Constitutional Law with Article 14

Supreme Court Limits High Court’s Power to Issue Blanket Orders on Bail and Arrests: High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan vs. The State of Rajasthan & Anr. (29 September 2021)

/ Aniruddha Bose, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 with Section 389, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 with Section 438, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 with Section 439, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 14, Constitutional Law with Article 21, Fundamental Rights, Judges, L. Nageswara Rao

Supreme Court Limits High Court’s Power to Issue Blanket Orders on Bail and Arrests Date of the Judgment: 29 September 2021 Citation: (2021) INSC 648 Judges: L. Nageswara Rao, J., Aniruddha Bose, J. Can a High Court issue blanket orders restricting the listing of bail applications and directing police not to make arrests in certain […]

Supreme Court Limits High Court’s Power to Issue Blanket Orders on Bail and Arrests: High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan vs. The State of Rajasthan & Anr. (29 September 2021) Read Post »

Supreme Court Clarifies Seniority for Regularized Ad Hoc Employees: Malook Singh vs. State of Punjab (28 September 2021)

/ Ad Hoc Appointments, B.V. Nagarathna, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 14, Constitutional Law with Article 16, Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, Judges, Punjab Civil Secretariat (State Service Class III) Rules 1976, Punjab Civil Secretariat (State Service Class III) Rules 1976 with Rule 9, Regularization, Seniority, Service Law, Vikram Nath

Supreme Court Clarifies Seniority for Regularized Ad Hoc Employees: Malook Singh vs. State of Punjab (2021) LEGAL ISSUE: Determination of seniority for ad hoc employees upon regularization. CASE TYPE: Service Law Case Name: Malook Singh and Others vs. State of Punjab and Others Judgment Date: 28 September 2021 Date of the Judgment: 28 September 2021

Supreme Court Clarifies Seniority for Regularized Ad Hoc Employees: Malook Singh vs. State of Punjab (28 September 2021) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds IIT Admission Criteria: IIT Kharagpur vs. Soutrik Sarangi (2021)

/ Admission Standards, Bela M. Trivedi, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 14, Institutes of Technology Act, 1961, Institutes of Technology Act, 1961 with Section 33(2)(b), Judges, S. Ravindra Bhat, Uday Umesh Lalit

Supreme Court Upholds IIT Admission Criteria: IIT Kharagpur vs. Soutrik Sarangi (2021) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the eligibility criteria for Joint Entrance Examination (JEE) Advanced, which restricts candidates who have already taken admission in an Indian Institute of Technology (IIT) from appearing again, is valid. CASE TYPE: Education Law Case Name: Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur

Supreme Court Upholds IIT Admission Criteria: IIT Kharagpur vs. Soutrik Sarangi (2021) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Outsourcing Policy for Class IV Employees in Aided Institutions: State of Uttar Pradesh vs. Principal Abhay Nandan Inter College (2021)

/ Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 14, Intermediate Education Act, 1921, Intermediate Education Act, 1921 with Section 16G, Intermediate Education Act, 1921 with Section 9(4), Judges, M.M. Sundresh, Regulations framed under the Intermediate Education Act, 1921, Sanjay Kishan Kaul

Supreme Court Upholds Outsourcing Policy for Class IV Employees in Aided Institutions: State of Uttar Pradesh vs. Principal Abhay Nandan Inter College (2021) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the State Government can mandate outsourcing for Class IV employee positions in aided educational institutions. CASE TYPE: Education Law, Service Law Case Name: The State of Uttar Pradesh &

Supreme Court Upholds Outsourcing Policy for Class IV Employees in Aided Institutions: State of Uttar Pradesh vs. Principal Abhay Nandan Inter College (2021) Read Post »

Supreme Court Clarifies Rights Under Section 11 of Coal Mines Act: Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd. vs. EMTA Coal Ltd. (21 September 2021)

/ B.R. Gavai, B.V. Nagarathna, Coal Mines (Special Provisions) Act, 2015, Coal Mines (Special Provisions) Act, 2015 with Section 11, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 14, Contract Act, 1872, Contract Act, 1872 with Section 62, Judges, L. Nageswara Rao, Novation of Contracts

Supreme Court Clarifies Rights Under Section 11 of Coal Mines Act: Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd. vs. EMTA Coal Ltd. (2021) Date of the Judgment: 21 September 2021 Citation: 2021 INSC 677 Judges: L. Nageswara Rao, J., B.R. Gavai, J., B.V. Nagarathna, J. Can a successful bidder of a coal mine be forced to continue

Supreme Court Clarifies Rights Under Section 11 of Coal Mines Act: Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd. vs. EMTA Coal Ltd. (21 September 2021) Read Post »

Supreme Court upholds differential promotion criteria based on educational qualifications: Chandan Banerjee vs. Krishna Prosad Ghosh (21 September 2021)

/ Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 14, Constitutional Law with Article 16, Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud, Educational Qualification, Fundamental Rights, Hima Kohli, Judges, Promotion, Service Law, Vikram Nath

Supreme Court Upholds Differential Promotion Criteria Based on Educational Qualifications: Chandan Banerjee vs. Krishna Prosad Ghosh (2021) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a classification based on educational qualifications for promotion to supernumerary posts within the same cadre is valid under Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. CASE TYPE: Service Law. Case Name: Chandan Banerjee

Supreme Court upholds differential promotion criteria based on educational qualifications: Chandan Banerjee vs. Krishna Prosad Ghosh (21 September 2021) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Restriction on GST Refund for Input Services: Union of India vs. VKC Footsteps India Pvt Ltd (2021)

/ CGST Act, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 14, Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, Goods and Services Tax, Goods and Services Tax with Rule 89, Goods and Services Tax with Section 54, Judges, MR Shah

Supreme Court Upholds Restriction on GST Refund for Input Services: Union of India vs. VKC Footsteps India Pvt Ltd (2021) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the refund of unutilized Input Tax Credit (ITC) under the Goods and Services Tax (GST) regime includes credit on input services, or is restricted to input goods. CASE TYPE: Tax Law (Goods

Supreme Court Upholds Restriction on GST Refund for Input Services: Union of India vs. VKC Footsteps India Pvt Ltd (2021) Read Post »

Supreme Court Orders Regularization of Teachers Appointed Under the Uttar Pradesh State Universities Act, 1973: Somesh Thapliyal vs. HNB Garhwal University (2021)

/ Ajay Rastogi, Central Universities Act, 2009, Central Universities Act, 2009 with Section 27, Central Universities Act, 2009 with Section 4(d), Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 14, Indian Contract Act, 1872, Indian Contract Act, 1872 with Section 23, Judges, Uday Umesh Lalit, Uttar Pradesh State Universities Act, 1973, Uttar Pradesh State Universities Act, 1973 with Section 21(1), Uttar Pradesh State Universities Act, 1973 with Section 31, Uttar Pradesh State Universities Act, 1973 with Section 4(1)

Supreme Court Orders Regularization of Teachers Appointed Under the Uttar Pradesh State Universities Act, 1973: Somesh Thapliyal vs. HNB Garhwal University (2021) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether teachers appointed through a regular selection process under the Uttar Pradesh State Universities Act, 1973, can be denied substantive appointments based on arbitrary contractual conditions imposed by the University. CASE

Supreme Court Orders Regularization of Teachers Appointed Under the Uttar Pradesh State Universities Act, 1973: Somesh Thapliyal vs. HNB Garhwal University (2021) Read Post »

Supreme Court extends retirement age for AYUSH doctors retrospectively: North Delhi Municipal Corporation vs. Dr. Ram Naresh Sharma & Ors. (2021) INSC 489 (03 August 2021)

/ Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 14, Discrimination in Service, Fundamental Rights, Hrishikesh Roy, Judges, L. Nageswara Rao, Retirement Age, Service Law, Service Law with Arrears of Salary

Supreme Court extends retirement age for AYUSH doctors retrospectively Date of the Judgment: 03 August 2021 Citation: (2021) INSC 489 Judges: L. Nageswara Rao, J., Hrishikesh Roy, J. Can doctors practicing traditional medicine (AYUSH) be treated differently from allopathic doctors regarding their retirement age? The Supreme Court of India addressed this question in a recent

Supreme Court extends retirement age for AYUSH doctors retrospectively: North Delhi Municipal Corporation vs. Dr. Ram Naresh Sharma & Ors. (2021) INSC 489 (03 August 2021) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds OBC, EWS Reservations in NEET for 2021-22: Nunes vs. Union of India (2022)

/ All India Quota, AS Bopanna, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 14, Constitutional Law with Article 32, Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, EWS Reservation, Fundamental Rights, Judges, OBC Reservation, Reservation Policy

Supreme Court Upholds OBC, EWS Reservations in NEET for 2021-22: Nunes vs. Union of India (2022) Date of the Judgment: January 7, 2022 Citation: (2022) INSC 12 Judges: Dr Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, J and AS Bopanna, J Can reservations for Other Backward Classes (OBC) and Economically Weaker Sections (EWS) be implemented in the All India

Supreme Court Upholds OBC, EWS Reservations in NEET for 2021-22: Nunes vs. Union of India (2022) Read Post »

Study Leave During Pandemic: Supreme Court directs reconsideration of denial of study leave: Dr. Rohit Kumar vs. Secretary Office of Lt. Governor of Delhi & Ors. (15 July 2021)

/ Central Civil Services (Leave) Rules, 1972, Central Civil Services (Leave) Rules, 1972 with Rule 50, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 14, Government Employees, Indira Banerjee, Judges, Public Interest, Service Law, Study Leave, V. Ramasubramanian

Supreme Court Directs Reconsideration of Study Leave for Doctor Amidst COVID-19: Dr. Rohit Kumar vs. Secretary Office of Lt. Governor of Delhi & Ors. (2021) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a government doctor can be denied study leave during a pandemic. CASE TYPE: Service Law Case Name: Dr. Rohit Kumar vs. Secretary Office of Lt. Governor of

Study Leave During Pandemic: Supreme Court directs reconsideration of denial of study leave: Dr. Rohit Kumar vs. Secretary Office of Lt. Governor of Delhi & Ors. (15 July 2021) Read Post »

Supreme Court settles rules for correction of name and date of birth in CBSE certificates: Jigya Yadav vs. CBSE (2021) INSC 332 (03 June 2021)

/ A.M. Khanwilkar, B.R. Gavai, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 14, Constitutional Law with Article 19, Fundamental Rights, Indian Evidence Act, 1872, Indian Evidence Act, 1872 with Presumption of Genuineness, Judges, Krishna Murari, Public Documents

Supreme Court Clarifies Rules for Name and Date of Birth Corrections in CBSE Certificates Date of the Judgment: 03 June 2021 Citation: (2021) INSC 332 Judges: A.M. Khanwilkar, J., B.R. Gavai, J., Krishna Murari, J. Can a student change their name or date of birth on their Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE) certificates? The

Supreme Court settles rules for correction of name and date of birth in CBSE certificates: Jigya Yadav vs. CBSE (2021) INSC 332 (03 June 2021) Read Post »

Scroll to Top