“EQUAL JUSTICE UNDER LAW.”
EMPLOYMENT
Kartick Paul v. The State of West Bengal and Others
Prison service cannot be equated with normal employment under Minimum Wages Act – Calcutta High Court
The Calcutta High Court held that prisoners in West Bengal are not governed by the provisions of the Minimum Wages Act, 1948.
The Court observed that prison service differs significantly from ordinary employment as prison labour involves statutory obligations and regulated prison conditions.
The Bench further noted that the West Bengal Correctional Services Act, 1992 specifically governs prison labour, remuneration and working conditions, thereby overriding general labour law provisions.
The Judgement can be accessed at:
View Details
PROPERTY
Vinodchandra Sakarlal Kapadia v. State of Gujarat and Ors
Restriction on transfer of agricultural land to non-agriculturists applies to Wills also – Supreme Court
The Supreme Court held that Section 63 of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 prohibits transfer of agricultural land to non-agriculturists even through testamentary disposition by way of a Will.
The Court observed that allowing transfer through Wills would defeat the legislative objective of preventing absentee landlordism and protecting cultivating tenants.
The Bench further clarified that the term “assignment” under Section 43 of the Act includes testamentary disposition.
The Judgement can be accessed at:
View Details
Siri Chand (Deceased) v. Surinder Singh
Annual rent escalation clause does not create tenancy beyond one year – Supreme Court
The Supreme Court held that a clause in a rent deed providing yearly increase in rent does not by itself establish that the tenancy was created for a period exceeding one year.
The Court observed that compulsory registration under Section 17(1)(d) of the Registration Act applies only where the lease is expressly for more than one year or reserves yearly rent.
The rent deed in the present case did not specify any definite tenancy period exceeding one year.
The Judgement can be accessed at:
View Details
COVID-19
Mr S R Krishna Murthy v. Union of India
Karnataka High Court dismisses plea challenging mandatory mask usage
The Karnataka High Court refused to entertain a Public Interest Litigation challenging the compulsory use of masks and PPE kits during the COVID-19 pandemic.
The petition alleged that masks and PPE usage were “unscientific”, which the Court declined to accept.
The Judgement can be accessed at:
View Details
Gaurav Jain v. Union of India & Anr
Courts cannot grant blanket waiver of rent during COVID-19 pandemic – Delhi High Court
The Delhi High Court held that courts should be extremely slow in interfering with contractual relationships between landlords and tenants.
The Court observed that landlords may also be financially dependent on rental income and therefore blanket rent waiver cannot be judicially imposed.
The Bench clarified that payment of rent is governed by contractual obligations between parties.
The Judgement can be accessed at:
View Details
Charan Ravindra Bhat v. State of Maharashtra & Ors
Essential service workers cannot be ostracized for contracting COVID-19 – Bombay High Court
The Bombay High Court dismissed a PIL alleging that unrestricted movement of essential service workers contributed to rising COVID-19 cases.
The Court observed that doctors, nurses, sanitation workers and other frontline staff should not be discriminated against merely because of the nature of their duties.
The Bench emphasized the need for a humane approach and encouraged essential workers to continue discharging their responsibilities without fear or stigma.
The Judgement can be accessed at:
View Details
