Cooperative Court maintains jurisdiction over dispute as it involves societys management and property, with Respondent No.1s claims linked to society, distinguishing this case from scenarios involving third-party private transactions.
Denial of benefit of maternity leave to Petitioner only on ground that Petitioner was granted a technical break of 1 or 2 days in service is unjustifiable and untenable.
Claimants are entitled to statutory benefits, including rental compensation for time deprived of land income hence, Reference Courts conclusions were determined incorrect, warranting modifications to initial awards.
It is necessary to conduct detailed investigation into genealogy claims made by Petitioner and his father, following a review of multiple genealogy charts.
Respondent Bank is directed to consider application of Petitioner for appointment of his son on compassionate ground and in lieu thereof grant lumpsum exgratia payment.
Petitioners wife was COVID positive at time of death, supported by substantial medical evidence hence, impugned order of collector set aside and Authorities are mandated to decide on claim within eight weeks.
Administration has failed to respond to requests for Petitioners appointment based on compassionate grounds, effectively undermining intended purpose of appointment scheme hence, school Management directed to comply with Education Officers directives.
Petitioners did not provide sufficient grounds for intervention and transfers within district did not warrant extraordinary scrutiny under Article 226 of Constitution.
Transaction involved the transfer of immovable property rights and it lacked any connection to Petitioners business activities, indicating an absence of supply of service as defined by law hence, impugned Show cause notice issued by Respondent No.1 is set aside.
Impugned order quashed and remanded for Minister to reevaluate and provide concrete findings on alleged misappropriation of food grains by Respondent No. 3/DSO.
Petitioners' claim for larger commercial structures is unfounded, as they do not own land and have exceeded originally allotted space.
Lack of seriousness from Petitioners in contesting suit, which has been ongoing since 2018 and reasons insufficient to condone delay hence, order rejecting Petitioners' application to file written statement, proper.
Matter, concerning a residential flat, does not support Respondents claims based on previous judgments hence; Respondent is directed to hand over possession of suit flat to Petitioner.
Rejection of Plaint based on Order 7 Rule 11 of CPC is deemed inappropriate, as case seeks to protect deceaseds estate and must continue alongside probate proceedings.
No evidence showed that employees of other CPSEs perform similar work, hold similar qualifications or discharge similar responsibilities hence, decision by MOIL to maintain distinct pay structure is justified for administrative efficiency.
Respondents-employees have proved before Industrial Court that they have completed 240 days of continuous service in one calendar year therefore, Industrial Court has rightly granted permanency in their favour.
Lack of a properly marked 'Domicile Certificate' should not disqualify a candidate whose entire record is from Maharashtra.
Voluntary retirement, while considered premature, does not deprive an employee of their pension benefits.
No writ of mandamus can be issued to compel authorities to treat Petitioner as eligible in contravention of governing statute.
Legal heirs are entitled to Rs. 5,00,000 in cases of death or permanent disability without any additional considerations hence, amended Section 164 of Act is applicable retroactively, allowing for this entitlement.
Tap the button below to open the PDF in your device's default viewer