Delhi High Court Weekly Round Up: July 25 To July 31, 2022

NOMINAL INDEXCitations 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 707 TO 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 727MANJU DEVI v. HINDUSTAN PETROLEUM CORPORATION LTD 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 707JAEWOO PARK v. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 708AIREEN INSTITUTION OF EDUCATION v. NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR TEACHER EDUCATION & ANR. 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 709SUSHIL KUMAR v. CENTRAL REGISTRAR OF COOP SOCY AND ORS 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 710Bharat Heavy Electrical Ltd. v. Bhatia Engineering Company 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 711Orchid Infrastructure Developers (P) Ltd. versus Five Star Constructions Pvt. Ltd. 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 712DB CORP LTD v. SHAILJA NAQVI & ORS. 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 713SRF Ltd. versus Union of India 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 714MONDELEZ INDIA FOODS PVT. LTD. AND ANR. v. NEERAJ FOOD PRODUCTS 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 715ANJALI BHARDWAJ v. CPIO, SUPREME COURT OF INDIA 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 716Easy Trip Planners Ltd. versus One97 Communications Ltd. 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 717Food Corporation of India v. Adani Agri Logistics Ltd. 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 718MANOJ MISHRA v. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 720SMT. POONAM BHANOT v. VIRENDER SHARMA & ORS. 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 721M/S. Unicon Engineers versus M/S. Jindal Steel and Power Ltd. 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 722RAJENDER PRASAD PANT v. M/S EXCHANGE AGENCIES & ANR. 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 723TV Today Network Pvt Ltd v. Newslaundry & ORS. 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 725BOEHRINGER INGELHEIM INTERNATIONAL GMBH v. THE CONTROLLER OF PATENTS & ANR. 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 726DR. ABHINAV KUMAR & ORS. v. UNION OF INDIA, THROUGH SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE & ANR. 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 7271. Compassionate Appointment Offered To Dependant Of Deceased Employee Is A Concession, Not A Right: Delhi High CourtCASE TITLE: MANJU DEVI v. HINDUSTAN PETROLEUM CORPORATION LTDCitation: 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 707The Delhi High Court has reiterated that an appointment on compassionate ground offered to the dependant of a deceased employee is a mere concession and not a right.A single judge bench of Justice Chandra Dhari Singh observed," The whole object behind granting compassionate employment is to enable the family to tide over the sudden crisis. Appointment on compassionate ground offered to a dependant of a deceased employee is an exception to the said rule. It is a concession and not a right."The petitioner in this case was the wife of an en employee of Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd who passed away while in service due to a Road accident. Through the petition, the petitioner sought compassionate employment for her son under the Rule 7(b)(ii)/8A of the HPCL Employee's Superannuation Benefit Fund Scheme, as per which she was entitled to the benefits as her deceased husband would have received had he superannuated.2. Outraging Modesty Of Woman: Delhi High Court Quashes FIR Based On Compromise With Condition That Accused Provide Computers In Two MCD SchoolsCase Title: JAEWOO PARK v. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ANRCitation: 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 708The Delhi High Court has quashed an FIR filed by a woman, working as a domestic servant in the Petitioner's house who is accused of outraging her modesty, following a compromise between the parties. However, it imposed a condition on the Petitioner to provide two fully functional computers each with printers in two schools run by Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD)."I am of the view that the entire police machinery has been put in motion on account of the acts of commission & omission on behalf of the petitioner and useful time of the police has been invested. The State resources have been unnecessarily overburdened. Hence the petitioner must do some social good for the benefit of the society," Justice Jasmeet Singh observed.3. NCTE Act | Service Of Show Cause Notice Vital For An Educational Institution, Affords Opportunity To Put Forth Their Stand Qua Alleged Deficiencies: Delhi HCCase Title: AIREEN INSTITUTION OF EDUCATION v. NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR TEACHER EDUCATION & ANR.Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 709The Delhi High Court has observed that the service of show-cause notice is a vital communication for an institute as it affords an opportunity to them to put forth their stand qua the alleged deficiencies, failing which adverse consequences are bound to follow."This opportunity is thus, crucial for the institutes whose recognition and operation are at stake," Justice Sanjeev Narula added.The Court was dealing with a plea challenging the decision of Western Regional Committee taken at its 322nd meeting held from 23rd to 24th November, 2020 whereby the recognition granted to Petitioner institute namely Aireen Institution of Education, for B.Ed. course was withdrawn.4. Mere Regulation Of A Body By A Statute Does Not Mean That The Body Is Discharging 'Public Function': Delhi High CourtCASE TITLE: SUSHIL KUMAR v. CENTRAL REGISTRAR OF COOP SOCY AND ORSCitation: 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 710The Delhi High Court has reiterated that merely because a body is obligated to comply with various statutory requirements, that cannot be...

Delhi High Court Weekly Round Up: July 25 To July 31, 2022

Nupur Thapliyal

Tags