Constitutional Law with Article 14

Supreme Court invalidates NDMC’s Unit Area Method for Property Tax: New Delhi Municipal Council vs. Association of Concerned Citizens of New Delhi (2019) INSC 44 (22 January 2019)

/ A.K. Sikri, Ashok Bhushan, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 14, Judges, New Delhi Municipal Council Act, 1994, New Delhi Municipal Council Act, 1994 with Section 388, New Delhi Municipal Council Act, 1994 with Section 63, Property Tax Assessment

Supreme Court Invalidates NDMC’s Unit Area Method for Property Tax Date of the Judgment: 22 January 2019 Citation: (2019) INSC 44 Judges: A.K. Sikri, J., Ashok Bhushan, J. Can a municipal council bypass the statutory method for calculating property tax by introducing a new system through bye-laws? The Supreme Court of India recently addressed this […]

Supreme Court invalidates NDMC’s Unit Area Method for Property Tax: New Delhi Municipal Council vs. Association of Concerned Citizens of New Delhi (2019) INSC 44 (22 January 2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Differential Tariff Regulations for Power Plants: Reliance Infrastructure Ltd. vs. State of Maharashtra (21 January 2019)

/ Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 14, Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud, Electricity Act 2003, Electricity Act 2003 with Section 181, Electricity Act 2003 with Section 61, Hemant Gupta, Judges, Right to Equality

Supreme Court Upholds Differential Tariff Regulations for Power Plants: Reliance Infrastructure Ltd. vs. State of Maharashtra (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a state electricity regulatory commission can set different operating norms for power plants based on their past performance, even if they have similar specifications. CASE TYPE: Electricity Tariff Regulation Case Name: Reliance Infrastructure Limited vs.

Supreme Court Upholds Differential Tariff Regulations for Power Plants: Reliance Infrastructure Ltd. vs. State of Maharashtra (21 January 2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court Orders Review of Financial Upgrade and Promotion for CSIR Employee: Anil Kumar vs. Union of India (2019)

/ Annual Confidential Reports (ACR), Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 14, Constitutional Law with Article 16, Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud, Financial Upgradation, Hemant Gupta, Judges, Natural Justice, Promotion, Service Law

Supreme Court Orders Review of Financial Upgrade and Promotion for CSIR Employee: Anil Kumar vs. Union of India (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether non-communication of Annual Confidential Reports (ACRs) to an employee affects their right to financial upgradation and promotion. CASE TYPE: Service Law Case Name: Anil Kumar vs. Union of India and Ors. Judgment Date:

Supreme Court Orders Review of Financial Upgrade and Promotion for CSIR Employee: Anil Kumar vs. Union of India (2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Right to Dance, Strikes Down Obscene Dance Restrictions in Maharashtra: Indian Hotel and Restaurant Association vs. State of Maharashtra (2019)

/ A.K. Sikri, Ashok Bhushan, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 14, Constitutional Law with Article 19, Fundamental Rights, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 292, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 294, Judges, Maharashtra Prohibition of Obscene Dance Act, 2016, Maharashtra Prohibition of Obscene Dance Act, 2016 with Section 2(8), Maharashtra Prohibition of Obscene Dance Act, 2016 with Section 6(4), Maharashtra Prohibition of Obscene Dance Act, 2016 with Section 8

Supreme Court Upholds Right to Dance, Strikes Down Obscene Dance Restrictions in Maharashtra: Indian Hotel and Restaurant Association vs. State of Maharashtra (2019) Date of the Judgment: January 17, 2019 Citation: 2019 INSC 28 Judges: A.K. Sikri, J., Ashok Bhushan, J. Can the state impose a complete ban on dance performances in hotels and bars?

Supreme Court Upholds Right to Dance, Strikes Down Obscene Dance Restrictions in Maharashtra: Indian Hotel and Restaurant Association vs. State of Maharashtra (2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court Denies Appointment Rights Based on Cancelled 1999 Lineman Selection: State of Manipur vs. Takhelmayum Khelendro Meitei (2019)

/ Appointment, Cancellation of Selection, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 14, Constitutional Law with Article 16, Judges, L. Nageswara Rao, R. Subhash Reddy, Recruitment, S.A. Bobde, Service Law

Supreme Court Denies Appointment Rights Based on Cancelled 1999 Lineman Selection: State of Manipur vs. Takhelmayum Khelendro Meitei (2019) Date of the Judgment: January 17, 2019 Citation: (2019) INSC 34 Judges: S.A. Bobde, J., L. Nageswara Rao, J., R. Subhash Reddy, J. Can a candidate claim a right to appointment based on a selection process

Supreme Court Denies Appointment Rights Based on Cancelled 1999 Lineman Selection: State of Manipur vs. Takhelmayum Khelendro Meitei (2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court settles promotion rules in Assam Rifles: Union of India vs. Krishna Kumar (2019)

/ Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 14, Constitutional Law with Article 16, Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud, Fundamental Rights, Hemant Gupta, Judges, Promotion, Recruitment Rules, Service Law, Service Law with Vested Right

Supreme Court clarifies promotion rules in Assam Rifles: Union of India vs. Krishna Kumar (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether promotions should be based on rules existing when vacancies arise or when the promotion is considered. CASE TYPE: Service Law Case Name: Union of India & Ors. vs. Krishna Kumar & Ors. [Judgment Date]: 14 January 2019

Supreme Court settles promotion rules in Assam Rifles: Union of India vs. Krishna Kumar (2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court Denies Pay Parity for Sub Fire Officers: Punjab State Electricity Board vs. Thana Singh (2019)

/ Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 14, Constitutional Law with Article 39(d), Fundamental Rights, Indira Banerjee, Judges, Pay Parity, R. Banumathi, Service Law

Supreme Court Denies Pay Parity for Sub Fire Officers: Punjab State Electricity Board vs. Thana Singh (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether Sub Fire Officers are entitled to the same pay scale as other employees within the same group, specifically Head Clerks, Head Clerk-cum-Divisional Accountants, and Internal Auditors. CASE TYPE: Service Law Case Name: Punjab State Electricity

Supreme Court Denies Pay Parity for Sub Fire Officers: Punjab State Electricity Board vs. Thana Singh (2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court Denies Pay Parity for Internal Auditors: Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd. vs. Rajesh Kumar Jindal (2019)

/ Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 14, Constitutional Law with Article 16, Fundamental Rights, Indira Banerjee, Judges, Pay Parity, R. Banumathi, Service Law, Service Law with Regulation 3(g)

Supreme Court Denies Pay Parity for Internal Auditors: Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd. vs. Rajesh Kumar Jindal (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether Internal Auditors are entitled to pay parity with Head Clerks solely based on being in the same group, irrespective of different recruitment methods, qualifications, and duties. CASE TYPE: Service Law Case Name: Punjab State

Supreme Court Denies Pay Parity for Internal Auditors: Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd. vs. Rajesh Kumar Jindal (2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court Directs Regularization Based on Seniority: Union of India vs. Sant Lal (2019) INSC 16

/ Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 14, Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, Hemant Gupta, Judges, Regularization of Employees, Right to Equality, Service Law, Service Law with Seniority

Supreme Court Directs Regularization Based on Seniority: Union of India vs. Sant Lal LEGAL ISSUE: Whether casual workers are entitled to regularization based on seniority, especially when juniors have been regularized. CASE TYPE: Service Law Case Name: Union of India & Ors. vs. Sant Lal & Ors. Judgment Date: 8 January 2019 Date of the

Supreme Court Directs Regularization Based on Seniority: Union of India vs. Sant Lal (2019) INSC 16 Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Tax Benefit Scheme for Disabled Dependents: Ravi Agrawal vs. Union of India (2019)

/ A.K. Sikri, Ashok Bhushan, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 14, Fundamental Rights, Income Tax Act, 1961, Income Tax Act, 1961 with Section 80DD, Judges, S. Abdul Nazeer, Tax Benefits

Supreme Court Upholds Tax Benefit Scheme for Disabled Dependents: Ravi Agrawal vs. Union of India (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the Jeevan Aadhar policy under Section 80DD of the Income Tax Act, 1961, which provides benefits to disabled dependents only after the death of the parent/guardian, is discriminatory and violates Article 14 of the Constitution. CASE

Supreme Court Upholds Tax Benefit Scheme for Disabled Dependents: Ravi Agrawal vs. Union of India (2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Tax on Vehicle Possession for Manufacturers and Dealers: Tata Motors vs. State of Jharkhand (2018)

/ A.K. Sikri, Bihar Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, 1994, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 14, Constitutional Law with Entry 57 of List II, Judges, M.R. Shah, Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, Motor Vehicles Taxation Law, Tax on Vehicles

Supreme Court Upholds Tax on Vehicle Possession for Manufacturers and Dealers: Tata Motors vs. State of Jharkhand (2018) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether manufacturers and dealers of motor vehicles are liable to pay tax on vehicles in their possession before sale to the ultimate consumer. CASE TYPE: Motor Vehicles Taxation Law Case Name: M/S. Tata Motors Limited

Supreme Court Upholds Tax on Vehicle Possession for Manufacturers and Dealers: Tata Motors vs. State of Jharkhand (2018) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies rights of death row prisoners regarding facilities and treatment: In Re: Inhuman Conditions in 1382 Prisons (2018)

/ Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 14, Constitutional Law with Article 21, Deepak Gupta, Fundamental Rights, Judges, Madan B. Lokur, Prisons Act, 1894, Prisons Act, 1894 with Section 30, S. Abdul Nazeer

Rights of Death Row Prisoners: Supreme Court Clarifies Entitlements (2018) Date of the Judgment: December 13, 2018 Citation: I.A. NO. 26542 OF 2018 in WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 406 OF 2013 Judges: Madan B. Lokur, J, S. Abdul Nazeer, J, Deepak Gupta, J Can a prisoner sentenced to death be treated differently from other convicts?

Supreme Court clarifies rights of death row prisoners regarding facilities and treatment: In Re: Inhuman Conditions in 1382 Prisons (2018) Read Post »

Scroll to Top