"I realise that some of my criticisms may be mistaken; but to refuse to criticize judgements for fear of being mistaken is to abandon criticism altogether... If any of my criticisms are found to be correct, the cause is served; and if any are found to be incorrect the very process of finding out my mistakes must lead to the discovery of the right reasons, or better reasons than I have been able to give, and the cause is served just as well."

-Mr. HM Seervai, Preface to the 1st ed., Constitutional Law of India.

Friday, December 12, 2008

SCI Judgements

Maharashtra State Judges Association & Ors. v. The Registrar General, High Court, High Court of Judicature at Bombay & Anr. WRIT PETITION (C) NO. 211 OF 2007 under Article 32 of the Constitution decided by K. G. BALAKRISHNAN CJI, R. V. RAVEENDRAN & J. M. PANCHAL, JJ. on DECEMBER 11, 2008
The following issues were involved in this case:
"The Maharashtra State Judges Association and some District Judges, have sought the following directions to the respondents:
(i) to make an uniform single cadre of District Judges by merging theposts of District Judges, Addl. District Judges, City Civil Court Judges, 2
Chief Judge and Addl. Chief Judges of Small Cause Court, with effect from13.11.1991 or alternatively with effect from 31.3.1994 (or furtheralternatively from 1.7.1996) with inter-se seniority being determined withreference to the date of entry into service in the said posts.
(ii) to withdraw the Maharashtra Judicial Service (Seniority) Rules 2007(for short the `Rules') and make rules in regard to seniority, in conformitywith the decision of this Court, by having a single uniform cadre of DistrictJudges (by merging the aforesaid multiple categories of posts) with effectfrom 13.11.1991 or 31.3.1994 or 1.7.1996; or in the alternative, to quash thesaid Rules in particular the proviso to Rule 4(1) of the said Rules.
(iii) to withdraw the draft gradation list of District Judges circulated on30.3.2007 and make the said list as on 13.11.1991, or 31.3.1994 or 1.7.1996on the basis of entry of the Judicial Officers in the cadre as DistrictJudges/Addl. District Judges/City Civil Court Judges/Chief Judge and Addl.Chief Judges of Small Court."
Punj Lloyd Limited v. Corporate Risks India Pvt. Ltd. CIVIL APPEAL NO. 1026 OF 2007 decided by TarunChatterjee & Harjit Singh Bedi, JJ. on December 11, 2008 involved the question as to whether the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission "was justified in dismissing the complaint in limine on the ground that the case involved disputes and questions which were contentious before issuing any notice to the respondent and without even prima facie going into the merits of the case."
State of Bihar & Ors. v. Pandey Jagdishwar Prasad CIVIL APPEAL NO.7237 OF 2008 decided by TARUN CHATTERJEE & AFTAB ALAM, JJ. on DECEMBER 11, 2008 wherein it was held:
It has been held in a catena of judicial pronouncements that even if by mistake, higher pay scale was given to the employee, without there being misrepresentation or fraud, no recovery can be effected from the retiral dues in the monetary benefit available to the employee.

No comments: