{"id":48471,"date":"2016-05-21T12:29:35","date_gmt":"2016-05-21T06:59:35","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=48471"},"modified":"2016-07-25T17:36:48","modified_gmt":"2016-07-25T12:06:48","slug":"2016-scc-vol-4-may-14-2016-part-4","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2016\/05\/21\/2016-scc-vol-4-may-14-2016-part-4\/","title":{"rendered":"2016 SCC Vol. 4 May 14, 2016 Part 4"},"content":{"rendered":"

Armed Forces \u2014 Promotion \u2014 Criteria\/Eligibility \u2014 Change in policy \u2014 Applicability of changed policy:<\/strong> Benefit of gallantry awards was given to respondent for two Selection Boards when Policy in force had no restriction on number of times such benefit could be given but later Policies restricted benefit of gallantry awards to two Selection Boards, by the time respondent officer concerned came to be considered for third promotion, also, one of the earlier posts to which respondent had been promoted becoming a non-selection post, hence, as Respondent, already having been granted benefit of gallantry awards in two Selection Boards, as per the extant Policy could not be granted benefit for the third time. [Union of India v. Chander Ballabh Sharma, (2016) 4 SCC 555<\/a>]<\/p>\n

Constitution of India \u2014 Art. 14 \u2014 Allocation of property\/natural resources\/trade outlets:<\/strong> Proper mode of allocation of property\/natural resources\/trade outlets, is by public auction properly conducted. In this case, allotment of shed concerned for factory purposes was set aside by High Court on grounds that said allotment was made (i) without any public auction or inviting tenders, and (ii) without granting any opportunity of hearing or issuing any show-cause notice to R-1 writ petitioner in compliance with directions issued by High Court in an earlier writ petition, which was filed by appellant and decided by quashing the allotment of shed concerned made in favour of R-1. Held, that allotment in favour of appellant was made after issuing requisite notices to R-1 and affording adequate opportunity to it. Hence, view taken by High Court that no opportunity was given to R-1, was wrong. However, observation made by High Court that the allotment order was issued without any public auction or inviting tenders and as such the same was unsustainable, held, was absolutely correct. Thus, authorities directed to conduct public auction or invite tenders for allotment of shed concerned at present market value. [Metal Seams Co. of India (P) Ltd. v. Avadh Delicacies, (2016) 4 SCC 564<\/a>]<\/p>\n

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 \u2014 S. 154 \u2014 Delay in lodging\/filing FIR \u2014 Explanation by prosecution for \u2014 Need of:<\/strong> Delay in setting law into motion by lodging of complaint and registration of FIR is normally viewed by courts with suspicion because there is possibility of concoction and embellishment of the occurrence. So it becomes necessary for prosecution to satisfactorily explain the delay. Object of insisting upon a prompt lodging of report, is to obtain early information not only regarding assailants but also about part played by accused, nature of incident and names of witnesses. [Gajanan Dashrath Kharate v. State of Maharashtra, (2016) 4 SCC 604<\/a>]<\/p>\n

Customs House Agents Licensing Regulations, 1984 \u2014 Regns. 12, 13 and 14 \u2014 Revocation of licence:<\/strong> Tribunal can dislodge or confirm or modify order of competent authority in appeal. However, when a jurisdiction is exercised, it has to be exercised in accordance with law, regard being had to the factual matrix of the case. Enquiry officer had held that misconduct alleged against respondent that it had allowed unauthorised persons to handle shipping bills stood proved, and accordingly had opined that articles of charge under Regns. 12, 13(b), 13(d), 20(1)(c), 13(n) of Customs House Agents Licensing Regulations, 2004 were established. Enquiry report which formed plinth of order of Commissioner demonstrated that by virtue of transfer of licence in contravention of Regulations, on many an occasion, immense financial loss has been caused to Revenue. Hence, in the present case, discretion exercised by the Tribunal showing leniency and holding that revocation for a period of three years from the date of suspension of licence would be sufficient, held to be inappropriate. [Commr. of Customs v. K.M. Ganatra & Co., (2016) 4 SCC 687<\/a>]<\/p>\n

Employees\u2019 State Insurance Act, 1948 \u2014 S. 2(9) \u2014 \u201cEmployee\u201d \u2014 Scope:<\/strong> Definition of \u201cemployee\u201d is very wide and includes persons employed for wages in factory or establishment, on any work of, or incidental or preliminary to or connected with work. Thus, casual employees engaged on race days for issue of tickets in Racecourse\/Turf Club and employed for part of wage period, are \u201cemployees\u201d coming within preview of ESI Act. [Royal Western India Turf Club Ltd. v. Employees\u2019 State Insurance Corpn., (2016) 4 SCC 521<\/a>]<\/p>\n

Excise \u2014 Valuation \u2014 Receipt of advance payments from buyer \u2014 Effect of, on determination of transaction value of goods:<\/strong> Onus is on Revenue to establish by adducing cogent material evidence that advances obtained from a buyer had really been instrumental in depression of sale price. Furthermore, inclusion of notional interest in the assessable value will depend upon the facts of each case. [CCE v. Hindustan National Glass & Industries Ltd., (2016) 4 SCC 675<\/a>]<\/p>\n

Family and Personal Laws \u2014 Muslim Law \u2014 Gift \u2014 Hiba-bil-musha:<\/strong> A hiba of an undivided share in property which is capable of division is invalid. Exceptions to the rule are: where the gift is made by one co-heir to the other; where the gift is of share in a zamindari or taluka; where gift is of a share in freehold property in a large commercial town, and where gift is of share in a land company. While gift of immovable property is not complete unless the donor parts with the possession and donee enters into possession but if the property is in occupation of tenants, gift can be completed by delivery of title deed or by request to tenants to attorn to the donee or by mutation. Gift of property which is capable of division is irregular but can be perfected and rendered valid by subsequent partition or delivery. [Khursida Begum v. Mohd. Farooq, (2016) 4 SCC 549<\/a>]<\/p>\n

Infrastructure Laws \u2014 Energy and Power \u2014 Electricity \u2014 Unauthorised use:<\/strong> As per Cl. 16.5 of Tariff Noti. dt. 21-6-1993, if during any month in a financial year the actual maximum demand of a consumer exceeded 110 per cent of the contract demand then the highest demand so recorded had to be treated as the contract demand for that financial year and the minimum base charges, both in respect of maximum demand and energy charge had to be paid on that basis. Respondent unit had entered into an agreement with appellant Board for a contract demand of 500 kVA and as per reading recorded by maximum demand indicator (MDI) meter, for six months during April 1999 to March 2000 the maximum demand of respondent had increased beyond the contracted load of 500 kVA which was more than 110% of the contract load, thus, the connected load exceeded 500 kVA. Hence, the denial of benefit of exemption from payment of minimum guarantee charges to respondent unit by appellant Board, was proper. Amount demanded from respondent by appellant Board for the year 1999-2000 as per the tariff notification concerned, was legal and valid. [Bihar SEB v. Bhola Ram Steel (P) Ltd., (2016) 4 SCC 680<\/a>]<\/p>\n

Land Acquisition Act, 1894 \u2014 Ss. 25 and 23 \u2014 Effect of amendment by Act 68 of 1984 w.e.f. 24-9-1984 \u2014 S. 4 Notification issued on 19-9-1983:<\/strong> Prior to Amendment Act 68 of 1984, amount of compensation that could be awarded by court was limited to amount claimed by applicant but now S. 25 as amended coming into effect on 24-9-1984 stipulates that amount of compensation awarded by court is not to be lower than amount awarded by Collector under S. 11. Cap on maximum having been expressly omitted, and cap that is put is only on minimum, it is clear that amount of compensation that a court can award is no longer restricted to amount claimed by applicant. Duty of court is to award just and fair compensation taking into consideration true market value and other relevant factors, irrespective of claim made by owner. [Ashok Kumar v. State of Haryana, (2016) 4 SCC 544<\/a>]<\/p>\n

Mines and Minerals \u2014 Minor minerals: <\/strong>New procedure of grant of mining leases only by e-tendering in State of U.P. as per Government of U.P. Order dt. 31-5-2012 confirmed by High Court in Nar Narain Mishra<\/em>, 2013 SCC OnLine All 13919, hence, impugned order of High Court quashing mining lease of appellants granted in violation of said new policy, affirmed. [Sulekhan Singh & Co. v. State of U.P., (2016) 4 SCC 663<\/a>]<\/p>\n

Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 \u2014 S. 18 \u2014 Recovery of 1 kg of opium:<\/strong> As the search of appellant was conducted in presence of and under the instructions of a gazetted officer, it was not SI alone who was involved in the investigation, hence, there was no reason to differ from the view taken by High Court that appellant was guilty under S. 18 for being in possession of 1 kg of opium. [Surender v. State of Haryana, (2016) 4 SCC 617<\/a>]<\/p>\n

Penal Code, 1860 \u2014 S. 193 \u2014 Perjury:<\/strong> Merely because an expert has tendered an opinion while also furnishing the basis of the opinion and that too without being conclusive and definite, it cannot be said that he has committed perjury so as to help somebody. And, mere rejection of the expert evidence by itself may not also warrant initiation of proceedings under Section 340 CrPC. [Prem Sagar Manocha v. State (NCT of Delhi), (2016) 4 SCC 571<\/a>]<\/p>\n

Penal Code, 1860 \u2014 S. 302 \u2014 Murder of wife by strangulation: <\/strong>Conviction for murder of wife by strangulation, restored, on the basis of circumstantial evidence, as motive, and strangulation by medical evidence, established.\u00a0 [State of A.P. v. Patchimala Vigneswarudu, (2016) 4 SCC 611<\/a>]<\/p>\n

Penal Code, 1860 \u2014 Ss. 120-B and 302\/149 and Ss. 143, 147, 148, 341 and 109:<\/strong> Proof of conspiracy is strictly conditional upon there being reasonable grounds to believe that two or more persons had conspired together to commit an offence. There was no cogent or positive evidence to prove conspiracy to murder in present case and no evidence was produced to link recovery of mobile phone to any accused. Besides, not identifying actual number of assailants was a major lacuna hitting root of prosecution case and material alterations were discernible in testimonies of all witnesses. Hence, acquittal confirmed. [B. Virupakshaiah v. State of Karnataka, (2016) 4 SCC 595<\/a>]<\/p>\n

Penal Code, 1860 \u2014 Ss. 301 and 300 Firstly [S. 302 or S. 304 Pt. I] \u2014 Transfer of malice:<\/strong> Conviction and sentence passed by trial court under S. 302 IPC, restored as High Court in converting conviction from S. 302 to S. 304 Pt. I has failed to take into consideration doctrine of transfer of malice as provided in S. 301 IPC. Intention on the part of respondent-accused in causing bodily injury as is likely to cause death was not a disputed fact. It cannot be believed that respondent did not know about likelihood of causing death, though, he may not know as to whom he is causing bodily harm, but his act clearly attracts ingredients of S. 300 IPC. [State of Rajasthan v. Ram Kailash, (2016) 4 SCC 590<\/a>]<\/p>\n

Penal Code, 1860 \u2014 Ss. 302 and 323 r\/w S. 34 \u2014 Murder \u2014 Dying declaration \u2014 Reliability:<\/strong> A valid dying declaration may be made without obtaining a certificate of fitness of declarant by a medical officer. [Gulzari Lal v. State of Haryana, (2016) 4 SCC 583<\/a>]<\/p>\n

Punjab Utilisation of Land and Allotment of Plots and Improvement Trust Rules, 1975 \u2014 R. 7(ii):<\/strong> \u201cLocal displaced person\u201d is a person who is owner of a property for a continuous period of two years immediately before first publication of Scheme by Trust under S. 36 of Punjab Town Improvement Act, 1922 and whose land is acquired by Trust for execution of a scheme. It cannot be held that once landowner is allotted lands as per Rules as a local displaced person, thereafter even if more of his property is acquired at a subsequent stage or at a different place, he will not be a local displaced person. Local displaced person has to be understood with reference to acquisition concerned. [Jaidev Inder Singh v. Amritsar Improvement Trust, (2016) 4 SCC 599<\/a>]<\/p>\n

Service Law \u2014 Appointment \u2014 Judicial review\/Validity of appointment:<\/strong> As R-1, in-service candidate who challenged appointment of appellant, direct recruit, to post of clerk on ground that single post of clerk ought to be filled by promotion in terms of Regulations (i) is retiring during pendency of proceedings; (ii) there is no in-service candidate other than respondent claiming candidature for said post; (iii) appellant working continuously on said post for last 36 years and duly qualified; (iv) no prejudice caused to anyone in case appellant allowed to continue on the post, hence, it is directed that appellant be allowed to continue on post of clerk until his retirement. Further directed that on appellant demitting office, post in question be filled by promoting suitable in-service candidate as per rules and in case number of posts have increased then as per applicable norms. [Sanjay Kumar Upadhyay v. Palak Dhari Yadav, (2016) 4 SCC 621<\/a>]<\/p>\n

Tenancy and Land Laws \u2014 Ceiling on Land \u2014 Determination of excess area \u2014 Clerical mistakes in identification of the land concerned: <\/strong>Adherence to statutory mandates and procedures, is mandatory for substitution of plots already notified as ceiling surplus, by other non-notified plots to correct purported clerical mistakes. Non-compliance therewith, would make such corrections illegal. Substituting plots simply by issuing handwritten corrigendum, illegal and impermissible even if it is a correction of clerical mistake. [Vipinchandra Vadilal Bavishi v. State of Gujarat, (2016) 4 SCC 531<\/a>]<\/p>\n

Town Planning \u2014 Illegal\/Unauthorised Constructions\/Development\/Encroachment: <\/strong>Eviction notice by Municipality to small shops on the side of road\/State Highway leading to Shirdi Shrine in violation of town plan and statutory mandates, affirmed, and Government directed to provide alternative land in the vicinity or in alternative to pay compensation of Rs 20 lakhs and Rs 15 lakhs to big and small shops, respectively. [Sayyed Ratanbhai Sayeed v. Shirdi Nagar Panchayat, (2016) 4 SCC 631<\/a>]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Armed Forces \u2014 Promotion \u2014 Criteria\/Eligibility \u2014 Change in policy \u2014 Applicability of changed policy: Benefit of gallantry awards was given to <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":102451,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[5,16],"tags":[4751],"class_list":["post-48471","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casesreported","category-supremecourtcases","tag-scc"],"yoast_head":"\n2016 SCC Vol. 4 May 14, 2016 Part 4 | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2016\/05\/21\/2016-scc-vol-4-may-14-2016-part-4\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"2016 SCC Vol. 4 May 14, 2016 Part 4\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Armed Forces \u2014 Promotion \u2014 Criteria\/Eligibility \u2014 Change in policy \u2014 Applicability of changed policy: Benefit of gallantry awards was given to\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2016\/05\/21\/2016-scc-vol-4-may-14-2016-part-4\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2016-05-21T06:59:35+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-07-25T12:06:48+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/01\/scccover-28.1.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1330\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"887\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Sucheta\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Sucheta\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"11 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2016\/05\/21\/2016-scc-vol-4-may-14-2016-part-4\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2016\/05\/21\/2016-scc-vol-4-may-14-2016-part-4\/\",\"name\":\"2016 SCC Vol. 4 May 14, 2016 Part 4 | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2016\/05\/21\/2016-scc-vol-4-may-14-2016-part-4\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2016\/05\/21\/2016-scc-vol-4-may-14-2016-part-4\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/01\/scccover-28.1.jpg\",\"datePublished\":\"2016-05-21T06:59:35+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-07-25T12:06:48+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/7416b8c43cd3a0a3412cf97fc17b54fa\"},\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2016\/05\/21\/2016-scc-vol-4-may-14-2016-part-4\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2016\/05\/21\/2016-scc-vol-4-may-14-2016-part-4\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2016\/05\/21\/2016-scc-vol-4-may-14-2016-part-4\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/01\/scccover-28.1.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/01\/scccover-28.1.jpg\",\"width\":1330,\"height\":887},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2016\/05\/21\/2016-scc-vol-4-may-14-2016-part-4\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"2016 SCC Vol. 4 May 14, 2016 Part 4\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/7416b8c43cd3a0a3412cf97fc17b54fa\",\"name\":\"Sucheta\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/530d4c250404c869212316d6351878b83f86bf27648031b1e6d4857a4bae4b88?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/530d4c250404c869212316d6351878b83f86bf27648031b1e6d4857a4bae4b88?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Sucheta\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/legal_editor\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"2016 SCC Vol. 4 May 14, 2016 Part 4 | SCC Times","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2016\/05\/21\/2016-scc-vol-4-may-14-2016-part-4\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"2016 SCC Vol. 4 May 14, 2016 Part 4","og_description":"Armed Forces \u2014 Promotion \u2014 Criteria\/Eligibility \u2014 Change in policy \u2014 Applicability of changed policy: Benefit of gallantry awards was given to","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2016\/05\/21\/2016-scc-vol-4-may-14-2016-part-4\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2016-05-21T06:59:35+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-07-25T12:06:48+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1330,"height":887,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/01\/scccover-28.1.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Sucheta","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Sucheta","Est. reading time":"11 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2016\/05\/21\/2016-scc-vol-4-may-14-2016-part-4\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2016\/05\/21\/2016-scc-vol-4-may-14-2016-part-4\/","name":"2016 SCC Vol. 4 May 14, 2016 Part 4 | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2016\/05\/21\/2016-scc-vol-4-may-14-2016-part-4\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2016\/05\/21\/2016-scc-vol-4-may-14-2016-part-4\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/01\/scccover-28.1.jpg","datePublished":"2016-05-21T06:59:35+00:00","dateModified":"2016-07-25T12:06:48+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/7416b8c43cd3a0a3412cf97fc17b54fa"},"breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2016\/05\/21\/2016-scc-vol-4-may-14-2016-part-4\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2016\/05\/21\/2016-scc-vol-4-may-14-2016-part-4\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2016\/05\/21\/2016-scc-vol-4-may-14-2016-part-4\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/01\/scccover-28.1.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/01\/scccover-28.1.jpg","width":1330,"height":887},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2016\/05\/21\/2016-scc-vol-4-may-14-2016-part-4\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"2016 SCC Vol. 4 May 14, 2016 Part 4"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/7416b8c43cd3a0a3412cf97fc17b54fa","name":"Sucheta","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/530d4c250404c869212316d6351878b83f86bf27648031b1e6d4857a4bae4b88?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/530d4c250404c869212316d6351878b83f86bf27648031b1e6d4857a4bae4b88?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Sucheta"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/legal_editor\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/01\/scccover-28.1.jpg","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":253848,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/09\/08\/gallantry-medal\/","url_meta":{"origin":48471,"position":0},"title":"HP HC | \u201cDispatching the gallantry medal directly to the writ petitioner through courier amount to breach of protocol\u201d; Such awards must be given only in ceremonial functions of Independence Day\/ Republic Day","author":"Editor","date":"September 8, 2021","format":false,"excerpt":"Himachal Pradesh High Court: Sureshwar Thakur, J. disposed of the petition by granting mandamus regarding quick conferment of medals in the manner as prescribed by law. The facts of the case are such that instant petition was filed for grant of monetary as well as other benefits which are admissible\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":336435,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/12\/02\/sc-denies-retrospective-promotion-and-notional-benefits-to-superannuated-employee\/","url_meta":{"origin":48471,"position":1},"title":"SC denies retrospective promotion and notional benefits to superannuated employee under Rule 54(1)(a) of WB Service Rules","author":"Editor","date":"December 2, 2024","format":false,"excerpt":"\u201cPromotion only becomes effective upon the assumption of duties on the promotional post and not on the date of occurrence of the vacancy or the date of recommendation.\u201d","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"promotion to superannuated employee","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/12\/promotion-to-superannuated-employee.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/12\/promotion-to-superannuated-employee.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/12\/promotion-to-superannuated-employee.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/12\/promotion-to-superannuated-employee.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":309931,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/12\/22\/air-force-tribunal-quasi-judicial-body-with-governing-legislation-cannot-direct-formation-of-policy-supreme-court\/","url_meta":{"origin":48471,"position":2},"title":"Air Force Tribunal a quasi-judicial body with governing legislation, cannot direct formation of a policy: Supreme Court","author":"Ridhi","date":"December 22, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"\u201cChallenging the basis of promotion after having participated in the process on consideration of promotion and having been declared unsuccessful thereunder, is not a valid ground to impugn the policy\/method\u201d","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Air Force Tribunal","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/12\/Air-Force-Tribunal.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/12\/Air-Force-Tribunal.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/12\/Air-Force-Tribunal.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/12\/Air-Force-Tribunal.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":321951,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/05\/13\/bhc-directs-aai-to-grant-maternity-benefits-to-employee-for-third-child-legal-news-2\/","url_meta":{"origin":48471,"position":3},"title":"\u2018Objective of AAI (Leave) Regulations, 2003 is not to curb population\u2019; Bombay HC directs AAI to grant maternity benefits to employee for third child","author":"Simranjeet","date":"May 13, 2024","format":false,"excerpt":"The respect and protection of a woman and of maternity should be raised to the position of an inalienable social duty and should become one of the principles of human morality.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Bombay High Court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Bombay-High-Court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Bombay-High-Court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Bombay-High-Court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Bombay-High-Court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":313331,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/02\/07\/benefit-of-duty-drawback-under-exim-policy-available-to-civil-construction-supreme-court-legal-news\/","url_meta":{"origin":48471,"position":4},"title":"SC upholds Karnataka HC\u2019s decision granting 15% interest on belated refund of Duty Drawback to Civil Construction under Exim Policy 1992-1997","author":"Editor","date":"February 7, 2024","format":false,"excerpt":"\u201cThe benefit of duty drawback would take effect from the date of enforcement of the Exim Policy and in case of belated refund of duty drawback, interest rate fixed by the Central Government at the relevant point of time is applicable\u201d.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Duty drawback under Exim Policy to civil construction","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Duty-drawback-under-Exim-Policy-to-civil-construction.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Duty-drawback-under-Exim-Policy-to-civil-construction.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Duty-drawback-under-Exim-Policy-to-civil-construction.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Duty-drawback-under-Exim-Policy-to-civil-construction.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":58481,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2016\/07\/27\/brave-soldier-needs-to-be-recognised-for-his-commitment-to-serve-the-nation-with-dignity-and-honour\/","url_meta":{"origin":48471,"position":5},"title":"Brave soldier needs to be recognised for his commitment to serve the nation with dignity and honour","author":"Sucheta","date":"July 27, 2016","format":false,"excerpt":"Delhi High Court: \u00a0Discussing the various parameters for grant of a President's Police Medal\/Police Medal to members of the police force for acts of valour and conspicuous devotion to duty,\u00a0 the Division Bench of Pradeep Nandrajog and Prathiba Rani, JJ.\u00a0 observed that if a deserving soldier\u00a0 is denied a gallantry\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/48471","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=48471"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/48471\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/102451"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=48471"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=48471"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=48471"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}