Back
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
P.N. Bhagwati, CJI., G.L.Oza, M.M.Dutt, Ranganath Misra, V.Khalid, JJ.
President, Association Of Allottees Of Requisition Premises, Bombay
Versus
State Of Maharashtra
Case No., 404 of 1986
Date of Decision, 9/23/86
Advocates Appeared: Bhasme A.S., Bhasme S.B., Bhasnic A.S., Dutta S., Khanwilkar A.M., Kulkarni B.Y., Lalit U.R., Manohar P.K., Mehta T.U., Parekh P.H.
Employment and Service – Retirement from Service - Writ petition is adjourned to enable State of put forward a definite scheme for construction of houses for government servants who are sought to be displaced as a result of de-requisitioning premises which were earlier requisitioned for housing government servants - Held, Obligation of the government to provide housing accommodation to government servants because a roof over the head is an absolute requirement and government should be able to provide it – Court do not see any reason why the State government should not be in a position to come out with a phased programmer for construction of houses for government servants – Order Accordingly
(1) THE writ petition is adjourned to 16/12/1986 to enable the State of Maharashtra to put forward a definite scheme for construction of houses for government servants who are sought to be displaced as a result of the de-requisitioning the premises which were earlier requisitioned for housing government servants. Keeping in view the extended period of requisition, we would impress upon the State government that it should be the obligation of the government to provide housing accommodation to the government servants because a roof over the head is an absolute requirement and the government should be able to provide it. We do not see any reason why the State government should not be in a position to come out with a phased programme for construction of houses for government servants. Meanwhile, interim orders shall continue.
(2) WE may also make it clear that if any retired government servant or relative of the deceased government servant are required to vacate the premises, the High court will give them six months time for that purpose. The affidavit dated 22/09/1986 filed by the State government is taken on record.
COURT Master.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
