Gujarat High Court observed that due to COVID-19 lockdown it was impossible for the petitioner to get Form-F and denying adjournment after taking note of this fact results in breach of principle of natural justice.
The Court has a duty to ensure compliance with the principles of natural justice and when an award has been passed without complying with the mandatory principles of natural justice, this Court being the custodian of rights and liberties of parties must take its guard to correct the infirmities which have already been carried out.
Upon the invitation of the National Commission for Protection of Child Rights (NCPCR), Symbiosis Law School, Pune, a constituent of Symbiosis International
Whether or not an employee should be permitted to retire in accordance with the Scheme in the event that the Scheme itself provides for retirement to become effective upon completion of the notice period. The VRS that was implemented by the Department is, in essence, an expression of the Department’s aim to prune the overstaffed positions.
Bombay High Court: The Division Bench of M. S. Sonak and Bharat P. Deshpande, JJ., quashed the impugned order of
It suffered from non-application of mind and was in violation of mandatory requirement of section 75 (6) of the CGST Act.
“Despite the claimants’ assertion that they seek only to examine the Constitution, the true subject matter of the present application is the propriety of the claimants’ convictions, which were the remit of their respective cases in the High Court and Court of Appeal. This application for permission amounts to a collateral attack on the earlier criminal decisions.”
AFT held that there was no violation of principles of natural justice while discharging the applicant from service. Further, there is no place for generosity or misplaced sympathy on the part of the judicial forums particularly in the matter of recruitment and employment in a sensitive establishment like the Armed Forces.
by Dhruv S. Patel*
Allahabad High Court: In a proceeding initiated by member of the UP Legislative Council- Lal Bihari Yadav, under Article 226
Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court: While deciding the instant petition wherein a person’s engagement as Rehbar-e-Khel was cancelled
In Union of India v. W.N. Chadha,1993 Supp (4) SCC 260, the bench of S. Ratnavel Pandian and K. Jayachandra Reddy, JJ explained the exclusion of the application of the principle of audi alteram partem in relation to an accused at the stage of investigation.
Kerala High Court: In a petition challenging the order dismissing the application filed under Section 33(2)(b) of the Industrial Disputes
Manipur High Court: In a writ petition filed to quash the dismissal order dated 18.1.2005 on the ground that it
Supreme Court: In a special leave petition against the impugned judgment passed by the Bombay High Court, whereby, the Court dismissed the
“The scenario is that any order or judgment passed by this Court becomes a reportable exercise to create more volumes of reported cases! This thus has a possibility at times of causing some confusion on the legal principles prevalent.”
Armed Forces Tribunal (Lucknow Bench): The Division Bench of Justice Umesh Chandra Srivastava, Member (J) and Vice Admiral Abhay Raghunath Karve, Member
“The claim pertains to events that occurred between 2016 and 2018 and was then not followed up until 2022, a few days before the sentence was to be carried out. For all these reasons we are satisfied that OC 173 is without merit and an abuse of process and cannot therefore be a basis for us to grant a stay of execution.”
Calcutta High Court: Sugato Majumdar, J. allowed a criminal appeal which was assailed against the judgment and order of Additional Sessions Judge
“The State being a welfare State governed by the rule of law, cannot arrogate to itself a status beyond what is provided by the statute”