Motor Accident Claim – Appellant’s appeal against the judgment and award of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal – Appellant seeks enhancement of compensation – Appellant sustained severe injuries in a motor accident caused by rash and negligent driving – Appellant’s income claimed at Rs. 4000/- per month – Dispute regarding the assessment of compensation and income – Court finds that the Tribunal incorrectly assessed the appellant’s income as a housewife at Rs. 3000/- per month, instead accepting her claim of Rs. 4000/- per month – Court acknowledges the invaluable contribution of a housewife and cites a Supreme Court case supporting this view – Court also determines enhanced compensation for pain, suffering, and future prospects – Appellant awarded an additional sum of Rs. 2,14,000/- with 6% per annum interest from the date of the claim application. [Para 9-14]

Hindu Law – Succession – Legitimacy of Children – Writ petition by widow and daughters of a deceased employee claiming retiral benefits – Marriage of appellant No.1 during subsistence of first marriage – Marriage void – Daughters born out of void marriage deemed legitimate for succession – Appeal allowed to the extent daughters entitled to father's estate and retiral benefits. [Paras 1-23]

Void Marriage – Rights of Children – Held – Appellant No.1 cannot claim as legally wedded wife due to subsistence of first marriage – Appellants No.2 and 3, daughters born out of void marriage, are legitimate for succession purposes – Entitled to estate and retiral benefits of deceased father. [Para 17]

Judicial Precedents – Legitimacy under Hindu Succession Act – Held – Children of void marriages are legitimate under Section 16 of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, for inheritance – Daughters' entitlement to retiral benefits and estate upheld – Decisions in Rameshwari Devi and Vidyadhari cases followed. [Para 16]

Decision – Appeal Allowed – Daughters' entitlement to retiral benefits and estate affirmed – Service benefits directed to be released with arrears and family pension from father's death date – Order to be complied within two months. [Paras 19-25]

Service Law – Recovery of Excess Payment – No Fraud or Mistake by Employee – Appeal against quashing of recovery order – Respondent received excess increment for 20 years due to employer's mistake – No allegation of fraud or mistake by respondent – Inequitable to recover after retirement or near retirement – Recovery orders set aside – Appeal dismissed. [Para 31-32]

Employee's Innocence – Analysis – Respondent had no role in pay fixation or excess payment – Excess payment received for nearly 20 years without any fault of respondent – Recovery at retirement considered harsh and inequitable – Judgment of Single Judge upheld. [Para 31-35]

Decision – Appeal Dismissed – Findings of Single Judge affirmed – Excess recovery deemed inequitable and arbitrary – No error in quashing recovery order – Appeal dismissed. [Para 40-41]

Criminal Law – Conviction Appeal – FIR Delay – Appeal against conviction under Section 397 IPC – Incident on 23.04.1996 – FIR registered on 18.05.1996 – 25 days delay in FIR registration – Place of occurrence on busy road in thickly populated area – Complainant admitted lodging complaint on occurrence date, but no complaint exhibited – Prosecution failed to explain delay in FIR registration – Conviction unsustainable – Appellants acquitted. [Paras 1-8]

Identification Parade – Test Identification – Held – Complainant saw accused before FIR registration – Accused refused identification parade after FIR registration – Accused not produced in muffled faces – Prosecution obliged to conduct TIP at first opportunity – Identification in court without TIP unreliable – Conviction unsustainable. [Para 11]

Evidence – Recovery of Stolen Property – Held – Prosecution failed to join private witnesses during recovery – Recovery from accused’s house doubtful – No private witnesses joined during recovery – Conviction based on recovery and disclosure statement not sustainable. [Para 14]

Decision – Appeals Allowed – Convictions Set Aside – Convictions and sentences under Section 397 IPC set aside – Appellants acquitted – Appellants to be released if not required in any other case – Bail bonds discharged. [Paras 15-18]

Land Acquisition - Re-determination of Compensation - Requirement of Certified Copy of Award - Civil Writ Petition against rejection of application under Section 28-A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 - Petitioner's application dismissed solely for not attaching certified copy of award - High Court finds no legal mandate requiring attachment of certified copy for re-determination of compensation - Held, the Land Acquisition Collector erred in law - Application to be reconsidered without such requirement.

Writ Petition Allowed. [Paras 1-12]

Requirement of Certified Copy - Legal Interpretation - Analysis - Held - From plain reading of Section 28-A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, there is no stipulation for attaching a certified copy of the award for re-determination of compensation - The entire acquisition record already with the Land Acquisition Collector makes such a requirement redundant - No substantial reasoning provided for considering the application time-barred - Submission of being time-barred rejected as it was not a ground in the original impugned order. [Para 7-9]

Decision - Quashing of Impugned Order - Court quashes the impugned order of the Land Acquisition Collector, directing a fresh decision on the application filed under Section 28-A of the Act within six months, with costs awarded to the petitioner. [Para 11-12]

Contract Law - Enforcement of Employment Terms – Regular Second Appeal against the dismissal of suit for recovery of damages and salary – Appellant, employed as Program Instructor, claimed unpaid salary and damages after the closure of the center – Agreement lacked explicit clause for salary payment by the respondent – Civil suit dismissed for absence of enforceable contractual obligation – Held that terms of contract must be explicit and cannot be presumed.

Recovery of Salary and Damages - Contractual Obligations – Analysis – Held – The court emphasized that no presumptions can be made beyond the written terms of a contract. The appellant failed to prove that the respondent was contractually obligated to pay her salary after the closure of the center. The suit was dismissed based on the clear terms of the contract. [Para 8-9]

Decision – Dismissal of Second Appeal – The court dismissed the second appeal, reinforcing the principle that contractual obligations must be explicitly stated and proven. The absence of any salary payment clause in the agreement led to the dismissal of the appellant’s claims. [Para 10]

Service Law – Pay Parity – Educational Qualification – Writ petition challenging different pay scales for graduate and non-graduate clerks – Petitioner, a non-graduate clerk, sought higher pay scale granted to graduate clerks – Held, educational qualification constitutes a valid basis for different pay scales – Classification between graduate and non-graduate clerks does not violate Articles 14 and 16 – Petition dismissed. [Paras 1-10]

Legal Precedents – Higher Qualification Justifies Higher Pay – Held – Division Bench judgment upheld classification based on educational qualifications – Graduate clerks likely to discharge duties more efficiently than non-graduates – Higher pay scale recommended for graduate clerks by Shetty Commission – Non-graduates not entitled to same pay scale. [Para 5]

Burden of Proof – Onus on Claimant – Held – Heavy onus on claimant to show identical duties and responsibilities for pay parity – Petitioner failed to provide evidence that duties and recruitment rules of non-graduate clerks in subordinate courts were same as those in the High Court – Different governing rules for High Court and subordinate court clerks. [Para 8]

Decision – Petition Dismissed – No merit in claim for pay parity with non-graduate clerks in High Court – Petition dismissed as lacking merit. [Para 10]

Service Law – Selection Process – Compliance with Rules – Writ petition challenging annulment of appointment due to procedural violations – Appointment as Salesman annulled for not issuing notice to Assistant Registrar’s nominee – Held, selection made without issuing notice to Assistant Registrar’s nominee in violation of Rule 80 of 1963 Rules – Selection and appointment void for not complying with Rule 5 of 1997 Rules – Petition dismissed. [Paras 1-10]

Method of Recruitment – Rule 5 of 1997 Rules – Held – Appointment to be made by Managing Committee on recommendation of Selection Committee comprising President, two Committee members, and Assistant Registrar or nominee – Procedure under Rule 80 of 1963 Rules mandates 7 days' notice for meetings – No notice to Assistant Registrar’s nominee renders selection invalid. [Para 8]

Judicial Reasoning – Procedural Compliance – Held – Failure to issue notice as required under Rule 80 vitiates selection process – Petitioner's appointment never approved as per Rule 5, thus void – Non-compliance with mandatory rules results in annulment of appointment – No ground for interference. [Para 9-10]

Decision – Petition Dismissed – Writ petition dismissed due to procedural violations in the selection process – Annulment of appointment upheld – No merit in petition. [Para 11]

Land Law – Encroachment – Demarcation Reports – Writ petition against orders under Section 7 of Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulation) Act – Petitioner's appeal dismissed without considering demarcation reports showing no encroachment – Held, authorities failed to consider demarcation reports revealing no encroachment on Panchayat land – Impugned orders set aside – Case remanded for fresh valid demarcation and a speaking order after giving opportunity of hearing. [Paras 1-6]

Procedural Fairness – Consideration of Evidence – Held – Authorities must consider all relevant evidence, including demarcation reports – Absence of findings on whether construction was on purchased land or Panchayat land vitiates impugned orders – Orders unsustainable without consideration of key evidence. [Para 5]

Decision – Orders Set Aside – Writ petition allowed – Impugned orders set aside – Case remanded to original authority for fresh demarcation and decision – Direction for completion within six months from receipt of court order – Speaking order to be passed after proper hearing and evidence presentation. [Para 6]