Supreme Court Weekly Round Up: April 11 To April 17, 2022

Supreme Court Judgements 1. Disclosure Of Material Information Itself Could Be A Ground For Termination Of Services : Supreme Court Case Name: Union of India vs Dillip Kumar Mallick | CA 2754 OF 2022 Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 360 The Supreme Court bench of Justices Dinesh Maheshwari and MM Sundresh has reiterated that non-disclosure of material information itself could be a ground for cancellation of employment or termination of services. 2. 'Part Of Agrarian Reform, Protected By Article 31A Constitution': Supreme Court Upholds 1992 Haryana Amendment To Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulation) Act Case Name: State of Haryana Through Secretary to Government of Haryana v. Jai Singh And Ors.| Civil Appeal No. 6990 of 2014 Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 361 The Supreme Court has upheld the validity of the 1992 Haryana Amendment ("Amending Act") to the Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulation) Act. 1961, which vests land reserved for common purposes by applying pro-rate cut in the village Panchayat. A Bench comprising Justices Hemant Gupta and V. Ramasubramanian allowed the appeals filed by the State of Haryana and the Panchayats and upheld the validity of the impugned Amending Act on the ground that it forms a part of agrarian reform and is protected under Article 31A of the Constitution. 3. Section 366 IPC Would Be Attracted Only When There Is A Forceful Compulsion Of Marriage : Supreme Court Case Name: Mafat Lal vs State of Rajasthan | CrA 592 OF 2022 Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 362 The Supreme Court observed that an offence under Section 366 IPC would be attracted only when there is a forceful compulsion of marriage, by kidnapping or by inducing a woman. The bench of Justices S. Abdul Nazeer and Vikram Nath observed that no fruitful purpose would be served by relegating the matter for conducting the trial as the same would not be conducive for either of the appellants and it would be a futile exercise. 4. Term Of Office Of A Nominated Member Of Wakf Board Can Be Curtailed: Supreme Court Case Title: State of Maharashtra vs Shaikh Mahemud | CA 2784 OF 2022 Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 363 The Supreme Court observed that the term of office of a nominated member of Wakf Board can be curtailed. The bench comprising Justices Hemant Gupta and V. Ramasubramanian observed that appointment of members by the method of nomination always stands on a slightly different footing than election. 5. If There Is Difference Between CAT Judicial Member & Administrative Member, Refer To 3rd Member; Reference To Full Bench Not Required : Supreme Court Case Name: Daljit Singh vs Arvind Samyal | SLP(C) 5192-5194/2022 Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 364 The Supreme Court observed that a reference to the Full Bench of the Central Administrative Tribunal is not required if there is a case of difference of opinion between the Judicial Member and the Administrative Member of the Tribunal. In such a situation, the matter is required to be referred to the third Member/Chairman who has to give his own decision upon such a reference, the bench comprising Justices MR Shah and BV Nagarathna observed. 6. Permission Granted For Medical Admissions For Subsequent Year Cannot Be Deemed To Be Permission For Earlier Year : Supreme Court Case Name: Central Council for Indian Medicine v. Karnataka Ayurveda Medical College And Ors.| Civil Appeal No. 2892 of 2022 Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 365 The Supreme Court bench of Justices L. Nageswara Rao and B.R. Gavai held that permission granted for undertaking admission of students for a subsequent academic year cannot be deemed to be permission granted for earlier academic year when the Ayurveda Medical College was not fulfilling the criteria of minimum standard as per the Indian Medicine Central Council (Post Graduate Ayurveda Education) Regulations, 2016. In the said terms it clarified the effect of the judgment of the Apex Court in Ayurved Shastra Seva Mandal and Another v. Union of India and Others (2013) 16 SCC 696. 7. Right To Establish An Educational Institution Can Be Regulated To Ensure Maintenance Of Proper Academic Standards, Atmosphere & Infrastructure: Supreme Court Case Name: Dental Council of India vs Biyani Shikshan Samiti | CA 2912 OF 2022 Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 366 The Supreme Court observed that the right to establish an educational institution can be regulated to ensure the maintenance of proper academic standards, atmosphere and infrastructure and the prevention of maladministration. The bench comprising Justices L Nageswara Rao and B R Gavai observed thus while upholding Regulation 6(2)(h) of the Dental Council of India (Establishment of New Dental Colleges, Opening of New or Higher Course of Studies or Training and Increase of Admission Capacity in Dental Colleges) ...

Supreme Court Weekly Round Up: April 11 To April 17, 2022

Shruti Kakkar

Tags