Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 11 (0.25 seconds)

Hardeep Singh vs State Of Punjab & Ors on 10 January, 2014

16. It is well settled through Hardeep Singh vs. State of Punjab reported in 2014 (3) SCC 92, that words in statute can't be construed as surplusage and no word can be rendered ineffective or purposeless. With this principle of interpretation in mind, when we construe the enactment, the intention of the legislature points to only one interpretation and that is to provide guaranteed employment for 100 days to the eligible and interested adult applicant in a rural household. When the State fails to provide such employment, the consequences are laid down in the Act itself and disbursal of unemployment allowance for the idle days is a statutory obligation, caste on the State, by the NREGA.
Supreme Court of India Cites 114 - Cited by 1591 - B S Chauhan - Full Document
1   2 Next