Does an Admission by a Public Employer of Liability to Revise Pension Bind the Employer to Implement It Within a Fixed Timeframe?

Where a statutory body clearly adopts a government notification granting revised pension/family pension benefits and admits entitlement in official communication, any failure to implement such benefit due to administrative or financial delay can be enforced by judicial direction. The High Court reaffirmed existing principles by issuing specific timelines and mandating interest for delay, serving as […]

Can Contempt Proceedings Continue in the High Court When the Impugned Order is Under Challenge Before the Supreme Court?

The High Court reaffirms that, following the Supreme Court’s directions, contempt proceedings relating to an order under challenge before the Supreme Court must be kept in abeyance during the pendency of the appeal. This maintains the established precedent and clarifies procedural conduct for courts and litigants until the Supreme Court resolves the substantive challenge.   […]

Can Non-Compoundable Offences Under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Be Quashed via Settlement in Writ Jurisdiction? High Court of Uttarakhand Affirms Discretion Guided by Facts

The Uttarakhand High Court has held that, despite certain offences being non-compoundable under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, the Court retains discretion to quash criminal proceedings if an amicable settlement is achieved and the facts warrant such intervention. This judgment reaffirms existing precedent on quashing of non-compoundable offences upon settlement, providing binding authority for subordinate […]

Does an Appellate Court Have Unlimited Power to Reverse Acquittals? Reaffirmation of the Principles Governing Interference with Acquittal Judgments

The judgment reiterates that while appellate courts have the full power to re-appreciate evidence in appeals against acquittal, there is a double presumption of innocence in favour of the accused. Interference is warranted only if the trial court’s view is perverse, unsupported by evidence, or manifestly illegal. This decision upholds established Supreme Court precedent and […]

Can Courts Grant Interim Custody of Seized Vehicles Involved in Illegal Mining During Trial? Practical Application of Section 497 BNSS, 2023 and Supreme Court Guidelines Reaffirmed

The High Court reaffirms that courts possess discretion under Section 497 BNSS, 2023 (analogous to Section 451 CrPC) to grant interim custody of vehicles seized for illegal mining, provided certain safeguards are met. This judgment follows Supreme Court precedents, streamlining the release process for vehicle owners during trial, and serves as binding authority for subordinate […]

Is Ex-Servicemen Reservation Under the 1985 Rules a Ground for Relaxing Statutory Minimum Qualification Requirements for Teacher Appointments? Clarifies binding precedent: High Court affirms that ex-servicemen reservation cannot override statutory minimum educational qualifications, such as TET/B.Ed/D.Ed., under the CG School Education Services Recruitment Rules.

The High Court holds that ex-servicemen cannot bypass the minimum qualification requirements prescribed by the 2009 Recruitment Rules, reaffirming that eligibility standards set as per NCTE guidelines must be met regardless of reservation policies. This judgment upholds existing precedent, has binding effect on subordinate courts in Chhattisgarh, and is directly relevant to education sector recruitment. […]

When Can “Loss of Confidence” Justify Denial of Reinstatement After Illegal Termination? Gauhati High Court Clarifies Employer’s Burden and Limits

The Gauhati High Court has clarified that, following an illegal termination without domestic enquiry, reinstatement can only be denied on the ground of “loss of confidence” if objective facts are pleaded and proved by the employer. Mere subjective satisfaction or suspicion cannot suffice. This decision upholds and applies Supreme Court precedent, and holds persuasive and […]

Does Failure to Publish Three Public Notices Invalidate Municipal Takeover of Illegal Colonies under Section 292(F) of the Chhattisgarh Municipal Corporation Act, 1956?

The High Court mandates strict compliance with the statutory procedure under Section 292(F)(2) for municipal authorities before taking over management of lands in illegal colonization cases. The order passed without issuing the required three public notices is quashed and the matter is remanded, reaffirming existing precedent and serving as binding authority within Chhattisgarh for municipal […]

Can Delay in Filing an Appeal Under the Chhattisgarh Rajya Suraksha Adhiniyam, 1990, Be Condoned in the Absence of Express Statutory Provision? – Precedent Affirmed on Adherence to Statutory Limitation Periods

The Chhattisgarh High Court held that, in the absence of a statutory provision permitting condonation of delay, delay in filing an appeal under the Chhattisgarh Rajya Suraksha Adhiniyam, 1990, cannot be condoned either by the appellate authority or by the writ court. The judgment affirms the principle that statutory limitation periods must be strictly followed […]

Does the Authority Must Issue Notice Before Reviewing an Administrative Order Under Section 51 of the Chhattisgarh Land Revenue Code? – Reaffirmation of Natural Justice Requirements

The High Court of Chhattisgarh holds that notice to the party in whose favour an order was passed is a mandatory requirement before review under Section 51 of the Chhattisgarh Land Revenue Code, reaffirming established precedent and following Division Bench decisions from the Madhya Pradesh High Court; this remains binding authority for subordinate courts and […]

Whether an Insurance Company Can Avoid Liability Solely on the Ground of Vehicle Substitution Allegations in Motor Accident Claims — Reaffirmation of Burden of Proof and Findings Based on Final Police Report

The High Court held that liability cannot be shifted from the insurer without cogent proof that a different vehicle was involved; unsubstantiated allegations and contradictions in evidence are insufficient. The judgment upholds existing precedent regarding the strict burden on insurers in claim disputes, and will serve as binding authority in the Chhattisgarh jurisdiction for future […]

Must a Dismissed Workman Be Reinstated When Termination Is Unsupported by Evidence and Domestic Enquiry? Binding Directions from Gauhati High Court on “Loss of Confidence” Doctrine and Employer’s Burden

The Gauhati High Court reaffirms that an employer bears the burden to prove misconduct when there is no domestic enquiry; subjective claims of “loss of confidence” must be objectively pleaded and proved for denying reinstatement. This judgment sets binding authority for labour dispute matters, clarifying the procedural and evidentiary standards applicable to “loss of confidence” […]