Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation And Another v. Bal Mukund Bairwa .

Factual and Procedural Background

The Supreme Court of India, after hearing counsel for the parties, noted that two earlier three-Judge Bench judgments—Rajasthan SRTC v. Krishna Kant (1995) 5 SCC 75 and Rajasthan SRTC v. Khadarmal (2006) 1 SCC 59—appear to be in conflict. Because the present appeals turn on issues governed by these decisions, the Court issued an order concerning further procedural steps.

Legal Issues Presented

1. Whether the apparent conflict between Rajasthan SRTC v. Krishna Kant (1995) and Rajasthan SRTC v. Khadarmal (2006) necessitates referral of the present appeals to a larger Bench for authoritative resolution.

Arguments of the Parties

The opinion does not contain a detailed account of the parties' legal arguments.

Table of Precedents Cited

Court's Reasoning and Analysis

The Court observed an “apparent conflict” between two of its own three-Judge Bench judgments on issues germane to the present appeals. Recognizing that a bench of equal strength cannot overrule or reconcile such conflicting authority, the Court determined that the proper course was to have the matters considered by a larger Bench capable of definitively settling the point of law. The order is procedural and does not engage in substantive legal analysis of the underlying disputes.

Holding and Implications

ORDER: The appeals are to be placed before the Hon’ble Chief Justice of India for assignment to a larger Bench.

Implications: The Court issued no final determination on the merits. Instead, it initiated the procedural mechanism for resolving conflicting precedent. The outcome will depend on the larger Bench’s eventual decision, and no new substantive precedent has yet been set.