Read Time: 22 minutes

1. Keywords: Writ Court, technical knowledge employer, bid, judicial review, High Court, expertise and knowledge, contractual obligations
   [Writ Courts' jurisdiction] The Supreme Court has held that a Writ Court should refrain itself from imposing its decision over and above the decision of the employer, as to whether or not to accept the bid of a tenderer. The Top Court said that Courts must be even more reluctant in interfering with contracts involving technical issues as there is a requirement of the necessary expertise to adjudicate upon such issues. It was further held that the Single Bench and the Division Bench of the High Court exercising power of judicial review, to find out whether the decision of the State in giving out work contract was manifestly "arbitrary" or "unjust" was not required and it did not have to act as an appellate authority over the decision of the State.
   Bench: Justices Hemant Gupta and V Ramasubramaniam
   Case Title: M/S. N.G. Projects Limited vs. M/S. Vinod Kumar Jain & Ors.
   Click here to read more
    
2. Keywords: Doctrine of Equality, misconduct, disciplinary proceedings, role of officers, departmental enquiry
   [Doctrine of Equality] While referring to the application of 'doctrine of equality' in a case where officers/employees were accused of misconduct, the Supreme Court has held that the role of each individual officer even with respect to the same misconduct is required to be considered in light of their duties of the office. "Even otherwise, merely because some other officers involved in the incident are exonerated and/or no action is taken against other officers cannot be a ground to set aside the order of punishment when the charges against the individual concerned - delinquent officer are held to be proved in a departmental enquiry...", said the court while stating that there cannot be any claim of negative equality in such cases.
   Bench: Justices MR Shah and BV Nagarathna.
   Case Title: The State of Uttar Pradesh and Ors. vs. Rajit Singh
   Click here to read more
    
3. Keywords: Land acquisition, consent award, compensation, Karnataka High Court, market price
   [Land acquisition compensation] The Supreme Court has set aside an order of the Karnataka High Court whereby it had enhanced the amount of compensation in respect of the land acquired in 2008 to Rs. 40 lakhs per acre, noting that the Court had relied upon a document for the lands acquired in the year 2011 and on “guesswork”. Court noted that the document relied upon by the respondent before the High Court was a consent award in respect of the property acquired in the year 2011, which was acquired for formation of double line railway broad gauge between Bengaluru and Mysore City. Since the said consent award was issued after three years, "the High Court ought not to have relied upon the same while determining the market price of the land acquired in 2008 considering the market price determined for the lands acquired in the year 2011 and on the basis of some “guesswork”", said the Court.
   Bench: Justices MR Shah and BV Nagarathna
   Case Title: Special Land Acquisition Officer and Ors. v. N. Savitha
   Click here to read more
    
4. Keywords: criminal trial, disciplinary proceedings, acquittal, accused-employee, disciplinary jurisdiction, burden of proof, misconduct, service rules
   [Criminal/Disciplinary Proceedings]  Noting that the principles which govern a disciplinary enquiry are distinct from those which apply to a criminal trial, the Supreme Court has held that the acquittal of the accused employee in a criminal case does not debar the employer from proceeding in the exercise of disciplinary jurisdiction. Court further clarified that while in a prosecution for an offence punishable under the criminal law, the burden lies on the prosecution to establish the ingredients of the offence beyond reasonable doubt and the accused is entitled to a presumption of innocence, the purpose of a disciplinary proceeding by an employer is to enquire into an allegation of misconduct by an employee which results in a violation of the service rules governing the relationship of employment.
   Bench: Justices Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud and Surya Kant
   Case Title: The State of Karnataka & Anr vs. Umesh
   Click here to read more
    
5. Keywords: Review Jurisdiction, error apparent on face of record,  speaking order, reasoned order, interference with court's order
   [Review Jurisdiction] Stressing that while exercising the review jurisdiction, the Court has to satisfy itself of any error apparent on the face of the record which calls for exercise of the review jurisdiction, the Top Court said, "Merely stating that there is an error apparent on the face of the record is not sufficient. It must be demonstrated that in fact there was an error apparent on the face of the record." Court further held that there must be a speaking and reasoned order as to what was that error apparent on the face of the record, which called for interference and therefore a reasoned order is required to be passed.
   Bench: Justices MR Shah and BV Nagarathna
   Case Title: Ratan Lal Patel vs. Dr. Hari Singh Gour Vishwavidyalaya & Another
   Click here to read more
    
6. Keywords: POCSO Act, Section 24, disclosure of victim's name,  Magistrate's permission, police investigation, Section 155(2) CrpC, Code of Criminal Procedure
   [POCSO Act] A division bench of Justices Indira Banerjee and JK Maheshwari on Monday gave divergent opinions on the legal issue of whether Section 155(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) applies to the investigation of an offence under Section 23 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act), i.e. whether a police officer requires a magistrate’s nod before investigating into case of disclosure of a child victim under the POCSO Act. One Gangadhar Narayan Nayak, the Editor of Karavali Munjavu Newspaper, had approached the Top Court after his criminal petition filed under Section 482 CrPC was dismissed by the Karnataka High Court, whilst upholding an order passed by the Principal District Judge, Uttar Kannada, Karwar, taking cognizance against him of offence under Section 23 POCSO Act.
   Bench: Justices Indira Banerjee and JK Maheshwari
   Case Title: Gangadhar Narayan Nayak @ Gangadhar Hiregutti vs. State of Karnataka & Ors.
   ​​​Click here to read more
    
7. Keywords: CESTAT, Customs Act, Section 130, tax exemption, rate of duty, maintainability of appeal, High Court, Supreme Court
   [Customs Act] The Supreme Court last week held that with respect to an issue on claiming exemption under the Customs Act against the order passed by the Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), the appeal would be maintainable before the High Court under Section 130 of the Customs Act, 1962. The bench also noted that a dispute with respect to the exemption claimed and the dispute with regard to the rate of duty are both different, distinct, and mutually exclusive. This view was taken by the top court while dismissing a Special Leave Petition (SLP) filed by M/s. Asean Cableship Pte. Ltd against an order of the Kerala High Court by which the high court had overruled the objection raised by Asean (the assessee) on the maintainability of the appeal before the High Court under Section 130(1) of the Customs Act, 1962 (the Act).
   Bench: Justices MR Shah and BV Nagarathna
   Case Title: M/s. Asean Cableship Pte. Ltd. vs. The Commissioner of Customs
   Click here to read more
    
8. Keywords: Elections, extension of elections, Bombay High Court, indefinite extension, Maharashtra Agricultural Produce Marketing (Development and Regulation) Act, 1963
   [Extension of elections] The Supreme court refused to interfere with an order passed by the Bombay High Court whereby it had refused to grant any fresh extension for conduct of elections at the Nashik Agricultural Produce Committee limited, noting that the extension of the term cannot be read to mean an indefinite extension. Referring to the expression used in the second proviso to Section 14(3) of the Maharashtra Agricultural Produce Marketing (Development and Regulation) Act, 1963, the bench noted that it was quite clear in stipulating that, “where the general election of members of a Committee could not be held for reason beyond the control of the Committee before expiry of the term of office of its members as aforesaid, the State Government may, by order in the Official Gazette, extend from time to time, the term of office of any such Committee, so however, that the period for which the term of office is so extended shall not exceed the period of one year in the aggregate.” (emphasis added)
   Bench: Justices UU Lalit, S Ravindra Bhat and PS Narsimha
   Case Title: Dari Vivid Karyakari Sahakari Sanstha Maryadit & Ors. vs. State of Maharashtra & Ors.
   Click here to read more
9. Keywords: Regularisation of employee, Absorption of employee, Article 226, High Court, supernumerary posts, letters patent appeal
   [Article 226] The Supreme Court has clarified that no direction can be issued by the High Court, in exercise of powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for absorption/regularisation of the employees who were appointed in a temporary unit which was created for a particular project and that too, by creating supernumerary posts. With this view, the Court set aside an order passed by the High Court of Gujarat allowing a LPA and directing the State to consider the cases of the respondent-employees for regularisation sympathetically and if necessary, by creating supernumerary posts.
   Bench: Justices MR Shah and BV Nagarathna
   Case Title: The State of Gujarat and others v. R.J. Pathan and others
   Click here to read more
    
10. Keywords: environmental clearance, exceptional circumstances, pollution norms, polluter pays principle, Consent to establish, consent to operate, The Environment (Protection) Act, 1986
    [Ex post facto EC]  Noting that Ex post facto environmental clearance should not be granted routinely, the Supreme Court on Friday held that the same can be granted in exceptional circumstances taking into account all relevant environmental factors. "Where the adverse consequences of denial of ex post facto approval outweigh the consequences of regularization of operations by grant of ex post facto approval, and the establishment concerned otherwise conforms to the requisite pollution norms, ex post facto approval should be given in accordance with law, in strict conformity with the applicable Rules, Regulations and/or Notifications...", opined the court. The division bench went on to add that in such cases the deviant industry may be penalised by an imposition of heavy penalty on the principle of ‘polluter pays’ and the cost of restoration of environment may be recovered from it.
    Bench: Justices Indira Banerjee and JK Maheshwari
    Case Title: M/S Pahwa Plastics Pvt. Ltd. and Anr. v. Dastak NGO and Ors.
    Click here to read more