Keeping Pace with Legal Change
Introduction The Supreme Court’s ruling in the case of Union of India v. Kamakhya Transport Pvt. Ltd. on June 5,…
In R.P. Azad vs. Union of India, the Supreme Court upheld administrative consistency in a service dispute, emphasizing fair application of service rules. The case involved R.P. Azad challenging arbitrary administrative actions affecting his service conditions. The Court ruled that administrative decisions must adhere to principles of natural justice and consistency, ensuring equitable treatment. It highlighted the importance of transparent procedures in service matters, reinforcing protections against arbitrary executive actions. This decision strengthens the framework for resolving service disputes, prioritizing fairness and legal compliance.
In Patanjali Foods Ltd. v. Union of India, the Supreme Court held that encashment of a bank guarantee is not equivalent to payment of customs duty under Section 27. Therefore, the doctrine of unjust enrichment does not apply, and the government must refund amounts secured through such guarantees without demanding compliance with refund procedures.
