Constitutional Law with Article 226

Supreme Court settles pre-deposit requirement for appeals under SARFAESI Act: Union Bank of India vs. Rajat Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. (2 March 2020)

/ Aniruddha Bose, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 226, Deepak Gupta, Judges, Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002, Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 with Section 18

Supreme Court Clarifies Pre-Deposit Requirement for DRAT Appeals under SARFAESI Act LEGAL ISSUE: Whether pre-deposit is mandatory for entertaining an appeal before the Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal (DRAT) under Section 18 of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act). CASE TYPE: Banking/Finance Law Case Name: Union […]

Supreme Court settles pre-deposit requirement for appeals under SARFAESI Act: Union Bank of India vs. Rajat Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. (2 March 2020) Read Post »

Supreme Court Orders Refund for Undelivered Sand Block: Popatrao Vyankatrao Patil vs. The State of Maharashtra (2020)

/ Administrative Law, Arbitrary Action, B.R. Gavai, Breach of contract, Civil Procedure, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 14, Constitutional Law with Article 226, Contract Law, Government Contracts, Judges, Model Litigant, Refund of Contract Amount, S.A. Bobde, Surya Kant, Writ Petition

Supreme Court Orders Refund for Undelivered Sand Block: Popatrao vs. State of Maharashtra (2020) Date of the Judgment: February 14, 2020 Citation: 2020 INSC 138 Judges: S.A. Bobde, CJI., B.R. Gavai, J., Surya Kant, J. Can a citizen be denied a refund for a government contract when the government fails to deliver the contracted goods?

Supreme Court Orders Refund for Undelivered Sand Block: Popatrao Vyankatrao Patil vs. The State of Maharashtra (2020) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Dismissal in Corruption Case: State of Karnataka vs. N. Gangaraj (2020)

/ Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 226, Disciplinary Proceedings, Hemant Gupta, Judges, Judicial Review, Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 with Section 13(1)(d), Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 with Section 13(2), Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 with Section 7, S. Abdul Nazeer, Service Law

Supreme Court Upholds Dismissal in Corruption Case: State of Karnataka vs. N. Gangaraj (2020) LEGAL ISSUE: Scope of judicial review in departmental proceedings. CASE TYPE: Service Law/Corruption Case Name: The State of Karnataka & Anr. vs. N. Gangaraj Judgment Date: 14 February 2020 Date of the Judgment: 14 February 2020 Citation: (2020) INSC 142 Judges:

Supreme Court Upholds Dismissal in Corruption Case: State of Karnataka vs. N. Gangaraj (2020) Read Post »

Supreme Court Sets Regularization Date for ONGC Employees: ONGC Employees Mazdoor Sabha vs. ONGC (2020)

/ Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 226, Constitutional Law with Article 227, Industrial Dispute, Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 with Section 25-B, Judges, R.F. Nariman, Regularization of Employees, S. Ravindra Bhat, V. Ramasubramanian

ONGC Employees Regularization: Supreme Court Sets Date for Regular Employment LEGAL ISSUE: Determining the correct date for regularizing term-based employees. CASE TYPE: Industrial Dispute Case Name: ONGC Employees Mazdoor Sabha vs. The Executive Director Basin Manager, Oil & Natural Gas Corporation (India) Ltd. [Judgment Date]: 13 February 2020 Introduction Date of the Judgment: 13 February

Supreme Court Sets Regularization Date for ONGC Employees: ONGC Employees Mazdoor Sabha vs. ONGC (2020) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds FIR under Gangsters Act: Padma Mishra vs. State of Uttarakhand (2020)

/ Aniruddha Bose, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 226, Indian Penal Code, Indian Penal Code with Section 323, Indian Penal Code with Section 506, Indira Banerjee, Judges, Offences against Public Tranquility, Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 with Section 2(b), Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 with Section 2(c), Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 with Section 3

Supreme Court Upholds FIR under Gangsters Act: Padma Mishra vs. State of Uttarakhand (2020) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether an FIR under the Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 can be quashed if it discloses offences under the Act. CASE TYPE: Criminal Law. Case Name: Padma Mishra vs. State of Uttarakhand & Anr. Judgment

Supreme Court Upholds FIR under Gangsters Act: Padma Mishra vs. State of Uttarakhand (2020) Read Post »

Supreme Court quashes High Court order staying transfer of government employee: Union of India vs. Deepak Niranjan Nath Pandit (2020)

/ Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 226, Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, Indu Malhotra, Judges, Judicial Review of Transfer Orders, Service Law, Transfer of Government Employees

Supreme Court quashes High Court order staying transfer of government employee: Union of India vs. Deepak Niranjan Nath Pandit (2020) Date of the Judgment: February 7, 2020 Citation: 2020 INSC 123 Judges: Dr. Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, J and Indu Malhotra, J. Can a High Court interfere with a routine transfer order of a government employee?

Supreme Court quashes High Court order staying transfer of government employee: Union of India vs. Deepak Niranjan Nath Pandit (2020) Read Post »

ONGC Regularisation: Supreme Court Refers Case to Larger Bench on Interpretation of Standing Orders and Unfair Labour Practices

/ Ajay Rastogi, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 226, Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 with Section 2(ra), Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 with Section 25(T), Judges, Unfair Labour Practices

Supreme Court refers ONGC Regularisation Case to Larger Bench Date of the Judgment: February 7, 2020 Judges: Dr Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, J and Ajay Rastogi, J. Can a temporary employee of a public sector undertaking, who has worked for more than 240 days, automatically become a permanent employee? The Supreme Court of India grappled with

ONGC Regularisation: Supreme Court Refers Case to Larger Bench on Interpretation of Standing Orders and Unfair Labour Practices Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies parity in service termination cases: U.P. Power Corporation Ltd. vs Ram Gopal (2020)

/ B.R. Gavai, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 226, Delay and Laches, Judges, Parity in Service, S. A. Bobde, Service Law, Surya Kant, Termination of Service

Supreme Court clarifies parity in service termination cases: U.P. Power Corporation Ltd. vs Ram Gopal (2020) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether an employee, whose services were terminated due to irregularities in the initial selection process, is entitled to reinstatement based on parity with another employee who was initially terminated for the same reason but was later allowed

Supreme Court clarifies parity in service termination cases: U.P. Power Corporation Ltd. vs Ram Gopal (2020) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Termination of Employment Based on False Caste Certificate: The Oriental Insurance Co Ltd vs. Pradip (2020)

/ Caste Certificate, Constitution of India, Constitutional Law with Article 142, Constitutional Law with Article 226, Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, Judges, K M Joseph, Service Law, Service Law with The Chief Regional Officer, The Oriental Insurance Co Ltd vs. Pradip and Anr, Termination of Service

Supreme Court Upholds Termination of Employment Based on False Caste Certificate: The Oriental Insurance Co Ltd vs. Pradip (2020) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether an employee’s services can be terminated if their caste certificate, on the basis of which they secured employment, is later found to be false. CASE TYPE: Service Law Case Name: The Chief Regional

Supreme Court Upholds Termination of Employment Based on False Caste Certificate: The Oriental Insurance Co Ltd vs. Pradip (2020) Read Post »

Child Custody in International Disputes: Supreme Court Addresses Habeas Corpus and Parental Rights in Yashita Sahu vs. State of Rajasthan (20 January 2020)

/ Aniruddha Bose, Child Custody, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 226, Deepak Gupta, Family Law, Habeas Corpus, Judges, Parental Rights

Supreme Court Rules on Child Custody in International Disputes: Yashita Sahu vs. State of Rajasthan (2020) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a writ of habeas corpus is maintainable for child custody when a child is with a natural guardian, and the extent to which Indian courts should consider foreign court orders in child custody matters. CASE TYPE:

Child Custody in International Disputes: Supreme Court Addresses Habeas Corpus and Parental Rights in Yashita Sahu vs. State of Rajasthan (20 January 2020) Read Post »

Supreme Court sets aside High Court’s order on Criminal Justice Reforms in Bail Matter (15 January 2020)

/ Bail, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 with Section 439, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 with Section 482, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 226, Hemant Gupta, Judges, L. Nageswara Rao

Supreme Court Sets Aside High Court Order on Criminal Justice Reforms in Bail Matter LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a High Court, while deciding a bail application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, can issue directions for reforms in the criminal justice system. CASE TYPE: Criminal Case Name: State Rep. by the Inspector

Supreme Court sets aside High Court’s order on Criminal Justice Reforms in Bail Matter (15 January 2020) Read Post »

Supreme Court allows admission after cut-off date in exceptional medical admission cases: S. Krishna Sradha vs. State of Andhra Pradesh (2019)

/ Arun Mishra, B.R. Gavai, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 14, Constitutional Law with Article 226, Fundamental Rights, Judges, M.R. Shah

Supreme Court Allows Admission After Cut-Off Date in Rare Cases: S. Krishna Sradha vs. State of Andhra Pradesh (2019) Date of the Judgment: December 13, 2019 Citation: 2019 INSC 1234 Judges: Arun Mishra J., M.R. Shah J., B.R. Gavai J. Can a meritorious student be denied admission to a medical course due to a delay

Supreme Court allows admission after cut-off date in exceptional medical admission cases: S. Krishna Sradha vs. State of Andhra Pradesh (2019) Read Post »

Scroll to Top