Educational Institutions - Termination of Service - Challenge to the selection process and appointments by the University - Multiple complaints and writ petitions led to the formation of a one-member committee (Justice Dhabe Committee) to investigate the allegations of irregularities in the selection process - Inquiry revealed numerous illegalities and malpractices, leading to the decision to terminate appointments - Appellants challenged the inquiry findings and the procedure of termination on grounds of natural justice and authority of the Chancellor - Supreme Court upheld the findings of the inquiry and dismissed the appeals.

University Administration - Inquiry into Irregularities - Powers of the Chancellor - Validity of the Chancellor's decision to appoint an inquiry committee to investigate the selection process - Supreme Court confirmed that the Chancellor had the authority under Section 11 of the Maharashtra Agricultural Universities (Krishi Vidyapeeths) Act, 1983 to direct such an inquiry - Rejected the argument that principles of natural justice were not followed, noting that the appellants had participated in the inquiry and were given opportunities to present their defense. [Paras 13-17]

Natural Justice - Compliance in Inquiry - Petitioners were notified and given opportunities to participate in the inquiry process, submit affidavits, and provide evidence - Supreme Court found no violation of natural justice principles as the petitioners had sufficient notice and opportunity to defend themselves. [Paras 18-22]

Judicial Review - Interference with Findings of Fact - Inquiry findings by Justice Dhabe Committee were based on substantial evidence and approved by the Executive Council - Supreme Court emphasized limited scope of interference with factual findings of duly constituted inquiry bodies, reaffirming that the conclusions of widespread irregularities justified the actions taken. [Paras 19-20]

Decision - Dismissal of Appeals - Supreme Court dismissed the appeals, directing the university to complete the selection process for the resultant vacancies within six months, allowing appellants to participate with age relaxation. Interim continuation in service for appellants until the completion of the selection process. [Paras 23-26]

Constitutional Law - Service Conditions - Retirement Age - Civil appeal challenging High Court's decision in favor of Respondent No. 1, who was forced to retire at 55 under Rajasthan Service Rules, 1951 - Respondent was originally under Central Civil Service Regulations prescribing retirement at 58 years - High Court ruled option exercised under Rajasthan Services (Protection of Service Conditions) Rules, 1957 allowed Respondent to be governed by Central Civil Service Regulations, including subsequent amendments - Appeal dismissed, affirming High Court's decision.

Rajasthan Services (Protection of Service Conditions) Rules, 1957 - Rule 11 - Scope of Option - Option exercised under Rule 11 by Respondent was comprehensive, encompassing all aspects of leave and pension rules, including retirement age - Held, option not limited to conditions existing on appointed day but included future amendments - Respondent entitled to retirement age of 58 years as per amended regulations.

State Reorganisation Act, 1956 - Section 115(7) - Protection of Service Conditions - Proviso to Section 115(7) protects conditions of service existing immediately before appointed day from being varied to employee's disadvantage without Central Government's approval - Held, State's rule allowing option to be governed by Central Regulations included subsequent amendments - Respondent's superannuation at 55 years under State rules invalid.

Decision - Appeal Dismissed - Supreme Court dismisses appeal, upholding High Court's ruling that Respondent No. 1 was entitled to retire at 58 years as per Central Civil Service Regulations, with all consequent benefits - Finds State's contention limiting option under Rule 11 to conditions existing on appointed day without merit - No costs awarded.

Criminal Law - Conviction for Murder - Appeal against High Court order upholding conviction under Section 302 IPC - Incident arising from a familial dispute where the deceased had an illicit affair with the daughter of one of the accused - Incident occurring on sudden provocation - Supreme Court modifies the conviction to Section 304 Part I IPC - Held, absence of premeditation and presence of sudden provocation brought the case under First Exception to Section 300 IPC - Conviction under Section 302 IPC set aside - Conviction under Section 304 Part I IPC imposed with a sentence of seven years rigorous imprisonment. [Paras 1-11]

Sudden Provocation - Analysis - Held - Relationship between the deceased and the daughter of the accused caused sudden provocation leading to the assault - Incident occurred at night with the deceased being found in the house of the accused - Actions not premeditated but reactionary to the situation - Falls under First Exception to Section 300 IPC - Cited similar cases to substantiate decision. [Para 8]

Decision – Appeal Allowed - Modification of Conviction and Sentence - Conviction under Section 302 IPC quashed - Appellants convicted under Section 304 Part I IPC - Sentenced to seven years rigorous imprisonment - Acknowledged the advanced age of the appellants while determining sentence. [Para 10-11]

Criminal Law – Right of tenants under SARFAESI Act – Appeals against High Court orders enforcing possession under SARFAESI – Appellants claim to be tenants of mortgaged premises under valid leases – SARFAESI Act does not extinguish tenant’s rights without lawful determination of lease – Chief Metropolitan Magistrate’s power under Section 14 limited to non-leasehold possession – Valid leases prior to mortgage or in compliance with Section 65A of Transfer of Property Act, 1882 protected – High Court orders and Magistrate’s decisions to be re-examined. [Paras 11-25]

Right of tenants under valid leases – Analysis – Tenants under valid leases created before the receipt of notice under Section 13(2) of SARFAESI Act are protected – Section 14 does not authorize dispossession of such tenants – Valid leasehold possession is a constitutional right under Article 300A – Affidavit by secured creditor in application under Section 14 must affirm non-existence of valid lease. [Paras 15-18]

Remedies for tenants – Held – Tenants in lawful possession under valid leases can resist dispossession by producing lease proof – Authorized officer cannot forcibly evict – Must apply to Chief Metropolitan Magistrate or District Magistrate for possession – Magistrate to provide hearing and consider validity of lease under Section 65A and Section 111 of Transfer of Property Act – Magistrate’s decision challengeable under Articles 226 and 227 – Debt Recovery Tribunal under Section 17 lacks authority to restore possession to tenants. [Paras 21-24]

Decision – Remand and directives – Chief Metropolitan Magistrate’s orders under Section 14 set aside – Matters remitted for fresh consideration – Secured creditor applications pending under Section 14 to be decided in accordance with this judgment – No injunctions from civil courts on actions under SARFAESI Act – Directions for hearing and final orders within four months. [Paras 28(i)-(v)]

Criminal Law - Summoning of Accused - Section 319 CrPC - Criminal appeal against High Court order upholding the summoning of the appellant to face trial based on a note written by the deceased. The note expressed apprehension of death at the hands of the appellant, but did not relate to the cause of death or any circumstance of the transaction resulting in the death - Supreme Court held that the note was inadmissible under Section 32 of the Evidence Act as it did not meet the criteria for a dying declaration - The power under Section 319 CrPC is discretionary and requires stronger evidence than mere probability - Appeal allowed, summoning order set aside. [Paras 1-23]

Evidence - Admissibility of Dying Declaration - Section 32 of Evidence Act - Analysis of whether a note expressing mere apprehension of death can be considered a dying declaration - Held - Such a note does not relate to the cause of death or the circumstances of the transaction leading to death - Not admissible as evidence under Section 32 - Reference to legal precedents and interpretation of "circumstances of transaction" - Supreme Court reiterates necessity of proximate relation to the actual occurrence of death for admissibility. [Paras 13-18]

Decision - Setting Aside Summoning Order - Court sets aside the order summoning the appellant to face trial, finding no prima facie evidence of complicity in the crime - Affirms the requirement for strong and cogent evidence for invoking Section 319 CrPC - Appeal allowed, High Court and trial court orders reversed. [Para 21-23]

Administrative Law - Recruitment Process - Changes in Criteria During Selection Process - Civil Appeal against the High Court order upholding the Central Administrative Tribunal's decision to quash appointments due to arbitrary changes in the recruitment process - Written examination marks and interview marks were equal, which was impermissible under the rules - Supreme Court emphasized strict adherence to established rules and transparency in the recruitment process - Appeals dismissed. [Paras 1-20]

Recruitment Process - Equal Marks for Written and Interview - Analysis - Held - Marks for written examination and interview must not be equal where not prescribed - Equal marks for both stages and the manner of awarding marks indicated lack of transparency and arbitrariness - Deviation from prescribed rules without transparency results in unfair selection. [Para 12, 20]

Decision - Continuation from Vitiated Point - Court upheld the High Court’s decision to continue the recruitment process from the point it stood vitiated - Fresh recruitment process ordered due to arbitrariness in the selection process - Appeals dismissed with no costs. [Para 20]

Service Law – Judicial Service – Advance Increments – Writ Petition under Article 32 – Challenge to cut-off date for granting three advance increments to judicial officers with higher qualifications in law – Petitioner possessed higher qualification (LL.M.) at the time of joining judicial service before 1.11.1999 – Resolution dated 14.6.2012 granted increments only to those with higher qualifications acquired on or after 1.11.1999 – Held, cut-off date is arbitrary and irrational – Recommendation of Ist National Judicial Pay Commission does not prescribe any cut-off date – Court directed the expression "on or after 1.11.1999" in the resolution to be read as "on or before 1.11.1999" – Writ petition allowed. [Paras 1-11]

Service Law – Higher Qualification in Law – Implementation of Judicial Pay Commission Recommendations – Analysis – Recommendation in para 8.48 of the Ist National Judicial Pay Commission approved by Supreme Court – No cut-off date provided in the recommendation for granting three advance increments to judicial officers with higher qualifications in law – Registrar General's communication misinterpreted leading to an arbitrary cut-off date – Court finds the prescribed cut-off date in resolution lacks rational basis and nexus with the objective. [Para 4-9]

Decision – Correction of Cut-off Date for Advance Increments – Court modifies resolution to grant three advance increments to all eligible judicial officers with higher qualifications in law irrespective of the date of acquisition – Orders the State of Gujarat to pay financial benefits to the petitioner and similarly situated officers within two months. [Para 10-11]

Landlord-Tenant Dispute – Eviction – Personal Necessity – Jurisdiction of High Court under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India – Appeal against the High Court's order setting aside the Appellate Court's decision granting eviction of tenants – High Court's jurisdiction under Articles 226 and 227 limited to correcting errors apparent on the face of the record – High Court cannot interfere with findings of fact unless there is a substantial question of law – Appellate Court's finding of bona fide requirement of landlord upheld – High Court's interference unjustified – High Court's judgment set aside – Appellate Court's order restored. [Paras 6-12]

Role of High Court in Reviewing Factual Findings – Analysis – Held – High Court erred in setting aside the factual findings of the Appellate Court regarding the landlord's bona fide need – No substantial question of law presented – Jurisdiction under Articles 226 and 227 does not extend to re-evaluation of evidence unless a clear error is shown. [Paras 10-12]

Decision – Restoration of Appellate Court's Order – The Supreme Court allows the appeal, setting aside the High Court's judgment and restoring the Appellate Court's order that granted eviction of the tenants, affirming the landlord's bona fide requirement of the premises. [Para 12]

Civil Law - Adjustment of Deposits by Judgment Debtor - Civil Appeal against High Court decision on adjustment of deposits towards principal or interest – Appellants awarded compensation with interest for road accident – Respondent Insurance Company deposited amounts claiming full satisfaction of award – Dispute on whether deposits to be adjusted first towards interest or principal – Supreme Court holds deposits to be adjusted first towards interest and costs, then principal – Appeals allowed, High Court judgment set aside.

Interpretation of Order 21 Rule 1 CPC - Analysis - Held - Appropriation of payments made by the judgment debtor to be applied first towards interest and costs, and then towards the principal amount due – Rule 472 of Andhra Pradesh Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989, treating the award as a money decree, justifies following this principle – High Court misinterpreted the provisions and relevant judgments – Judicial discipline mandates adherence to Supreme Court precedents under Article 141 of the Constitution.

Interest on Interest - Prohibition - Analysis - Held - Section 3(3) of the Interest Act, 1978, does not allow interest on interest – However, deposits must be adjusted towards interest and costs before principal to avoid unjust enrichment of the judgment debtor – Execution of decrees requires compliance with established norms of payment prioritization.

Decision:

Appeal allowed. The judgment of the Andhra Pradesh High Court is set aside, and the order of the Executing Court is restored, directing that the amounts deposited by the Respondent Insurance Company be adjusted first towards interest and costs, and then towards the principal amount due.