointment in the Dandakarnya Project after the closure of his original project. The appointment letter stipulated a 25% deputation allowance for permanent or quasi‑permanent employees, along with other allowances

PUNJAB STATE CIVIL SUPPLIES CORPN., LTD., CHANDIGARH AND ORS.versusNARINDER SINGH NIRDOSH

1997 INSC 40310 April 1997Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent, an Inspector in the Punjab Civil Supplies Corporation, was found to have filled wheat bags with husk and misappropriated large quantities of wheat, and later repeated similar misconduct in collaboration with another inspector. After an enquiry, the disciplinary authority reduced his rank from Inspector

SH. J.P.S. SAROHA AND ANR.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ANR.

1997 INSC 40410 April 1997Dismissed

The appellants, two scientific assistants originally appointed in the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO), were transferred to the Director General of Inspection (DGI) and the Technical Committee (Engineers Stores) following a departmental trifurcation. They sought repatriation to DRDO, alleging that r

STATE OF BIHARversusKUMAR PROMOD NARAIN SINGH AND ORS.

1997 INSC 40510 April 1997Disposed off

The State of Bihar recruited for Class III posts through the Bihar State Selection Service Board, advertising 1,005 positions and receiving a large number of applications. After selection, the government claimed appointments were made based on pay scale and educational qualifications, without preparing a merit list or

STATE OF BIHARversusKAUSHAL KISHORE SINGH AND ORS.

1997 INSC 40610 April 1997Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined the recruitment of Class III posts by the Bihar State Selection Service Board, where no merit list was prepared and candidates were selected solely on educational qualifications and pay‑scale considerations. The High Court had held that such selection without a merit list and without calling

MAHENDRA RAGHUNATHDAS GUPTAversusVISHVANATH BHIKAJI MOGUL AND ORS.

1997 INSC 40710 April 1997Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, brother of the original tenant, continued to pay rent after the landlords directed payment to new persons and later sold the property to the respondents without giving the tenant notice of the sale. After a notice dated 29 September 1986 demanding arrears, the appellant tendered the rent by cheque to the

URBAN IMPROVEMENT TRUST, JODHPURversusGOKUL NARAIN AND ANR.

1996 INSC 50210 April 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The Urban Improvement Trust (Jodhpur) acquired land of Gokul Narain under Section 52 of the Rajasthan Urban Improvement Act, 1959 and paid compensation. The High Court later enhanced the compensation and, applying the Central Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (as amended), awarded solatium, interest and additional amount, whi

STANDARD GAMES ETC.versusSTATE OF UP. AND ORS. ETC.

1996 INSC 50010 April 1996Dismissed

The appellant installed a coin‑operated video‑game machine that lights up and starts a game when a coin is inserted. The issue before the Court was whether such a machine falls within the definition of "entertainment" under Section 2(g) of the U.P. Entertainment and Betting Act, 1979 and consequently attracts the enter

MOHAN SINGH ETCversusSTATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS. ETC.

1995 INSC 25910 April 1995Appeal(s) allowed

Mohan Singh, an Assistant in the Advocate‑General's Office, was promoted to Superintendent Grade‑I. Respondents Tarlok Singh and Deena Nath Singla filed a writ petition challenging the promotion, arguing that the vacancy was not a reserved one and that a direct promotion (double jump) was impermissible where a Superint

SH. JAI KISHANversusCOMMISSIONER OF POLICE AND ANR.

1995 INSC 26010 April 1995Dismissed

Jai Kishan was appointed as a temporary constable in the Delhi Police on 9 September 1982 and placed on probation as required by Rule 5(e) of the Central Services Temporary (Service) Rules, 1966. The rule mandates a two‑year probation, extendable up to three years, after which successful completion leads to confirmatio

RAMBHAI LAKHANBAI BHAKTversusSTATE OF GUJARAT AND ORS.

1995 INSC 26110 April 1995Dismissed

The petitioner, a landowner, challenged the acquisition of his land by the State of Gujarat, arguing that the notice issued under Section 5A(2) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 required a personal hearing which was not provided, and that the declaration under Section 6 was published beyond the one‑year limit. The noti

KANDENKUTTY AND ORS.versusSTATE OF KERALA AND ORS.

1997 INSC 24610 March 1997Dismissed

The petitioners challenged a land acquisition notification issued on 10 January 1981 under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (and the corresponding Kerala provision). They argued that the later denotification of part of the land under Section 48 disturbed the integrality of the original notification, rende

STATE OF M.P. AND ANR.versusBRIJESH KUMAR AWASTHI AND ORS.

1997 INSC 24710 March 1997Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Madhya Pradesh acquired forest land under Section 16 of the Indian Forest Act and, in lieu of compensation, transferred the land to the respondents. The respondents later sued for a declaration of title and compensation, and the Conservator of Forest colluded with them to obtain a compromise decree that se

HINDUSTAN EDUCATION SOCIETY AND ANR.versusSK. KALEEM SK. GULAM NABI AND ORS.

1997 INSC 24810 March 1997Appeal(s) allowed

The Hindustan Education Society appointed Sk. Kaleem as a teacher on a temporary basis for eleven months under a clear vacancy, as per the order dated 10 June 1992. The appellant sought regularisation of his service, but the Bombay High Court had held that the appointment was a permanent one and directed his regularisa

THE BIHAR STATE WATER DEVELOPMENT CORPORATIONversusSHRI ARUN KUMAR MISHRA AND ORS.

1997 INSC 24910 March 1997Dismissed

The case concerned a permanent employee of the Bihar Irrigation Department who was transferred on deputation to the Bihar State Water Development Corporation while retaining a lien on his original post. The corporation was subsequently wound up and the employees were to be accommodated in other departments; the employe

SRI SANJOY BHATTACHARJEEversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

1997 INSC 25010 March 1997Dismissed

Sanjoy Bhattacharjee, a diploma‑engineer, applied for a technician post and was placed on a waiting list after the 480 notified vacancies were filled. He filed an application before the Central Administrative Tribunal seeking his appointment according to his rank and a stay on fresh recruitment until the waiting list w

STATE OF HARYANAversusSURINDER KUMAR AND ORS.

1997 INSC 25110 March 1997Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined the claim of daily‑wage contract clerks employed by the State of Haryana for regularisation and equal pay with regular clerks. The High Court had ordered their regularisation and payment of equal wages, which the State appealed. The Court held that any appointment or regularisation must confo

THE DIRECTOR OF TRIBAL WELFAREversusLAVETI GIRI AND ORS.

1997 INSC 25310 March 1997

The Supreme Court examined a petition by the Director of Tribal Welfare seeking clarification on whether the Andhra Pradesh Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Backward Classes Rules for Issue of Community Certificates, 1997, complied with earlier Supreme Court guidelines on caste‑certificate issuance. The Court rev

SRI DEVENDRA PRASAD SHARMAversusTHE STATE OF MIZORAM AND ORS.

1997 INSC 25410 March 1997Dismissed

The petitioner, Srid... was promoted to Deputy Superintendent of Police in 1982, while the respondents were directly recruited to the same rank on 25 March 1982. The dispute centered on the inter‑se seniority between direct recruits and promotees under Rule 25(iii) of the Mizoram Police Service Rules, 1986, which manda

SUCHITRA NAGversusCOMMISSIONER, SANCHAITA INVESTMENTS

1995 INSC 18510 March 1995Appeal(s) allowed

The trial court decreed against the husband of S. Nag, ordering attachment of a flat. The husband appealed, and the Calcutta High Court affirmed the decree, focusing solely on the husband's liability. The wife (appellant) subsequently filed objections, asserting that she was the independent owner of the flat and had no

MISBAH ALAM SHAIKHversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR.

1997 INSC 12710 February 1997Disposed off

Misbah Alam Shaikh challenged the Maharashtra government's abolition of the State Minority Commission, arguing that the decision was mala fide and contrary to the National Commission for Minorities Act, 1992. The Supreme Court examined Sections 3 and 9 of the Act, which vest the duty of constituting a National Commissi

BIBI JAIBUNISHAversusJAGDISH PANDIT AND ORS.

1997 INSC 12810 February 1997Appeal(s) allowed

Bibi Jaibunisha sold a property to Jagdish Pandit by a registered conveyance dated 21‑02‑1969, which included an agreement that the property would be reconveyed for Rs 4,000. She filed a suit for specific performance of reconveyance on 07‑04‑1975. The trial court and the Patna High Court dismissed the suit, holding tha

STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR.versusDR. S.S. SRIVASTAVA AND ANR.

1997 INSC 12910 February 1997Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Maharashtra filed a contempt petition after the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) issued an interim direction ordering the government to consider the promotion of Dr. S.S. Srivastava to the Senior Scale and Junior Administrative Grade. The government had already examined the case on 7 June 1996 and con

BHURI NATH AND ORS.versusSTATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR AND ORS.

1997 INSC 1410 January 1997Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined the constitutionality of the Jammu & Kashmir Shri Mata Vaishno Devi Shrine Act, 1988, which transferred management of the shrine and its endowments to a statutory Board and extinguished the hereditary rights of Baridars to receive offerings. The Baridars argued that the Board was a "controlle

RAJESWARI AMMA AND ANR.versusJOSEPH AND ANR.

1995 INSC 1910 January 1995Appeal(s) allowed

The legal representatives of the deceased filed an execution petition that was granted by the District Munsif, directing delivery of possession of an undivided property to three decree‑holders. In the subsequent revision before the Madras High Court, only two of the three decree‑holders were impleaded, and the order in

KARNAIL SINGHversusANIL KUMAR AND ANR.

1995 INSC 2010 January 1995Dismissed

The appellant purchased a share of joint family property from his sister Neeru, who sold it by a registered deed on 22 January 1985. The brother, Anil Kumar, who was not a party to the sale, filed a suit for pre-emption under clause (ii) of Section 15(1)(b) of the Punjab Pre-emption Act, 1913. The trial court and the a

SMT. PREM LATA AND ANR.versusMIS ISHAR DASS CHAMAN LAL AND ORS .

1995 INSC 2110 January 1995Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, the widow and alleged son of a deceased partner, sought the accounts of an unregistered partnership firm that had dissolved upon the partner's death. They invoked Clause 16 of the partnership deed, which mandated referral of any dispute to named arbitrators, and filed a suit under Section 20 of the Arbi

CHIEF MEDICAL OFFICERversusKHADEER KHADRI

1995 INSC 2210 January 1995Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent, a government employee who joined service in 1951, claimed that his date of birth recorded as 14 November 1933 was incorrect and sought correction to 15 July 1934 in 1991. The Andhra Pradesh Public Employees (Recording and Alteration of Date of Birth) Rules, 1984 required an application for correction wi

AYUB KHANversusDEEP KUMAR CHAWLA AND ORS. ETC.

1995 INSC 2310 January 1995Dismissed

Ayub Khan purchased a family property from Gopal Krishan Chawla, the Karta of a Hindu joint family, after obtaining a decree for specific performance. The Karta's children, including his daughters Meeka and Madhu, and the tenants of the property filed suits claiming pre-emption under the Punjab Pre-emption Act, 1913. T

HARI SHAMRAO HIMJE AND ORS.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

1996 INSC 14479 December 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, who were promoted from Data Processing Assistants to Data Processing Supervisors, were placed in the entry‑level Grade ‘A’ (pay Rs.1600‑2600) instead of the higher promotional Grade ‘B’ (pay Rs.2000‑3300). They contended that this classification was unjust and sought to be fitted into Grade ‘B’ with the

UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.versusA.J. FABIAN

1996 INSC 14489 December 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent, a retired railway chief inspector, was given six opportunities to switch from the Provident Fund Scheme to the Pension Scheme but never exercised the option. In 1993 he applied to be allowed to opt for the pension scheme; the Government rejected the request and he filed a petition before the Central Adm

DHIRENDER SINGH ETCversusSTATE OF HARYANA AND ORS.

1996 INSC 14499 December 1996Dismissed

The appellants, police officers, were promoted on an ad‑hoc basis under the sports quota by the Superintendent of Police on 16 January 1990, without the required approval of the DIG. The promotion order stipulated that the officers could be reverted at any time without notice and without seniority rights. The appellant

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