The Chhattisgarh High Court upheld a Family Court ruling directing a father-in-law to provide maintenance to his widowed daughter-in-law and her minor daughter. The bench affirmed that the statutory obligation applied despite his appeal before the judges today.
The Orissa High Court ruled that a valid Hindu adoption cannot be denied recognition merely because the adoption deed was registered after the employee’s death. The Court held that performance of adoption rituals is decisive, and late registration cannot defeat a rightful claim for compassionate appointment.
The Supreme Court held that once a dependent of a deceased employee accepts compassionate appointment, the right stands exhausted, and the appointee cannot later demand transfer or appointment to a higher post in public employment under service law.
The Patna High Court has ruled that compassionate appointments are meant only to address immediate financial distress after an employee’s death. The Court rejected a plea filed decades later, stating such claims cannot be made after prolonged delay.
The Kerala High Court has ruled that a widow’s remarriage cannot disqualify her from compassionate appointment under Rule 51B. The judgment reinforces that dependents of deceased aided school teachers hold a protected statutory right to employment.
A widow wins her 24-year-long battle as Rajasthan High Court orders the government to pay family pension, death gratuity, and interest for her late husband’s temporary government service. Court rules delay cannot deny rightful benefits to dependents.
The Punjab & Haryana High Court ruled that a second wife is eligible for compassionate appointment if nominated by her deceased husband in service records and is fully dependent on him, despite his first marriage not being legally dissolved. This decision emphasizes the significance of dependence and nomination over legal marital status complications.
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court of India has ruled that if a High Court Bench hears a case that was not assigned to it by the Chief Justice of the High Court, its order will be considered void and without legal authority. The Bench comprising Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice Rajesh Bindal stated that even if both parties agree to have their case heard by such a Bench, it does not grant the Bench the authority to decide the case.
The Supreme Court made significant rulings on various constitutional and legal issues, including the non-challenge of statutes based on basic structure, necessity for official notifications for customs exemptions, and limitations on property rights. The Court reinforced principles of fairness, integrity in appointments, and guidelines against punitive demolitions while addressing social justice concerns.
