P&H HC: Eyewitness Account Not Credible if Eyewitness Directly Identifies Accused in Court  ||  Delhi HC: Conditions u/s 45 PMLA Have to Give Way to Article 21 When Accused Incarcerated for Long  ||  Delhi High Court: Delhi Police to Add Grounds of Arrest in Arrest Memo  ||  Kerala High Court: Giving Seniority on the Basis of Rules is a Policy Decision  ||  Del. HC: Where Arbitrator has Taken Plausible View, Court Cannot Interfere u/s 34 of A&C Act  ||  Ker. HC: No Question of Estoppel Against Party Where Error is Committed by Court Itself  ||  Supreme Court: Revenue Entries are Admissible as Evidence of Possession  ||  SC: Mere Breakup of Relationship Between Consenting Couple Can’t Result in Criminal Proceedings  ||  SC: Bar u/s 195 CrPC Not Attracted Where Proceedings Initiated Pursuant to Judicial Order  ||  NTF Gives Comprehensive Suggestions on Enhancing Better Working Conditions of Medical Professions    

SC: CJs of HCs Acting on Administrative Side Don’t Have Any Rule Making Authority of Executive - (04 Jan 2024)

ADMINISTRATIVE

Supreme Court while observing that policymaking needs consideration of many factors, has held that Chief Justices(CJs) of High Courts, acting on the administrative side don’t have the power to frame rules about post-retiral benefits for former judges that must mandatorily be notified by the State.

Tags : SUPREME COURT   FORMER JUDGES   POLICYMAKING   POST-RETIRAL BENEFITS  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2024 - All Rights Reserved