Promotions can't be with retrospective effect: SC

Press Trust of India
Posted online: Tuesday, January 02, 2007 at 1440 hours IST


New Delhi, January 2: No retrospective effect can be given to an order of promotion, the Supreme Court has ruled.

Upholding an appeal filed by the Uttaranchal Government a Bench comprising Justices A R Lakshmanan and Altamas Kabir felt that granting promotions with retrospective effect was not only against certain rules but would also be unreasonable and against common parlance.

The Bench rejected the plea of the employee Dinesh Kumar Sharma, who claimed that he should be promoted from the date of vacancy and not from the date as decided upon by the selection panel.

Sharma, who was working as a Senior Chemical Assistant, Research (chemistry) Branch, Department of Agriculture in the Uttaranchal Government, was promoted to his next higher post in 1999.

It was claimed by Sharma that since the vacancy for the promoted post arose in 1995-1996, he was entitled for the promotion from the said year with all related benefits; a contention which was upheld by the High Court.

In its appeal before the apex court the State Government complained that the employee obtained a favourable order from the High Court after concealing the fact that his three representations to the appropriate authority for consideration of the retrospective promotion had already been rejected.

However, the apex court rejected the employee's contention and held that promotions cannot be made with retrospective effect and the right to constitute the selection committee against the vacancy is vested in the Government.

"This court has categorically held that seniority must be reckoned from the date of substantive appointment under the relevant rules and also that the right to frame rules for the determination of inter-se seniority is the prerogative of the State," the Bench observed.

The Bench further observed that the High Court took an erroneous view of the dispute and committed an error by directing the State Government to promote the employee with retrospective effect.

Accordingly, the Bench set aside the High Court order and upheld the Government's contention that the promotion would be effective only from the date from which the employee was actually promoted.

Probate of Will

Probate means copy of the will certified under the seal of a court of a competent jurisdiction. Probate of a will when granted establishes the Will from the death of the testator and renders valid all intermediate acts of the executor as such. It is conclusive evidence of the validity and due execution of the will and of the testamentary capacity of the testator.

A probate differs from succession certificate. A probate is issued by the court, when a person dies testate i.e. having made a will and the executor or beneficiary applies to the court for grant of probate. in case a person has not made a will his legal heirs will have to apply to the court for grant of a succession certificate which will be given as per applicable laws of inheritance.

To who can a probate be granted

Probate can be granted only to the executor appointed by the will. The appointment may be express or implied by necessary implication.

It cannot be grated to any person who is a minor or is of unsound mind, nor to any association of individuals unless it is a company satisfies the conditions prescribed by the rules made by the State Government.

Reservation in fraction? When in doubt, round off

NEW DELHI, NOVEMBER 6: When reservation permissible is 7.5 per cent , how many seats out of 100 should be allotted to the reserved category — 7 or 8? This was the question before the Delhi High Court in a recent petition filed by a student, who challenged the admission policy of the Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha University to allot only seven seats for STs for the 2006-07 MBBS course.
Drawing on law and simple mathematics, Justice Anil Kumar of the HC answered the “puzzle” thus: “If the reservation is in fraction, then how it should be considered, this has to be based on logic and common sense. Applying the principle of rounding off of mathematics which is, if part is one half or more, its value should be increased to one and if part less than half then its value should be ignored.”
Applying the reasoning to the facts of the case, the court further said “the inevitable inference in these facts and circumstances on the reasons as detailed herein is that for 7.5 per cent reservation for STs, the Government should have allocated eight seats. The respondents (University) have rather allocated only seven seats and therefore the respondents are liable to allocate one more seat for ST quota.”

The petitioner, Madan Mohan had taken the Combined Entrance Test for MBBS, 2006 and was ranked 6250 in the merit list. He, however, claimed to have fallen just short of a place in the admitted list as the University had allotted only seven seats for the ST pool complying with the requirement to set apart 7.5 per cent seats to the community. For 7.5 per cent reserved seats, the University could not allocate seven seats only as for half fraction or more, a full seat ought to have been allocated, Mohan insisted.
On behalf of the Union, it was submitted that two of the 100 seats were earmarked for citizens of Maldives, leaving only 98 seats. The mandated 7.5 per cent quota against 98 would be 7.35, which on rounding off would leave the scope for only seven seats, the Government contended. Brushing aside the argument, the HC referred to a decision of the Supreme Court that had adopted the rounding off rule in UPSC examinations and said the plea that the 7.5 per cent had to be calculated from 98 seats was not acceptable.

How are service benefits like salary, promotions and rank within the organization protected?

Mandatory Reservations

• Ratheesh Babu vs. UGC
• Dilip Baruah vs. State of Assam and Ors
• R Manoj Kumar vs. University of Hyderabad Rep by its Registrar
• Dalbir Singh Bagga vs. State of Punjab and Ors
• Ram Sevak Tripathi vs. U.P. Public Service Commission and Ors
• Vinod Kumar Rai vs. Public service Commission, Allahabad
• Daya Ram Tripathi vs. State of U.P. and another
• Nanjala Bayamma vs. Revenue Divisional Officer and Anr
• Jaswant Singh vs. State of Haryana and Another
• Anjali Arora vs. National Thermal Power Corporation

Reservation only for those who do not Qualify on Merit

• All India Confederation Of The Blind vs. Govt. of NCT of Delhi
• Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi and Ors vs. All India Confederation of the Blind

Acceptable Qualifications

• Bharat Lal Meena vs. Govt of NCT of Delhi

Definition of the Term "During Service"

• SK Maulana vs. APSRTC
• DTC vs. Rajbir Singh
• Union of India & Ors vs. Mohd Mobin Khan & Anr
• Satyabir Singh vs. Delhi Transport Corporation &Anr

Definition of Reinstatement

• Rajbir Singh vs. AJS Sawhney

Reinstatement when Disability is Acquired During Service

• Md Jani Miya vs. APSRTC
• KV Ranga Reddy vs. DIG Border Security Force
• Dharambir vs. DTC
• Ramphal vs. DTC
• KJ Dhulia vs. State of Gujarat
• Baljeet Singh vs. Delhi Transport Corporation
• DTC vs. Balram Sharma
• Sulochana vs. APSRTC, Hyd and Another
• Delhi Transport Corporation vs. Rajbir Singh and Sadh Ram
• Syed Sha Musebulla Alvi vs. Secretary, General Administrative Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad and others
• APSRTC vs. M V Ramana Rao
• Metropolitan Transport Corporation vs. the Presiding officer, Principal Labour Court
• Ravichandran vs. Metropolitan Transport Corporation Ltd
• University of Rajasthan vs. Surendra Kumar Goel
• A John Peter vs. Manager, Tamil Nadu Transport Corporation
• Virender Kumar Gupta vs. Delhi Transport Corporation
• Hari Om Singh vs. Union of India and Ors
• Virender Kumar Gupta vs. Delhi Transport Corporation
• Kunal Singh vs. Union of India
• Sadh Ram vs. Delhi Transport Corporation
• LIC vs. Chief Commissioner for disabilities, Harish Chander Dabral and Dr.Uma Tuli, Managing Director, Amar Jyoti Trust
• Shri Sunil Kumar vs. Delhi Transport Corporation
• Anand Bihari & others vs. Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation, Jaipur & anr
• Krishan Chander and PO Bhainswal Kalan vs. Delhi Transport Corporation
• Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation vs. Gopal Motambhaia Patel
• Delhi Transport Corporation vs. Ganpat Singh
• S. Rajendran vs. the Deputy Commissioner of Police, Crime and Traffic and the Commissioner of Police
• J. Benjamin vs. the Management of Bharat Earth Movers Limited, Kolar Gold Field
• Narain Singh vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and anr
• Mohd Yasin Ansari, Gyanendra Singh, Inder Deo, Ishu Narayan, Anil Singh and Hasib Ahmed Islam vs. Union of India and Ors
• Shri Jagdish Prasad vs. Delhi Transport Corporation & the Depot Manager
• Delhi Transport Corporation vs. Sh. Himmat Singh and Others

Compensation does not bar Claim for Reinstatement

• Kuldeep Singh vs. Delhi Transport Corporation
• Rajamani vs. State Express Transport Corporation Ltd. Rep. by its General Manager

Reinstatement in Special Circumstances

• Dr Kanshi Ram Anand vs. the State of U.P. and another

Posthumous Reinstatement

• Mahipal Singh vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and Anr

Payment of Minimum Wages

• Delhi Administration through Directorate of Social Welfare vs. Presiding Officer

Pay scale once fixed cannot be altered

• Delhi Transport Corporation through Regional Manager vs. Ishwar Singh, Batch No. 15664 S/o Shri Dalip Singh, The Presiding Officer Industrial Tribunal –I and The Government of NCT of Delhi through the Secretary Labour and Human Welfare Ministry
• Union of India & Others vs. Hari Ram Shukla & Others

Scope of Government Organizations under Purview of the PWD Act

• MV Ramana Rao vs. APSRTC

Special Concessions

• R. Govindarajan vs. Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd
• V.K. Bhasin vs. State Bank of Patiala and Ors
• Rakesh Kumar vs. All India Institute of Medical Sciences & Others
• Sunil Raosaheb Narke vs. Air India and Anr
• Vikram Trisal vs. Union of India and Ors
• Sandhya Jain, Rajana Purwar, Satyendra Pal Singh, Smt.Anjana Mishra (Dixit), Jyotsana Bhatnagar vs. State of U.P & Others
• Irrigation Development Employees Association & Ors vs. Government of A.P. & Ors
• T. Raja Rama Mohan Rao vs. Income-tax Officer
• Shri Suresh Kumar Tiwari vs. Union of India (UOI) and Ors
• D. Saibaba vs. Bar Council of India

Instances when Compassionate Employment is Granted

• Uppala Venkat vs. Divisional Railway Manager (P), South Central Railway, Secunderabad and Others

Employment to a Family Member only if Declared ‘Disabled’

• Lal Chand vs. State of Haryana and others

Reduction of Posts only with Valid Reason

• Shruti Kalra vs University of Delhi

Creation of a Supernumerary Post

• Lance Naik Vinod Kumar vs. Union of India
• K Kamatchi vs. the Managing Director, Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation Madhurai (Division IV) Ltd. and the Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation Pvt, Kumbam Branch
• L. Loganathan vs. The Managing Director, Tamil Nadu Express State Corporation and the General Manager (Amdn), Tamil Nadu Express State Transport Corporation

Continuation of Service till the age of Superannuation

• Tarlochan Singh Aujla vs. Delhi Transport Corporation
• Rama vs. State of Rajasthan and Ors
• Shivaji S/o Vishwanath Dongre vs. State of Maharashtra and Ors

Instances when Special Compensations are Granted

• Rajanna vs. Union of India

Non Discrimination in Service

• Pradeep Jagannath Talekar and Others vs. Union of India and Ors
• Nand Kumar Jivan Dalvi vs. Union of India through the Director General, ESIC, New Delhi and Anr
• Jai Shankar Prasad vs. State of Bihar and Others
• Orissa Association for the Blind and others vs. State of Orissa and others
• Ghanakeshi Sahu vs. Director, Elementary Education, Orissa
• Smt Omvati Kalshan vs. Delhi Development Authority

Government Appointments subject to State Rules

• Binu vs. State of Kerala

Alternative Employment on Acquiring Disability

• O.P. Sharma vs. Delhi Transport Corporation & Anr
• Md. Sukur Miya and Anr. vs. Singareni Collieries Company Limited and Ors.
• P. Thangamarimuthu vs. Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation, Madurai (Division-1) Ltd., through its Managing Director
• Zammel Ahmed vs. Regional Manager, U.P.S.R.T.C. and Ors
• Rajinder Kumar Sharma vs. Union of India (UOI) and Ors
• Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation vs. Hanitsinh Thakubha Parmar
• E. Subramani vs. the General Manager, (Administration) Puratchi Thalaivar MGR Transport Corporation
• Shree Satish Prabhakar Padhye vs. Union of India (UOI) through the Secretary Ministry of Law Justice and Company Affairs (Legislative Department) and Ors
• Vijender Singh vs. Delhi Transport Corporation
• L.Loganathan vs. the Managing Director, Tamil Nadu Express State Transport Corporation and the General Manager (Admn), Tamil Nadu Express State Transport Corpn

Pay Scale to be protected in Alternative Employment

• Narendra Kumar Chandla vs. State of Haryana and Ors
• Satya Prakash Meena vs. Union of India through General Manager, Western Railway, Churchgate, Mumbai and Anr
• P.Pardhasarthy vs. Union of India (UOI) and Ors
• K. Satyanandam, Peon vs. Chairman, Ministry of Railways and Ors.

Provide Compensation or give Alternative Jobs

• Rameshwar Dass and Others vs. State of Haryana and Others
• Jaswant Singh and another vs. State of Punjab

Matters related to Promotion

• Union of India and Others vs. Hari Ram Shukla and Others
• M. Krishna Das vs. the Chairman, Railway Board and Ors

Matters Related to the Teaching Staff of Special Institutions

• Surekha d/o Nagorao Pawar (Kumari) and Ors vs. State of Maharashtra and Ors

Statutory Authority to Exercise Impartial Discretion in Retrenchment

• U.P. State Road Transport Corporation and another vs. Mohd Ismail and others

Follow Procedure for Termination

• Captain Virendra Kumar vs. Union of India

Entitlement to Earned Leave on Acquiring Disability during Service

• Devki Nandan (Dr.) vs. Union of India (UOI) and Ors

Implementing Reservation

• Sayed Dasthagiri Pasha vs. Osmania University, rep. by its Registrar
• State of Rajasthan and Anr vs. Shiv Kumar Singh

Directions to Seek Relief under the Act

• N. Siva Kumar vs. APSRTC, Musheerabad, Hyderabad and Others

How are the provisions of the PWD Act interpreted?

Three percent Reservation to be Equally Distributed

• Perambaduru Murali Krishna and Ors vs. The State of Andhra Pradesh and Ors

Exemption from the Act to be Notified

• RK Arora vs. Union of India

Three percent reservation does not include Merit Qualifiers

• All India Confederation Of The Blind vs. Govt. of NCT of Delhi

Applicability of the Provisions of the Act

• UOI through G.M. Western Railway vs. Sanjay Kumar Jain
• Union of India vs. Sanjay Kumar Jain

How are employment opportunities for the disabled created and protected?

Special privileges to be accorded to the Disabled

• Shri Niaz Ahmad vs. Union of India & Others

Vacancies for Reserved Categories to be duly filled up

• Anthosh Kumar Panigrahi vs. P. Narayanan, Chief General Manager, HRMD Nabard and Ors

Identify Posts for Reservation

• Dr. Honey Arya vs. Punjab University
• Ray John Varghese vs. State of Kerala

Certain posts cannot be denied on ground of Disability

• Ramesh Chander vs. R.L. Chugh, P.O, Industrial Tribunal

What are the limitations of the Act?

Alternate Employment not Provided

• Nandkumar Narayanrao Ghodmare vs. State of Maharashtra and Others

All Charges to be Substantiated

• Capt. Rachpal Singh vs. Union of India
• Lt. Col. Jagannath Singh Pathania (Retd.) vs. Union of India (UOI) and Anr

Concessions Granted only when Disability is over Forty Percent

• Union of India and Others vs. KP Singh

Meet Basic Merit Requirements

• Prakash Chandra vs. Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha University and Ors
• S.D. Sridhar vs. Union of India (UOI) and Ors
• Smt. G. Mallicka vs. the Municipal Council and Ors.

Recruitment Rules Governing a Post must be Honored

• The Joint Commissioner of Customs (Personnel and Vigilance, representing Union of India (UOI) and the Deputy Commissioner of Custom (P and V) vs. Smt. T.E. Radha, Sundaraj Gugan, Examiner and the Registrar, Central Administrative Tribunal, Madras Bench
• Sarika vs. State of U.P and Ors

Reservation in Certain Services not to exceed 50 percent of total posts

• State of U.P and Anr vs. Pawan Kumar Tiwari and Ors

Sub Categorization in Disability Category not Allowed

• K.V. Ramana vs. the Director, O/o Director General of Audit (Defence Services) and Ors

Claim for Employment on Compassionate Grounds, to be made within a Specified Time

• G. Mallikharjuna Rao vs. District and Sessions Judge, Nellore and another

Section 47 not applicable to Private Bodies

• Hem Chand vs. Union of India (UOI) and Ors

Decision of Stipulated Body Final in Judiciary Transfers

• Registrar General of High Court and Anr vs. Chitra Biswas and Ors

UGC Decision Cannot be Interfered with in Certain Matters

• All India Confederation of the Blind vs. Union of India and Anr

What are the limitations to the privileges accorded to the disabled?

Equality before Law

• Srikrishan Gupta vs. Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Ors

What conditions must be satisfied before a Writ Petition is filed?

Legal Procedures to be Followed

• Rajesh Kumar vs. Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd and Ors
• The Managing Director, Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (Madurai Division IV) Ltd. vs. P. Ellappan
• Pushpa Kumari and Ors vs. GAIL (India) and Anr

Reservation in Certain Services not to exceed 50 percent of total posts

State of U.P and Anr vs. Pawan Kumar Tiwari and Ors

Filed under: Uttar Pradesh Public Service (Reservation for Physically Handicapped Dependants of Freedom Fighters
and Ex-Servicemen) Act, 1993
Uttar Pradesh Public Service (Reservation for Scheduled Castes,
Scheduled Tribes and Other Backwards Classes) Act, 1994
Appellant: State of U.P and Anr
Respondent: Pawan Kumar Tiwari and Ors
Citation: AIR2005SC658, 2005 (1) AWC 363 (SC), 2005(1)ESC96, [2005(1)JCR147(SC], 2005(1)JKJ [SC], JT2005(1)SC150,2005(2) SLJ 386 (SC), (2005)2 UPLBEC1285
Court: In the Supreme Court of India
Judges: R.C. Lahoti, G.P. Mathur and A.K. Mathur

Facts

In the year 1997, the State Public Service Commission, pursuant to the requisition made by the State Government on the advice of the High Court of Uttar Pradesh, advertised 93 posts of Civil Judge (Junior Division) in the Uttar Pradesh Judicial Service.

Keeping in view the provisions for reservation, mandated by the U.P. Public Service (Reservation for Physically Handicapped, Departments of Freedom Fighters and Ex-Servicemen) Act 1993 and U.P. Public Service (Reservations for Schedule Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Other backward Classes) Act 1994, certain posts were reserved.

To the extent of the percentage of reservation, as contemplated by the two Acts mentioned above, there was no controversy. However, a controversy arose on the application of the percentage as against the total number of posts. Pawan Kumar Tiwari belonged to general category. 46 selected candidates in the general category were appointed. There were 3 candidates in the waiting list.

He was at the top of the waiting list but was denied appointment. Aggrieved he filed a Writ Petition in the High Court which was allowed directing the State of U.P. to issue a letter of appointment to him. The State then filed this appeal against the order of the High Court.

Observations of the Court

The Court examined the rule of rounding off the reservation percentage, according to which if the decimal part was one-half or more, its value would be increased to one and if it was less than half then its value would be ignored. Therefore, 46.50 should have been rounded off to 47 and not to 46 as has been done.

If 47 candidates would have been considered for selection in the general category, Pawan was sure to find a place in the list of selected meritorious candidates and hence entitled to appointment. Moreover the total number of vacancies was 93 and consequent upon the allocation of reservation and calculation done by the State, the number of reserved seats would be 47, leaving only 46 available for general category candidates.

Meaning thereby, the reservation would exceed 50% which would be unconstitutional. It was stated that the total number of reserved seats could not exceed 46 out of 93. The appeal was therefore dismissed.

Public interest litigation

Public interest litigation

"Public interest Litigation", in simple words, means, litigation filed in a court of law, for the protection of "Public Interest", such as pollution, Terrorism, Road safety, constructional hazards etc.

Public interest litigation is not defined in any statute or in any act. It has been interpreted by judges to consider the intent of public at large. Although, the main and only focus of such litigation is only "Public Interest" there are various areas where a Public Interest Litigation can be filed. For e.g.

• Violation of basic human rights of the poor

• Content or conduct of government policy

• Compel municipal authorities to perform a public duty.

• Violation of religious rights or other basic fundamental rights.

When can a public interest litigation be filed?

A public interest litigation can be filed only in a case where "Public Interest" at large is effected. Merely because, only one person is effected by state inaction is not a ground for Public interest litigation

These are some of the possible areas where a PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION can be filed.

• Where a factory / industrial unit is causing air pollution, and people nearly are getting effected.

• Where, in an area / street there are no street lights, causing inconvenience to commuters

• .Where some "Banquet Hall" plays a loud music, in night causing noise pollution.

• Where some construction company is cutting down trees, causing environmental pollution.

• Where poor people, are affected, because of state government's arbitrary decision to impose heavy "tax".

• For directing the police / Jail authorities to take appropriate decisions in regards to jail reforms, such as segregation of convicts, delay in trial, production of under trial before the court on remand dates.

• For abolishing child labor, and bonded labor.

• Where rights of working women are affected by sexual harassment.

• For keeping a check on corruption and crime involving holders of high political officer.

• For maintaining Roads, Sewer etc in good conditions.

• For removal of Big Hoarding and signboard from the busy road to avoid traffic problem.

• Recently a Public Interest Litigation has been filed, for directing the "Delhi Traffic Police" to stop the method of sending challans to address by post, as it is being misused.

Loan recovery firm manager held

The Crime Branch on Wednesday arrested the manager of a recovery agency, along with two agents, for harassing a doctor living in Sarita Vihar. The doctor who was harassed reportedly did not even take a loan.

The police said the accused wanted to recover the loan amount from someone else in the area. When they did not find the person they were looking for, they went to the complainant's residence, who lived few blocks away, and threatened him with dire consequences and asked him to repay the loan amount.

The incident took place on Sunday at the Sarita Vihar residence of Dr S.S. Chahar, a senior government functionary. The police arrested the three accused — Nazir Hussain (22), Mahender Singh (22) and Vikas Mete, the agency manager.

Hussain, one of the accused had gone to look for one Surender Singh, a resident of Sarita Vihar. “When he did not find any person by the name of Surender Singh at the address concerned, he asked neighbours for any person living in the area with that name.

“The doctor’s initials matched with the name of the person he was looking for and he went to his house to seek the loan amount from him,” said Satyendra Garg, additional commissioner of police (crime).

The police said the three men were employed with Legal Eye, a Madangir-based recovery agency. They said the agency was working for a multinational bank and the men had gone to recover a loan amount of Rs 3.5 lakh.

The accused did not listen even when the doctor said he had not taken any loan. “The doctor approached us with through the helpline,” said Garg.

Banks not liable to pay interest on export subsidy: SC

The Supreme Court has held that banks are not liable to pay interest tax on subsidies they get from the RBI for giving concessional loans to exporters.

Dismissing an appeal filed by the income-tax department recently, a bench headed by Justice S H Kapadia has upheld the Delhi High Court judgement, which said that the compensatory interest received as subsidy by Punjab National Bank from the RBI for giving concessional loans to exporters did not amount to interest tax chargeable under the Interest Tax Act, 1979.

The RBI gives export subsidy to banks to make good their losses due to extending export credit at a lower rate of interest.

PNB had received export subsidy of more than Rs 9 lakh for assessment years 1985-87 under the Export Credit (Interest Subsidy) Scheme, 1968. The Assessing Officer had taxed it on the grounds that any amount received by way of export subsidy can only be regraded as such when it was directly paid to an exporter.

According to the department, the export subsidy PNB received was essentially in the nature of interest defined under Section 2(7) of the Act and hence is liable to be included in its income for paying tax.

Additional Solicitor General Mohan Parasaran argued that the money the bank received can be regraded as export subsidy in the hands of an assessee only when the latter directly engaged in exports and received the subsidy in the course of its export business.

"Since the assessee is a bank and not engaged in any export activity, but is essentially engaged in (the) banking business, nor has rececived the said sum from (the) RBI for utilisation of any export activity as an exporter, the same cannot be regarded or characterised as an export subsidy as to take out the same from the taxing net," the petition stated.

FIR

First Information Report (FIR):

F.I.R. is the abbreviated form of First Information Report. It is the information recorded by the police officer on duty, given either by the aggrieved person or any other person about the commission of an alleged offence. On the basis of the F.I.R. the police commences its investigation.

Who can file an F.I.R.

Any person can file an F.I.R. He need not be the aggrieved person. It may be merely hearsay and need not be by the person who has had firsthand knowledge of the facts.

Where to file an F.I.R.

An F.I.R. can be filed in the police station of the concerned area in whose jurisdiction the offence has occurred. It must be made to the officer-in-charge of the police station and if he is not available the Assistant Sub Inspector is competent to enter upon the investigation

How to file an F.I.R.

When a wrong has been committed and the aggrieved person or any other person wants to file a F.I.R. it shall be filed in the following manner.

1. Go to the police station and meet the officer-in-charge.

2. Step by step in an orderly sequence narrate to the officer every information relating to the commission of the offence.

3. The officer shall reduce the information given in writing.

4. The information given shall be signed by the person giving it.

5. The information given shall be entered in a book to be kept by the officer.

Copy of the information as recorded shall be given free of cost to the informant.

Where an officer-in-charge refuses to record the information

If the officer in charge refuses to record the information, the information may be sent in writing and by post, to the Superintendent of Police concerned who, if satisfied that such information discloses the commission of a cognizable offence, shall either investigate the case himself or direct an investigation to be made by any police officer subordinate to him.

Summons

Proclamation for person absconding

If any court has reason to believe that any person against whom a warrant has been issued has absconded or is concealing himself so that such warrant cannot be executed, such court may publish a written proclamation requiring him to appear at a specified place and time within 30 days of publishing such proclamation.

The proclamation shall be published as follows:-

1. It shall be publicly read in some conspicuous place of the town or village in which such person ordinarily resides;

2. It shall be affixed in some conspicuous part of the house or homestead in which such person ordinarily resides or to some conspicuous place of such town or village;

3. A copy thereof shall be affixed to some conspicuous part of the court house;

4. The court may also, if it thinks fit, direct a copy of the proclamation to be published in a daily newspaper circulating in the place in which person resides.

Attachment of property of person absconding

The Court issuing a proclamation may, at any time after the issue of the proclamation, order the attachment of any property, movable or immovable or both, belonging to the proclaimed person:

Provided where at the time of issue of the proclamation the Court is satisfied that the person in relation to whom the proclamation is to be issued –

is about to dispose of the whole or any part of his property, or

is about to remove the whole or any part of his property from the local jurisdiction of the Court,

it may order the attachment simultaneously with the issue of the proclamation.

Your duties

1. To accept the summons and sign the duplicate if required.

2. To treat the officer serving the summon with respect.

3. To appear on the date mentioned in the summons or engage a lawyer to appear on your behalf.

4. d
   

Bail

Application for Bail

For non-bailable offence one has to move an application setting out the grounds for the grant of bail. In case the court is convinced that bail should be granted it passes the order after hearing the arguments. At that stage one has to fill in the bail bond duly signed by the surety and to be filled through his advocate. In case the accused is before the court, he is set at liberty in the court itself and in case the accused is under detention in the jail, orders of grant of bail are sent to the concerned jail,

To get oneself released on bail in bailable or non-bailable offences one has to file the bail bond The bail bond is filed by the surety who takes the responsibility for producing the accused person in the court or before the investigating agency. Any person who has the capacity, control and competence to produce the accused in case of non-appearance or to pay the amount of the surety can be accepted by the court for the purpose.

Personal Bond and Cash Security

In some cases while granting bail the court directs for personal bond as well as security in cash.

Amount of Bond

The amount of every bond executed shall be fixed with due regard to the circumstances of the case.

Cancellation of Bail

A High Court or Court of Session may direct that any person who has been released on bail be arrested and commit him to custody on an application filed by the complainant or the prosecution.

'Super' Kochhar makes journey from trainee to CEO

Success like her's is the staple of dreams that school children dream, but Chanda Kochhar is one that would have hardly had the time for such fantasies. A diligent student, Kochhar was busy collecting gold medals in management studies and cost accountancy when others were wiling away time -- all of which she channelised to get to the top post of India's largest private sector bank ICICI Bank.

Kochhar spent her college years playing badminton and polishing her elocution skills -- which would come handy later in the hardball game of boardroom negotiations. Soon after completing her masters in management studies (finance) and cost accountancy, this Jodhpur girl joined the erstwhile industrial finance company ICICI in 1984 as a management trainee.

In 1993, when the Industrial Credit and Investment Corporation of India decided to enter commercial banking business, Kochhar was deputed to ICICI Bank as a part of the core team to set up the operations.

She was instrumental in setting up, as well as scaling up, the retail business for ICICI. In 2000, by when Kochhar had already started rising from the ranks to become a key player in the top management, ICICI Bank formally entered retail banking business and within five years became the largest private sector financer in the country. The bank became the leader in car and two-wheeler finance, home finance and card business - a super achievement by a woman who has been named among the world's most powerful women by Fortune.

A doting mother, she cared for the bank as much, if not more, for her two children and believed in the institution so much that she continues to park her entire savings in the bank.

Where do I file my complaint and How many Consumer Courts are there in India?

• Pecuniary Jurisdiction

  * In cases where the value of goods and services involved is less than Rs. 20 Lakhs in value, you will have to file the complaint in the District Forum constituted in the specified districts of a State.
  * In cases where the value of goods and services involved is more than Rs. 20 Lakhs in value but does not exceed Rs 1 crore you will have to file the complaint with the State Commission constituted in the capital cities of the different states
  * In cases where the value of goods and services involved is more than 1 crore in value then you can file a complaint with the National Commission which has been constituted only in New Delhi.
  

  Territorial Jurisdiction.

  The jurisdiction of the complaint is determined by the facts of the case and where the cause of action arises. Further, when you file a complaint, the area in which the opposite party resides or carries on his work or business will also have to be taken into consideration by you. This means that if you are filing a complaint against a service provider for a sum below 20 lakhs you would have to approach the District Forum in the jurisdiction where the cause of action arose. If the matter is above 20 lakhs but below 1 crore then it would be filed in the State Commission within which State the trader/ service provider/ manufacturer is located in the state in which the trader resides or works in. These two factors will have to be kept in mind while filing your complaint.
  

  Consumer Courts Consumer Forums

  There are consumer forums at the District, State and National level. At present, there are 569 District Consumer Forums, 33 State Commissions & the highest body which is the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) having its office at Janpath Bhawan, A Wing, 5th Floor, Janpath , New Delhi.
  
  The District Forum consist of one president and two other members (one of whom is to be a woman).The president of the Forum is a person who is, or has been qualified to be a District Judge, and other members are persons of ability, integrity and standing, and have adequate knowledge or experience of, or have shown capacity in dealing with, problems relating to economics, law, commerce, accountancy, industry, public affairs or administration. They can hear the case involving amount of Rs. Twenty Lacs. It is situated in the District head quarters.
  
  State Commissions A State Commission has jurisdiction in whole of the State for which it is constituted. It can hear the cases involving the amount more than rupees twenty lacs and up to rupees one crore. It has also jurisdiction to hear appeal against the orders of District Forum of that particular State. It is situated in the capital of the State.

  State Commission consists of a president and two members one of whom is to be a woman.President is a person who is or has been a Judge of a High Court, and the members, are persons of ability, integrity and standing and have adequate knowledge or experience of, or have shown capacity in dealing with, problems relating to economics, law, commerce, accountancy, industry, public affairs or administration.

  The National Commission consists of a president, and four other members (one of whom is to be a woman).The president should be the one who is or has been a Judge of the Supreme Court, and the members should be the persons of ability, integrity and standing and have adequate knowledge or experience of, or have shown capacity in dealing with, problems relating to economics, law, commerce, accountancy, industry, public affairs or administration.
  
  Do other Courts (District Courts/High Courts) accept consumer disputes?
  
  The jurisdiction of other courts to hear consumer disputes is not excluded. This is because the Parliament of India felt it was necessary to have an efficient & convenient mechanism to address and resolve the various consumer complaints across the country. As a result it created a three-tier remedial machinery for the inexpensive and quick disposal of consumer complaints. As these forums only deal with consumer complaints/issues and nothing else, all their time can be devoted to addressing consumers complaints.

RAILWAY PANTRY SERVICES CHARGING EXORBITANT RATES

The contractors charge more than prescribed rates. Please be alert. Ask for bill and immediately complain to the concerned authorities. I have noticed that this corruption is very pertinent in almost all trains. Even passengers are to be blamed partly as they do not ask for menu card and the cash memo.

The highest cheating goes on in vegetarian meal in Thali that costs Rs. 22 and is charged around Rs. 40 from passengers. The vegetarian meal in casserole costs Rs.30 (with 300ml mineral water) but it is charged Rs. 45 from innocent passengers. The full list of items with costs is given below

(The rates are subject to change from time to time. They may be verified through the Train Conductor/Catering Manager)

Sl.No	Item	Static (Rs.)	Mobile (Rs.)	Sl.No	Item	Static (Rs.)	Mobile (Rs.)
1	Chicken curry 260gms per plate (100gms chicken pieces and 160gms gravy)	32.00	34.00	2	Mutton curry 225gms per plate (85gms mutton and 140gms gravy)	24.00	26.00
3	Mutton Roganjosh 275gms per plate (125gms mutton and 150gms gravy)	32.00	34.00	4	Mutton cutlets (2 pieces) 160gms. per plate	23.00	25.00
5	Fried Fish with Chips 135gms per plate (100 gms fish and 35gms fried chips)	22.00	23.00	6	Egg curry 240gms per plate(2 eggs and 150gms gravy)	14.00	15.00
7	Omelette (2 eggs) per plate	10.00	12.00	8	Fried Egg (2 eggs) per plate	10.00	10.00
9	Poached Egg with one slice (2 eggs per plate	12.00	13.00	10	Matter Paneer 200gms per plate	20.00	20.00
11	Boiled Rice (Basmati) 450gms per plate	10.00	11.00	12	Allo Matar/Chole 225gms per plate	12.00	13.00
13	Veg. Pulao/Biryani 450gms per plate	18.00	20.00	14	Cornflakes with Milk 235gms per plate	10.00	11.00
15	Fruit Salad with cream 110gms per plate (Fruit Salad 100gms and 10gms Cream)	13.00	14.00	16	Jam/Marmalade 25gms per portion	3.00	3.00
17	Butter chiplet (10gms)	3.00	3.00	18	Bread Slice (large pieces)	2.00	2.00
19	Sharbat 250ml per glass	5.00	6.00	20	Squash 250ml per glass	6.00	6.00
21	Kheer (Rice/Semeye) 140gms per plate	10.00	11.00	22	Green salad 150gms per plate	10.00	10.00
23	Boiled Egg (2 No)	8.00	8.00	24	Custard Plain 140 gms per plate	8.00	8.00
25	Vegetable Cutlet 2 pcs 150gms per plate	10.00	12.00	26	Idli with Sambhar (220gms) (100gms idli & 120gms sambar)	8.00	8.00
27	Sada Vada with Sambhar (150gms) (50gms Vada & 100gms sambar)	8.00	8.00	28	Masala vada with Sambhar (180gms) (60gms vada & 120gms sambar)	8.00	8.00
29	Masala dosa with Sambhar (250gms) (70gms dosa, 80gms masala with 100gms sambar)	12.00	12.00	30	Plain dosa with Sambhar (70gms dosa & 100gms sambar)	10.00	10.00
31	Soup with bread slice (1 piece) 150ml.	10.00	10.00	32	Roast chicken with boiled vegetable 350gms per plate (100gms chicken and 250gms boiled veg)	45.00	45.00
33	Roast mutton with boiled vegetable 350gms per plate (100gms mutton and 250gms boiled veg)	45.00	45.00	34	Shami kabab (2 pcs) 50gms each	20.00	20.00
35	Dry veg 165gms per plate	14.00	14.00	36	Expresso Coffee	6.00	6.00
37	Boiled veg 200gms per plate	10.00	10.00	38	Chapati 25gms each	1.00	1.00
39	Dal 165gms per plate	7.00	7.00	40	Finger Chips 100gms	10.00	10.00
41	Jodhpur Kachori 100gms	7.00	7.00	42	Parantha 50gms each	2.00	2.00
43	Rajma Curry 200gms per plate	8.00	8.00	44	Curd plain 100gms per plate	4.00	4.00
45	Shikanjivi 250ml per glass	5.00	5.00	46	Roomali Roti 50gms each	2.00	2.00
47	Veg. Burger (50gms veg.Tikka)	10.00	10.00	48	Non Veg. Burger (65gms non veg.Tikka)	15.00	15.00
49	Paneer Pakora 120gms (4 pcs per plate)	15.00	15.00	50	Bread slice(small)	1.00	1.00
51	Vegetable S/wich (2 pcs)	10.00	10.00	52	Palak Paneer	15.00	15.00
53	Stuffed Parantha	5.00	5.00	54	Frooti (Tetra pack)	As per MRP	As per MRP
55	Tea in disposable cup 150 ml with tea bag in 170 ml cup	4.00	4.00	56	Roasted Papad	2.00	2.00
57	Cold Drink	As per MRP	As per MRP	58	Dal kachori 30gms (1 pc)	4.00	6.00
59	Ice cream of short listed brands	As per MRP	As per MRP	60	Kulche Chole (2 pcs)/100gms	8.00	10.00
61	Biscuit	As per MRP	As per MRP	62	Potato Chips (pkt)	As per MRP	As per MRP
63	Namkeens (pkt)	As per MRP	As per MRP	64	Glass of milk (200ml)	5.00	6.00
65	Milk Badam (200ml)	8.00	10.00	66	Aloo Bonda (2 no.) / 40gms each	6.00	6.00
67	Gulab Jamun (40gms each)	4.50	5.00	68	Maggi Noodles (100gms)	10.00	10.00
69	Lassi Salt /Sweet (200ml.)	6.00	8.00	70	Bread pakora 2 slice (100gms)	9.00	10.00
71	Dahi Vada (2 no. 150gms)	10.00	12.00	72	Mineral water of short listed brand	10.00	10.00

Revised Tariff for standard meals, breakfast, tea/coffee etc. at stations effective from 1-06-2003			Revised Tariff for standard meals, breakfast, tea/coffee etc. on trains effective from 1-06-2003
1.	Standard Tea 150 ml Readymade 170 ml cup (disposable cup.)	3.00	1.	Standard Tea 150 ml Readymade in 170 ml cup (disposable cup.)	3.00
2.	Tea with tea bag- 150ml in disposable cup (170 ml) including tea dispensed through AVM (Automatic Vending Machine)	4.00	2.	Tea with tea bag- 150ml in disposable cup (170 ml) including tea dispensed through AVM (Automatic Vending Machine)	4.00
3.	Coffee (using instant coffee powder) 150 ml in disposable cup 170 ml capacity including dispensed through AVM	5.00	3.	Coffee (using instant coffee powder) 150 ml in disposable cup 170 ml including dispensed through AVM	5.00
4.	Tea in pots (285ml) + 2 tea bags +2 sugar pouch with 2 disposable cups of 170 ml capacity	5.00	4.	Tea in pots (285ml) + 2 tea bags +2 sugar pouch with 2 disposable cups of 170 ml capacity	5.00
5.	Coffee in pots (285ml) +2 Coffee sachet +2 sugar pouch with 2 disposable cups of 170 ml capacity	7.00	5.	Coffee in pots (285ml)+ 2 Coffee sachet +2 sugar pouch with 2 disposable cups of 170 ml capacity	7.00
6.	Mineral water 1 liter bottle (chilled)	10.00	6.	Mineral water 1 liter bottle (chilled)	10.00
7.	JANTA MEAL (In quality disposable card board boxes)	10.00	Standard Breakfast
Standard Breakfast			7.	Vegetarian	17.00
8.	Vegetarian	17.00	8.	Non-vegetarian	20.00
9.	Non-vegetarian	20.00	Casserole Meals
10.	Meals in Thalis (veg.)	22.00	9.	Standard Vegetarian with packaged drinking water in sealed glass of 300 ml.	30.00
11.	Meals in Thalis (Non-veg.)	27.00	10.	Standard Non-vegetarian with packaged drinking water in sealed glass of 300 ml.	35.00

No separate catering charges are payable by passengers on Shatabdi and Rajdhani Express trains.