Excise Duty – Classification of Goods – Product 'Moisturex' classified as medicament under Heading 30.03 – Contains pharmaceutical constituents with therapeutic properties – Intended for treatment of dry skin conditions, not just for skin care – Tribunal’s classification upheld [Paras 1-21].

Medicaments vs. Cosmetics – Medicaments contain therapeutic or prophylactic ingredients – Not solely determined by prescription requirement – 'Moisturex' used for curing skin ailments like fissure feet, dry scaly skin, ichthyosis – Sold over-the-counter does not negate its medicament classification [Paras 12-19].

Decision:

Appeals dismissed – Tribunal's decision classifying 'Moisturex' as medicament under Heading 30.03 upheld – No costs [Para 21].

Pension – Withholding during Pendency of Proceedings – Appellant State withheld part of pension and gratuity during the pendency of criminal and departmental proceedings – Respondent challenged this action – High Court held that there is no power under the Bihar Pension Rules to withhold pension/gratuity during the pendency of proceedings – Supreme Court upheld High Court's decision [Paras 1-16].

Right to Pension – Property Right – Pension recognized as a right to property – Cannot be deprived without due process of law – Article 300A of the Constitution of India prohibits deprivation of property without authority of law – Administrative instructions cannot substitute statutory provisions [Paras 7-15].

Decision:

Appeals dismissed – High Court's order affirmed – Costs of Rs. 10,000 imposed on the Appellant for each appeal [Para 16].

Criminal Law – Transfer of Case – Appellant sought transfer of case alleging bias and unfair trial – Arguments by prosecution concluded, defense arguments near completion – Special Judge directed submission of written arguments and set judgment date – Supreme Court provided further time for arguments and upheld the High Court’s dismissal of the transfer petition [Paras 2-14].

Judicial Bias – Allegation of bias due to familial connections of the Presiding Judge with a political rival – Supreme Court found no merit in allegations raised at the final stage of trial – Emphasized independence and fairness in judicial proceedings [Paras 9-12].

Decision:

Appeal dismissed – Additional time granted for concluding arguments – Special Judge directed to pronounce decision uninfluenced by external observations [Paras 14-15].

Jurisdiction – Small Causes Court – Suit by licensor against gratuitous licensee for recovery of possession – Division Bench of Bombay High Court held such suits are not tenable before the Presidency Small Causes Court – Full Bench overruled this decision, stating the term "licensee" in Section 41(1) of the PSCC Act includes gratuitous licensees – Supreme Court affirmed Full Bench's decision [Paras 1-53].

Licensor-Licensee Relationship – The expression "licensee" in Section 41(1) of the PSCC Act is not limited to those defined under Section 5(4A) of the Rent Act, which excludes gratuitous licensees – Intent of legislature to avoid multiplicity of litigation and bring all suits under one umbrella – Interpretation consistent with legislative history and purpose [Paras 33-52].

Decision:

Appeals dismissed – Full Bench decision upheld – Small Causes Court has jurisdiction over suits by licensors against gratuitous licensees [Para 53].

Environmental Law – Public Hearing Requirement – SHEP received environmental clearance in 1985, before the enactment of the EIA Notification, 1994 – Supreme Court held that public hearing was not required as the project was an ongoing one nearing completion – Public hearing considered unnecessary at advanced construction stage [Paras 8-18].

Relocation of Religious Structures – Dhari Devi Temple relocation challenged on grounds of violating Article 25 – Court found no infringement of religious rights as the temple structure remains attached to its sacred rock – Expert committee reports endorsed relocation plan to protect the temple from submergence [Paras 27-34].

Dam Safety and Environmental Concerns – Emphasized the need for compliance with environmental management plans and safety regulations – Referred to expert committee recommendations on muck management and catchment area treatment [Paras 35-37].

Decision:

Appeals allowed – High Court’s direction for public hearing set aside – Expert committee recommendations on Dhari Devi Temple relocation and environmental safeguards upheld [Para 33].

Criminal Law – Sentencing – High Court reduced the sentence of respondents from two years to three months due to the protracted nature of proceedings – Supreme Court emphasized the importance of proportional sentencing – Held that the reduction was unjustified and restored the trial court's sentence [Paras 1-20].

Proportionality in Sentencing – Courts must balance the gravity of the crime with the punishment – Lenient sentencing for serious offences undermines public confidence in the justice system – Deterrence and societal impact must be considered [Paras 8-16].

Decision:

Appeal allowed – High Court’s order set aside – Trial court's original sentence restored – Respondents directed to surrender within four weeks, or be taken into custody to serve the remaining sentence [Para 20].

Service Law – Reinstatement – Back Wages – Employer's onus to prove gainful employment – Denial of back wages to an employee who has suffered due to illegal act of employer amounts to rewarding the employer and punishing the employee. The Supreme Court upheld the Tribunal's decision for reinstatement with full back wages, as the management failed to prove the employee's gainful employment during the suspension [Paras 1-33].

Principles of Natural Justice – Inquiry proceedings against the appellant were found to be vitiated due to non-adherence to principles of natural justice – The Inquiry Committee was not validly constituted, and the appellant was not allowed to cross-examine witnesses – The Supreme Court emphasized the importance of adherence to statutory provisions and principles of natural justice in disciplinary proceedings [Paras 7-14, 16-22].

Decision:

Appeal allowed – High Court's order set aside – Tribunal’s order reinstating the appellant with full back wages upheld – The appellant is entitled to full back wages from the date of termination until reinstatement [Paras 33-36].

Service Law – Appointment – Appellants, having secured qualifying marks in LDCE for promotion to Section Officer's Grade, were denied appointment – Despite DoP&T's requisition for six candidates to fill vacancies, UPSC forwarded only three names – Supreme Court found this arbitrary and discriminatory – Mandated UPSC to forward names of next three candidates including the appellants [Paras 1-19].

Public Employment – Filling Vacancies – Legal position affirmed that inclusion in select list does not confer an indefeasible right to appointment – However, when vacancies are available and requisitioned within permissible limits, non-recommendation of qualifying candidates is unjustified – Directive for filling vacancies to avoid discrimination and ensure fair opportunity [Paras 12-18].

Decision:

Appeal allowed – High Court and Tribunal orders set aside – Mandamus issued to UPSC to forward names of next three candidates – Appellants to get seniority from date of Rajesh Kumar Yadav's appointment – Pay fixed notionally without arrears [Paras 19-20].

Criminal Law – Acquittal – Appeal against acquittal of the respondent under the Prevention of Corruption Act for accepting bribe – High Court acquitted on grounds of insufficient evidence and possible tampering – Supreme Court upheld High Court’s decision, citing procedural and evidentiary shortcomings [Paras 1-11].

Evidentiary Standards – Demand and Acceptance of Bribe – Essential for conviction under the Prevention of Corruption Act – Mere recovery of money insufficient without substantive evidence of demand and acceptance – Prosecution failed to establish a foolproof case [Paras 7-10].

Witness Credibility – Testimony of Complainant – Considered partisan and unreliable without independent corroboration – Supreme Court emphasized careful evaluation of complainant’s evidence due to vested interests [Para 8].

Procedural Lapses – Trap Case – High Court noted procedural irregularities and inconsistencies in the prosecution's trap case – Executive Magistrate’s testimony highlighted discrepancies in planning and execution [Paras 9-10].

Decision: Appeal dismissed – High Court’s acquittal upheld – Supreme Court emphasized adherence to stringent evidentiary and procedural standards in corruption cases [Para 11].