Supreme Court Monthly Roundup – May 2019

TOP STORIES


Sexual Harassment allegations against CJI: SC In-House committee gives clean chit to CJI

The In-House committee, headed by Justice SA Bobde, also comprising Justices Indira Banerjee and Indu Malhotra, found “no substance” in the sexual harassment allegations levelled by a former Supreme Court employee against the CJI Ranjan Gogoi.

Non maintenance of record is not just a clerical error; Section 23 of PCPNDT Act can’t be diluted

Dilution of the provisions of the Act or the Rules would only defeat the purpose of the Act to prevent female foeticide and relegate the right to life of the girl child under Article 21 of the Constitution, to a mere formality.

MORE STORIES


Panchayat Samiti members have right to vote on the ‘No Confidence Motion’

Neither Article 243C nor the Regulation made by the State Legislature or the Rules framed thereunder expressly exclude the other members of the Panchayat Samiti referred to in Section 107(3) of the Regulation from exercising their vote on a ‘Motion of No Confidence’

Mere search under Section 240A of Companies Act without seizure won’t suffice the purpose of investigation

Provisions of Section 240A do not merely relate to an authorisation for a search but extend to the authorisation of a seizure as well. Unless the seizure were to be authorised, a mere search by itself will not be sufficient for the purposes of investigation.

Trade Union is an operational creditor under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016

An “operational debt”, meaning a claim in respect of employment, could certainly be made by a person duly authorised to make such claim on behalf of a workman.

Commissioner under Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act is not a Court

When an appeal is provided against the order of the Commissioner under Section 69 to the Court which is defined under Section 6(7), there is no question of treating the Commissioner as a Court under the statutory scheme of Act, 1959.

Courts can’t do interpretive re­writing of the advertisement thereby changing the conditions of eligibility

In no case can the Court, in the garb of judicial review, sit in the chair of the appointing authority to decide what is best for the employer and interpret the conditions of the advertisement contrary to the plain language of the same.

Second round of litigation doesn’t lie before Foreigners Tribunal

Paragraph 8 does not envisage and provide for a second round of litigation before the same authority i.e. the Foreigners Tribunal constituted under the 1964 Order on and after preparation of the final list. Provisions of paragraph 8 of the Schedule to the 2003 Rules will apply when there has not been an earlier adjudication and decision by the Foreigners Tribunal.

SC to decide if Arbitration Clause in the principal contract be imported into subsequent contracts

The Court to decide Whether the Arbitration Clause in the Principal Agreement, which refers to two other Agreements i.e. Supply Agreement and Distribution Agreement will also be read into the other two Agreements vide the theory of Incorporation?

Karnataka Reservation Act, 2018 constitutional; Benefit of consequential seniority to be accorded retrospectively

The providing of reservations for SCs and the STs is not at odds with the principle of meritocracy. “Merit” must not be limited to narrow and inflexible criteria such as one‘s rank in a standardised exam, but rather must flow from the actions a society seeks to reward, including the promotion of equality in society and diversity in public administration.

SC explains law on payment of interest on ‘Differential excise duty’ under Section 11AB of Central Excise Act, 1944

It may be true that the differential duty becomes crystalised only after the escalation is finalized under the escalation clause but it is not a case where escalation is to have only prospective operation. It is to have retrospective operation admittedly.

IN OTHER NEWS


SC Collegium reiterates proposal for elevation of Justices Aniruddha Bose and A.S. Bopanna as Judges of Supreme Court

4 Judges appointed to be the Judges of the Supreme Court of India

President re-appoints Atma Ram Nadkarni, Senior Advocate as Additional Solicitor General of India

Appointment of Justices Bhushan Ramkrishna Gavai and Surya Kant as Judges of Supreme Court

Join the discussion

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.