Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 – Section 9A – Change in Service Conditions – Supreme Court held that transferring workmen from Dewas to Chopanki, 900 kms away, violated Section 9A read with Fourth Schedule of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 – Such transfers were deemed arbitrary, mala fide, and amounted to victimization – The nature of work and service conditions would change, with workmen becoming supervisors, thus depriving them of the protections under the Industrial Disputes Act [Paras 7-7.4].

Judicial Review – Article 226 vs. Article 227 – The petitions before the High Court were considered under Article 227, making the writ appeals non-maintainable – The Supreme Court emphasized the need to look at the nature of the jurisdiction invoked and the relief sought to determine the appropriate article – The substantive relief sought was quashing and setting aside the Labour Court's award, aligning with Article 227 [Paras 4.1-4.3, 7.9].

Transfer and Victimization – Adverse Impact on Workmen – The transfer orders affected workmen at the fag end of their careers, causing severe personal and professional disruption – The Court found that such transfers were intended to reduce the workforce at Dewas and constituted unfair labour practice, violating the statutory protections for workmen under the Act [Paras 5.1-5.4, 7.1-7.2].

Decision – Appeals dismissed – Supreme Court upheld the High Court and Labour Court's findings – Directed the appellant to comply with the Labour Court’s award and provide consequential benefits to the workmen, including arrears of salary and retirement benefits within four weeks – Costs imposed on the appellant [Paras 8-8.1].

Criminal Procedure Code – Section 482 – Quashing of Proceedings – Supreme Court observed that mere breach of contract cannot give rise to criminal prosecution for cheating unless fraudulent or dishonest intention is shown right at the beginning of the transaction – The Court emphasized the distinction between a civil dispute and a criminal offense – The High Court erred in dismissing the petition for quashing the FIR and subsequent proceedings – The appeal was allowed, and the proceedings were quashed [Paras 1-48].

Penal Code – Sections 406, 419, 420 – Ingredients of Offense – The complaint alleged that the appellant sold flats beyond their share, which was a matter of civil dispute – No fraudulent or dishonest intention was evident at the inception of the transaction – The facts did not disclose the commission of any offense under Sections 406, 419, or 420 IPC – Criminal proceedings should not be used as an instrument of harassment in civil disputes [Paras 27-38].

Judicial Precedents – Abuse of Process – The Court referred to various precedents where it was held that criminal proceedings must not be used to settle civil disputes – Jurisdiction under Section 482 CrPC should be exercised to prevent abuse of the process of law and secure the ends of justice – The present case was found to fall within the categories warranting quashing of proceedings as laid down in State of Haryana vs. Bhajan Lal [1992 Supp (1) SCC 335] [Paras 39-47].

Decision – Appeal allowed – Impugned order of the High Court set aside – FIR No. 185/2016 dated 29.03.2016 and proceedings in C.C. No. 20609 of 2017 on the file of VI Additional CMM Bengaluru quashed [Paras 48-49].

Specific Relief Act, 1963 – Section 20 – Discretionary Relief – Supreme Court held that the High Court erred in denying specific performance on the grounds that it is a discretionary relief – Execution of agreement to sell, part sale consideration payment, and plaintiff's readiness and willingness to perform his part of the contract were established – Denying specific performance would encourage dishonesty – High Court’s interpretation of Section 20 is incorrect and unsustainable [Paras 10-10.1, 12].

Section 16(c) of Specific Relief Act – Readiness and Willingness – The plaintiff made necessary averments in the plaint and proved readiness and willingness to perform the contract – High Court's conclusion on non-compliance with Section 16(c) is contrary to record and law – The conduct of the plaintiff and subsequent actions were in line with the contract terms [Paras 6-6.1, 7].

Discretion under Section 20 – Judicial Exercise – Discretion must be exercised judiciously, soundly, and reasonably – Refusal of specific performance despite established facts would tilt balance unfairly in favor of the defendant, rewarding dishonest conduct – Amendment to Section 10(a) of the Act serves as a guide, emphasizing that specific performance is no longer discretionary [Para 10].

Concurrent Findings – High Court’s Error – High Court improperly interfered with concurrent findings of the Trial Court and First Appellate Court on readiness and willingness – Findings were based on evidence and not perverse – High Court's intervention under Section 100 CPC was unwarranted [Para 7].

Decision – Appeal allowed – High Court’s judgment set aside – Trial Court’s judgment and decree for specific performance restored – Defendants directed to execute the sale deed and hand over possession within four weeks [Para 12].

Constitutional Law – Right to Equality – Ex-employees of a Mill challenged the denial of plots by State instrumentalities – High Court held treating 318 ex-employees differently from 134 others who received free plots as violative of Article 14 – Emphasized vested right in claiming equality and parity enforceable under Article 226 [Paras 1-14].

Allotment of Quarters – Discrimination – 318 ex-employees vacated quarters as per notice, while 134 stayed – Supreme Court ruled that rewarding unauthorized occupation by allotting plots to 134 ex-employees and denying the same to law-abiding 318 is discriminatory – Orders for equal treatment upheld [Paras 9-13].

Decision – Appeals Allowed – Held – Judgment of learned Single Judge directing allotment of plots to 318 ex-employees upheld – High Court's order set aside – Directed respondents to complete allotment within six months [Para 10].

Motor Vehicles Act – Compensation – Maintainability of Claim Petition by Mother-in-law – Mother-in-law was living with the deceased and his family – Held that mother-in-law is a legal representative under Section 166 of MV Act and entitled to maintain the claim petition – Dependency established sufficiently [Paras 10-21].

Compensation Calculation – Split Multiplier – High Court applied a split multiplier for pre-retiral and post-retiral periods – Supreme Court held split multiplier inappropriate – Applied standard multiplier considering future prospects – Detailed compensation recalculated with consideration for future prospects and deductions for personal expenses [Paras 22-35].

Decision – Appeal Allowed – Held – High Court's judgment modified – Total compensation recalculated at Rs. 85,81,815 with 7.5% interest per annum from the date of the claim petition till realization – Directed respondent to deposit the amount within eight weeks [Para 36-37].

SC/ST Act – Quashing of Proceedings – Compromise – Using casteist slur against a neighbor – Compromise reached between the parties – Supreme Court invoked powers under Article 142 to quash the proceedings – Offence considered predominantly private and civil in nature, rooted in a pre-existing civil dispute – No mental depravity exhibited by the appellant – Quashing proceedings seen as advancing peace and harmony given the socio-economic status of both parties [Paras 19-20].

Article 142 of the Constitution – Powers of the Supreme Court – Court reiterated that Article 142 powers could be invoked to quash criminal proceedings, even for non-compoundable offences, when a voluntary compromise is reached – Emphasized complete justice between the parties, considering the nature of the offence and the conduct of the accused [Paras 9-13].

Decision – Appeal Allowed – Held – Criminal proceedings quashed – Judgment and orders passed by the Trial Court and the High Court set aside – Bail bonds discharged [Para 20].

Attempt to Commit Rape – Distinction between Preparation and Attempt – Respondent lured minor girls, took them inside a room, closed the doors, undressed them, and rubbed his genitals against theirs – High Court reduced conviction to 'outraging the modesty' under Section 354 IPC – Supreme Court held acts were beyond preparation and amounted to an attempt to commit rape – Offence of attempt to commit rape upheld [Paras 11-24].

Criminal Jurisprudence – Mens Rea and Attempt – Explained the three stages of crime: Mens Rea, preparation, and attempt – 'Attempt' starts after preparation and is punishable even if the crime is not completed – Specific actions of the respondent were proximate to committing the offence, thus constituting an attempt [Paras 11-13].

Decision – Appeal Allowed – Held – High Court’s judgment set aside – Conviction under Section 376(2)(f) read with Section 511 IPC restored – Respondent directed to surrender and serve the remainder of his sentence [Paras 25-26].

Administrative Service – Allocation of Cadre – Selected candidate's right to be considered for appointment to IAS but no right to choose cadre or home state – Allocation of cadre an incidence of service – High Court's directive to allocate respondent to Kerala cadre set aside – Consultation required with the state to which allocation is made, not with the candidate's home state – Policy of allocation followed as per rules and procedures [Paras 1-28].

Allocation Circular – Interpretation – Allocation of insiders and outsiders in the ratio of 2:1 – Consultation with State Government where cadre is allocated – Decision on the number of vacancies based on various administrative factors – High Court misread statutory rules and policy of allocation [Paras 23-26].

Decision – Appeals Allowed – Held – Orders of the High Court and the Central Administrative Tribunal set aside – Original application by the respondent dismissed [Paras 48].

Taxation – Nature and Character – Levy of water and sewerage taxes under Section 52 of the UP Water Supply and Sewerage Act – Levy labeled as water tax and sewerage tax – Supreme Court held that the nomenclature does not determine the nature of the levy – Taxes on lands and buildings within the meaning of Entry 49 List II of the Seventh Schedule – Taxes imposed to augment finances for providing water supply and sewerage services [Paras 1-28].

Legislative Competence – Entry 49 List II – Tax on Lands and Buildings – Legislature’s choice of label for the tax does not alter its nature – Supreme Court emphasized the levy’s character as a tax on lands and buildings – Restrictions imposed by Section 55 do not change the tax's fundamental nature [Paras 29-38].

Decision – Appeals Allowed – Held – High Court’s judgment set aside – Levy of water and sewerage taxes upheld – Constitutional challenge to the levy rejected [Paras 39-47].