1.

TITLE OF THE CASE-

Section 33-A of the 1951 Act also includes Information, that the candidate is required to furnish,
under the Act or the Rules
DATE – 1st October 2019
NAME- Satish Ukey V. Devendra Gangadharrao Fadnavis And Anr.
ISSUE
 Whether the provisions of Section 125-A of the 1951 Act would be applicable in the
present case
 Whether the word ‘information’ as mentioned in Section 33-A of the 1951 Act means
only such information as mentioned in clause (i) and (ii) of Section 33-A(1)
 Whether along with the said information a candidate is also required to furnish such other
information as required under the Act or the Rules made thereunder
FACTS
It was alleged that in the affidavit in Form-26, prescribed by the Conduct of Election Rules, 1961
(hereinafter referred to as “the 1961 Rules”), which had accompanied the nomination papers of
the first respondent details of two cases in which cognizance was taken i.e. (i) Summary Case
No.231 of 1996 (under Section 500 of IPC) before the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Nagpur;
and (ii) Regular Criminal Case No.343 of 2003 (Old No.125 of 1998) 3 (under Sections 468,
471, 218, 467, 420 and 34 of IPC) before the Court of Judicial Magistrate First Class, Nagpur
have not been mentioned by the first respondent despite knowledge of the same. Consequently,
according to the appellant – complainant, an infraction of the provisions of Section 125-A has
been committed for which the first respondent is liable to be prosecuted in a court of competent
jurisdiction. On the very same allegations the appellant had challenged the election of the first
respondent before the High Court by instituting Election Petition No.1 of 2014 which has been
dismissed by the High Court by its order dated 19th August, 2015.

RATIO
Hon’ble judges observed in this case that cumulative reading of Section 33-A of the 1951 Act
and Rule 4-A of the 1961 Rules and Form-26 along with the letters dated 24.8.2012, 26.9.2012
and 26.4.2014, in our 26 considered view, make it amply clear that the information to be
furnished under Section 33-A of the 1951 Act includes not only information mentioned in
clauses (i) and (ii) of Section 33-A(1), but also information, that the candidate is required to
furnish, under the Act or the Rules made thereunder and such information should be furnished in
Form 26, which includes information concerning cases in which a competent Court has taken
cognizance (Entry 5(ii) of Form 26). This is apart from and in addition to cases in which charges
have been framed for an offence punishable with imprisonment for two years or more or cases in
which conviction has been recorded and sentence of imprisonment for a period of one year or
more has been imposed (Entries 5(i) and 6 of Form 26 respectively).
Bench
HON’BLE JUSTICE RANJAN GOGOI, HON’BLE JUSTICE DEEPAK GUPTA, HON’BLE
JUSTICE ANIRUDDHA BOSE (SUPREME COURT)

2. TITLE OF THE CASE- Creation of a casteless society is the ultimate aim : SC

DATE – 01 October 2019
NAME UNION OF INDIA V. STATTE OF MAHARASHTRA
ISSUE
 Whether the allegations make out a case under the Atrocities Act and that the allegations
are not frivolous or motivated.
 Whether untouchability has vanished?
 Whether he can shake hand with a person of higher class on equal footing?
 Whether we have been able to reach that level of psyche and human dignity and able to
remove discrimination based upon caste?
FACTS
The Union of India has filed the instant petition for review of the judgment and order dated
20.3.2018 passed by this Court in Criminal Appeal No.416 of 2018. This Court while dealing
with the provisions of Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act,
1989 (for short ‘the Act of 1989’) has issued guidelines in paragraph 83 of the judgment,
RATIO
In the instant case court said that “Creation of a casteless society is the ultimate aim. We
conclude with a pious hope that a day would come, as expected by the framers of the
Constitution, when we do not require any such legislation like Act of 1989, and there is no need
to provide for any reservation to SCs/STs/OBCs, and only one class of human exist equal in all
respects and no caste system or class of SCs/STs or OBCs exist, all citizens are emancipated and
become equal as per Constitutional goal.”
Supreme Court partially recalled the decision of a two-member bench to dilute the provisions of
the SC/ST Act. It said that an FIR can be registered under this act without investigation.
BENCH
HON’BLE JUSTICE ARUN MISHRA, HON’BLE JUSTICE M.R. SHAH, HON’BLE
JUSTICE B.R. GAVAI (SUPREME COURT)

3. TITLE OF THE CASE- Petition disposed but the direction should not be used as
precedent for other cases.
DATE – 01 OCTOBER 2019
NAME- ORIENTAL BANK OF COMMERCE AND ORS. V. JANAK RAJ SHARMA
ISSUE
Petitioner was abroad so that he was not acknowledged with the new scheme
FACTS
The respondent was working as a Senior Manager in appellants-Bank. He took voluntary
retirement on 15.01.2001. On 23.08.2010, the appellants-Bank issued circular granting
opportunity to the employees who were in service of the Bank prior to 29.09.1995 and had
retired after the date but prior to 27.04.2010 to opt for the pension scheme. The circular had a
last date of application which was 25.10.2010 but the respondents got to know about the said
circular only on 18.11.2010. He applied for the same. His application was rejected by the
appellants-Bank on the account of late submission of the application. Being aggrieved by such
rejection, respondent filed writ petition before the High Court.
RATIO-
The appeal was disposed off in the instant case, However, considering the fact that the
respondent had rendered long period of service to the appellants-Bank and keeping in view that
in exceptional circumstance the learned Single Judge as well as the Division Bench of the High
Court had directed the appellants-Bank to accept the option exercised by the respondent herein,
we are not inclined to interfere with the impugned order. However, we reiterate and make it clear
that such direction issued is in the exceptional circumstance keeping in view the facts involved in
the instant case and the same shall not be treated as a precedent in any other case. It is also made
clear that in respect of the said Pension Scheme if any other matter is pending before any other
Court in respect of the appellant-Bank herein or other public sector banks, the direction as
approved in the instant appeal shall not be treated as a precedent in such cases and the said cases
shall be dealt with independently on its own merits.
BENCH
J. R. BANUMATHI, J. A.S. BOPANNA, J. HRISHIKESH ROY (SUPREME COURT)

4. TITTLE OF THE CASE- Courts are not possessed of expertise to dispute medical
reports unless there is strong medical evidence on record to dispute the opinion of the
Medical Board
DATE 01 OCTOBER 2019
NAME OF THE CASE-
NO. 14666828M EX CFN NARSINGH YADAV V. UNION OF INDIA & ORS
ISSUE
 Whether the person was posted in harsh and adverse conditions which led to mental
imbalance.
 Whether the duties assigned to the individual may have led to stress and strain leading to
Psychosis and psychoneurosis
FACTS
The appellant was enrolled in the Indian Army on December 2, 2003. The invaliding Medical
Board found the appellant to be suffering from Schizophrenia, which disability was assessed at
20% for a period of five years. The opinion of the Board was that disability was neither
attributable to nor aggravated by military service and consequently, the appellant was discharged
from army service on May 8, 2007. The claim of the appellant for disability pension was rejected
departmentally and later by the Tribunal and still aggrieved, the appellant is before this Court.
The appellant was appointed as CFN - Craftsman (Military Rank). he was posted at 3 EME
Centre, Bhopal from December 2, 2003 to August 23, 2005 and thereafter at AD Static
Workshop from August 24, 2005 till the time, he was produced before the invaliding Medical
Board. Both the places of posting of the appellant were the peace stations. In respect of disease,
the appellant declared that he was treated, firstly, at INHS, Nivarini Chilka on September 7 and
8, 2006, then, at Command Hospital, Kolkata from September 9, 2006 to December 23, 2006.
Thereafter, he was treated at Military Hospital, Allahabad from January 21, 2007 to February 21,
2007 and finally, at Command Hospital, Kolkata from February 23, 2007 till the time, he was
examined by the invaliding Medical Board. In Part I of the Personal Statement, the Question
asked was to “Give details of any incidents during your service which you think caused or made
your disability worse”. The answer given by the appellant was ‘NIL’. In Part II of the Report, the
Commanding Officer answered ‘No’ to the question – “Did the Duties involve
Severe/exceptional stress and strain?”
RATIO
In this court said that “The appellant was a young boy of 18 years at the time of enrolment and
had been boarded within 3½ years of his service. Even if he was suffering from any mental
disorder prior to enrolment, the same could not be detected as there were intervals of normality.
The appellant was posted in peace station as a Vehicle Mechanic. Neither the nature of job nor
the place of posting was such which could have caused stress and strain leading to disability as
attributed to or aggravated by military service.” “Though, the opinion of the Medical Board is
subject to judicial 14 review but the Courts are not possessed of expertise to dispute such report
unless there is strong medical evidence on record to dispute the opinion of the Medical Board
which may warrant the constitution of the Review Medical Board. The invaliding Medical Board
has categorically held that the appellant is not fit for further service and there is no material on
record to doubt the correctness of the Report of the invaliding Medical Board.”
BENCH .J. L. NAGESWARA RAO, J. HEMANT GUPTA

5. TITTLE OF THE CASE

The expression “unincorporated associations” would include persons who join together in some
common purpose or common action.
DATE OF THE JUDGMENT 03 OCTOBER 2019
NAME OF THE CASE
State of West Bengal & Ors V. Calcutta Club Limited
ISSUE
 Whether the expression “body of persons” would include any incorporated company,
society, association, etc.
 What would be included and can be classified as transactions relating to supply of goods
by an unincorporated association or body of persons to its members by way of cash,
deferred payment or valuable consideration.
FACT
Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes issued a notice to the respondent Club assessee
apprising it that it had failed to make payment of sales tax on sale of food and drinks to the
permanent members during the quarter ending 30-6-2002. After the receipt of the notice, the
respondent Club submitted a representation and the assessing authority required the respondent
Club to appear before it on 18-10-2002. The notice and the communication sent for personal
hearing was assailed by the respondent before the Tribunal praying for a declaration that it is not
a dealer within the meaning of the Act as there is no sale of any goods in the form of food,
refreshments, drinks, etc. by the Club to its permanent members and hence, it is not liable to pay
sales tax under the Act. A prayer was also made before the Tribunal for nullifying the action of
the Revenue threatening to levy tax on the supply of food to the permanent members.
RATIO
It was stated in this case that “When the scheme of service tax changed so as to introduce a
negative list for the first-time post 2012, services were now taxable if they were carried out by
“one person” for “another person” for consideration. “Person” is very widely defined by Section
65B(37) as including individuals as well as all associations of persons or bodies of individuals,
whether incorporated or not. Explanation 3 to Section 65B(44), instead of using the expression
“person” or the expression “an association of persons or bodies of individuals, whether
incorporated or not”, uses the expression “a body of persons” when juxtaposed with “an
unincorporated association”. It was also mentioned in the order that “the expression “body of
persons” occurring in the explanation to Section 65 and occurring in Section 65(25a) and (25aa)
does not refer to an incorporated company or an incorporated cooperative society. The
expression “unincorporated associations” would include persons who join together in some
common purpose or common action”
BENCH J.R.F. Nariman J. Surya Kant, J. V. Ramasubramanian
 6. TITTLE OF CASE
“Providing employment to the displaced Abkari workers is the impossible task” said SC
DATE OF JUGEMENT 04 OCTOBER 2019
NAME
Kerala State Beverages (M and M) Corporation Limited V. P.P. Suresh & Ors, Etc. Etc. & Ors.
ISSUE-
 Whether the displaced abkari workers had a vested right of rehabilitation pursuant to the
Government Order dated 20.02.2002
 Whether modification/ alteration of the Government Order dated 20.02.2002 is vitiated
due to unfairness, arbitrariness and unreasonableness.
 Whether the Respondents are entitled to any relief after the passage of 23 years since they
lost their jobs due to ban on arrack.
FACTS –
After the ban of arrack in Kerala, workers were deprived of their livelihood. Since it was not
possible to provide re-employment to the displaced arrack workers, State Government paid
compensation of Rs. 30,000/- each to the arrack workers in lieu of rehabilitation. In addition, an
ex gratia of Rs.2000/- was also disbursed by the Government. The Government ordered that 25%
of all daily wage employment vacancies which would arise in the Corporation in future shall
stand reserved to be filled up by displaced workers who were members of the Abkari Workers
Welfare Fund Board and whose services were terminated due to the ban of arrack. In the
meanwhile, Rules 4(2) and 9(10)(b) were introduced in the Kerala Abkari Shops Disposal Rules,
2002 4 | P a g e (for short “the Rules”). The said Rules provided for absorption of arrack workers
who lost employment due to the abolition of the Abkari shops. The said Rules were declared
ultra vires the Abkari Act enacted in the year, 1902
RATIO
In this case court observed that “The promise held out by the Government to provide
employment to the displaced Abkari workers had become an impossible task in view of the non-
availability of vacancies in the Corporation. The decision taken by the Government in overriding
public interest was a measure to strike a balance between the competing interest of the displaced
Abkari workers and unemployed youth in the State of Kerala. The impairment of the
fundamental rights of the Respondents due to the change in policy cannot be said to be
excessive. Hence, it cannot be said that the change in policy regarding re-employment of
displaced abkari workers is disproportionate.” Court further added that “We are not in agreement
with the findings recorded by the High Court that a right of appointment accrued to the
Respondents and it matured into a Right to Life as provided in Article 21 of the Constitution.” It
BENCH – NAGEHWAR RAO, J HEMANT GUPTA

7. TITTLE OF CASE
Introduction of the NEET Scheme, as such, has nothing to do with the Institutional Preference
DATE OF JUGEMENT 04 OCTOBER 2019
NAME
Yatinkumar Jasubhai Patel and others …Appellants Versus State of Gujarat and others
ISSUE
 Challenging the policy of “Institutional Preference” for admission to the Post Graduate
Medical Courses
 Whether after the introduction of the NEET Scheme, still the “Institutional Preference” in
the Post Graduate Medical Courses would be permissible?
FACTS-
In exercise of powers under Section 39 read with Section 32 of the Gujarat University Act, 1949,
the Gujarat University has framed the rules for the purpose of governing admission to Post
Graduate Courses. As per the aforesaid Rules, 50% of the total available seats in the academic
year in various Post Graduate Degree and Diploma Courses in each subject in Government
Institution/Colleges will be filled up as “All India Quota Seats” by competent authority and the
remaining seats will be filled up in accordance with Rule 4.1 of the Rules of the University. As
per Rule 3 of the Rules, remaining 50% of the total seats in Post Graduate Courses will be filled
up by the “Admission Committee” of University. As per Rule 4.3 of the Rules, after merit list
prepared under rule 4.1 is exhausted, candidates graduating from any other University located in
Gujarat State will be considered
RATIO
Even while giving admissions in the State quota/institutional reservation quota, still the
admissions are required to be given on the basis of the merits determined on the basis of the
NEET examination results. Under the circumstances, introduction of the NEET Scheme, as
such, has nothing to do with the “Institutional Preference”. Therefore, the change by introduction
of the NEET Scheme shall not affect the Institutional Preference/Reservation as approved by this
Court from time to time in catena of decisions, more particularly the decisions referred to
hereinabove. Under the guise of introduction of the NEET Scheme, the petitioners cannot be
permitted to reagitate and/or reopen the issue with respect to Institutional Preference
BENCH Hon’ble justice Arun Mishra, Hon’ble justice M.R. Shah, Hon’ble justice B.R. Gavai

8. TITTLE OF CASE
Quick disposal of commercial litigations so as to benefit the litigants especially those who are
engaged in trade and commerce which in turn will further economic growth of the country.

DATE OF JUGEMENT- 04 OCTOBER 2019

NAME
AMBALAL SARABHAI ENTERPRISES LTD V. K.S. INFRASPACE LLP & ANR.
ISSUE
 Whether the transaction between the parties herein which is the subject matter of the suit
could be considered as a “commercial dispute” so as to enable the Commercial Court to
entertain the suit.
 Whether the immovable property involved could be considered as being used exclusively
in trade or commerce
 Whether the intended transaction between the parties was of such nature that it is to be
construed as a commercial dispute.
FACTS
The appellant herein executed an agreement to sell dated 14.02.2012 in favour of the respondent
No. 2 in respect of the land which is described in the agreement. The respondent No. 2 assigned
and transferred all his rights under the said agreement to sell in favour of respondent No.1 by
executing an assignment deed dated 12.10.2017. In that view, the respondent No. 1 herein was to
purchase the lands which were the subject matter of the agreement from the appellant herein.
Accordingly, the sale was made under a Deed of Conveyance dated 03.11.2017. Since certain
other aspects were to be completed regarding the change relating to the nature of the use of the
land for conclusion of the transaction, the right of the appellant in respect of the land was to be
protected. In that view a Memorandum of Understanding dated 03.11.2017 was entered into
between the appellant and the respondents herein. As per the same, a Mortgage Deed was
required to be executed by respondent No. 1 herein in favour of the appellant.
RATIO
The object and purpose of the establishment of Commercial Courts, Commercial Divisions and
Commercial Appellate Divisions of the High Court is to ensure that the cases involved in
commercial disputes are disposed of expeditiously, fairly and at reasonable cost to the litigants.
Keeping in view the object and purpose of the establishment of the Commercial Courts and fast
tracking procedure provided under the Act, the statutory provisions of the Act and the words
incorporated thereon are to be meaningfully interpreted for quick disposal of commercial
litigations so as to benefit the litigants especially those who are engaged in trade and commerce
which in turn will further economic growth of the country.

BENCH .J. R. BANUMATHI (SUPREME COURT)

9. TITTLE OF CASE
The powers under Section 433 of Cr.PC can only be exercised by the appropriate Government
not by any court.
DATE OF JUGEMENT 04 OCTOBER 2019
NAME
RAJ KUMAR V. THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH
ISSUE
 Whether the article complies with the standards laid down or not?
FACTS
On 30.10.1995 a sample of milk was collected from the appellant by the Food Inspector. The
same was sent to the Public Analyst who received the same on 02.11.1995. The sample was
analysed and Milk Fat (MF for short) was found to be 4.6% and Milk Solid NonFat (MSNF for
short) was 7.7%, against the prescribed standard of 8.5%. The appellant was prosecuted after
obtaining consent of the Chief Medical Officer
RATIO
Court in this case observed that “A bare perusal of Section 433 of Cr.PC shows that the powers
under Section 433 can only be exercised by the appropriate Government. These powers cannot
be exercised by any court including this Court. At best, the court can recommend to the State
Government that such power may be exercised but the power of the appropriate Government
cannot be usurped by the courts and the Government cannot be directed to pass ‘formal
compliance order’. Furthermore, the power under Article 142, in our considered view, cannot be
used in total violation of the law. When a minimum sentence is prescribed by law, this Court
cannot, in exercise of its power under Article 142, pass an order totally contrary to law. If such
power could be used in a food adulteration case to impose a sentence lower than the minimum
prescribed, then even in cases of murder and rape
BENCH J. Deepak Gupta, J. Aniruddha Bose

10. TITTLE OF CASE

Right conferred on minorities under Article 30 is only to ensure equality with the majority
DATE OF JUGEMENT 1 October, 2019
NAME Kiran Jain vs Government Of Nct Of Delhi & Ors.
ISSUE
 Whether the petitioner can be allowed to suffer for any irregularity?
 Whether the appointment of the petitioner herein as TGT (Hindi) while her higher
qualification was M.A. (English) was proper?
 Whether Rule 96 of the Delhi School Education Rules, 1973 is applicable to minority
aided schools ?
FACTS
In this present case school invited applications for appointment of teacher through a newspaper
advertisement dated 26.08.2017. The petitioner applied for the same and was selected vide
appointment letter dated 18.12.2017 for permanent post. Consequently, the petitioner joined the
school on 16.01.2018 and continued to teach in the school till 18.08.2019 when the above
mentioned order of termination was passed by the school. It is further the case of the petitioner
that respondent no.3/school duly intimated the Section Officer, Accounts Department of
Directorate of Education about the selection of the petitioner as TGT Hindi and requested for the
grant in aid for her salary to the extent of 95%, the school being aided. However, the respondent
no.2 through its letter dated 31.01.2018 to the respondent no.3/school asked for certain queries
regarding which due intimation was sent by the school vide letter dated 05.02.2018.
Subsequently, vide letter dated 10.08.2019, the respondent no.1&2 informed the school that
appointment of the petitioner was not in order and, therefore, there is no question of grant of
sanction of salary and she must be relieved. Through a letter dated 18.08.2018, the respondent
no.3/school called upon the petitioner regarding termination of her employment.
RATIO
It is not necessary for us to examine the extent of power to make regulations, which can be
enforced against linguistic minority institutions, as we have already discussed the same in the
earlier part of the judgment. No doubt, right conferred on minorities under Article 30 is only to
ensure equality with the majority but, at the same time, what protection is available to them and
what right is granted to them under Article 30 of the Constitution cannot be diluted or impaired
on the pretext of framing of regulations in exercise of its statutory powers by the State. The
permissible regulations, as afore-indicated, can always be framed and where there is
maladministration or even where a minority linguistic or religious school is being run against the
public or national interest, appropriate steps can be taken by the authorities including closure but
in accordance with law. The minimum qualifications, experience, other criteria for making
appointments, etc. are the matters which will fall squarely within the power of the State to frame
regulations but power to veto or command that a particular person or class of persons ought to be
appointed to the school failing which the grant-in-aid will be withdrawn, will apparently be a
subject which would be arbitrary and unenforceable.
BENCH- SURESH KUMAR KAIT) JUDGE, DELHI HIGH COURT
 11. TITTLE OF CASE
DATE OF JUGEMENT 30 September, 2019
NAME Jisal Rasak vs The State Of Kerala
ISSUE
FACTS

In the course of investigation, the investigating officer chanced upon information that the
congregation of some of the accused in and around the scene of crime immediately prior to the
murder and also of the injured witness being carried away from the location had been captured in
three security cams installed at nearby places. The footage was retrieved by following the
procedure and the same was forwarded to the Cyber Forensic Lab for analysis and a report was
obtained. The footage was produced before Court along with the final report by categorizing the
same as a material object. The petitioner approached the learned Magistrate and filed an
application seeking to obtain copies of

(a) the CCTV footage relied on by the prosecution,

(b) the FSL report obtained from the Forensic Science Laboratory relating to the CCTV footage
and

(c) the report submitted by the investigating agency seeking further investigation.

The prosecution vehemently opposed the handing over of the CCTV footage and it was argued
that the footage having been produced as a material object, the digital copies of the same cannot
be furnished. The learned Magistrate ordered for the issuance of the records, which were
requested for, but refused to issue digital copies of the camera footage.
RATIO
Hon’ble justice in this case stated that” I have no doubt in my mind that the investigating agency
has committed a grave error by producing the CCTV footage as a material object and also in
refusing to give a copy of the same to the accused. The accused is entitled to a digital copy of the
CCTV footage, which is relied on by the prosecution to prove the charge. That being the case,
the order passed by the learned Magistrate will stand set aside.”
BENCH

12. TITTLE OF CASE

DATE OF JUGEMENT 3 OCTOBER, 2019
NAME HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA VS THE STATE OF TRIPURA
ISSUE
Whether the order of detention, as prayed for, needs to be quashed on the ground of non-supply
of document relied upon by the detaining authority in passing the order of detention or not.
FACTS
Petitioner is a resident of Tripura. Allegedly, he engages himself in the illicit traffic of narcotic
drugs and psychotropic substances, which activities the authorities have found to be prejudicial
to public interest and, as such, his detention in the attending facts and circumstances is
warranted. Consequently, vide order dated 26.12.2018 the appropriate authority under the
provision of the Prevention of Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act,
1988 issued an order under Section 3 directing detention of the petitioner. This order dated
26.12.2018 passed by Addl. Secretary to the Government of Tripura was served upon the
petitioner on 15.01.2019. It is a matter of record that document whatsoever forming part of the
opinion leading to the detention was ever Page - 3 of 12 supplied to the petitioner, despite his
written request dated 18.01.2019 specifically praying for supply of copy of the FIRs, for the
petitioner had denied his involvement or any connection with respect thereto. The petitioner's
representation stands rejected by one word using an expression "reject the prayer" without
assigning any reason(s) or dealing with anyone of the contentions raised by him.
RATIO
Court in the instant case stated that “In this view of the matter, on this short ground alone,
holding the detaining authority not to have supplied the vital and material documents, thus
enabling the petitioner to make an effective representation and as such his constitutional right
having been violated.”
BENCH HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. SANJAY KAROL, HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE
ARINDAM LODH, TRIPURA HIGH COURT