Constitutional Law with Article 14

Supreme Court mandates a committee for appointment of Election Commissioners: Anoop Baranwal vs. Union of India (2 March 2023)

/ Aniruddha Bose, Appointment of Election Commissioners, C.T. Ravikumar, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 14, Constitutional Law with Article 324, Election Commission of India, Election Law, Fundamental Rights, Hrishikesh Roy, Judges, K.M. Joseph

Supreme Court Mandates Independent Panel for Election Commissioner Appointments Date of the Judgment: 2 March 2023 Citation: (2023) INSC 151 Judges: K.M. Joseph, Aniruddha Bose, Hrishikesh Roy, C.T. Ravikumar, JJ. Can the Election Commission of India, the body responsible for overseeing free and fair elections, truly be independent if its members are solely appointed by […]

Supreme Court mandates a committee for appointment of Election Commissioners: Anoop Baranwal vs. Union of India (2 March 2023) Read Post »

Supreme Court mandates Independent Panel for Election Commissioner Appointments: Anoop Baranwal vs. Union of India (2023)

/ Ajay Rastogi, Aniruddha Bose, C.T. Ravikumar, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 14, Constitutional Law with Article 324, Fundamental Rights, Hrishikesh Roy, Judges, K.M. Joseph

Supreme Court Mandates Independent Panel for Election Commissioner Appointments LEGAL ISSUE: The core legal issue revolves around the process of appointing members to the Election Commission of India, specifically whether the current procedure ensures the independence and impartiality of the commission. CASE TYPE: This case falls under Public Interest Litigation concerning constitutional law, specifically regarding

Supreme Court mandates Independent Panel for Election Commissioner Appointments: Anoop Baranwal vs. Union of India (2023) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Police Decision on Criminal Background: Imtiyaz Ahmad Malla vs. State of Jammu and Kashmir (28 February 2023)

/ Ajay Rastogi, Bela M. Trivedi, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 14, Employment, Forest Act, Forest Act with Section 6, Judges, Offences Against Property, Police Recruitment, Ranbir Penal Code, Ranbir Penal Code with Section 379, Service Law

Supreme Court Upholds Police Decision on Criminal Background: Imtiyaz Ahmad Malla vs. State of Jammu and Kashmir (2023) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a police department can deny employment to an individual based on their criminal background, even after an acquittal. CASE TYPE: Service Law. Case Name: Imtiyaz Ahmad Malla vs. The State of Jammu and Kashmir

Supreme Court Upholds Police Decision on Criminal Background: Imtiyaz Ahmad Malla vs. State of Jammu and Kashmir (28 February 2023) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Land Acquisition for Public Use: State of Haryana vs. Niranjan Singh (2023)

/ C.T. Ravikumar, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 14, Judges, Land Acquisition Act, 1894, Land Acquisition Act, 1894 with Section 4, Land Acquisition Act, 1894 with Section 6, M.R. Shah

Supreme Court Upholds Land Acquisition for Public Use: State of Haryana vs. Niranjan Singh (2023) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the State can refuse to release acquired land when a significant portion of similarly situated lands has already been released. CASE TYPE: Land Acquisition Case Name: State of Haryana & Ors. vs. Niranjan Singh & Ors. Etc.

Supreme Court Upholds Land Acquisition for Public Use: State of Haryana vs. Niranjan Singh (2023) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Land Acquisition for Public Use, Reverses High Court Order: State of Haryana vs. Niranjan Singh (2023)

/ C.T. Ravikumar, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 14, Judges, Land Acquisition Act, 1894, Land Acquisition Act, 1894 with Section 4, Land Acquisition Act, 1894 with Section 5A, Land Acquisition Act, 1894 with Section 6, M.R. Shah

Supreme Court Upholds Land Acquisition for Public Use, Reverses High Court Order: State of Haryana vs. Niranjan Singh (2023) Date of the Judgment: 24 February 2023 Citation: 2023 INSC 167 Judges: M.R. Shah, J. and C.T. Ravikumar, J. Can a state government selectively release acquired land, favoring some landowners over others? The Supreme Court of

Supreme Court Upholds Land Acquisition for Public Use, Reverses High Court Order: State of Haryana vs. Niranjan Singh (2023) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Pay Disparity Between Junior Design Officers and Civilian Technical Officers: Union of India vs. Indian Navy Civilian Design Officers Association (22 February 2023)

/ Ajay Rastogi, Bela M. Trivedi, Central Administrative Tribunal, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 14, Equal Pay for Equal Work, Judges, Pay Scales, Service Law

Supreme Court Upholds Pay Disparity Between Junior Design Officers and Civilian Technical Officers: Union of India vs. Indian Navy Civilian Design Officers Association (2023) Date of the Judgment: 22 February 2023 Citation: Civil Appeal No. 8329 of 2011 Judges: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ajay Rastogi and Hon’ble Ms. Justice Bela M. Trivedi Can the judiciary interfere

Supreme Court Upholds Pay Disparity Between Junior Design Officers and Civilian Technical Officers: Union of India vs. Indian Navy Civilian Design Officers Association (22 February 2023) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Differential Pay Scales for Junior Design Officers and Civilian Technical Officers: Union of India vs. Indian Navy Civilian Design Officers Association (22 February 2023)

/ Ajay Rastogi, Bela M. Trivedi, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 14, Equal Pay for Equal Work, Judges, Pay Scales, Service Law, Service Law with Fifth Central Pay Commission

Supreme Court Upholds Differential Pay Scales for Junior Design Officers and Civilian Technical Officers LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the courts can interfere with the pay scales fixed by expert bodies like the Pay Commission. CASE TYPE: Service Law. Case Name: Union of India vs. Indian Navy Civilian Design Officers Association and Anr. Judgment Date: 22 February

Supreme Court Upholds Differential Pay Scales for Junior Design Officers and Civilian Technical Officers: Union of India vs. Indian Navy Civilian Design Officers Association (22 February 2023) Read Post »

Supreme Court Strikes Down Discriminatory Land Compensation: Ramesh Chandra Sharma vs. State of Uttar Pradesh (20 February 2023)

/ Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 14, Fundamental Rights, Judges, Krishna Murari, Land Acquisition Act, 1894, Land Acquisition Act, 1894 with Section 23, S. Ravindra Bhat, U.P. Land Acquisition Rules, 1997

Supreme Court Strikes Down Discriminatory Land Compensation: Ramesh Chandra Sharma vs. State of Uttar Pradesh (2023) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a distinction can be made between “Pushtaini” (ancestral) and “Gair-Pushtaini” (non-ancestral) landowners for compensation during land acquisition. CASE TYPE: Land Acquisition, Constitutional Law. Case Name: Ramesh Chandra Sharma & Ors. vs. State of Uttar Pradesh &

Supreme Court Strikes Down Discriminatory Land Compensation: Ramesh Chandra Sharma vs. State of Uttar Pradesh (20 February 2023) Read Post »

Supreme Court strikes down discriminatory compensation for ‘Pushtaini’ and ‘Gair-Pushtaini’ landowners: Ramesh Chandra Sharma vs. State of Uttar Pradesh (20 February 2023)

/ Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 14, Fundamental Rights, Judges, Krishna Murari, Land Acquisition Act, 1894, Land Acquisition Act, 1894 with Section 23, Land Acquisition Rules, 1997, S. Ravindra Bhat

Supreme Court strikes down discriminatory compensation for ‘Pushtaini’ and ‘Gair-Pushtaini’ landowners: Ramesh Chandra Sharma vs. State of Uttar Pradesh (2023) Date of the Judgment: 20 February 2023 Citation: 2023 INSC 144 Judges: Krishna Murari, J., S. Ravindra Bhat, J. Can a government authority differentiate between landowners based on their ancestry when providing compensation for acquired

Supreme Court strikes down discriminatory compensation for ‘Pushtaini’ and ‘Gair-Pushtaini’ landowners: Ramesh Chandra Sharma vs. State of Uttar Pradesh (20 February 2023) Read Post »

Supreme Court Transfers Petitions on Uniform Marriage Age: Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay vs. Union of India (2023)

/ Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 14, Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, Fundamental Rights, Judges, Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha

Supreme Court Transfers Petitions on Uniform Marriage Age: Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay vs. Union of India (2023) Date of the Judgment: January 13, 2023 Citation: (2023) INSC 28 Judges: Dr Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, CJI and Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha, J. Can the minimum age of marriage be different for men and women? The Supreme Court of India

Supreme Court Transfers Petitions on Uniform Marriage Age: Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay vs. Union of India (2023) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Bar Council’s Power to Set Pre-Enrollment Standards: Bar Council of India vs. Bonnie Foi Law College (2023)

/ Abhay S. Oka, Advocates Act, 1961, Advocates Act, 1961 with Section 24, Advocates Act, 1961 with Section 49, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 14, Fundamental Rights, J.K. Maheshwari, Judges, Right to Practice, Sanjay Kishan Kaul, Sanjiv Khanna, Vikram Nath

Supreme Court Upholds Bar Council’s Power to Set Pre-Enrollment Standards: Bar Council of India vs. Bonnie Foi Law College (2023) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the Bar Council of India can prescribe pre-enrollment training or examinations for advocates. CASE TYPE: Legal Profession Regulation Case Name: Bar Council of India vs. Bonnie Foi Law College & Ors. Judgment

Supreme Court Upholds Bar Council’s Power to Set Pre-Enrollment Standards: Bar Council of India vs. Bonnie Foi Law College (2023) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Denial of Regularization for Daily Wage Employee: Vibhuti Shankar Pandey vs. State of Madhya Pradesh (2023)

/ Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 14, Daily Wage Employees, Judges, Regularization, S. Ravindra Bhat, Service Law, Sudhanshu Dhulia

Supreme Court Upholds Denial of Regularization for Daily Wage Employee: Vibhuti Shankar Pandey vs. State of Madhya Pradesh (2023) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a daily wage employee is entitled to regularization without a sanctioned post and appointment by a competent authority. CASE TYPE: Service Law Case Name: Vibhuti Shankar Pandey vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh

Supreme Court Upholds Denial of Regularization for Daily Wage Employee: Vibhuti Shankar Pandey vs. State of Madhya Pradesh (2023) Read Post »

Scroll to Top