Blog

No leniency for an act of theft / misappropriation once proved, either it be a small or large or a small thing – Karnataka HC

No leniency for an act of theft / misappropriation once proved, either it be a small or large or a small thing.

Copy of judgement attached

Recording of evidence in a disciplinary proceeding proposing charges of a major punishment is mandatory -; Supreme Court

Recording of evidence in a disciplinary proceeding proposing charges of a major punishment is mandatory.

Copy of judgement attached

Factual finding of the Labour Court should not normally be disturbed by a Writ Court without compelling reason – Supreme court

Factual finding of the Labour Court should not normally be disturbed by a Writ Court without compelling reason.

Copy of judgement attached

Absence of 90 days and not responding to noticed would amount to abandonment of employment- Supreme Court

Absence of 90 days and not responding to noticed would amount to abandonment of employment.

Copy of judgement attached

Retention allowances paid to seasonal workers is to be included for PF contributions under the EPF Act, 1952 – Bombay HC

Retention allowances paid to seasonal workers must be included in basic wages for PF contributions under the EPF Act, 1952.

Copy of judgement attached

Appellate authority under POSH Act has implied power to consider passing of interim order of stay as well -Karnataka HC

Appellate authority under POSH Act has implied power to consider passing of interim order of stay as well –

Copy of judgement attached.

Compassionate appointment is not a vested right

Compassionate appointment is not a vested right.

Copy of judgement attached

Article 14 of the Constitution cannot be used to perpetuate illegality – Supreme Court

Article 14 of the Constitution cannot be used to perpetuate illegality

Copy of judgement attached

Recruitment Rules cannot be changed midway after the selection process for posts has begun unless the relevant rules expressly permit so – Supreme Court

Recruitment Rules cannot be changed midway after the selection process for posts has begun unless the relevant rules expressly permit so.

Copy of judgement attached

Placement in the select list gives no indefeasible right to appointment – Supreme Court

Placement in the select list gives no indefeasible right to appointment. The State or its instrumentality for bona fide reasons may choose not to fill up the vacancies. However, if vacancies exist, the State or its instrumentality cannot arbitrarily deny appointment to a person within the zone of consideration in the select list.

Copy of judgement attached