Important Supreme Court Judgments [ November 22, 2018]
1. Uttar Pradesh Public Service Commission v. Surendra Kumar
When recommendations were made for substantive number of posts on 12.08.2010, we are of the view that period of one year for operating wait-list is to be computed from 12.08.2010 but not from the last recommendation made for one post, vide letter dated 28.08.2012.
(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});
2. M. C. Mehta v. Union of India
If a mob goads an elected MP to commit a far more serious offence, would it mean that the elected representative would act on the instructions of the mob and commit the offence? A large number of such situations can arise on a day to day basis and it is disconcerting to note that an elected member of a responsible political party can succumb to pressure from a mob rather than require the mob to follow the rule of law. In such a situation, the elected representative ceases to be a leader and becomes a blind follower.
(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});
3. South Delhi Municipal Corporation v. SMS AAMW Tollways Private Limited
A right of appeal is a creature of statute and can only be exercised in the manner provided by the statute.
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 – Section 11 (6) – Arbitration has always been understood to mean the process by which a dispute is resolved by an arbitrator chosen or acceptable to both sides under an arbitration agreement between the two parties.
4. Central Board of Secondary Education v. T.K. Rangarajan
(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});
![Tax Law Internship Opportunity at Legum Attorney [Chamber of Ashish Panday], Delhi [Tax Litigation]: Apply by 2nd November](https://www.ourlegalworld.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/Legum-Attorney-Intern.png)
