R. R. K. TRIVEDI, D. P. MOHAPATRA
BALAK SINGH KUSHWAHA – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF UTTAR PRADESHAND OTHERS – Respondent
( 1 ) DISPUTE in this bunch of cases, consisting of Special Appeals and Writ Petitions, pertains to selection of principals by U. P. Secondary Education Services Commission for various recognised private aided Intermediate College in the State of Uttar Pradesh. On the basis of the challenges raised and the reliefs sought in the cases, they may be put in different groups. The factual matrix of the cases is as under :
( 2 ) U. P. Secondary Education Services Commission (hereinafter referred to as the Commission)by advertisement dated 13. 12. 1995 invited applications for the post of Principal of private recognised and aided higher secondary Institutions in the State. In pursuance of the aforesaid advertisement, large number of applications were received by the Commission. The proceedings for selection of Principals with regard to institutions located in different regions of the State were initiated. The Commission finalised the selection, prepared the panel of the selected candidates for respective regions. Separate notifications were Issued for each such region on 3. 8. 1996 and 30. 8. 1996. Ad hoc principals already functioning in the institutions filed large n
Dr. Krishna Chandra Sahu v. State of Orissa
State of Bihar and others v. Bihar Distillery Ltd. and others
REFERRED TO : Delhi Laws Act 1912 etc.
A.N. Parasuraman v. State of Tamil Nadu
Umesh Chandra Shukla v. Union of India
State of Mysore v. S.R. Jairam
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.