SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2022 Supreme(Raj) 2362

SANDEEP MEHTA, VIJAY BISHNOI, ARUN BHANSALI
Priyanka Shrimali – Appellant
Versus
State Of Rajasthan – Respondent


Advocates appeared:
Mr. Vinay Jain. Dr. Nupur Bhati., Mr. Harish Purohit., Mr. M.S. Purohit., Mr. Rakesh Kalla., Mr. Manish Pitaliya., Mr. Subhankar Johari., Mr. Vikas Bijarnia., Mr. Vivek Mathur., Mr. Hanuman Singh Choudhary., Mr. Amit Kumar Purohit., Mr. D.D. Purohit., Mr. Narayan Yadav., Mr. Lalit Parihar., Mr. Rishabh Tayal., Mr. Jitendar Choudhary., Mr. Kuldeep Vaishnav., Mr. V.D. Vaishnav., Mr. Vikram Singh., Mr. Arpit Samariya., Mr. Virendra Agarwal., , , , Mr. G.S. Rathore., Mr. Hari Singh Rajpurohit., Mr. Bharat Devasi., Ms. Paru Malik., Mr. Narendra Malik., Mr. Rishabh Purohit., Mr. Pawan Bharti., Mr. M.P. Singh., Mr. Arpit Gupta., Mr. K.D. Dayal., Ms. Adeeti., Ms. Kingal Purohit., Ms. Radhika Vyas., Mr. Manoj Purohit., Mr. RDSS Kharlia., Mr. Naman Bhansali., Mr. S.S. Choudhary., Mr. Vishal Singhal., Mr. K.S. Sisodia through V.C., Mr. Kshma Purohit through V.C., , Mr. Manish Vyas, AAG with, Mr. Kailash Choudhary., Mr. Sunil Beniwal, AAG., Mr. Sudhir Tak, AAG with, Mr. Saransh Vij., Mr. Vikram Choudhary., Mr. R.R. Ankiya., Mr. Avin Chhangani., Ms. Dimple Chhangani through V.C., Mr. Parmeshwar Pilania through V.C., Mr. Surya Kant through V.C., Mr. Sayar Gurjar, through V.C., for the Members of the Bar

JUDGMENT

Arun Bhansali, J. - The present reference has come-up before this Larger Bench on account of issue referred by the Division Bench on 12.01.2022, inter alia, observing and referring the question as under:-

    "In our opinion, the view of the Rajasthan High Court requires consideration by a larger Bench. The reference is therefore made to three members Bench on the following:

    "Whether the view taken by the three Division Benches of this Court in the cases of Smt. Sumer Kanwar (supra), Smt. Vandana Sharma (supra) and Kshama Devi (supra) upholding the vires of Rule 2(c) of the Rules, which excludes the married daughter from the definition of term 'dependent' is correct?"

    2. After hearing the learned counsel appearing before this Bench, on 20.07.2022, the question referred was re-framed with the following observations:-

      "After hearing the learned counsel appearing before us on previous dates and today, we are of the opinion that the question which has been referred to the Larger Bench requiring it to examine the correctness of the Division Bench judgments in the case of Smt. Sumer Kanwar, Smt. Vandana Sharma and Kshama Devi restricts the scope of consideration of the aspects which aris

                                  Click Here to Read the rest of this document
                                  1
                                  2
                                  3
                                  4
                                  5
                                  6
                                  7
                                  8
                                  9
                                  10
                                  11
                                  SupremeToday Portrait Ad
                                  supreme today icon
                                  logo-black

                                  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

                                  qr

                                  Scan Me!

                                  India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

                                  For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

                                  whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
                                  whatsapp-icon Back to top