Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR2003SC4050; JT2003(5)SC268; (2003)IIILLJ23SC; 2003(5)SCALE42; (2003)11SCC572; 2003(1)SLJ114(SC); (2003)2UPLBEC1709
Shivaraj V. Patil, J. Civil Appeal No. 5638 of 19991. The Andhra Pradesh State Irrigation DevelopmentCorporation Ltd. (for short 'Corporation') is aGovernment company, registered under the Companies Act,1956. Pursuant to the national policy, the State ofAndhra Pradesh issued instructions for floatingVoluntary Retirement Scheme (VRS) in the Governmentcompanies and corporations. The Corporation introducedthe VRS (Phase-I) on 1.6.1995. In the light of thesaid Scheme the Corporation issued a circular on4.7.1997 inviting applications from the employees, whowere eligible under the Scheme. In response to thesame 416 employees submitted their options seekingvoluntary retirement. The Corporation accepted theiroptions on 18.10.1997 treating 31.10.1997 as cut offdate for all purposes of VRS. The funds, for givingbenefits under the Scheme to the employees, were madeavailable to the Corporation by the State Governmentduring the first week of November, 1997. Theemployees, whose options had been acce...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR2003SC4036; JT2003(5)SC372; 2003(5)SCALE52; (2003)5SCC511; 2003(1)SLJ39(SC)
Shivaraj V. Patil, J.1. The Division Bench of the High Court by the common impugned order disposed of Writ Petition Nos. 34839, 35775 of 1997 and 6758 of 1998. This appeal is filed by the respondent No. 4 in W.P. No. 35775/97. Some of the Head Constables including the respondent No. 4 herein (hereinafter referred to as 'respondent') in this appeal were appointed temporarily as out of seniority, Sub-Inspector (OSSI) w.e.f. 3.12.1983 without following recruitment rules. The appellant was appointed as direct recruit on 12.9.1985. Between 1996 and 1997, the Government of Andhra Pradesh issued various Government Orders relaxing relevant recruitment rules in favour of the respondent and others regularizing their services with effect from the date of their temporary appointment affecting the seniority of the appellant. The appellant challenged the same before the A.P. Administrative Tribunal. The Tribunal held that the State Government had power to relax the recruitment rules with retrospecti...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR2003SC4023; 2003(2)JKJ197[SC]; JT2003(5)SC241; 2003(5)SCALE27; (2003)9SCC401; 2003(1)SLJ13(SC)
Shivaraj V. Patil, J.1. These appeals are directed against the common judgment and order dated 4.1.2001 passed by the Division Bench of the High Court. The controversy relates to selection/non-selection of candidates to the posts of Assistant District Transport Officer (for short 'ADTO'). The Punjab Subordinate Selection Board advertised 12 posts of ADTO's on 15.5.1995. Out of them, 7 posts were for the general category, 4 for SC/ST and one was reserved for Ex-servicemen. A written test was conducted on 24.3.1996, the result of which was declared on 1.4.1998, declaring 78 persons successful. Out of these 78 persons, 61 belonged to general category, 15 belonged to SC/ST category and 2 belonged to category of Ex-servicemen. Later, on 22.4.1998, 40 more candidates were declared successful by lowering the standard. Out of these 40 candidates, 21 belonged to general category, 13 to SC/ST category and 6 to Ex-servicemen category. Criteria for selection were framed on 22.4.1998; final result ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
ORDER1. Leave granted.2. Printing dispensed with. Appeals to be heard on SLP paper books. Additional document, if any, shall be filed within a period of ten weeks. Original record need not be called for.3. Interim order granted on 12th May, 2003 shall continue until further orders.4. Further proceeding before the Single Judge as well as before the Division Bench is stayed....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
ORDER1. In view of the urgency pleaded, we entertain this special leave petition. We have heard learned counsel for the petitioners. It is submitted before us that there is a clear admission by the respondent No. 3 Shri Akashdeep Sabir in an interview given by him on 2nd May, 2003 that the serial in question is based on a novel written by the petitioners herein. It is submitted taking into note of this admission as also the argument of the learned counsel for the respondents who appeared before the learned Single Judge, that the petitioners here in suppressed the material fact of having filed a suit in the Bombay High Court and withdrawing the same, as also the further argument of therespondents that the Calcutta High Court did not have the pecuniary jurisdiction to entertain the suit in question, the learned Single Judge confirmed the earlier ex-parte injunction granted in favour of the petitioners herein. The further submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners is that the A...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 2004(2)ARBLR44(SC); (2003)10SCC51
Brijesh Kumar, J.1. This petition under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short 'the Act') has come up before me on being designated for appointing an Arbitrator, by the Hon'ble the Chief Justice of India.2. Learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent raised an objection that there is no concluded contract between the parties, hence no Arbitration agreement as well. It is also emphasised that no agreement has been executed by the parties. That being the position, there is no occasion for the petitioner to move the petition for appointment of an Arbitrator. It has also been indicated that the letter of intent (LOI) as issued, was cancelled by the respondent by means of a letter dated 04.06.2002, since the bank guarantee furnished was a conditional bank guarantee and not unconditional as per stipulation. It is contended that though the Arbitrator is competent to decide any dispute regarding existence or validity of the agreement but prima faci...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : [2003(4)JCR36(SC)]; 2003(3)KLT198(SC); 2003(4)SCALE643; (2003)5SCC494
Rajendra Babu, J. 1. A Senior Advocate practising in this Court has filed this petition purportingto be one under Article 32 of the Constitution of India in public interest primarilyfor the publication of the inquiry report made by a Committee consisting of twoChief Justices and a Judge of different High Courts in respect of certainallegations of alleged involvement of sitting Judges of the High Court ofKarnataka in certain incidents and also for a direction to any professional andindependent investigating agency having expertise to conduct a thoroughinvestigation into the said incident and to submit a report on the same to thisCourt.2. In the Chief Justices' Conference held in December 1999, 16 clausesformed part of the Code of Conduct in addition to the declaration of assets bythe Judges and In-House procedure was suggested in the event of any complaintagainst any Judge. However, sanction for these guidelines in absent. In ourconstitutional scheme it is not possible to vest the Chief...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : [2003(97)FLR1173]; [2003(3)JCR78(SC)]; 2003(2)JKJ227[SC]; JT2003(4)SC586; 2003(5)SCALE8; (2003)6SCC171; 2003(1)SLJ48(SC); 2003(2)LC1113(SC); (2003)2UPLBEC1417
S.B. Sinha, J.1. The petitioners herein are aspirants of joining Rajasthan Judicial Service. They are working as Legal Assistants in the Education Department of the State of Rajasthan. Prior thereto they practiced as lawyers but they had not completed three years' period as was necessary in terms of the rules as thence existing.2. The contention of the petitioners in these Writ Petitioners is that they having been allowed to appear at the written examination and having been called for interview, their candidature could not have been cancelled on the purported ground of non-completion of three years' practice in terms of the All India Judges' Association and Ors. v. Union of India; keeping in view the fact that they have been representing their department before the district courts and Tribunal like lawyers in respect whereof they had affirmed the requisite affidavits and filed certificates granted by the Competent Authority.3. Further contention of the petitioners is that having regard...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 2003(51)BLJR1655; [2003(97)FLR1169]; [2003(4)JCR32(SC)]; 2003(2)JKJ430[SC]; JT2003(4)SC564; (2003)IILLJ1094SC; RLW2003(4)SC547; 2003(5)SCALE4; (2003)5SCC12; 2003(1)SLJ147(S
R.C. Lahoti, J.1. The appellant was employed as a Junior Engineer on daily wages for a period of 100 days vide order dated 22.9.1988 in ascheme known as Rural Employment Programme. There were two similar employment welfare schemes operating, known as--RuralEmployment Programme (REP) and Rural Landless Employment Guarantee Programme (RLEGP). The two schemes were merged into one elaborate scheme known as Jawaharlal Nehru Rozgar Yojna or Jawahar Rozgar Yojna. On completion of 100 days, his employment would have terminated automatically; however, the authority passed a speciic order of termination dated 29.12.1988. Instead of being rendered jobless the appellant was offered yet another temporary employment in a scheme known as Jeevan Dhara vide order dated 17.1.1989. The employment was extended from time to time upto 12.6.1989. The last order of appointment was for aperiod of 7 days issued on 24.6.1989 which came to an end of 30.6.1989. The appellant, and a few others similarly employedfil...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 2003(3)AWC2344(SC); 2003(2)BLJR1354; [2003]116CompCas133(SC); JT2003(5)SC1; (2003)IIILLJ31SC; (2003)3MLJ1(SC); 2003(4)SCALE712; (2003)6SCC1; [2003]44SCL429(SC)
ORDER1. If at all and to what extent the Government of the State of Bihar is vicariously liable for payment of arrears of salaries to the employees of the State owned corporations, public sector undertakings or the statutory bodies is the core question involved in this writ petition. 2. It appears from the records that various Government companies/public sector undertakings, details whereof are stated hereunder have not (SIC) paid to their workmen and other employees for a long time resulting in death of several persons and miseries brought to a large number of families as would appear from the following:Statement As of 12.3.2003 Sl. No. Name of Public Undertaking No. of Employee Date from which salary is due Nos. of Death of Employees 1. Bihar State Agro Industries Development Corporation 630 May-93 702. Bihar State Medicine & Chemical Development Corporation 265 Aug-93 113. Bihar State Handloom & Handicraft Corpn. 429 In Headquarter from May 1996 in Unit from 1993 34. Bihar State Sm...
Tag this Judgment!