Employee Who Made False Declaration In Criminal Case Not Entitled To Appointment In Service As A Matter Of Right
The case was of Rajasthan Rajya Vidyut Prasaran Nigam Limited v. Anil Kanwariya. The decision was given by Justices MR Shah and AS Bopanna. The Court allowed the appeal and held that an employee who made a false declaration and/or suppressed the material fact of his involvement in a criminal case shall not be entitled to an appointment or to continue in service as a matter of right.
What do you think about this case?
Single Bench Hearing Transfer Petitions Cannot Pass Mutual Consent Divorce Decree Invoking Article 142
The decision was given by Justice A S Oka. It was observed by the Supreme Court that a single bench hearing a transfer petition cannot pass a decree on divorce by mutual consent under Section 13 B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 read with Article 142 of the Constitution of India.
What do you think about this case?
Rent Control Act Will Not Bar Demolition Of Building As Per Municipal Law
The case was of Abdul Khuddus v.H.M. Chandiramani (Dead). The decision was given by Justices Hemant Gupta and AS Bopanna. The judgment of the High Court was set aside and the bench observed that the Rent Control Act would not prevail over an Act which deals with municipal functions.
What do you think about this case?
Complainant's Caste Is Of Paramount Importance And Sine Qua Non In A Case Under SC/ST Act
The case was of Alkesh and Others v. State of M.P. The decision was given by Justice Subodh Abhyankar. In this case, it was held that in a case under the SC/ST Act, the caste of the complainant is of paramount importance and is a sine qua non. It can't be assumed that the complainant would forget to mention in the FIR that the assailants had made aspersions against his caste.
What do you think about this case?
Join LAWyersClubIndia's network for daily News Updates, Judgment Summaries, Articles, Forum Threads, Online Law Courses, and MUCH MORE!!"
