Consumer Protection – Deficiency in Service – Insurance claim related to fire damage – Appellant claimed significant loss from fire – Insurance company's surveyor assessed lower loss – Appellant contested assessment – National Commission limited compensation to surveyor’s assessment – Supreme Court upheld National Commission's decision – Emphasis on jurisdiction limitations of Consumer Forum in technical assessment cases – No established deficiency in service by insurer – Appeal dismissed [Paras 1-39].

Surveyor's Report – Weight and Assessment – Surveyor's assessment given deference – Jurisdiction of Consumer Forum does not extend to detailed re-examination of technical survey reports – Surveyor's method found justified – No arbitrariness in insurer’s acceptance of surveyor’s report [Paras 17-24, 30-39].

Discrepancies in Assessment – Appellant’s objections on volumetric analysis and weight per bale – Surveyor's method of volumetric analysis justified – Surveyor's decision to adopt lower weight per bale based on appellant’s own submissions considered reasonable [Paras 21-28].

Decision – Appeal dismissed – National Commission's judgment upheld – Compensation limited to surveyor’s assessed loss – No costs [Paras 30-39].

Eviction – Unauthorized Subletting and Construction – Show cause notices issued to respondents for unauthorized subletting and construction – Orders of eviction passed and upheld by Additional District Judge – High Court allowed writ petitions challenging eviction – Supreme Court restored eviction orders – Unauthorized partnership and subletting violated license terms – Regularization policies not applicable to markets managed by New Delhi Municipal Council on behalf of Government of India [Paras 1-17].

Administrative Law – Delegated Authority – New Delhi Municipal Council managing markets as delegate of Government of India – No title or ownership transferred to Council – Policies of regularization by Union applicable, not Council's policies – Revenue generated to be used for market development only [Paras 14-16].

Policy Interpretation – Regularization and Ownership Rights – Cabinet decisions and public notices on regularization and ownership rights limited to specific markets – Baba Kharag Singh Marg Market not included – Interdepartmental communications not enforceable policies [Paras 7-12].

Decision – Appeals allowed – Orders of High Court set aside – Eviction orders restored – Respondents granted time to vacate premises by 30.11.2021 [Paras 17].

Criminal Law – Cancellation of Bail – High Court granted bail to the first respondent accused of conspiracy and murder of an Intelligence Bureau officer – Allegations of tampering with evidence and influencing witnesses – Supreme Court found High Court's bail decision erroneous – Considerations for bail include seriousness of crime, evidence tampering risks, and role of accused – Bail granted to co-accused (wife) due to special circumstance of having an infant – Parity not applicable to first respondent – Bail order set aside and respondent directed to surrender [Paras 1-18].

Judicial Review – Bail Decisions – Evaluation of factors for bail – Role of accused in crime critical – High Court's oversight in assessing gravity and risks – Prior decisions on bail considerations cited – Supreme Court emphasized judicious exercise of discretion in bail matters [Paras 13-16].

Decision – Appeal allowed – High Court's order granting bail to first respondent set aside – First respondent to surrender and be taken into custody – Observations specific to bail decision, not affecting trial outcome [Paras 16-18].

Education Law – Regulation of Service Conditions – State of UP amended Regulation 101 to mandate outsourcing for non-teaching Class IV staff in aided institutions – High Court found amendment unconstitutional for violating Article 14 – Supreme Court upheld validity of the regulation – Policy decisions concerning economic efficiency and financial constraints are within executive domain – Institutions receiving aid must comply with conditions attached to aid – Appeals allowed [Paras 1-60].

Outsourcing Policy – Economic Efficiency – Outsourcing as a policy decision – Applied uniformly across all departments in the state – Presumption of constitutionality – Courts should avoid intervening in policy decisions unless manifest arbitrariness is evident – Seventh Central Pay Commission recommendations on outsourcing considered [Paras 37-53].

Minority Rights – Aided Institutions – No distinction between minority and non-minority aided institutions regarding compliance with conditions attached to grants – Article 30 rights are subject to reasonable regulations in national interest – Equal treatment between majority and minority institutions emphasized [Paras 32-35].

Decision – Appeals allowed – High Court judgment set aside – Regulation 101 upheld – Existing non-compliant recruits to be retained by institutions without state aid – Institutions responsible for adherence to regulations and conditions of service for outsourced staff as per Seventh Central Pay Commission recommendations [Paras 54-60].

Judicial Interpretation – Rewriting Statutory Provisions – High Court's interim order modifying Rule 29(4) of the Copyright Rules – High Court substituted statutory requirement of prior notice with post facto reporting within fifteen days – Supreme Court held that judicial re-drafting of legislation or delegated legislation is impermissible – Interim order set aside [Paras 1-24].

Rule of Law – Legislative Domain – Courts cannot supplant or rewrite statutory provisions – Draftsmanship is a legislative function – Judicial craftsmanship must not transgress legislative boundaries – Supreme Court emphasized separation of powers and proper roles of judiciary and legislature [Paras 20-22].

Statutory Licensing – Copyright Act – Section 31D – Statutory license regime for broadcasting literary and musical works – Prior notice requirement under Section 31D – Rule 29(4) specifies detailed requirements for notice – Interim modifications to rule deemed inappropriate by Supreme Court [Paras 8-22].

Decision – Appeals allowed – High Court's interim order dated 2 August 2021 set aside – No opinion expressed on merits of the pending writ proceedings in High Court – Expedited final disposal of writ petitions encouraged [Paras 23-24].

Voluntary Retirement – Resignation and Acceptance – Employee's resignation under MVRS accepted on 28.05.2003 – Postponement of cut-off date for administrative reasons – Employee's subsequent withdrawal of resignation on 01.07.2003 not permissible – Resignation deemed accepted and final on 28.05.2003 – Post stood abolished simultaneously with acceptance of resignation [Paras 1-47].

Provident Fund Discrepancies – Delay in resolving provident fund discrepancies did not justify withdrawal of resignation – Provident fund issue a separate administrative matter – Resignation acceptance and post-abolishment valid and binding [Paras 7-10, 32-35].

Contractual Interpretation – MVRS terms and conditions – Resignation once accepted under MVRS not revocable – Post abolishment simultaneous with resignation acceptance as per MVRS Clause 5.1 – Delay in relieving duties does not impact resignation acceptance [Paras 18-31, 39-42].

Judicial Precedents – Distinguished cases based on factual nuances – No conditional resignation under MVRS – Reliance on judgments for prospective resignation withdrawals not applicable [Paras 20-45].

Decision – Appeal allowed – High Court’s judgment set aside – Resignation deemed accepted on 28.05.2003 – Employee entitled to benefits under MVRS already paid – No reinstatement or further benefits due [Paras 46-47].

Criminal Law – Summoning of Accused – Magistrate's order summoning the accused must record satisfaction about a prima facie case – High Court and Sessions Court quashed summons against corporate executives due to lack of specific allegations and individual roles – Appeal dismissed, reinforcing need for detailed allegations in vicarious liability cases [Paras 1-10].

Vicarious Liability – Corporate Executives – Summoning directors and officers – Mere designation as Chairman, Managing Director, Executive Director, or Deputy General Manager does not suffice for vicarious liability – Specific allegations and roles required – No evidence of personal involvement or command in alleged offenses [Paras 7-9].

Judicial Scrutiny – Serious Matter – Summoning in criminal cases requires application of mind and careful scrutiny of allegations – Summoning order must reflect satisfaction of prima facie case – Legal principles reiterated from previous judgments emphasizing careful judicial exercise [Paras 8.2, 8.3].

Decision – Appeal dismissed – High Court and Sessions Court orders upheld – Complaint against remaining accused to proceed on merits [Paras 10].

Stamp Duty – Refund – Application for refund of stamp duty – Appellant sought refund due to prolonged proceedings before NCDRC – Application rejected on grounds of delay beyond six months – Supreme Court held rejection of refund application due to judicial delay violates equity and fairness – Case fit for exercise of power under Article 142 of the Constitution – Application for refund granted with interest [Paras 1-33].

Judicial Delay – Equity and Fairness – Litigants not to suffer due to judicial delays – Refund applications in cases involving prolonged judicial proceedings should not be rejected on the ground of delay – Principle of restitution and equity upheld [Paras 30-31].

Statutory Interpretation – Sections 47, 48, 50, and 52A of Stamp Act – Section 48's limitation period not applicable to cases outside Section 47 – Non-obstante clause in Section 52A overrides authority of adjudicating officer but not limitation provisions – Holistic interpretation required to avoid discrimination [Paras 12-27].

Decision – Appeal allowed – High Court judgment set aside – Appellant entitled to refund of stamp duty with 6% interest from 16 July 2016 until date of refund – No order as to costs [Paras 32-33].

Electricity Duty – Imposition and Penalty – Appellant challenged imposition of electricity duty and penalty on supply of electricity to BSEB – High Court dismissed writ petition citing availability of alternate remedy and factual nature of dispute – Supreme Court held High Court erred in dismissing petition – Issues raised were questions of law suitable for writ jurisdiction – High Court's judgment set aside and matter remanded for fresh determination [Paras 1-27].

Writ Jurisdiction – Alternate Remedy – High Court's discretion to entertain writ petitions despite alternate remedies – Exceptions to rule of alternate remedy include violation of fundamental rights, lack of jurisdiction, or legislative competence – Supreme Court emphasized principles from previous rulings on writ jurisdiction [Paras 19-24].

Legislative Competence – Tax on Electricity – Appellant argued State lacked legislative competence to tax supply of electricity to BSEB – Relied on interpretation of Entry 53 of List II in Constitution – Supreme Court directed High Court to adjudicate issue on remand [Paras 22-24].

Decision – Appeal allowed – High Court's judgment set aside – Writ petition restored for fresh determination – No order as to costs [Paras 25-27].