The Andhra Pradesh High Court clarified that where a civil suit is already pending between parties, the High Court ordinarily will not issue a writ of mandamus directing police protection, and parties should seek remedies from the civil court; this judgment reaffirms settled precedent and has binding value in similar writ proceedings. Summary Category […]
The Andhra Pradesh High Court reaffirms existing precedent that once police register an FIR regarding a complaint, no further judicial orders are necessary for additional action on the same issue. This decision upholds settled law and clarifies the practical expectations for writs seeking FIR registration under Article 226, reinforcing binding precedent for all subordinate courts […]
High Court clarifies that when a transfer order loses efficacy solely due to an interim stay and passage of time, quashing may be ordered with liberty to the administration for future action; affirms exercise of discretion but does not lay down new law. Relevant primarily to public service transfer petitions in government employment. Precedent value […]
Recovery of excess payments from employees—where not due to fraud or misrepresentation—is impermissible, reaffirming the Supreme Court’s holding in Rafiq Masih and its progeny. The judgment upholds settled law and is binding on subordinate courts in Chhattisgarh, with clear guidance for service law matters involving public employees. Summary Category Data Case Name WPS/3240/2023 of […]
The Chhattisgarh High Court, relying on binding Supreme Court authorities, restates that compassionate appointment is not an alternative recruitment avenue nor a right to a specific position; it is an exception made to provide immediate succor to families of deceased employees. The ruling affirms the existing chain of Supreme Court precedents and has high precedential […]
Chhattisgarh High Court upholds and clarifies “just compensation” jurisprudence, affirming 100% permanent disability even where the claimant continued employment post-injury; compensation may exceed claimed amount if warranted by evidence. This is binding precedent for Motor Accident Claims Tribunals (MACTs) in Chhattisgarh and has persuasive value elsewhere. Summary Category Data Case Name MAC/1588/2017 of Rupesh […]
The High Court of Chhattisgarh has reaffirmed that a Family Court’s discretionary grant of maintenance under Section 125 CrPC will not be interfered with in revision unless there is illegality, perversity, or jurisdictional error. The decision upholds established principles on the limited revisional scope over maintenance awards and serves as binding authority for subordinate courts […]
The High Court of Chhattisgarh has reaffirmed that mere reliance on an isolated statement from a witness does not suffice to establish contributory negligence unless the Insurance Company leads independent evidence substantiating the plea. This decision upholds existing precedents and is binding authority for subordinate courts within Chhattisgarh on the evidentiary requirements for contributory negligence […]
The High Court held that, where authorities have already considered and rejected a land measurement application after inquiry, a writ of mandamus does not lie; the petitioner is relegated to alternative legal remedies. This affirms existing precedent on judicial restraint in exercising writ jurisdiction where administrative remedies are available or exhausted, particularly in the context […]
The Chhattisgarh High Court clarifies that reassigning a government employee’s charge within the same Tahsil—such as changing a Patwari’s Halka number—does not amount to a transfer under service law; such decisions, when based on administrative exigency, are not subject to judicial interference unless shown to be perverse or illegal. This holding affirms established precedent and […]
The court affirms that, following prior Board sanction, disciplinary inquiry and recovery orders under Rule 351-A can be lawfully initiated and concluded after an officer’s retirement, where loss to government is established; calculation methodology, if undisputed, cannot be challenged on grounds of other officers’ involvement unless supported by substantial material. This decision reinforces existing precedent […]
The High Court of Chhattisgarh has reaffirmed that review jurisdiction under Article 226 is limited to clear errors apparent on the face of record, declining to entertain review on the merits of the underlying auction process or alleged statutory violations under Section 13(8) of the SARFAESI Act. This decision does not overrule or modify existing […]