Court : Supreme Court of India
NONREPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 54015404 OF2017KARNATAKA POWER CORPORATION APPELLANT LIMITED VERSUS EMTA COAL LIMITED & ANR. RESPONDENTS JUDGMENT N. V. RAMANA, CJI1The present Civil Appeals, by way of Special Leave, arise out of the impugned common judgment dated 24.03.2016 passed by the High Court of Karnataka, at Bengaluru, whereby the High Court allowed the writ petitions filed by the respondents herein. By way of the writ petitions, the respondents had challenged the adverse decisions taken by the appellant with respect to the arrangement regarding coal procurement entered into by the parties for the purposes of the appellants thermal power projects in the State of Karnataka. 2 A conspectus of the facts necessary for the disposal of the 1 present appeal is as follows: the appellant was allotted coal mines by the Union of India for captive consumption for their thermal power projects in the State of Karnataka. In 2002, M/s E...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.4100 OF2022Shri M.L. Patil (Dead) Through LRs Appellant(s) Versus The State of Goa and Anr. Respondent(s) JUDGMENT M.R. SHAH, J.1. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned final judgment and order dated 11.02.2020 passed by the High Court of Bombay at Goa in Writ Petition No.961/2015, by which, though the High Court has allowed the said writ petition by holding that the respective writ petitioners ought to have been superannuated/retired at the age of 60 years instead of 58 years, the High Court has refused arrears of pension and has observed that the pension at 1 the revised rates will become payable only from 1st January, 2020, the original writ petitioner has preferred the present appeal.2. That the appellant original writ petitioner of writ petition No.961/2015 and others filed the writ petitions before the High Court challenging the action of the respondents in superannuating/retirin...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 39003901 OF2022The State of Bihar & Ors. ..Appellant (S) Versus Rajmati Devi & Anr. ..Respondent (S) JUDGMENT M. R. Shah, J.1. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and order dated 11.04.2017 passed by the Division Bench of the High Court of Judicature at Patna in Letters Patent Appeal No.1099/2016, by which, the Division Bench of the High Court has dismissed the said appeal preferred by the State and has confirmed the judgment and order dated 02.09.2015 passed by the learned Single Judge holding that respondent No.1 being widow of the deceased employee would be entitled for grant 1 of family pension from the date of death of her husband, the State of Bihar has preferred the present appeals.2. The husband of respondent No.1 herein joined the Bihar Research Society, an autonomous society registered under Societies Act, as a peon. The said society was taken over by the Governme...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
NON-REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1301 OF2019RISHIRAJ @ TUTUL MUKHARJEE & ANR. ..Appellants VERSUS STATE OF CHHATTISGARH ..Respondent WITH CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1302 OF2019HANI @ KOUSTUBH SAMDARIYA ..Appellant VERSUS STATE OF CHHATTISGARH ..Respondent AND CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1303 OF2019VIJAY @ HALLO JAISWAL & ANR. ..Appellants VERSUS STATE OF CHHATTISGARH & ANR. ..Respondents JUDGMENT Uday Umesh Lalit, J.1. These appeals by special leave, at the instance of accused, named; (1) Rishiraj @ Tutul Mukharjee, (2) Samrat @ Laltu Mukharjee, (3) Vijay @ 1 Hallo Jaiswal, (4) Ajay @ Chhotu @ Jijji Jaiswal and (5) Hani @ Koustubh Samadriya, challenge the common judgment and order dated 10.08.2018 passed by the High Court of Chhattisgarh at Bilaspur in Criminal Appeal Nos.452, 492, 522 and 538 of 2012.2. The present proceedings arise out of the registration of crime pursuant to First Information Report No.187 of 2010 dated 09.06.2010, lodge...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.4103 OF2022(Arising out of S.L.P.(Civil) No.936/2022) Malaya Nanda Sethy Appellant Versus State of Orissa and others Respondents JUDGMENT M.R. SHAH, J.1. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and order dated 26.10.2021 passed by the High Court of Orissa at Cuttack in Writ Petition (Civil) No.28023/2021, by which the High Court has dismissed the said writ petition preferred by the appellant herein and has refused to direct the State authorities to appoint the appellant herein original writ petitioner on compassionate ground, the original writ petitioner has preferred the present appeal.2. The facts leading to the present appeal in a nutshell are as under: That the father of the appellant herein original writ petitioner was working as an Assistant Sub-Inspector in the Excise Department. He passed away on 02.01.2010 while in service. On the death of his father, 1 the appellant a...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL No.807 of 2022 M/s Knit Pro International ...Appellant Versus The State of NCT of Delhi & Anr. ...Respondents JUDGMENT M. R. Shah, J.1. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and order dated 25.11.2019 passed by the High Court of Delhi at New Delhi in Writ Petition (Crl.) No.3422 of 2018 by which the High Court has allowed the said writ petition and has quashed the FIR bearing No.431 of 2018 filed against the respondents for the offences under Sections 63 and 65 of the Copyright Act, 1957 (hereinafter referred to as Copyright Act), the original complainant has preferred to the present appeal. 12. That the appellant herein filed an application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. and sought directions from the learned Chief Metropolitan Magistrate for the registration of FIR against the respondent No.2 herein for the offences under Sections 51, 63 & 64 of the Copyright Act read with S...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL No.988 OF2017SABITRI SAMANTARAY APPELLANT VERSUS STATE OF ODISHA RESPONDENT WITH CRIMINAL APPEAL No.860 OF2022(arising out of S.L.P (CRL.) No.3881 OF2017 BIDYADHAR PRAHARAJ APPELLANT VERSUS STATE OF ODISHA RESPONDENT JUDGMENT KRISHNA MURARI, J.Leave granted in Special Leave Petition (Criminal) No.3881 of 2017.2. Present appeals are directed against the judgment and order dated 08.11.2016 passed by the High Court of Odisha at Cuttack in Criminal Appeal 1 No.202 of 2015. The Appellants herein, namely Sabitri Samantaray and Bidyadhar Praharaj are wife and husband respectively. The two have been arrayed as accused No.2 and accused No.1 in FIR No.120 of 2008. The Appellants herein along with their daughter (accused No.3) had been charged with offences under Sections 302, 201 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (hereafter referred to as IPC). Sessions Court Jajpur, in C.T. Case No.76 of 201...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.2914 OF2022Agra Development Authority, Agra ..Appellant Versus Anek Singh and others ..Respondents JUDGMENT M. R. Shah, J.1. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and order passed by the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad in Civil Miscellaneous Writ Petition No.13927 of 2016 by which the High Court has allowed the said writ petition preferred by the respondents herein original writ petitioners and has held that the acquisition proceedings with respect to the land in question shall be deemed to have lapsed under Subsection (2) of Section 24 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (hereinafter referred to as the Act 2013), 1 the Agra Development Authority, Agra has preferred the present appeal.2. We have heard learned counsel for the respective parties. We have perused and considered the impugned judgmen...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.9746 of 2011 STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH & ORS. ...APPELLANT(S) VERSUS RAJ KUMAR & ORS. RESPONDENT(S) WITH CIVIL APPEAL No.9747 of 2011 ANURAG SHARMA AND ORS. ...APPELLANT(S) VERSUS STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH & ORS. RESPONDENT(S) JUDGMENT PAMIDIGHANTAM SRI NARASIMHA, J.1.1 These appeals arise out of the decision of the High Court of Himachal Pradesh allowing the writ petition and directing the State to consider the case of the writ petitioners, Respondents No.1 to 3 herein, for promotion under Rules that existed when the vacancies arose and not as per the subsequently amended rules. These directions were based on the decision of this Court in the case of Y.V. Rangaiah v. J.Sreenivasa Rao1. As we noticed a number of decisions of this Court that have followed Rangaiah, and far more decisions 1 Y.V. Rangaiah v. J.Sreenivasa Rao (1983) 3 SCC284 hereinafter referred to as Rangaiah. 1 that have distinguished i...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.3490 OF2022State Bank of India & Anr. ...Appellants Versus K.S. Vishwanath ...Respondent JUDGMENT M. R. Shah, J.1. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and order dated 16.03.2021 passed by the High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru in Writ Appeal No.4220 of 2011 by which the High Court has dismissed the said Writ Appeal No.4220 of 2011 preferred by the appellant employer SBI and has confirmed the judgment and order passed by 1 the learned Single Judge setting aside the order of dismissal passed by the Disciplinary Authority and directing the Bank to pay to the delinquent officer consequential benefits without back wages, the appellant SBI employer has preferred the present appeal.2. The facts leading to the present appeal in nutshell are as under: That the respondent herein the delinquent officer was working as a Deputy Manager (Cash) at SSI Peenya II Stage Branch of the SB...
Tag this Judgment!