Second charge sheet - question in writ proceedings

charge against the respondent had already been enquired into earlier and he had been exonerated of the charge in an earlier proceeding. Hence, he contended that the impugned Charge Memo would amount to double jeopardy and was therefore illegal. He relied upon the decision of this Court in Lt. Governor Delhi and Ors. v. HC Narender Singh 2004 (13) SCC 342.

Post decision hearing - tendency to uphold the decision

K.I. Shephard and Ors. etc. etc. v. Union of India and Ors. MANU/SC/0643/1987 : (1988)ILLJ162SC , this Court held:

...It is common experience that once a decision has been taken, there is tendency to uphold it and a representation may not really yield any fruitful purpose.

[See also Shri Shekhar Ghosh v. Union of India and Anr. MANU/SC/8616/2006 : (2007)1SCC331 and Rajesh Kumar and Ors. v. D.C.I.T. and Ors. MANU/SC/4779/2006 : [2006]287ITR91(SC) ]

Stamp duty and alternative remedy

AIR 2011SC3748 for alternative remedy and stamp matter

Sent from phone

Sent from phone

Land Acquisition Proceedings cannot be challenged after entering into agreement

2011 (6) ALJ 473

Sent from phone

Mandamus - duty

Mehsana DCCB v. State, AIR 2004 SC 1576 (mandamus lies when breach of statute is shown);
Indian Bank (AIR 2008 SC 2585) (court can order inquiry into affairs of coop banks when breach of statute and act to the prejudice of depositors is shown)
Sent from phone

Heirs of deceased employee can claim benefits of service - retiral dues

   

AIR 1996 SC 571

AIR 1969 All 432

AIR 2009 SC 3162

Opinion of Attorney General cannot be sought by CBI

(2007) 1 SCC 110

AIR 2007 SC 1087

Scope of Article 227

a.       In Jai Singh v. Municipal Corporation of Delhi, (2010) 9 SCC 385, the Hon'ble Apex Court while dealing with the scope of Article 227  observed in paragraph 15 that "Undoubtedly, the High Court under this Article, has the jurisdiction to ensure that all subordinate courts as well as statutory or quasi-judicial tribunals, exercise the powers vested in them, within the bounds of their authority."

 

b.      In Shalini Shyam Shetty v. Rajendra Shankar Patil,  (2010) 8 SCC 329 at page 346 para 47, the Hon'ble Apex Court has held that "… in exercise of its jurisdiction under Article 227, the High Court, apart from annulling the proceedings, can also substitute the impugned order by the order which the inferior tribunal should have made." (but see para 49( c) and 66, also but see para 58).

 

c.    Surya Dev Rai v. Ram Chander Rai & Others, (2003) 6 SCC 675 (Paras 6-21)

Heirs of deceased employee can claim benefits of service

AIR 1996 SC 571

AIR 1969 All 432