“In an organisation like CRPF, which is India’s largest paramilitary Force, a member with a mental condition cannot be expected to perform his duties with utmost commitment and discipline.”
“The Supreme Court has declined to stay the Order dated 05-07-2023. Therefore, propriety demands that this Court ought not have passed any interim order which had the effect of staying the Order dated 05-07-2023 and other consequential orders.”
Delhi High Court observed that Bangalore Water Supply and Sewerage Board v. R. Rajappa, 1978 (3) SCR 207 acts as a North star for the courts to reach the conclusion regarding the applicability of the Industrial Dispute Act to an organization by laying down elaborate guidelines with respect to the definition of ‘industry’ under Section 2(j) of the Industrial Dispute Act.
Allahabad High Court said that the Tribunal has not considered the effect of acquittal of the petitioner from the identical criminal charges. The judgment is completely silent about the same. This is an apparent perversity on the part of the Tribunal.
Sections 20-A and 41(ha) of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 expresses the legislative intent to not grant injunctions relating to infrastructure projects where delay may be caused by such an injunction. Thus, the role of Courts in this exercise is to interfere to the minimum extent so that public work projects are not impeded or stalled.
Employees guilty of submitting forged documents to their employer must be dealt with strictly and no sympathy or compassion can be shown to such an employee.
Delhi High Court observed that if a termination order is founded on allegations, the order is stigmatic and punitive, and the services of an employee cannot be dispensed with without affording him an opportunity of defending the accusations/allegations made against him in a full-fledged inquiry
Supreme Court said that prior approval of the Director of Education is mandatory as per Section 18 of the Rajasthan Non-Governmental Educational Institutions Act, 1989, on termination after the disciplinary proceedings.
Grant of injunction in favour of the plaintiff company would cause irreparable injury to the Artist which cannot be compensated in monetary terms as he would be forced to continue with the contract of personal service even though mutual trust has been lost between parties.
Justice Chandra Dhari Singh observed that the entire saga of the series of appointments, absorption and promotion of Siddharth Rao, Secretary of Delhi Legislative Assembly, is tainted with irregularities and illegalities, de-hors the rules or due process of law, without approval by the competent authority and hence vitiated.
In the present case, a victim of sexual assault, aged about 13 years, had filed a writ petition forterminating her pregnancy caused due to illegal act perpetuated upon her.
The Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas in the Union Government had instituted proceedings under Sections 14(2) read with Section 15(2) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (Act) for a declaration that the majority of the members of the Arbitral Tribunal were de jure/de facto unable to discharge their functions and consequently their mandate stands terminated in terms of Section 14 of the Act.
Gujarat High Court: The instant petitions came up before the Court challenging the Award of the Labour Court, Vadodara, whereby which it
Punjab & Haryana High Court: While allowing the instant petition filed against the order, whereby the services of the petitioners were terminated
Delhi High Court: In a case seeking grant of medical termination of pregnancy by a 16-year-old rape victim (‘petitioner’), Yashwant Varma J.,
Delhi High Court: A Division Bench of Sathish Chandra Sharma, CJ and Subramonium Prasad, J refused termination of pregnancy to an unmarried
Madras High Court: Abdul Quddhose, J. permitted the termination of pregnancy of 27+ week of a minor child victim of offence under
Bombay High Court: A.S. Chandurkar and Urmila Joshi-Phalke, JJ. allowed a writ petition which was filed by a minor victim of sexual
Supreme Court: While addressing a case raising significant question of law on principles governing compassionate appointment, the Division Bench of D.Y. Chandradhud
Gujarat High Court: Biren Vaishnav, J. allowed a petition which was filed challenging the order of termination passed by the respondent –