Constitution of India, 1950 - Article 226 - Customs Act, 1962 - Section 18 - Major Ports Trusts Act, 1963 - Handling of Cargo in Customs Area Regulations, 2009 - Illegal detention of imported goods - Petitioner imported defective/secondary cold rolled coils - Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (DRI) directed to put the consignment on hold - Despite reminders, no action taken for provisional assessment and release of goods - Writ petition filed - Chartered Engineer's inspection report confirmed goods as cold rolled coils with minor variation in thickness - Laboratory tests showed conflicting results - Held, goods were not prohibited - Detention was illegal, and petitioner was not liable for detention and demurrage charges. Responsibility lies with Customs Department. [Paras 55-89]

Held:

Illegal Detention and Demurrage Charges - Liability:

Goods were not prohibited.

Petitioner not liable for detention and demurrage charges due to illegal action of Customs Department.

Customs Department responsible for bearing the costs demanded by the Port Trust and Shipping Line​​.

Inspection and Testing:

Initial inspection by Chartered Engineer confirmed goods as cold rolled steel.

TCR Engineering Services' conflicting report did not justify continued detention.

Fresh samples tested at Bokaro Steel Plant confirmed cold rolled steel.

Customs' inaction and delay led to avoidable litigation and financial burden on petitioner​​.

Provisional Release:

Despite confirming reports, Customs delayed provisional release.

Provisional assessment should have been done to avoid demurrage charges.

Customs directed to take immediate steps for testing and provisional release in future cases to avoid similar issues​​.

State Bank of India (Subsidiary Banks) Act, 1959 - Remuneration Fixation – Writ Petition – Retired Chief Manager appointed as Member, District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum – Claimed remuneration based on last pay drawn minus pension – State Bank of Patiala held as an extended arm of the Government within the term “Corporation” – Bound by Government circular – Petition allowed – Impugned orders set aside – Directions to fix honorarium as per last pay drawn minus pension. [Paras 1-18]

Remuneration of Retired Employees - Definition of Corporation – Analysis – State Bank of Patiala, a subsidiary of State Bank of India established under a Central statute, falls within the term “Corporation” – Employees of such Corporations covered under Government circular for remuneration fixation – Petitioner's claim for remuneration as per last pay drawn minus pension valid. [Paras 8-15]

Government Policy - Clarification of Terms – Circular by Government of Punjab – Remuneration of Members from judicial or government jobs – Includes those from Corporations and Public Sector Undertakings – Petitioner's appointment and remuneration fixation fall within the clarified terms – Compliance required. [Paras 5-7, 15]

Decision – Petition Allowed – Orders declining remuneration fixation set aside – Directions to release financial benefits based on last pay drawn minus pension – Action to be taken within three months. [Paras 16-18]

Employment Law - Prescribed Qualifications – Writ Petition – Employer's right to prescribe qualifications for a post – Applicants cannot claim the benefit of equivalent qualifications unless explicitly stated – Court not to sit in appeal over expert opinions on qualifications – Advertisement and statutory rules stipulate recognized qualifications – Petitioners' qualifications from ISO certified institutions not equivalent to those prescribed – Petition dismissed. [Paras 1-26]

Expert Opinion on Qualifications – Analysis – Qualification equivalence and recognition fall within the domain of experts – Courts to avoid interference unless clear statutory violations – Expert committee findings upheld – Qualifications from ISO certified institutions not recognized as equivalent to government-approved diplomas. [Paras 18-20]

Statutory Rules vs Advertisement – Prevailing Criteria – Statutory rules prescribe qualifications from government-recognized institutions – Advertisement stipulating recognized university or institution must align with statutory rules – Petitioners' failure to show equivalence to government-recognized diplomas – No right to compel recognition of ISO-certified qualifications. [Paras 19-21]

Alleged Discrimination and Equal Treatment – Equitable Argument – Instances of other candidates with similar qualifications being treated as eligible do not justify perpetuating irregularities – Courts cannot mandate equality in illegality – Each case evaluated on its own merits within statutory framework. [Paras 23-25]

Decision – Petition Outcome – Petitioners ineligible based on statutory qualifications – No merit found in pleas for equivalence or discrimination – Petitions dismissed. [Paras 25-26]

Punjab Regional Town Planning and Development Act, 1995 - Forfeiture of Amount – Writ Petition – Section 45(3) as amended in 2013 – Petitioner surrendered plot – 10% forfeited under amended provisions – Allotment letter issued prior to amendment – Held, Section 45(3) is a substantive provision – Amendment operates prospectively – Forfeiture under pre-amended Section 45(3) set aside – Matter remanded to determine appropriate quantum of forfeiture. [Paras 1-16]

Substantive Law vs Procedural Law – Analysis – Section 45(3) imposes financial implications on bidders – Substantive provision affects rights and obligations – Amendments to substantive provisions apply prospectively unless expressly stated otherwise – No retrospective application intended for amended Section 45(3). [Paras 9-11]

Contractual Obligations – Bidders' Expectations – Financial bids structured based on forfeiture provisions – Substantive changes impact financial decisions – Bidder considerations include forfeiture risks – Authorities must consider facts of each case to determine appropriate forfeiture under pre-amended provisions. [Paras 10-12]

Decision – Petition Outcome – Impugned orders forfeiting 10% of the amount set aside – Case remanded to Revisional Authority – Authorities to determine quantum of forfeiture based on facts and circumstances – Petitioners to be heard. [Paras 16]

Electricity Act, 2003 - Erection of Power Transmission Towers – Writ Petition – Non-opportunity of hearing – Held, no hearing contemplated against laying of lines – Decision to mark route for electric lines is highly specialized and technical – Route may run through various lands, making individual hearings impractical – Only right available to landowners is to receive compensation and damages, if any, sustained – Petition dismissed. [Paras 1-9]

Land Use and Compensation – Analysis – Laying of power transmission lines under specialized and technical decisions – No acquisition of land; only right of user – Hearing not required under the Indian Telegraph Act – Landowners entitled to compensation for any damage – Project progress and infrastructure development prioritized. [Paras 7-9]

Judicial Precedents – Application – Reference to Division Bench judgment of Nagpur Bench of Bombay High Court and Andhra Pradesh High Court – Consistent judicial stance on non-requirement of hearing for laying power lines – Owners' right limited to compensation – No judicial interference in ongoing infrastructure projects as per precedents. [Paras 7, 9]

Decision – Petition Outcome – Technical and specialized nature of power line routing upheld – Practicality of hearing landowners for extensive routes dismissed – Petition without merit and dismissed. [Para 9]

Industrial Disputes - Reinstatement – Appeal – Workman reinstated with 50% back wages – Conviction for embezzlement and misconduct concealed – Management cannot be compelled to retain dishonest employee – Serious charges and conviction – Award of Tribunal and Single Bench judgment set aside – Appeal allowed. [Paras 1-13]

Employment Law - Concealment of Conviction – Analysis – Workman concealed conviction during proceedings – Misled Tribunal and Court – bligation to disclose all relevant information – Concealment shows disrespect for legal process – Plea for equity by workman unfounded. [Paras 7-8, 11]

Decision – Appeal Outcome – Conviction of workman upheld by higher courts – Employer not liable to retain dishonest employee – Impugned orders of reinstatement with back wages set aside – Appeal allowed. [Paras 12-13]

Criminal Law - Murder and Conspiracy – Appeal – Evidence – Conviction challenged due to lack of recovery of material objects – No proof of appellant administering poison – Liquor bottle, residue, and steel tumbler not recovered – Absence of material evidence weakens prosecution case – Conviction set aside – Appellant acquitted. [Paras 1-24]

Evidence - Recovery of Material Objects – Analysis – Failure to recover liquor bottle and steel tumbler alleged to contain poison – No direct evidence linking appellant to administering poison – Testimonies of prosecution witnesses and documentary evidence do not conclusively prove guilt – Investigative lapses noted – Benefit of doubt extended to appellant. [Paras 8, 18, 22]

Decision – Appeal Allowed – Conviction and sentence by trial court set aside – Appellant acquitted of charges due to lack of sufficient evidence – Bail bond discharged. [Paras 23-24]

Service Law - Departmental Inquiry – Writ Petition – Termination Proposal – Inquiry conducted against Junior Assistant on charges of indiscipline and misconduct – Approval for termination declined by DPI due to lack of documentary evidence – Educational Tribunal upheld DPI’s decision – Held that mere absence of delinquent in inquiry does not imply admission of charges – Inquiry Officer must conduct ex parte proceedings and record evidence – Proposal for termination based on such inquiry rightly declined – Petition dismissed. [Paras 1-19]

Disciplinary Proceedings - Ex Parte Inquiry – Procedural Requirements – Analysis – Absence of charged employee does not absolve Inquiry Officer from obligation to collect and record evidence – Findings based on non-participation without evidence are invalid – DPI and Tribunal decisions justified – Charges of gross indiscipline and misconduct not substantiated with evidence in inquiry. [Paras 13-16]

Decision – Petition Outcome – Approval for termination refused due to procedural lapses – No evidence led during inquiry – Findings based solely on employee’s absence – Orders of DPI and Tribunal upheld – Writ petition dismissed. [Paras 17-19]

Hindu Marriage Act - Maintenance and Divorce – Appeal – Non-compliance of interim maintenance order under Section 24 by husband – Defence struck off – Order under Section 24 essential for the indigent spouse to prosecute proceedings – Section 151 CPC invoked for enforcement of maintenance order – Non-payment of maintenance amounts to taking advantage of own wrong under Section 23 – Decree of divorce set aside. [Paras 1-27]

Maintenance - Enforcement and Compliance – Analysis – Interim maintenance aims to support financially weak spouse – CPC Section 151 invoked for enforcing Section 24 order – Inherent powers of court to ensure compliance – Non-compliance leads to striking off defence – Orders under Section 24 crucial for justice and equity in matrimonial proceedings. [Paras 11, 13-15]

Divorce - Taking Advantage of Own Wrong – Section 23 HMA – Conduct of non-payment by husband amounts to a wrong – Relief denied if spouse takes advantage of own wrong – Courts must ensure compliance with orders for maintenance to uphold statutory intent – Relief granted only when petitioner’s conduct aligns with statutory requirements. [Paras 17, 21-24]

Decision – Appeal Allowed – Defence of respondent-husband struck off – Pleadings by husband non-existent in law – Decree of divorce set aside – Appellant-wife’s appeal succeeds – Respondent disqualified from relief under Section 13 due to non-compliance with Section 24 order. [Paras 25-27]