Tender Conditions - Additional Performance Security - Compliance with Clause 2.22.0 (ix) - Interpretation of a mandatory condition for submission of additional performance security within a specified timeframe - Effect of bank holidays and employee strikes - Appellant's compliance with the condition by submitting security on the third working day - No breach of Clause 2.22.0 (ix) - Acceptance of additional performance security justified. [Para 13-19]

Interpretation of Tender Documents - Employer's Understanding - Deference to employer's interpretation of tender documents - Absence of mala fide or perversity - Tender authority's acceptance of security based on understanding of ground realities and necessities - No arbitrariness or irrationality - Court's role in interpreting tender documents. [Para 25-26]

Legal Maxim - Lex non cogit ad impossibilia - Principle that the law does not compel the performance of impossible tasks - Application to tender conditions and compliance - Appellant's reasonable efforts to comply with security submission timeframe - Acceptance of security in due compliance with law. [Para 19-20]

Judicial Review of Tender Matters - Standards for interference - Court's caution against interference in tender matters - Consideration of mala fide, arbitrariness, irrationality, and impact on public interest - Guiding principles for judicial review in tender and contractual issues. [Para 33]

Setting aside of the High Court's order - Direction to dismiss Writ Petition challenging the acceptance of appellant's tender and issuance of work order - Appellant's compliance with tender conditions upheld - Appeal allowed. [Para 34]

Criminal Appeal - Quashing of Criminal Complaints - Allegations of dishonored cheques and liability under various sections of NI Act and IPC - Respondent claimed retirement from partnership firm and sought quashing of proceedings - High Court quashed summoning order and complaints - Appeal against High Court's order - Whether the order quashing summoning order and complaints against respondent justified - Appellate Court's findings.

Personal Liability - Liability of partners in a partnership firm for dishonored cheques - Relevance of evidence and timing of retirement announcement - Courts must evaluate evidence presented during the trial - Retirement Deed produced after complaints were filed cannot be conclusive proof for quashing proceedings - Partner's involvement in business affairs must be assessed in context.

Quashing of Proceedings - Exercise of powers under Section 482 of CrPC for quashing proceedings - Courts can quash proceedings if unimpeachable and incontrovertible evidence shows lack of involvement in the alleged offense - Evidence regarding partner's connection with issuance of cheques must be thoroughly examined.

Decision - High Court's quashing of summoning order and complaints against respondent set aside - Complaints revived for trial by the concerned court - Appeals allowed.

(Para No. 9, 10, 15 – 20)

Criminal Appeal – Conviction under Sections 307 and 332 of IPC – Appellant convicted by Trial Court and High Court – Allegation of demanding ransom and threatening public – Attempted assault on police head constable during arrest – Injuries sustained by complainant simple, but intention and overt act established – Appellant challenged conviction on grounds of proportionality and sympathy – Court emphasized that the injuries’ nature does not absolve from conviction if intention and overt act established – Previous cases pending against appellant considered – Leniency in sentence not warranted – Appeal dismissed, and sentence upheld. [Para 1-11]

Contractual Dispute - Interpretation of contract clauses related to embankment construction with approved material and pond ash - Disagreement over measurement and payment methodology - Majority view of tribunals favoring composite measurement, minority view advocating separate measurements - Analysis of relevant contract stipulations and technical specifications. [Para 2-9]

Role of Arbitrators - Emphasis on the expertise of technical arbitrators in interpreting contracts - Relevance of expert personnel in resolving technical aspects of disputes - Need for courts to respect arbitrators' interpretation of contractual terms, barring patent illegality or perverse decisions. [Para 21-24]

Dissenting Opinions - Significance of dissenting opinions in multi-member tribunal arbitration - Dissenting opinions not automatically treated as awards - Importance of dissenting views in presenting alternate perspectives, but limited scrutiny compared to majority awards. [Para 25-26]

Judicial Review - Courts' restrained approach in interfering with awards containing reasons, particularly in contract interpretation - Arbitrators' authority to construe terms of the contract within their jurisdiction - Circumstances under which courts can review awards under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act. [Para 24]

Appeals allowed, Delhi High Court judgments set aside - Awards subject to challenge upheld and restored - Modification of interest payment directions in the awards - Uniform interest payment at 12% from date of award to date of payment ordered - No costs awarded. [Para 28]

Criminal Procedure – Complaint under Section 200 of CRPC – Allegation of offences under Sections 120-B, 406, 420 read with Section 34 of IPC – Summons issued – Objection raised by respondents regarding non-compliance with Section 202(1) of CRPC – High Court quashed the summons and remanded the complaint for compliance with Section 202(1) – Petitioner’s contention of substantial compliance with examination of complainant before issuing summons – Reliance on Vijay Dhanuka case – Mandatory nature of Section 202(1) of CRPC emphasized – Failure of substantial compliance in this case – Impugned order of remand upheld. [Para 2-5]

Criminal Appeal - Regular Bail - Offence under Sections 302 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 - High Court granted regular bail to the respondent No.2 - Appellant challenged the High Court's order - Peculiar nature of the case and considerations warrant further review by the Supreme Court - Special leave granted. [Para 1-5]

Bail Criteria - Considerations for granting bail - Settlement between parties and absence of adverse antecedents considered by the High Court - Importance of proper assessment of circumstances and antecedents in bail decisions. [Para 7-8]

Antecedents of Accused - Criminal antecedents of respondent No.2 considered by the State - Record of previous FIRs and subsequent arrest during bail period - Antecedents indicate propensity towards committing crimes - Significance of considering antecedents in bail decisions. [Para 8-9]

Tampering with Evidence - Apprehension of tampering with evidence if accused remains on bail - Defense's argument against tampering with evidence - Court's consideration of this aspect. [Para 10-11]

Denial of Bail - Inadequacy of time spent in custody and serious nature of the offence - Antecedents and propensity towards crime weighed in decision - High Court's bail order quashed and set aside - Respondent No.2 directed to surrender before the trial court. [Para 12]

Future Bail Application - Possibility of future bail application based on new facts and circumstances acknowledged - Directions for consideration of any new application in accordance with law. [Para 14]

Civil Appeal - Jurisdiction - High Court's Jurisdiction under Article 226 - Validity of Assignment and Resumption Proceedings - Scope of - Whether High Court's decision to entertain and decide disputed questions of fact was within its jurisdiction under Article 226 - Whether resumption proceedings against allotted land were valid - Examination of - Disputed questions decided based on documents and records - High Court not deciding fact in issue on title, identity, or entitlement - Admitted documents forming basis of findings - High Court's approach deemed appropriate - Jurisdiction under Article 226 not exceeded. [Para 10, 12.2]

Property Dispute - Land Allotment - Resumption Proceedings - Power of re-entry - Law on power of re-entry - Re-entry without reference to law - Whether needs of justice demand interference by Supreme Court against impugned Judgment - Examining needs of justice - High Court's finding on Points 1 and 2 available from record - Respondent-State's method for dispossessing or attempting to dispossess first petitioner unconstitutional and illegal - State's objections against impugned Judgment rejected - Respondent-State's actions contradictory and arbitrary - Answer of High Court upheld. [Para 11, 12, 12.1]

Land Allocation - Government Land - Allotment to Armed Personnel - Allocation of land to armed personnel participated in Indo-China war - Assignment order for land settlement in favor of Surgeon Vice Admiral GP Panda - Validity of assignment examined - Revision against assignment order dismissed earlier - Land allocated to IDCO subsequently - Resumption proceedings initiated against allotted land - State's attempt to dispossess and allocate land to IDCO found unconstitutional and illegal - State's actions contradictory and arbitrary. [Para 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8]

Appeals - Dismissal - Appeals filed by State and IDCO - Dismissal of appeals - High Court's findings based on documents and records, not disputed questions of fact - Appeals lacked merit - High Court's decision in favor of GP Panda's legal heirs affirmed - Importance of lawful process emphasized. [Para 9, 13, 14]

Appointment – Assistant Teacher – Illegal Appointment – Appellant claimed appointment as Assistant Teacher in Bengabari M.E. School and sought release of salary from 12.03.2001 onwards. The Director of Elementary Education, Assam, declared all appointments, including the appellant’s, as illegal and void ab initio, as they were made against non-existent posts [Para 4].

Jurisdiction – Appointment Beyond Legislative Assembly Constituency – The appellant’s appointment was beyond the Udalguri Legislative Assembly Constituency, making it invalid and in violation of the Rules [Para 4].

Continuation in Service – No Legal Right – Once the appointment of the appellant had been declared illegal and void ab initio, and was canceled, the appellant could not legally continue in service. The appellant had no legal right to continue in service, especially when there was no order or letter allowing her to continue beyond 31.03.2002 [Para 7].

Claim for Salary – Dismissed – No claim for payment of salary could be made for any period, as the appellant’s appointment was declared illegal. The appeal was dismissed, concurring with the reasons recorded by the High Court [Para 8].

Criminal Appeal – Acquittal under NDPS Act – Violation of safeguard under Section 50 – Appellants convicted under Section 20(b)(ii)(C) of the NDPS Act – Challenge to conviction on the basis of violation of the safeguard provided in Section 50 – Consent letter failed to inform appellants of their right to request a search before a gazetted officer or Magistrate – Precedent in Vijaysinh Jadeja case establishes mandatory nature of informing suspect about this right – Violation of safeguard found. [Para 4-8]

Acquittal – Conviction based on recovery of illicit items – Violation of Section 50 safeguard renders recovery suspect – Conviction solely based on such recovery could be vitiated – Appellants acquitted due to violation of safeguard. [Para 8-9]

Relief – Appeals allowed – Appellants acquitted of charges – Bail bonds to be canceled if appellants were on bail – Appellants in custody to be set at liberty. [Para 9-10]