SC castigates NMC on stipend issue

SC castigates NMC on stipend issue 

TIMES NEWS NETWORK 04.11.2025

With National Medical Commission (NMC) failing to ensure that all private medical colleges and deemed universities pay stipend to MBBS interns, Supreme Court (SC) directed the Union health secretary to ensure that NMC collects details of charges imposed by these institutions and the stipend they pay. SC, in an order last week, said

it expected the commission “to wake up from slumber” and directed it to file a comprehensive compliance affidavit within two weeks. Over two years after SC said non-payment of stipend to MBBS interns was akin to bonded labour, not only has NMC failed to ensure payment, it has failed to even produce a list of medical colleges with details of how much they paid as stipend or penalise colleges not paying stipend, as it has been threatening to do. I

n July, NMC had issued a public notice directing colleges to submit the complete course-wise fee structure and details of stipend payment to MBBS interns/junior residents/senior residents etc, tuition fees, hostel charges, caution deposits and all miscellaneous charges. NMC had threatened to act against the colleges, including issuing show-cause notices, imposing financial penalties, withdrawing course recognition and suspending admissions, if they failed to comply. 

A few days before the July 11 public notice, NMC had issued another notice, pushing the onus of addressing grievances of medical students onto colleges, universities and directorates of medical education at the state level. Before the sudden move to shift responsibility and the U-turn soon after, NMC had issued notices to colleges thrice in 2024, threatening action. However, with no action being taken, colleges clearly have not taken the threats seriously. SC observed that NMC “seems to be dragging its feet without having any serious concern.”

Law Colleges Can’t Bar Students From Exams Over Attendance Shortage:

Law Colleges Can’t Bar Students From Exams Over Attendance Shortage: HC 9 Yrs After Death By Suicide Of Student, Court Says Norms Can’t Be So Stringent 

Abhinav.Garg@timesofindia.com  04.11.2025

New Delhi : Nine years after an Amity Law School student died by suicide after being barred from taking semester exams because of attendance shortage, Delhi High Court ruled that no law college or university can stop students from sitting for tests on this ground. Referring to the death of Sushant Rohilla and the "stark realities that have come to the surface," a bench of Justices Prathiba M Singh and Amit Sharma said it was "strongly of the view that attendance norms for education in general, and legal education in particular, cannot be made so stringent” that it causes mental trauma and death. 

It directed the Bar Council of India to re-evaluate the mandatory attendance norms and also ordered long-term reforms on mental well-being. "Sushant Rohilla has now left a permanent and indelible mark in the legal education space," the bench said, disposing of a suo motu petition by Supreme Court that was transferred to the high court. 

Rohilla, a third-year student, was allegedly barred from sitting for the semester exams because he did not have the requisite attendance. He left behind a note that said he felt like a failure and did not wish to live. Criminal proceedings against Amity Law School by Rohilla's family ended last year when both parties signed an out-of-court settlement. In its 122-page order, the high court passed a series of directions for law institutes. "... No student enrolled in any recognised law college, university, or institution in India shall be detained from taking examinations or be prevented from further academic pursuits or career progression on the ground of lack of minimum attendance," it said. 

No law college, university or institution should be permitted to set attendance norms over and above the minimum percentage prescribed by the BCI, the bench added. It also directed all BCI-recognised law colleges and universities to implement measures, such as a weekly notification of attendance of students on an online portal or a mobile app, monthly notice to guardians on attendance shortage, and extra physical or online classes for students who do not fulfil the minimum attendance norms. 

"If at the end of a semester, a student still does not qualify the prescribed attendance norms, the college or university cannot bar the student from taking the examination," the court said. Lack of attendance can be penalised by reducing the grade in the final result, it said. 

The court said even if attendance was not the only factor in Rohilla’s death, but just a contributing factor, still the loss of the life of a young boy could not have come at the behest of such norms. "There are several other cases of suicide by students over the years which have been connected to mandatory attendance requirements, mental health crises arising from the pressure to meet such requirements, and other related issues," the court said.

Pay service benefits to wife of missing govt employee: HC

Pay service benefits to wife of missing govt employee: HC 

25.10.2025 TIMES OF INDIA DELHI 

Raipur : Dependent wife of a missing govt employee can challenge his ex parte termination and claim service benefits of the employee who has been presumed dead after law-mandated absence of seven years, Chhattisgarh high court ruled earlier this week, reports Partha Behera . 

With this, the court dismissed a writ petition filed by Steel Authority of India Limited (SAIL) and Bhilai Steel Plant (BSP), upholding an order mandating the company to provide all consequential service benefits to family of the missing employee. A division bench comprising Justice Sanjay K Agrawal and Justice Radhakishan Agrawal directed BSP to expeditiously finalise the service benefits for the woman. 

The bench rejected SAIL’s challenge against the order of Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT), Bilaspur bench, which had set aside the employee’s removal from service. The employee, a senior technician at BSP’s Rajhara mines, went missing on Jan 14, 2010. His wife had lodged an FIR regarding his disappearance. Despite receiving an official intimation about his missing status, BSP proceeded to issue a charge sheet against the absent employee on Dec 11, 2010, and subsequently removed him from service through an ex parte order dated Sept 17, 2011. 

CAT allowed the woman’s application, setting aside the removal order and directing BSP to grant all consequential benefits. SAIL/BSP challenged this order in HC, arguing that the woman lacked locus standi to file the plea without a civil court declaration presuming her husband’s death. The HC bench, however, held that since the employee had not been heard from for more than seven years, presumption of death under Section 108 of Indian Evidence Act, 1872, applied. 

The court noted that a civil court declaration under Specific Relief Act, 1963, was unnecessary when the fact of the seven year absence was undisputed. HC said BSP committed a legal error by terminating the employee’s service despite being aware of his missing status.

8.8 Lakh Execution Petitions Pending Across Country :

8.8 Lakh Execution Petitions Pending Across Country : 

Supreme Court Expresses Alarm, Asks High Courts To Ensure Speedy Disposals 

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK 18 Oct 2025 10:26 AM

The Supreme Court has expressed serious concern over the alarming pendency of execution petitions across the country, revealing that 8,82,578 execution petitions remain pending before district courts nationwide, despite earlier directions to High Courts to ensure their disposal within six months.

A Bench of Justice J.B. Pardiwala and Justice Pankaj Mithal was monitoring compliance with its March 6, 2025 order in Periyammal (Dead) Through LRs & Ors. v. V. Rajamani & Anr., which set a 6 month limit to dispose of execution petitions.

The Court described the statistics received from the High Courts as “highly disappointing" and "alarming."

The data compiled from all High Courts shows that Bombay (3.41 lakh), Madras (86,148), Kerala (82,997), and Andhra Pradesh (68,137) are among the jurisdictions with the highest pendency. The Court noted that while 3,38,685 execution petitions were disposed of in the last six months, the backlog remains massive.

The statistics which we have received are highly disappointing. The figures of the pendency of the execution petitions across the country are alarming.

The Bench recorded its displeasure that the Karnataka High Court had failed to furnish the required data, despite explicit directions. The Court directed the Registrar General of the Karnataka High Court to submit an explanation within two weeks and to immediately provide the updated figures on pendency and disposal.

Reiterating its earlier directions, the Supreme Court asked High Courts to ensure effective follow-up with their district judiciary for the disposal of pending execution petitions.

"As observed in our main Judgment, after the decree is passed, if it is going to take years and years to execute the decree, then it makes no sense and would be nothing short of travesty of justice,"the Bench remarked.

Calling upon the High Courts to evolve effective procedures and monitoring mechanisms, the Court fixed April 10, 2026 for the next review of compliance, directing that complete figures on the status of execution petitions ,including those pending on the original side, be furnished before the next hearing.

"We once again request all the High Courts to evolve some procedure and guide their respective District judiciary for effective and expeditious disposal of the execution petitions which are pending as on date."

The Supreme Court Registry has been directed to forward a copy of this order to all High Courts for immediate action.

Case : Periyammal (Dead) Through LRs & Ors. v. V. Rajamani & Anr. | Miscellaneous Application Nos.1889-1891/2025 in C.A. Nos.3640- 3642/2025

Honest public servants should be protected from ‘unwarranted frivolous prosecution’, says court

Honest public servants should be protected from ‘unwarranted frivolous prosecution’, says court

COURTS STRESS ON SHIELD FOR THE HONEST, CENSURE FLAWED  PROBES

 Vineet.Upadhyay@timesofindia.com 07.10.2025

New Delhi : Observing that courts must protect honest public servants from “unwarranted frivolous prosecution”, a court acquitted one Ashutosh Vasant, a former director of a PSU, in a corruption case. There are officers who give their life and soul to build the institutions they work for, and therefore, such a lopsided approach needs to be discouraged, Special Judge Sunena Sharma stated on Sept 25. 

The court said it appeared that CBI wanted us to see a ghost where there was none and Vasant, when he was at the peak of his career, fell prey to unfulfilled ambitions of some of his disgruntled colleagues who started considering him as a stumbling block to their career ambitions. “Though the case is ending up in acquittal, the damage suffered by the accused on account of the allegations raised in this case is enormous, and unfortunately, in this entire process, the career of the accused got stalled, jeopardised and ruined,” said the court. In 2019, CBI booked Railtel director Vasant and two firms for alleged misconduct in officials’ travel to the United States in 2012. Railtel, a public sector company, runs a nationwide broadband, telecom, and multimedia network to modernise train control operation and safety systems of Indian Railways. According to the prosecution, Vasant travelled by economy class and raised a bill for business class. He allegedly did not produce any journey documents to hide the cheating committed by him in the purchase of tickets. 

The prosecution alleged that on the recommendation of Vasant and two other officials, Railtel selected the consortium of two companies—United Telecom Limited and Infinera — which were alleged to be non-compliant vendors, for the tender of dense wave division multiplexing technology. The judge did not find any cogent or credible evidence on record to support the prosecution case that the accused received Rs 2,06,500 in cash as wrongful gain or pecuniary advantage from a travel agency as a refund of the residual amount of his business class ticket and caused a corresponding loss to the govt exchequer. 

The court said a mere suspicion or an erroneous administrative decision (act or omission) taken in good faith cannot be transformed into a corruption charge in the absence of clear evidence of any pecuniary advantage. Highlighting that undoubtedly, a “zero tolerance” policy against corruption is the need of the hour to uphold ethical governance, the court said any investigation or trial should not start with a preconceived notion that all public servants are corrupt or dishonest

Vijay fled, shows no remorse, says HC, sets up stampede SIT

Vijay fled, shows no remorse, says HC, sets up stampede SIT 

politi

Bus Involved & CCTV Footages From Incident Spot To Be Seized

 Sureshkumar.K@timesofindia.com  04.10.2025

Chennai : Criticising actorpolitician Vijay and his Tamilaga Vettri Kazhagam (TVK) members for first causing a stampede that killed 41 people in Karur on Sept 27, and then abandoning their cadres and followers, Madras HC ordered aprobe by an SIT Friday. Citing two accidents involving Vijay’s campaign vehicle, which did not stop even after dashing against the bikes of his accompanying cadres, HC also ordered registration of a hit-and-run case against the politician. “Both the driver and the leader (Vijay) saw the accident but left the place without stopping... This court highly condemns the attitude of the party (TVK)... There was not even a remote sense of feeling expressed by the party taking responsibility for organising such an event. This only shows the mental state of the leader and the party,” Justice N Senthilkumar said.

 “The SIT will be headed by Asra Garg, IGP (north zone), and comprise Vimala, SP, Namakkal, and Shyamaladevi, SP. In addition, Garg is at liberty to select additional team members under any category/designation as he deems fit,” said the judge. 

All available CCTV footage from the place of the incident, and in particular CCTV footage inside and outside the bus carrying the head of the political party, shall be seized. The bus involved shall also be seized, the court said. “In both cases (campaign vehicle hitting two bikes), police have not registered an FIR for hitand-run. Court expresses its deep anguish and agony that even if no complaint is filed by the aggrieved, state has suo motu responsibility to register a case, bring the perpetrators of the crime on record, and make them face trial,” Justice Senthilkumar said. 

“Neither the politician nor his followers were there at the scene of occurrence after the incident. The President, the PM, Union home minister, CM of Tamil Nadu, and leader of opposition condoled the incident, and almost all political parties were there to rescue people. This court could not understand how the political party that organised the rally abandoned the scene of occurrence immediately after the incident,” the judge said. “The fateful occurrence resulted in the loss of 41 lives. 

Unfortunately, the organisers, right from the leader... vanished, leaving their own cadres, leaving their own followers, leaving their own fans in the lurch,” the judge said.

 “Such an irresponsible attitude of any politician or organisation cannot be taken lightly. The court owes its responsibility towards its citizens. It is unfortunate to record such leadership quality,” the judge said. The court was passing the order on a plea moved by P H Dinesh, of Chennai, seeking to restrain TN home secretary and DGP from granting permission for road shows to Vijay’s TVK or other political parties until guidelines are framed for such events.

Madras HC refuses to order college to readmit student held in drug case

Madras HC refuses to order college to readmit student held in drug case

The orders were passed recently on a petition filed by P Pradeep, a third year LLB student of the Central Law College, Salem.

He was arrested in a criminal case registered under NDPS Act, 1985, on September 10, 2024, and was released on bail on October 14, 2024.

Express News Service

Updated on:

30 Sep 2025, 8:22 am

CHENNAI: The Madras High Court has refused to order a private law college to readmit a student who was dismissed after being arrested in a drug case. However, the court quashed the termination order, as it was passed without issuing notice to the student before taking the decision to dismiss him, and directed the college to initiate fresh proceedings.

The orders were passed recently on a petition filed by P Pradeep, a third year LLB student of the Central Law College, Salem. He was arrested in a criminal case registered under NDPS Act, 1985, on September 10, 2024, and was released on bail on October 14, 2024.

The college administration passed an order on December 2, 2024, dismissing him from the college and sent his transfer certificate and other original certificates to him.

Pradeep filed a plea against the dismissal and contended that he was not issued notice before deciding to dismiss him; and this amounted to violation of principles of natural justice. He prayed for the court to quash the order and direct the college to readmit him.

Justice Kumarappan observed that the principles of natural justice were not followed and so quashed the impugned order. He directed the college to pass a fresh order after following due procedures in four weeks. Until final decision is taken, the petitioner is not entitled to enter the college except for inquiry, the order said.

HC: Don’t share info with anyone, except for probe

HC: Don’t share info with anyone, except for probe 

Justice Govindaraj noted that while Section 29 restricts divulging of Aadhaar information, Section 33 allows it on a high court order, as is the case here. 

“What is required to be ascertained here is whether the said Aadhaar card was used by the son of the petitioner or someone else, and the location of the said usage,” he said. 

The court directed UIDAI to provide police with location details where the card was used and instructed cops not to share them with anyone except as required for probe. HC to UIDAI: Share Aadhaar location data to trace missing man

Bengaluru : Karnataka HC has directed UIDAI to share Aadhaar location details to help trace a man who has been reported missing from Hubballi since Dec 2019. Allowing a petition filed by Hubballi resident Krishnamurthy, whose elder son, Vijay Krishnamurthy Sangeet, is missing since Dec 19, 2019, Justice Suraj Govindaraj ruled that the authorities requiring the use or authentication of an Aadhaar card during a probe must approach the high court under Section 33 of the Aadhaar Act, 2016. Vijay, an adult, remains untraceable despite attempts by the police to locate him. Krishnamurthy came to know on June 20, 2023, that his son’s Aadhaar card had been used for the purpose of authentication. Police and the petitioner then sought Vijay’s Aadhaar authentication history from UIDAI. With the Central agency refusing to share the details, the petitioner moved Karnataka high court for redressal.

HC: Conduct add’l mop-up counselling for NEET-SS

HC: Conduct add’l mop-up counselling for NEET-SS 

TIMES NEWS NETWORK  19.09.2025

Chennai : Madras high court has directed the director general of health services and the medical counselling committee to conduct additional mopup counselling for NEET-SS 2024-25 to include the unfilled super-specialty seats in Tamil Nadu and complete the process within four weeks. 

Justice G K Ilanthiriayan issued the order following a plea by three PG doctors who wanted to pursue super-specialty courses of their choice but were denied due to the nonconduct of mop-up counselling. Representing the petitioners, senior advocate P H Arvindh Pandian submitted that the failure of the counselling committee to conduct mop-up counselling for NEET-SS 202425 has left a large number of super-specialty seats vacant, despite there being willing, eligible, and meritorious candidates available to fill them. 

The denial of a mop-up counselling round results in the arbitrary and unjustified non-utilization of valuable public and private medical education resources, particularly in high-demand specialties and prestigious institutions like the Madras Medical College, Stanley Medical College, and Madurai Medical College.

 “The authorities are under a statutory and administrative obligation under the PG Medical Education (Amendment) Regulations, 2019, to conduct counselling for all super specialty seats in a manner that ensures maximum seat utilization. The current approach defeats this objective,” he added.

Employed wife also entitled to maintenance: HC

Employed wife also entitled to maintenance: HC 

Abhinav.Garg@timesofindia.com  12.09.2025

New Delhi : Noting that a highly qualified, gainfully employed wife is also entitled to maintenance if she enjoyed a better standard of life in the matrimonial home, Delhi HC has enhanced the monthly maintenance from Rs 35,000 fixed by the family court for the estranged couple’s child to Rs 1.5 lakh for the wife and the child. “Her financial self-sufficiency must be assessed not in absolute terms but relative to the standard of living maintained during the marriage... maintenance must be calibrated in a manner that allows both parties, especially the financially weaker spouse, to live with dignity, particularly when the respondent (husband’s) income is almost 10-fold,” a bench of justices Navin Chawla and Renu Bhatnagar observed in a verdict Wednesday. 

The wife is a DU assistant professor earning over Rs 1.2 lakh per month while her husband is a senior data scientist with an MNC drawing an annual income exceeding Rs 1 crore, with benefits like RSUs, stock options and international travel allowances, HC noted. “Despite her employment, her income doesn’t sufficiently meet the demands of sustaining the standard of living she and the child were accustomed to prior to the separation. 

It is evident while the appellant earns an income, it is not comparable to the scale and diversity of the respondent’s earnings,” the bench said. Faulting the family court for focusing only on the wife’s qualification and employment, HC noted though she is earning, “her income is insufficient to support her own needs and those of the minor child”. “She is residing with her parents, which cannot continue indefinitely, and her limited earnings compel her to remain dependent on them. With such resources, she is unable to maintain a reasonable standard of living,” it said, adding the husband’s “substantially higher income makes him financially capable of providing adequate maintenance”.

HC Quashes MBBS Student's Suspension In NEET Malpractice Case, Says NMC Can Act Post-Trial If Guilty

HC Quashes MBBS Student's Suspension In NEET Malpractice Case, Says NMC Can Act Post-Trial If Guilty 

Written By Barsha MisraPublished On 26 Aug 2025 3:22 PM 

Madras High Court

Chennai: Granting relief to an MBBS student, who was suspended after being framed with charges of malpractice in the National Eligibility-Entrance Test Undergraduate (NEET-UG) 2024 examination, the Madras High Court recently allowed him to attend classes and appear in the examinations.

The HC bench, comprising Justice C. Kumarappan, opined that suspending a student while the trial is pending would affect his right to pursue studies and jeopardise his future.

However, the bench made it clear that if the petitioner is ultimately held guilty in the trial, the National Medical Commission (NMC) can take an appropriate decision in accordance with law, which may include cancellation of his admission to the medical course.

The petitioner is currently pursuing an MBBS course at the Government Thiruvarur Medical College. He was issued with a suspension order on 15.04.2025 by the Dean of the medical college, allegedly without being given any opportunity of hearing on the grounds that he was framed with the charges of malpractice in the NEET UG 2024 examination. He is currently on bail granted by the Patna High Court.

It was argued by the petitioner's counsel that since the petitioner was arrested and remanded to judicial custody, the Dean had issued the suspension order based on the letter issued by the National Medical Commission (NMC).

Further, the petitioner's counsel submitted that if the petitioner, who was granted bail, was not allowed to attend classes, it would prejudice his education and would affect his eligibility to participate in the examinations. Further, the petitioner's counsel claimed that the petitioner is innocent and was falsely implicated in the criminal case.

The petitioner's counsel relied on a judgment from the Rajasthan High Court in the case of Vikas Vishnoi vs. Controller of Examinations, Rajasthan University of Health Science, Jaipur and Others, where the Court had allowed an accused to continue his MBBS courses subject to certain conditions.

On the other hand, the counsel for NMC and the counsel for DMER, and the Dean and Vice Principal of Government Thiruvarur Medical College strongly objected to these contentions and submitted that the petitioner was arrested on serious allegations of malpractice in the NEET UG 2024 examination and an investigation was currently in progress by the Central Bureau of Investigation.

They further submitted that the petitioner was suspended based on NMC's recommendations and the question of reviving the suspension order would not arise at all, since the conduct of the petitioner was not only unethical but also unbecoming of a student.

After taking note of the submissions, the HC bench opined,

"...this Court is of the considered opinion that as rightly held by the Rajasthan High Court, suspending the petitioner, who is a student, while the trial is pending would affect the petitioner's right to pursue his studies and would jeopardize his future. Moreover, if the petitioner is ultimately acquitted, he would suffer the irreversible and irreparable loss of precious years of his studies." "The petitioner being a student, this Court would like to have a soft approach, though the allegations against the petitioner are serious in nature. Therefore, suspending the petitioner from College would effectively presume the petitioner guilty and amount to punishment before a final determination by the Competent Court," it observed. Accordingly, the bench granted the following relief:

(1) The petitioner's suspension order dated 15.04.2025 passed by the 5 th respondent-college is hereby quashed. The suspension is treated as quashed from the date of this order. The respondent college shall forthwith allow the petitioner to attend classes.

(2) If the petitioner fulfills the requisite attendance criteria, he shall be allowed to appear in the ensuing examination in accordance with law. The petitioner shall be allowed to complete the course, but the respondents shall not issue him a degree or register him unless the trial is concluded and he is acquitted of the charges.

(3) If the petitioner is held guilty in the trial, the National Medical Commission (NMC) shall be free to take an appropriate decision in accordance with law, which may include cancellation of his admission to the medical course. It is needless to state that if the petitioner is acquitted, he shall be issued a degree as soon as he is acquitted.

Can SC/ST Community Status Of Govt Employee Be Verified After Retirement? Madras High Court Delivers Split Verdict

Can SC/ST Community Status Of Govt Employee Be Verified After Retirement? 

Madras High Court Delivers Split Verdict 

Upasana Sajeev 13 Aug 2025 5:00 PM

The Madras High Court has delivered a split verdict on whether the community status of a government employee can be verified/scrutinised after their retirement.

While Justice Nisha Banu opined that reopening the verification of a community certificate would amount to re-litigation, Justice M Jothiraman opined that once a verification starts, it should continue till its conclusion.

Since contradictory views have been taken by the judges, the Registry has been directed to place the matter before the Chief Justice for further action.

Also Read - Recreational Clubs Selling Liquor Becoming 'Nuisance', Govt Allowing It Because Owners Are Influential/ Politicians: Madras High Court The court was hearing two writ petitions filed by M Gunasekaran and G Thangavel seeking to restrain the SC/ST Vigilance Cell from conducting verification of their respective caste status. In both cases, the persons were issued notices calling upon them to appear for an enquiry in connection with the verification of their community certificate, years after their retirement.

The petitioners submitted that the High Court had consistently taken a view that after the retirement of an employee, the process of verification would be academic and had restrained the committee/verifying authority from proceeding further.

Also Read - Wife Holding Immovable Properties & Substantial Income Does Not Need Interim Maintenance To Live Comfortably: Madras High Court The petitioners submitted that they had not been summoned for more than 40 years for verification and had even attained superannuation. It was thus submitted that the authorities should be refrained from conducting verification. The petitioners also filed an affidavit undertaking that they would not make any claim or concession based on their community certificate.

On the other hand, the Additional Government Pleader submitted that the summons and show cause notice have been issued to the petitioners for only appearing before the authority to submit an explanation along with proof of documents, and no adverse orders had been made. The court was also informed that the authorities were taking steps to verify the genuineness of the community certificate following an order of the Supreme Court.

Justice Nisha Banu noted that in a previous order, the court had held that the action of the authorities in initiating vigilance enquiry after superannuation was not sustainable.

In the present cases, the court noted that the authorities had taken up the verification 4 years and 7 years respectively after the retirement, which was uncalled for. The judge observed that the inordinate delay on the part of the authorities in initiating the enquiry was highly unreasonable and could not be justified under any acceptable standard of prompt administrative action.

The judge also took into account an Office Memorandum placed before the Supreme Court by the Joint Secretary, Lok Sabha Secretariat, which specified that only community certificates of employees inducted into Government Service after 1995 could be subjected to scrutiny/verification. The judge also noted that as per the Government Order issued by the Government of Tamil Nadu which specified the functions of a Vigilance Cell, the inquiry should be completed within a period not exceeding two months.

“Once a government servant has retired and completed all service verifications during his tenure, reopening of the community certificate issue amounts to re-litigation. It is pertinent to note that the employer accepted the community certificates at the time of appointment of the petitioners and did not raise any issue during the long years of service of the petitioners. A retired employee has a legitimate expectation that benefits earned during service will not be taken away arbitrarily after retirement. When a community certificate is issued and accepted for decades, and no concerns are raised, then there is a presumption that such certificates are valid and the information contained within it are accurate,” the judge observed. Thus, considering all the factors, Justice Nisha Banu opined that the authorities could not keep the matter pending for months/years together in the garb of verification of community certificates, especially when a time limit had been fixed for completing the verification. She was thus inclined to set aside the impugned proceedings initiated by the authorities.

Justice Jothiraman's observation

Justice Jothiraman took a different view and noted that once a verification is started, it shall continue till its conclusion. He added that mere undertaking affidavits filed by the petitioners were not sustainable under law, and could not be accepted to close the verification process.

“I am of the view that verification once started shall continue till its conclusion and mere acceptance of undertaking affidavits filed by the petitioners for restraining the authorities is not sustainable under law when the authorities are empowered to issue the impugned notices calling upon the petitioners for enquiry to verify the genuineness of their community certificates in order to ensure implementation of constitutional reservation benefits to the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes and therefore, the same cannot be quashed at this stage. There is no merits in these petitions and the same is liable to be dismissed,” the judge said. The judge also highlighted the order of the Supreme Court in which the court had opined that there was a huge racket in Tamil Nadu for issuing community certificate and had directed the State Level Scrutiny Committee to conduct an extensive enquiry into the same and file a report.

Considering the observations made by the Supreme Court, the judge opined that the verification of the community certificate could not be quashed at this stage. Thus, the judge found no merits in the plea and was inclined to dismiss the same.

Counsel for Petitioner: Mr. V. Vijay Shankar

Counsel for Respondents: Mr. Vadivel Deenadayalan Addl. Govt. Pleader, Mr. Babu Muthu Meeran Addl. Public Prosecutor

Case Title: M Gunasekaran v. The State Level Scrutiny Committee – II and Another

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 275

Case No: W.P.No.24381 of 2025

Shortfall In Service, Excess Pension Paid Due To Factual Errors; Madras HC Upholds Recovery After Retirement

Shortfall In Service, Excess Pension Paid Due To Factual Errors; Madras HC Upholds Recovery After Retirement

Namdev Singh 23 July 2025 11:18 AM

The Madras High Court bench comprising Justice A.D. Maria Clete held that excess pension paid due to a clerical or mechanical mistake in pay fixation to the factually ineligible employee can be recovered post-retirement. Further the protection against recovery laid down in Rafiq Masih case does not apply when eligibility itself is lacking.

Background Facts

The petitioner was employed as a Lecturer (Selection Grade) at Arulmigu Palaniandavar College of Arts and Culture, Palani. It was an aided private institution governed by the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department. After his retirement, he was granted pension based on the UGC scale applicable to Lecturers in Selection Grade with three years of service.

However, upon audit it was found that the petitioner had rendered only 2 years and 7 months of service in the Selection Grade. He was falling short of the required 3 years. It was held that he had been wrongly granted a higher pension. Therefore, recovery proceedings were initiated by the Assistant Treasury Officer through proceedings dated 19.07.2016.

Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner filed the writ petition.

It was submitted by the petitioner that the recovery proceedings were initiated without affording any prior notice or opportunity of hearing. The petitioner contended that neither at the stage of audit nor at the time of revising the pensionary benefits was any communication issued to the petitioner, nor was a copy of the audit objection furnished, depriving him of the chance to offer an explanation or clarification regarding the alleged excess payment.

The petitioner further relied upon the judgments of the Supreme Court in State of Punjab v. Rafiq Masih and Thomas Daniel v. State of Kerala, to submit that recovery of excess amounts from retired employees, particularly when no fraud or misrepresentation is attributed to them, would be arbitrary and unsustainable in law. It was also submitted that G.O.(Ms.) No.286 Finance (Pension) Department, dated 28.08.2018 issued by the State Government discourages recovery in cases of bona fide mistake after retirement.

On the other hand, it was submitted by the respondents that the petitioner was not entitled to receive the higher pension granted under the UGC scales, as he had not completed the minimum required service of three years in the Selection Grade. It was submitted that the petitioner had served only 2 years and 7 months in that post. It was contended that the pension was wrongly calculated as if the petitioner belonged to the category of “Lecturer Selection Grade with three years and above”, which was factually incorrect. It was submitted that this was not a matter of interpretation but a question of eligibility, and that the recovery initiated upon audit was legally sound and justified.

Findings of the Court

It was observed by the Court that the mistake in pay fixation was purely mechanical. The Court held that the petitioner had served only 2 years and 7 months in the Selection Grade and thus was factually ineligible for the pension. The error was not interpretational but an objectively verifiable shortfall in qualifying service, therefore, there was no need for subjective assessment. It was further observed that the absence of prior notice amounted to procedural irregularity but it did not cause any real prejudice to the petitioner. It was observed by the court that since the pension was erroneously fixed based on inapplicable criteria, the petitioner was not entitled to the higher benefits granted to him.

The case was distinguished by the court from decisions in State of Punjab vs Rafiq Masih and State of Kerala vs Thomas Daniel, where the Supreme Court had restrained recovery on the ground of injustice or hardship to retired employees. It restrained particularly in cases which involved long-standing payments and no fault of the employee. However, in this case the core issue was of eligibility, and not hardship or equitable considerations.

Further the case of Chandi Prasad Uniyal v. State of Uttarakhand was relied upon wherein the Supreme Court held that public funds wrongly paid due to bona fide mistake and without fraud must be recovered. Further allowing the recipient to retain such funds from government exchequer would amount to unjust enrichment. It was held that any amount paid without authority of law is recoverable, unless exceptional hardship is there.

It was held by the Court that the petitioner was not legally entitled to the higher pension, therefore the recovery initiated by the department was justified.

With the aforesaid observations, the writ petition was dismissed.

Case Name: P. Ganga Parameshwaran vs. The Government of Tamil Nadu & Others

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 251

Case No.: W.P.(MD) No.14857 of 2016

Counsel for the Petitioner: M. Saravanan

Counsel for the Respondents: T. Amjad Khan, Government Advocate, K. Govindarajan, P. Aathimoola Pandian

MBBS Internship: 'You Make Them Work For 18-19 Hours & Pay No Stipend?' : Supreme Court Asks Army College To Clear Arrears Of 2022 Batch

MBBS Internship: 'You Make Them Work For 18-19 Hours & Pay No Stipend?' : Supreme Court Asks Army College To Clear Arrears Of 2022 Batch 

Gursimran Kaur Bakshi 1 Aug 2025 2:40 PM

Listen to this Article The Supreme Court today(August 1) directed the Army Medical College Sciences to pay stipend arrears, calculated at Rs.25,000 per month, to the MBBS interns of 2022.

There was an order passed in September 2023 to pay a monthly stipend of Rs. 25,000 to medical students from the batches from October 2023.

At the outset, a bench comprising Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia and Aravind Kumar questioned Senior Advocate R Balasubramanian, for the Army College, why they failed to disburse the stipend even after three years had passed.

 Advocate Tanvi Dubey, for the petitioners, informed the Court that three subsequent batches have received a stipend of Rs. 25,000. Another advocate appearing for petitioner Abhishek Yadav said, "They have already given their services in the mandatory internship program. This order says that the present batch commencing from today should get stipend of Rs. 25,000. We are the ones that approached the Court. We have already interned and given our services and we have not been given any sought of arrears.

Balasubramanian responded that the College is run by a society and it's not government-funded. Justice Dhulia however said that since these students worked for the College, they must be paid the stipend.

The Court passed an order: "Advocate R Balasubramanian, who appears for Army Medical College Sciences has made a very fair statement that Army College will give the same stipdent of Rs. 25,000 to all the interns. A three-judge bench of this Court on the same matter had passed the following orders giving stipend to the interns who are similarly situated as the petitioners batch commencing from 1 October 2023, for whom a stipend of Rs. 25,000 was fixed. 

We are informed that this stipend has been given. As regarding previous batch, it was said as follows. We are of the opinion that the same benefit ought to be given to the previous batch as well. Since nothing has come from the Respondent as to the amount, consequently we direct that interns of 2022, who had done their internship with Army Medical College, that also be paid an amount of Rs. 25,000. Let the same be calculated and paid within eight weeks."

Counsel for Petitioners: Mr. Somdev Tiwari, Ms. Kokila Kumar, Ms. Shefali Munde, Vansh Shrivastav.

Counsel for College: Col. R. Balasubramian

Pvt medical colleges to pay govt PGs stipend only

Pvt medical colleges to pay govt PGs stipend only 

TIMES NEWS NETWORK 16.07.2025

Chennai : Madras high court has clarified that private self financing medical colleges are required to pay only a stipend, and not a full salary, to in-service govt doctors pursuing postgraduate or super-specialty courses under the govt quota. 

A division bench of Justice R Subramanian and Justice K Surender passed the order while partly allowing a batch of appeals moved by Karpaga Vinayaga Medical College and others. They challenged a single judge's order that directed private colleges to pay salaries to in-service doctors studying in their institutions. 

The appeals were moved based on a GO dated Feb 7, 2020, which permits salary payments only to in-service doctors studying in govt medical colleges, including Raja Muthiah Medical College (a govt-acquired institution), and denies the same to those studying in private colleges. 

The institutions argued that they should not be compelled to pay full salaries, as the inservice doctors were not employees of the private institutions. They cited Regulation 13.3 of the Postgraduate Medical Education Regulations, which mandates payment of a stipend on par with govt medical colleges but does not refer to salary. Concurring with the submissions, the judges said private colleges are liable to pay only the stipend fixed by the state govt for postgraduate medical students and not the full salary that govt-employed doctors receive while studying in govt institutions. 

“Inservice doctors in private colleges do not retain employee status with those institutions and are to be treated as students,” the bench said.

Madras HC refuses any interim relief to Ilaiyaraaja

Madras HC refuses any interim relief to Ilaiyaraaja 

TIMES NEWS NETWORK

15.07.2025

Chennai : In a setback to music director Ilaiyaraaja , Madras high court on Monday refused any interim relief in a suit moved by him seeking to restrain the makers of the Tamil movie Mrs&Mr from using a song composed by him. Justice Senthilkumar Ramammoorthy refused to grant any interim order without hearing the respondents and adjourned the hearing for two weeks to allow Vanitha Vijayakumar Productions to file its counter. 

Ilaiyaraaja alleged that the song, ‘Siva Rathiri’, composed by him for the Tamil movie ‘Michael Madana Kama Rajan’ was used without his authorization. He wanted the court to direct the makers of the movie, Vanitha Vijayakumar Productions and Jovika Vijayakumar, to abstain from using the song in the movie. 

He alleged that besides using the song in the film, the makers of Mrs&Mr also altered the song without his permission. He claimed that such use of his song amounts to infringement of his copyright. He wanted the court to pass an interim injunction restraining the makers from using his composition in any way pending disposal of the suit

No maintenance for wife living apart without reason: HC

No maintenance for wife living apart without reason: HC 

Rajesh Kumar Pandey TNN  13.07.2025

Prayagraj : A wife is not entitled to maintenance if she resides separately from her husband without valid reasons, Allahabad high court has held, setting aside a family court’s order. 

The HC’s Justice Subhash Chandra Sharma allowed a revision petition by Vipul Agarwal against a Feb 2025 order by afamily court in Meerut. “The trial court (family court) has recorded the finding that the wife failed to prove she had sufficient reasons for living separately from her husband or that he was neglecting to maintain her, even though the amount of maintenance has been fixed in favour of the wife as Rs 5,000 per month. As per Section 125(4) of criminal procedure code (CrPC), if the wife is living separately from the husband without sufficient reasons, she is not entitled to maintenance,” Justice Sharma said in his July 8 order. 

Agarwal’s counsel argued that despite the trial court’s finding of the wife living separately without sufficient reason, it erroneously awarded her Rs 5,000 monthly maintenance without considering the earning capacity of the husband. The family court had fixed Rs 5000 for Agarwal’s wife and Rs 3000 per month for their minor child. The counsel pointed out that Agarwal continued to pay Rs 3000 to his wife and Rs 2000 per month to their child. 

The counsel for the wife and state countered by saying she lived separately due to the husband’s neglect, justifying the trial court’s decision to grant maintenance. They argued that the trial court’s finding might be a clerical error and shouldn’t render the entire order illegal or erroneous. But Justice Sharma concluded that the family court’s findings about the wife and the maintenance order were contradictory and in violation of Section 125(4) CrPC, requiring “interference by this court (HC)”. 

Accordingly, the High ourt set aside the order and remanded the matter back to the family court to decide the case afresh after hearing both parties. In the meantime, the HC directed Agarwal to continue paying Rs 5,000 as interim maintenance.

Can’t decide physio degree on par with MBBS, says HC

Bar council prohibits advocate from practice

Bar council prohibits advocate from practice 

08.07.2025

Chennai : More than a week after Madras HC initiated suo motu proceedings for criminal contempt of court against advocate R Balasubramanian, the bar council prohibited him from practising law in courts and tribunals, pending disposal of disciplinary proceedings. Through a notification dated 7 July, the Bar Council said it received a letter from the high court registry regarding the initiation of suo motu proceedings against Balasubramanian of Arakkonam, Ranipet. 

The council perused the records and passed a resolution dated 4 July prohibiting Balasubramanian from practising as an advocate until disposal of disciplinary proceedings. The issue pertains to a plea moved by S Krishnaveni, M Markandan, and E Subramani seeking to transfer a civil suit pending with the Sholingur district munsif court to any other court in Chennai. 

During the hearing, the lawyer filed affidavit with scandalous and defamatory remarks against HC judges and district munsif. When the presiding judge, Justice P T Asha, questioned the derogatory contents in the affidavit, Balasubramanian bullied the court, prompting the judge to initiate contempt proceedings. Since they failed to appear, the court issued non-bailable warrants. After preventing police from producing the petitioners before court, the advocate threatened Justice Asha to recuse herself from the case. Justice Asha referred the issue to division bench to consider initiating criminal contempt of court. TNN

Bar council not an employer, no need for POSH panel, says HC

Bar council not an employer, no need for POSH panel, says HC 

08.07.2025

Mumbai : Bombay high court on Monday said that the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013, will not apply to complaints by advocates to bar councils as there is no employer-employee relationship between them, reports Rosy Sequeira. 

Hearing a petition seeking direction to bar councils to constitute committees to address sexual harassment complaints against advocates, a bench of Chief Justice Alok Aradhe and Justice Sandeep Marne said the POSH Act will apply to cases where there is a relationship of employer and employee, and the bar councils cannot be said to be “employer of advocates”. 

The petition also sought the implementation of the POSH Act and a committee of lawyers, NGOs and retired women judges to review and look into lacunae in the Act. ICC not applicable, P 14 Creating ICC not applicable under POSH Act The bench was hearing a petition by UNS Women Association seeking direction to the Bar Council of India and Bar Council of Maharashtra and Goa to constitute a permanent grievance redressal committee of female advocates in all state bar council offices and bar associations to address sexual harassment complaints against advocates as per Supreme Court’s Oct 2012 directions in Medha Kotwal Lele’s case. 

The petition also sought the implementation of POSH Act and a committee of lawyers, NGOs, and retired female judges to review and look into lacunas in the Act. Senior advocate Milind Sathe, for BCMG, and advocate Shekhar Jagtap, for BCI, submitted that there is no employer-employee relationship between advocates and bar councils. Hence, the establishment of an Internal Complaints Committee (ICC) is not applicable as per POSH Act. 

They said there is a provision for local committees headed by the district collector to receive complaints of sexual harassment for a workplace having fewer than 10 employees. However, neither ICC nor the local committees can be invoked by female advocates. Sathe said under Section 35 of the Advocates Act, 1961, there is remedy for professional and other misconduct. The judges referred to sections of the POSH Act relating to the constitution of ICC and local committees and also considered the definition of employer. In the order, they said it is evident that these provisions will apply to a case where there is a relationship of employer and employee.