Constitutional Law with Article 14

Supreme Court restricts refund of transportation charges in GAIL vs. IPCL case

/ Abhay S. Oka, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 14, Contract Law, Contract Law with Section 10.01, Contract Law with Section 4.04, Judges, Sanjay Kishan Kaul, Unequal Bargaining Power

Supreme Court Restricts Refund in GAIL vs. IPCL Case on Transportation Charges LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a public sector undertaking can levy transportation charges on another when the latter is mandated to use its own pipelines. CASE TYPE: Contract Law, Writ Jurisdiction Case Name: M/S. GAIL (INDIA) LIMITED vs. M/S. INDIAN PETROCHEMICALS CORP. LTD. & ORS. […]

Supreme Court restricts refund of transportation charges in GAIL vs. IPCL case Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Challenge to GAIL’s Transportation Charges: GAIL vs. IPCL (2023)

/ Abhay S. Oka, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 14, Contract Law, Contract Law with Clause 4.04, Fundamental Rights, Judges, Public Sector Undertakings, Sanjay Kishan Kaul, Unequal Bargaining Power

Supreme Court Upholds Challenge to GAIL’s Transportation Charges: GAIL vs. IPCL (2023) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a Public Sector Undertaking can levy transportation charges on another entity when that entity is mandated to use its own infrastructure for gas transportation. CASE TYPE: Contract Law, Writ Jurisdiction Case Name: M/S. GAIL (INDIA) LIMITED vs. M/S. INDIAN PETROCHEMICALS

Supreme Court Upholds Challenge to GAIL’s Transportation Charges: GAIL vs. IPCL (2023) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Rights of OCI Cardholders in NEET Admissions: Anushka Rengunthwar vs. Union of India (2023)

/ A.S. Bopanna, C.T. Ravikumar, Citizenship Act, 1955, Citizenship Act, 1955 with Section 7B, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 14, Constitutional Law with Article 21, Fundamental Rights, Judges, Overseas Citizens of India (OCI)

Supreme Court Upholds Rights of OCI Cardholders in NEET Admissions: Anushka Rengunthwar vs. Union of India (2023) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether Overseas Citizens of India (OCI) cardholders should be treated on par with Non-Resident Indians (NRIs) for admissions to educational institutions, specifically for seats not exclusively reserved for Indian citizens. CASE TYPE: Education/Citizenship Law Case Name:

Supreme Court Upholds Rights of OCI Cardholders in NEET Admissions: Anushka Rengunthwar vs. Union of India (2023) Read Post »

Supreme Court Protects OCI Cardholders’ Educational Rights: Anushka Rengunthwar vs. Union of India (2023)

/ A.S. Bopanna, C.T. Ravikumar, Citizenship Act, 1955, Citizenship Act, 1955 with Section 7A, Citizenship Act, 1955 with Section 7B(1), Citizenship Act, 1955 with Section 7B(2), Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 14, Constitutional Law with Article 21, Fundamental Rights, Judges

Supreme Court Protects OCI Cardholders’ Educational Rights: Anushka Rengunthwar vs. Union of India (2023) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether Overseas Citizens of India (OCI) cardholders can be restricted to only NRI quota seats for medical admissions, impacting their previously held rights. CASE TYPE: Constitutional Law, Education, Citizenship Case Name: Anushka Rengunthwar & Ors. vs. Union of India

Supreme Court Protects OCI Cardholders’ Educational Rights: Anushka Rengunthwar vs. Union of India (2023) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds the Validity of Contesting from Two Seats in Elections: Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay vs. Union of India (2023)

/ Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 14, Constitutional Law with Article 19, Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, Fundamental Rights, J B Pardiwala, Judges, Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha, Representation of the People Act, 1951, Representation of the People Act, 1951 with Section 33(7)

Supreme Court Upholds the Validity of Contesting from Two Seats in Elections Date of the Judgment: February 2, 2023 Citation: (2023) INSC 75 Judges: Dr Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, CJI, Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha J, and J B Pardiwala J. The judgment was authored by Dr Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, CJI. Can a candidate contest from multiple constituencies

Supreme Court Upholds the Validity of Contesting from Two Seats in Elections: Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay vs. Union of India (2023) Read Post »

Supreme Court settles the implementation date for Fifth Pay Commission recommendations for Maharashtra State Financial Corporation employees (02 February 2023)

/ Aniruddha Bose, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 14, Fundamental Rights, Judges, Pay Revision, Retirement Benefits, S. Ravindra Bhat, Service Law

Supreme Court rules on implementation of Fifth Pay Commission for Maharashtra State Financial Corporation Employees LEGAL ISSUE: Whether denying pay revision benefits to employees of the Maharashtra State Financial Corporation (MSFC) who retired before a specific cut-off date is discriminatory and violates Article 14 of the Constitution of India. CASE TYPE: Service Law Case Name:

Supreme Court settles the implementation date for Fifth Pay Commission recommendations for Maharashtra State Financial Corporation employees (02 February 2023) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies pay revision benefits for MSFC employees: Maharashtra State Financial Corporation Ex-Employees Association & Ors. vs. State of Maharashtra & Ors. (2023) INSC 962 (02 February 2023)

/ Aniruddha Bose, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 14, Constitutional Law with Article 43, Fundamental Rights, Judges, Pay Revision, S. Ravindra Bhat, Service Law, Voluntary Retirement Scheme

Supreme Court rules on pay revision for retired employees of Maharashtra State Financial Corporation Date of the Judgment: 02 February 2023 Citation: (2023) INSC 962 Judges: Aniruddha Bose, J., S. Ravindra Bhat, J. Can a cut-off date for implementing pay revisions unfairly exclude employees who have already retired? The Supreme Court of India recently addressed

Supreme Court clarifies pay revision benefits for MSFC employees: Maharashtra State Financial Corporation Ex-Employees Association & Ors. vs. State of Maharashtra & Ors. (2023) INSC 962 (02 February 2023) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies Nursing Allowance eligibility based on qualifications: Union of India vs. Rajib Khan (2023)

/ Allowances, C.T. Ravikumar, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 14, Constitutional Law with Article 16, Equal Pay for Equal Work, Judges, M.R. Shah, Pay Scales, Service Law

Supreme Court Clarifies Nursing Allowance Eligibility Based on Qualifications: Union of India vs. Rajib Khan (2023) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether Nursing Assistants are entitled to the same Nursing Allowance as Staff Nurses, despite differences in educational qualifications. CASE TYPE: Service Law Case Name: The Union of India & Ors. vs. Rajib Khan & Ors. Judgment Date:

Supreme Court clarifies Nursing Allowance eligibility based on qualifications: Union of India vs. Rajib Khan (2023) Read Post »

Supreme Court Denies Nursing Allowance Parity for Nursing Assistants: Union of India vs. Rajib Khan (2023)

/ Allowances, C.T. Ravikumar, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 14, Constitutional Law with Article 16, Equal Pay, Judges, M.R. Shah, Pay Scales, Service Law

Supreme Court Denies Nursing Allowance Parity for Nursing Assistants: Union of India vs. Rajib Khan (2023) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether Nursing Assistants are entitled to the same Nursing Allowance as Staff Nurses when their educational qualifications and job requirements differ. CASE TYPE: Service Law Case Name: The Union of India & Ors. vs. Rajib Khan &

Supreme Court Denies Nursing Allowance Parity for Nursing Assistants: Union of India vs. Rajib Khan (2023) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies “Sikkimese” definition for Income Tax Exemption, Invalidates Gender-Based Exclusion: Association of Old Settlers of Sikkim vs. Union of India (2023)

/ B.V. Nagarathna, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 14, Constitutional Law with Article 15, Fundamental Rights, Income Tax Act, 1961, Income Tax Act, 1961 with Section 10(26AAA), Judges, M.R. Shah

Supreme Court rules on Sikkimese definition for Income Tax Exemption Date of the Judgment: January 13, 2023 Citation: (2023) INSC 29 Judges: M.R. Shah, J. and B.V. Nagarathna, J. (Separate concurring opinion by Nagarathna J.) Can the definition of “Sikkimese” for income tax exemptions exclude long-term Indian settlers? The Supreme Court of India addressed this

Supreme Court clarifies “Sikkimese” definition for Income Tax Exemption, Invalidates Gender-Based Exclusion: Association of Old Settlers of Sikkim vs. Union of India (2023) Read Post »

Supreme Court Strikes Down Discriminatory Definition of “Sikkimese” in Income Tax Act: Association of Old Settlers of Sikkim vs. Union of India (2023)

/ B.V. Nagarathna, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 14, Constitutional Law with Article 15, Fundamental Rights, Income Tax Act, 1961, Income Tax Act, 1961 with Section 10(26AAA), Judges, M.R. Shah, Tax Exemptions

Supreme Court Strikes Down Discriminatory Definition of “Sikkimese” in Income Tax Act LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the definition of “Sikkimese” under Section 10(26AAA) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, is discriminatory against long-term Indian settlers and Sikkimese women. CASE TYPE: Tax Law, Constitutional Law Case Name: Association of Old Settlers of Sikkim & Ors. vs. Union

Supreme Court Strikes Down Discriminatory Definition of “Sikkimese” in Income Tax Act: Association of Old Settlers of Sikkim vs. Union of India (2023) Read Post »

Supreme Court Denies Daughter’s Claim in Tribal Land Compensation: Kamla Neti vs. Special Land Acquisition Officer (2022)

/ Compensation, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 14, Constitutional Law with Article 21, Fundamental Rights, Hindu Succession Act, 1956, Hindu Succession Act, 1956 with Section 2(2), Judges, Krishna Murari, Land Acquisition Act, Land Acquisition Act with Section 30, M.R. Shah

Supreme Court Denies Daughter’s Claim in Tribal Land Compensation: Kamla Neti vs. Special Land Acquisition Officer (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a daughter from a Scheduled Tribe is entitled to a share of compensation for land acquired, based on survivorship under the Hindu Succession Act. CASE TYPE: Land Acquisition/Civil Law Case Name: Kamla Neti (Dead) through

Supreme Court Denies Daughter’s Claim in Tribal Land Compensation: Kamla Neti vs. Special Land Acquisition Officer (2022) Read Post »

Scroll to Top