Special Appeal Pending - Writ Petitioner's interest to be protected

When special appeal involving the same questions of law which are subject matter of a fresh writ petition is pending adjudication, the interest of the writ petitioner is to be protected in the interim. 

Writ Petition No. 4047 of 2012 (S/S) dated 24.8.2012

Strict Construction of Taxing Statutes

A taxing statute, as is well-known, must be construed strictly. In Sneh
Enterprises v. Commissioner of Customs [2006] 7 SCC 714, it was held :

"While dealing with a taxing provision, the principle of 'Strict Interpre-
tation should be applied. The Court shall not interpret the statutory
provision in such a manner which would create an additional fiscal burden on
a person. It would never be done by invoking the provisions of another Act,
which are not attracted. It is also trite that while two interpretations are
possible, the Court ordinarily would interpret the provisions in favour of a
taxpayer and against the Revenue."

Alternative Remedy - Writ & Arbitration

AIR 2012 Chh 123 (relying on AIR 2008 SC 2160)

 

Action is not for enforcment of contractual obligation, but to protection the Petitioner from arbitrary action of the State - writ would be maintainable.

Cooperative Society would be public authority - if substantially financed

http://delhicourts.nic.in/JAN12/Northern%20zone%20Railway%20Employees%20Vs.pdf

 

AIR 2012  Del 112

 

NZRE Coop v. Central Registrar, Co-op Society

Societies registered under the Cooperative Socities Act would be 'public authority'

AIR 2012 Kerala 124 (Full Bench)

 

Right to Information Act

Debt Recovert Tribunal and Code of Civil Procedure

The DRT is not bound by Code of Civil Procedure, it has jurisdiction to exercise powers of Court as contained in Civil Procedure Code; it can travel beyond CPC provided it obserbes principles of natural justice.

 

AIR 2012 Bom 127

entitlement of back wages

 In PNB v. Virendra Kumar Goel, AIR 2004 SC 3988, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has been pleased to hold as under:

 

"The applicants shall be reinstated into their posts with continuity in service, back wages and all consequential benefits as are entitled to them under the law. They shall, however, refund the entire amount deposited into their bank accounts with interest accrued, if any, to the bank. Full refund of the amount by the applicants would be the condition precedent for reinstatement. Mr. Mukul Rohtagi learned ASG submits that applying the principle of 'No Work No Pay', back wages should not be allowed to them on their reinstatement. We are unable to accept this contention. The applicants were out of their jobs for no fault of theirs. Even otherwise, party in breach of contract can hardly seek for any equitable relief."

 

Similar view has been taken by this Hon'ble Court in 2007(3)ADJ1 Brijendra Prakash v. Director of Education and also in 2007 4 AWC 3382, Ram Narain Singh's Case, and in Mukeem Ahmad v. State of UP, Writ Petition No. 4599 of 2010 (S/S) dated 5.1.2011 (reported at MANU/UP/0056/2011