Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 1]

Supreme Court - Daily Orders

State Of Maharashtra vs Tejwant Singh Sandhu on 30 September, 2022

Bench: M.R. Shah, Krishna Murari

     ITEM NO.42                              COURT NO.7                SECTION IX

                                   S U P R E M E C O U R T O F     I N D I A
                                           RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

     Petition for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No.1041/2020
     (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 11-12-2018
     in WP No. 927/2018 passed by the High Court of Judicature at
     Bombay)

     STATE OF MAHARASHTRA                                               Petitioner(s)
                                                    VERSUS

     TEJWANT SINGH SANDHU & ORS.                                        Respondent(s)

     (IA No. 185559/2019 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED
     JUDGMENT

IA No. 34340/2020 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. IA No. 185561/2019 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T.) WITH SLP(C) No. 6342/2020 (IX) (IA No. 34363/2020 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT, IA No. 34366/2020 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. IA No. 34362/2020 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES IA No. 34370/2020 - PERMISSION TO FILE LENGTHY LIST OF DATES) Date : 30-09-2022 These matters were called on for hearing today.

CORAM :

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.R. SHAH HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KRISHNA MURARI For Parties: Mr.Aaditya A. Pande, AOR.
Mr.Siddharth Dharmadhikari, Adv. Mr.Bharat Bagla, Adv.
Mr. Sachin Patil, AOR Mr. B.H Marla Palle, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Dilip Annasaheb Taur, AOR Mr. Amol V. Deshmukh, Adv.
Mr. Sandeep Sudhakar Deshmukh, AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Signature Not Verified SLP (C) No.1041/2020 Digitally signed by SNEHA Date: 2022.10.11 17:47:34 IST Reason: The short question which is posed for consideration of this Court is whether the judicial officers who have acquired Contd..
- 2 -
the degree of LL.M. are entitled to the benefit of an additional increment? It is the case on behalf of the State that once the concerned Judicial Officer is getting the benefit of ACP, is not entitled to the additional increment on acquiring the additional qualification of LL.M. The aforesaid cannot be accepted. The grant of ACP has nothing to do with the benefit of additional increment on acquiring the additional qualification like LL.M. Even otherwise, the issue is squarely covered by the decision of this Court in Bharat Kumar Shantilal Thakkar Vs. State of Gujarat & Anr. (2014) 15 SCC 305.
In view of the above, there is no substance in the present Special Leave Petition and the same deserves to be dismissed and is accordingly dismissed. SLP(C) No. 6342/2020
So far as SLP(C) No. 6342/2020 is concerned, the same is disposed of in terms of the decision of this Court in Bharat Kumar Shantilal Thakkar Vs. State of Gujarat & Anr. (2014) 15 SCC 305.
Pending applications shall stand disposed of. (NEETU SACHDEVA) (NISHA TRIPATHI) ASTT. REGISTRAR-cum-PS ASSISTANT REGISTRAR