Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query..!
Scanned Judgements…!
Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query..!
Scanned Judgements…!
Analysis and Conclusion - Case limits state power in administrative actions like tender cancellation, prohibiting post facto justifications for arbitrariness; restricts unfettered discretion absent contracts ["2026 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 472"] ["2025 0 Supreme(Gau) 2081"]
In the dynamic landscape of Indian , disputes between state governments and private entities often highlight tensions around contracts, services, and regulatory compliance. One such case drawing attention is , Civil Appeal of 2025 arising out of (C) No.6531/2025. This Supreme Court () involves the Himachal Pradesh government challenging a lower court decision against the private firm OASYS Cybernatics Pvt. Ltd. While specifics on this exact case remain elusive in available judicial records, examining related precedents provides valuable context on employment and state-employee relations in Himachal Pradesh.
This article delves into why direct information on (C) No. 6531/2025 is absent from key documents, explores analogous cases on for , and integrates insights from broader Supreme Court and High Court rulings. Note: This is general information based on public judicial excerpts and not specific legal advice. Consult a qualified lawyer for personalized guidance.
The case , Civil Appeal of 2025 arising out of (C) No.6531/2025 appears to stem from a between the state and the IT firm. However, reviewed legal documents do not reference, discuss, or provide any information regarding this specific Supreme Court . 2025 0 Supreme(HP) 711 2025 0 Supreme(HP) 716
Key observations include:- No analysis, holdings, or outcomes related to OASYS Cybernatics or (C) No. 6531/2025 can be derived.- Documents focus exclusively on employment disputes in Himachal Pradesh universities and state instrumentalities, particularly conferment of on daily-waged employees after 8 years of service. 2025 0 Supreme(HP) 711 2025 0 Supreme(HP) 716
This absence underscores the importance of verifying case status directly via official court portals like the website or e-Courts services, as SLPs may be at early stages or dismissed without detailed reporting.
While the OASYS case remains undocumented in the materials, closely related judgments from (LPAs) offer clarity on state employment policies. These LPAs, filed by universities challenging single judge orders, affirm post-8 years of continuous service.
The LPAs reject university contentions and cite Supreme Court affirmance in State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors v Surajmani & anr, Civil Appeal No. 1595 of 2025 (decided ): the Respondents shall be entitled for grant of ‘work-charged’ status from the date of completion of 8 years of service. However, we hold that the relief in the present appeals will be limited to ... 2025 0 Supreme(HP) 711 2025 0 Supreme(HP) 716
Impugned single judge orders (dated and ) granted status from dates like or till in 2007, distinguishing Jaswant Singh v Union of India (1979) 4 SCC 440. 2025 0 Supreme(HP) 711 2025 0 Supreme(HP) 716
A pivotal holding: work-charged establishment is not a prerequisite for conferment of ... This aligns with precedents like , , , and Pritam Singh v State of Himachal Pradesh (CWPOA No 7497 of 2020). 2025 0 Supreme(HP) 711 2025 0 Supreme(HP) 716
Recent rulings echo themes of and state obligations, potentially relevant to disputes like HP vs OASYS if involving service contracts.
Other snippets highlight procedural distinctions:- Administrative vs. criminal proceedings: FIR registration doesn't hinge on prior administrative actions. 2025 4 Supreme 713- Seniority counting for temporary engineers: Officiating service periods must be considered. 2025 0 Supreme(SC) 337- No right to contract renewal for employees. 2020 0 Supreme(Guj) 9
These cases illustrate that while states like Himachal Pradesh must follow schemes, private entities (potentially like OASYS) face different scrutiny under .
| Key Case | Ruling Summary | Relevance to HP Employment ||----------|----------------|----------------------------|| State of HP v Surajmani (CA 1595/2025) 2025 0 Supreme(HP) 711 | after 8 years, | Direct precedent for daily wagers || LPA 321/2024 2025 0 Supreme(HP) 855 | Upholds | Consistent HP High Court view || Uma Devi (2006) SCC 2022 0 Supreme(Guj) 1231 | No automatic | Limits expectations |
Analysis is confined to provided documents; no external knowledge invoked. Relevance is limited to public entities, not private firms like OASYS. 2025 0 Supreme(HP) 711 2025 0 Supreme(HP) 716
Recommendations:1. Obtain the specific judgment via court records.2. Legal professionals: Check listings post-. 2025 0 Supreme(HP) 7113. For similar disputes, review HP policies under CSKHPKV v Sarwan Kumar.
Stay informed on evolving labor laws. For HP vs OASYS updates, monitor Supreme Court orders. This overview generally highlights trends but may not apply to your situation—seek expert advice.
#HPLaborLaw #SupremeCourtIndia #EmployeeRegularization
Learned counsel cites the judgment in the State of Himachal Pradesh and Another v. M/s.OASYS Cybernatics Pvt. ... 1. ... For Petitioner : Mr.B.Vijay for M/s.Eswar, Kumar and Rao For Respondents : Mr.U.Baranidharan, Spl.G.P. ... The matter was carried in appeal and the appellate authority confirmed the order of the Sub Registrar under order dated 25.06.2024. Both these orders are challenged in this writ petition.....
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 1923 OF 2025 (Arising out of SLP (C) No. 11296/2024 THE STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AND ORS. … APPELLANTS VERSUS KHARAK BAHADUR … RESPONDENT CIVIL APPEAL NO. 1924 OF 2025 (Arising out of SLP (C) No. 10211/2024 THE STATE OF H.P. ... #HL_STA....
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO 2250 OF 2025 (Arising out of SLP (Crl.)No.359 of 2025) AND CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 2263 OF 2025 (Arising out of SLP (Crl ... .)No.436 of 2025) M/S SRT CONSTRUCTIONS PVT LTD & ANR. ... No(s). 359/2025 [Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 26-09-2024 in....
Pvt. Ltd. ... Katherine Docks Co. (1865) 3 H & C 596. ... Versus CHANDRAKESH AND OTHERS With MISC. APPEAL No. 6531 of 2023 UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO.LTD. Versus CHANDRAKESH AND OTHERS With MISC. APPEAL No. 6532 of 2023 UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO.LTD. ... Versus CHANDRAKESH AND OTHERS With CIVIL REVISION NO. 810/2023 UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD#HL_E....
Further, he submitted that the High Court for the State of Telangana in Arene Life Sciences Pvt. Ltd. v. ... (C) 14754/2025, decided on 23.09.2025, we have dismissed similar petitions by relying upon TKS Builders Pvt. Ltd. (supra). 19. Mr. ... (C) 14225/2025 has issued notice and stayed the assessment proceedings till the next date of hearing. Similarly, in Yukti Export v. Income Tax officer, SLP....
Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 2743/2025 [Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 24-01-2025 in WP(C) No. 813/2025 passed by the High Court of Delhi at New Delhi] TPF ENGINEERING PVT LTD & ANR. ... REVISED ITEM NO.56+ 61 COURT NO.8 SECTION XIV S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Item No.56 Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (#HL_ST....
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2025 (ARISING OUT OF SLP (CIVIL) NO. 21573 OF 2019) THE STATE OF HARYANA & ANR. ... APPELLANT(S) VERSUS M/S LANDMARK APARTMENTS PVT. RESPONDENT(S) LTD. & ANR. O R D E R 1. Leave granted. 2. ... ITEM NO.6 COURT NO.3 SECTION IV-B S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A ....
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. /2025 [@ SLP [C] NO.14142/2024] STATE OF ODISHA & ORS. ... The issue involved in the present appeal is covered by the decision in State of Odisha & Ors. v. Binodini Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. ... ITEM NO.35 COURT NO.7 SECTION XI-A S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDI....
Now, since the Hon’ble Supreme Court has stayed the 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? operation of the aforesaid judgment on 30.05.2025 in SLP(c) Diary No. 26933 of 2025 titled as M/s Riar Builders Pvt. ... While dealing with a similar situation, the Hon’ble Supreume Court, in Civil Appeal No. 10620 of 20o24 [Arising out of Special Leave Petition (Civil) No.23320 of 2023] title....
ITEM NO.23 COURT NO.3 SECTION XVI S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) ……………...Diary No(s). 2168/2025 [Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated ... SLP(C) No. 1564-1565/2025 (XVI) IA No. 14834/2025 - EX-PARTE STAY IA No. 6530/2025 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT IA No. 6531#HL_EN....
We set aside the impugned judgments and grant a period of two weeks, from the date of passing this judgment, for the concerned respondents to resort to appropriate remedies in a manner known to law. All the issues are left open to be raised, except for the one issue which has been decided by us in these appeals. Needless to state that the FIRs and the subsequent criminal proceedings which have been quashed, despite no prayer being made, will also stand restored in their original form. Further, the respondents before us in the aforementioned cases are directed to compulsorily implead the Appe....
8. Similar view has been taken by Division Benches of this High Court in LPA No.321 of 2024, titled State of H.P. and others v. Gian Chand and others, decided on 3.1.2025; and LPA No.68 of 2025, titled State of Himachal Pradesh and others v. Charan Dass, decided on 1.3.2025. 154 of 2024, titled State of HP vs. Sohan Lal, decided on 14th June, 2024; LPA No.177 of 2024, titled State of HP vs. Satdev Sharma & others, decided on 1st July, 2024; LPA No.230 of 2024, titled State of HP vs. Chet Ram & others, decided on 2nd September, 2024; LPA No.303 of 2024, titled State of HP vs. Vishal Kumar & o....
Civil Appeal No..................of 2025 [Arising Out of SLP (Civil) No..............of 2025] [Diary No. 27613 of 2024] 52. Delay condoned. 53. Leave granted. 54. In terms of the judgment passed in Civil Appeals arising out of SLP (Civil) Nos. 4036-4038 of 2024 and connected matters, these appeals are disposed of accordingly. 55. Pending applications, if any, shall also stand disposed of. 51. Pending applications, if any, shall also stand disposed of.
The second is the case of State of Karnataka and Ors. Shri Gupta, the learned counsel for the appellants – original petitioners has tendered a rejoinder affidavit, and the thrust is laid on the aforesaid contention reiterating the request to set aside the impugned orders of the learned Single Judge. Versus M.L. Kesari and Ors. passed in Civil Appeal arising out of SLP (C) No.15774 of 2006 on 03.08.2010. By referring to the material contained in paragraph 53 and paragraph 5 respectively, a contention is raised that the orders passed by the learned Single Judge deserve to be ....
Shri Gupta, the learned counsel for the appellants – original petitioners has tendered a rejoinder affidavit, and the thrust is laid on the aforesaid contention reiterating the request to set aside the impugned orders of the learned Single Judge. versus M.L. Kesari and Ors. passed in Civil Appeal arising out of SLP (C) No.15774 of 2006 on 03.08.2010. The second is the case of State of Karnataka and Ors. By referring to the material contained in paragraph 53 and paragraph 5 respectively, a contention is raised that the orders passed by the learned Single Judge deserve to be ....
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
