Skip to main content

Posts

Showing posts from January, 2023

RAM RATAN v. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

 A B C D E F G H 866 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2021] 9 S.C.R. [2021] 9 S.C.R. 866 866 RAM RATAN v. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH (Criminal Appeal No.1333 of 2018) DECEMBER 17, 2021 [N. V. RAMANA, CJI, A. S. BOPANNA AND HIMA KOHLI, JJ.] Penal Code, 1860 – ss.392, 397 – Appellant along with other two accused was convicted u/ss.392, 397 r/w s.11/13, MPDVPK Act, 1981 – On appeal, held: Complainant narrated in detail the manner in which he was woken up by the accused while he was sleeping in the hut and the demand for money that was made by brandishing the firearm – Motorcycle and mobile which was stolen were recovered – Appellant participated in the offence of committing robbery as the motorcycle was recovered at his instance – His conviction u/s.392 by trial court which was upheld by High Court is sustained – Sentence modified to the period of imprisonment undergone – Further, though all the three accused had taken part in the offence of committing robbery, only one of the co-accused had used ...

K. ANJINAPPA v. K.C. KRISHNA REDDY AND ANR.

 A B C D E F G H 1034 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2021] 9 S.C.R. [2021] 9 S.C.R. 1034 1034 K. ANJINAPPA v. K.C. KRISHNA REDDY AND ANR. (Civil Appeal No. 7478 of 2019) DECEMBER 17, 2021 [M. R. SHAH AND B. V. NAGARATHNA, JJ.] Advocates Act, 1961 – ss.35, 36, 36B – Held: Disposal of a complaint received by a State Bar Council u/s.35 within a period of one year from the date of receipt of such complaint is mandatory – Only in an exceptional case, by giving valid reasons to be recorded as to why the complaint could not be disposed of within one year, such complaints are required to be transferred to the Bar Council of India as provided u/s.36B – Thus, the transfer of the complaint(s) received u/s.35 from the State Bar Council to the Bar Council of India is an exception – Further, on such transfer the Bar Council of India shall also dispose of the transferred proceedings/complaints within one year from receipt thereof – In the present case, the complaint filed by appellant against an advocate...

RAJESH PRAVINCHANDRA RAJYAGURU v. GUJARAT WATER SUPPLY & SEWERAGE BOARD AND ORS.

 A B C D E F G H 846 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2021] 9 S.C.R. [2021] 9 S.C.R. 846 846 RAJESH PRAVINCHANDRA RAJYAGURU v. GUJARAT WATER SUPPLY & SEWERAGE BOARD AND ORS. (Civil Appeal No. 7578 of 2021) DECEMBER 17, 2021 [DR. DHANANJAYA Y CHANDRACHUD AND M.R. SHAH, JJ.] Service Law – Grant of pay-scales – Autonomous body vis-àvis State Government – Claim for parity – Appellants worked as daily rated employees with the Respondent-Board – Respondent adopted a Resolution in 1988 (the Parent Resolution) passed by State Government granting benefits to the skilled daily wager workmen – Appellants were accordingly granted pay scale of Rs.750 and other benefits flowing from the said Resolution – Subsequent Resolutions issued by State Government in 1991 and 1992 modified the Parent Resolution, granting pay scale of Rs.950-1500 to a class of daily wagers as specified therein – Appellants claimed entitlement to the aforesaid pay scale – Writ petition allowed by Single Judge – Order set aside by ...