Service Law – Seniority – Inter Se Seniority – Appellants appointed as Deputy Jailors in 1991 through the Selection Commission – Respondents appointed in 1994 through UPPSC based on selection process initiated in 1987 – High Court held respondents senior – Supreme Court reversed – Held 1991 appointees senior to 1994 appointees based on date of substantive appointment [Paras 1-33].

Rules and Regulations – Interpretation – Rule 5 and Rule 8 of the 1991 Rules – Rule 5 inapplicable where service rules provide for appointment by promotion and direct recruitment – Rule 8 applicable – Seniority determined from date of substantive appointment – Appellants’ appointments in 1991 substantively earlier than respondents in 1994 [Paras 18-19].

Seniority Principles – No Retrospective Seniority – Seniority cannot relate back to vacancy occurrence date unless expressly provided by rules – Principle reaffirmed that seniority is determined from date of entry into service – Reiterated that notional seniority not granted without valid statutory basis [Paras 27, 30-31, 44].

Decision: Appeals allowed – High Court judgment set aside – Seniority of 1991 appointees upheld over 1994 appointees – No costs awarded [Paras 33, 46-47].

Excise Duty – Limitation – Show cause notice issued to respondent on 15.05.2000 for excise duty evasion – Tribunal held demand time-barred – Supreme Court reversed – Found intention to evade excise duty, invoking proviso to Section 11A of the Act – Cause of action date attributed to 1997; notice within five-year limitation period [Paras 1-24].

Immovable vs. Movable Property – Items fabricated by respondent at customer's site – Tribunal found items affixed to ground immovable – Supreme Court disagreed – Referenced decision in Craft Interiors Pvt. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise Bangalore – Held items such as furniture are movable – Restored Commissioner’s order identifying furniture items subject to excise duty [Paras 25-28].

Judicial Scrutiny – Tribunal’s Findings – Tribunal’s decision rejected for lack of detailed reasoning – Commissioner’s thorough examination and classification of items upheld [Paras 27-29].

Decision: Appeal allowed – Tribunal's order set aside – Commissioner’s order demanding excise duty restored – No order as to costs [Para 29].

Criminal Law – Conspiracy and Breach of Trust – High Court acquitted accused citing insufficient evidence – Supreme Court found ample material showing criminal conspiracy to award contract at exorbitant rates causing loss to the Board – Evidence established accused’s involvement in manipulation of tender process and acceptance of special conditions favoring contractor [Paras 1-24, 46-48].

Judicial Review – Scope and Power – Appellate Court’s power to review evidence and re-evaluate findings – Supreme Court held High Court erred in dismissing credible evidence without adequate reasoning – Emphasized principle of double presumption favoring accused must be balanced against proven facts [Paras 7-9].

Evidence and Procedure – Special Conditions in Contract – Accepted special conditions involved significant financial implications against Board’s interest – Supreme Court found evidence of undue influence and favoritism – Concluded that High Court overlooked key documentary and testimonial evidence [Paras 23-26].

Decision: Appeal allowed – High Court’s judgment set aside – Conviction and sentence of accused by Special Judge restored – Directed accused to surrender for undergoing remaining sentence – No costs awarded [Paras 27-29].

Criminal Law – Confession and Evidence – Appellant convicted under TADA based solely on retracted confession – Confession not corroborated by any material evidence – Supreme Court reiterated that confession to police without corroboration is a weak form of evidence – Conviction based solely on such confession not sustainable [Paras 1-7].

Membership in Banned Organization – Section 3(5) of TADA and Section 10 of Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act – Mere membership of a banned organization without evidence of active participation in violence or incitement to imminent violence insufficient for conviction – Supreme Court emphasized necessity to prove active involvement in criminal activities [Paras 7-9].

Constitutional Principles – Freedom of Association – Referred to U.S. Supreme Court decisions rejecting 'guilt by association' – Membership in an organization without specific intent to further illegal aims not criminal – Provisions criminalizing mere membership must be read in consonance with Fundamental Rights under Constitution [Paras 9-31].

Decision: Appeal allowed – Conviction under Section 3(5) of TADA set aside – Appellant acquitted – Emphasis on protection of Fundamental Rights and strict interpretation of statutes to avoid unconstitutional outcomes [Paras 31-45].

Education – Appointment of Teachers – Non-Compliance with Rules – Respondent teachers were appointed without adhering to the prescribed procedures under the Orissa Education Rules, 1974 – Many did not possess requisite qualifications at the time of appointment – Appointments were made without proper advertisement and selection process – Supreme Court held such appointments invalid and benefits of UGC pay scales granted by High Court unsustainable [Paras 1-21, 46-48].

Relaxation of Eligibility – Statutory Requirements – Condonation of deficiency in qualifications by Utkal University was without statutory basis – High Court's reliance on previous erroneous decisions not justified – Doctrine of per incuriam applied to previous judgments granting benefits – Supreme Court emphasized adherence to statutory requirements for maintaining educational standards [Paras 12, 23-31, 44-47].

Delay and Laches – Writ Petitions Filed After Long Delay – Relief for UGC pay scales sought after decades – High Court ignored principles of delay and laches – Supreme Court reiterated that claims for retrospective benefits must be made within a reasonable period – Relief granted by High Court set aside due to unexplained delay [Paras 32-34].

Judicial Discipline – Binding Precedents – High Court should not perpetuate errors by relying on previous incorrect decisions – Negative equality not permissible under Article 14 of the Constitution – Arbitrary actions of State authorities invalidated [Paras 36-41].

Decision: Appeals allowed – Judgments and orders of the High Court of Orissa set aside – Claims for UGC pay scales by respondents rejected – Respondents not entitled to any relief including grant-in-aid or UGC pay scales due to lack of requisite qualifications and non-compliance with appointment procedures [Paras 48-49].

Education – Appointment of Teachers – Non-Compliance with Rules – Respondent teachers were appointed without adhering to the prescribed procedures under the Orissa Education Rules, 1974 – Many did not possess requisite qualifications at the time of appointment – Appointments were made without proper advertisement and selection process – Supreme Court held such appointments invalid and benefits of UGC pay scales granted by High Court unsustainable [Paras 1-21, 46-48].

Relaxation of Eligibility – Statutory Requirements – Condonation of deficiency in qualifications by Utkal University was without statutory basis – High Court's reliance on previous erroneous decisions not justified – Doctrine of per incuriam applied to previous judgments granting benefits – Supreme Court emphasized adherence to statutory requirements for maintaining educational standards [Paras 12, 23-31, 44-47].

Delay and Laches – Writ Petitions Filed After Long Delay – Relief for UGC pay scales sought after decades – High Court ignored principles of delay and laches – Supreme Court reiterated that claims for retrospective benefits must be made within a reasonable period – Relief granted by High Court set aside due to unexplained delay [Paras 32-34].

Judicial Discipline – Binding Precedents – High Court should not perpetuate errors by relying on previous incorrect decisions – Negative equality not permissible under Article 14 of the Constitution – Arbitrary actions of State authorities invalidated [Paras 36-41].

Decision: Appeals allowed – Judgments and orders of the High Court of Orissa set aside – Claims for UGC pay scales by respondents rejected – Respondents not entitled to any relief including grant-in-aid or UGC pay scales due to lack of requisite qualifications and non-compliance with appointment procedures [Paras 48-49].

Land Acquisition – Additional Compensation – The Respondents were awarded compensation for acquired land along with statutory benefits under Sections 23(1A), 23(2), and 28 – The Executing Court and the High Court awarded additional amount under Section 23(1A) on the solatium amount – Supreme Court clarified that the additional amount under Section 23(1A) is payable only on the market value of the land and not on the solatium [Paras 1-9].

Compensation Components – Section 23 of the Act outlines four distinct amounts: (i) Market value of the land, (ii) Damages/expenses under Section 23(1), (iii) Additional amount at 12% per annum under Section 23(1A), (iv) Solatium at 30% under Section 23(2) – No judicial exercise involved for additional amount or solatium as they are statutory benefits [Paras 4-6].

Interest and Enhanced Compensation – Clarified interpretation of additional amount and solatium as part of 'enhanced compensation' for Income Tax purposes as per Commissioner of Income Tax Faridabad vs. Ghanshyam (HUF) – Distinguished from interpretations under the Land Acquisition Act [Paras 8-9].

Decision: Appeal allowed – High Court and Executing Court orders set aside – Declared that additional amount under Section 23(1A) is only on the market value determined under Section 23(1) and not on solatium under Section 23(2) [Para 9].

Criminal Law – Dowry Death – Conviction under Section 304B IPC upheld – Appellants (mother-in-law and husband) harassed the deceased, Kanta, for dowry (motorcycle) – Kanta died by hanging within three months of marriage – Evidence established harassment and demand for dowry – Appeal dismissed [Paras 1-20].

Dowry Demand – Definition and Scope – Demand for motorcycle for business purposes held to be 'demand for dowry' – Reiterated that 'dowry' under Section 2 of the Dowry Prohibition Act includes any property or valuable security given or agreed to be given in connection with marriage [Paras 11-16].

Evidence and Presumption – Section 113B of Evidence Act – Presumption of dowry death applied – Appellants failed to rebut the presumption – Evidence from prosecution witnesses (PW-8, PW-9, PW-10) found credible [Paras 17-19].

Decision: Appeal dismissed – Conviction and sentence of seven years' rigorous imprisonment for both appellants upheld – Two months’ time granted to the first appellant (A-1) to surrender for undergoing the sentence [Para 20].

Customs Duty – Refund Claim – Appellant's claim for refund of customs duty rejected by Deputy Commissioner on grounds of unjust enrichment and failure to appeal assessment orders – Delhi High Court directed customs authorities to consider refund claims based on Essentiality Certificates – Supreme Court held that the refund claim was erroneously rejected ignoring High Court's specific directions [Paras 1-20].

Judicial Hierarchy and Compliance – High Court’s orders under Article 226 must be followed by subordinate authorities – Adjudicating authority circumventing High Court's order amounts to denial of justice – Subordinate authorities must approach the issuing court for clarification or modification if they believe the order is contrary to law [Paras 15-19].

Principles of Mandamus – High Courts have wide powers under Article 226 to issue writs to promote justice – Directions issued must be complied with unless legally challenged – Courts have the power to mould reliefs to meet the requirements of justice [Paras 16-17].

Decision: Appeal allowed – Customs authorities directed to consider the appellant's refund claim in accordance with the directions issued by the Delhi High Court – No costs awarded [Paras 20-21].