HEMANT GUPTA, ANJANA MISHRA, SUDHIR SINGH
Union of India through Secretary, Ministry of Railways, Rail Bhawan, New Delhi – Appellant
Versus
Sanjay Kumar, son of Late Raghubir Singh Arya – Respondent
HEMANT GUPTA, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. The matter has been placed before this Bench in terms of an order passed by a Division Bench of this Court on 14th of July, 2014 doubting the correctness of Division Bench judgment of this Court passed in C.W.J.C. No. 2592 of 2007 (Union of India through the General Manager, Eastern Railway and others Vs. Uma Devi) on 22nd of April, 2010 wherein, it was held that the children born out of second wife without permission of the Railway authorities are not entitled to seek compassionate appointment in terms of the circular issued by the Railways on 24th of January, 1992.
3. The brief facts leading to the present reference to the larger Bench is that writ-applicant invoked the writ jurisdiction of this Court claiming appointment on compassionate grounds after death of his father on 18th of March, 1991. The application for appointment on compassionate grounds was filed on 7th of April, 1992 after he attained majority. The learned Single Bench allowed the writ application for the reason that his application could not be rejected simply on the ground that he is son from the second wife of the deceased.
4. In appeal, the ap
LIC v. Asha Ramchhandra Ambekar
G.M. (D&PB) v. Kunti Tiwary (2004) 7 SCC 271
V. Sivamurthy v. State of Andhra Pradesh and others
Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra and others
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.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.