Fundamental Rights

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 Refuses Transfer of Case, Emphasizes Fair Prosecution: Sunil Saini & Ors. vs. State of Haryana & Ors. (2023)

/ B.V. Nagarathna, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 with Section 319, Constitutional Law, Fair Trial, Fundamental Rights, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 302, Judges, K.M. Joseph

Supreme Court Refuses Transfer of Case, Emphasizes Fair Prosecution: Sunil Saini & Ors. vs. State of Haryana & Ors. (2023) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a criminal case should be transferred to another state due to allegations of witness intimidation and an unfair prosecution. CASE TYPE: Criminal Case Name: Sunil Saini & Ors. vs. State of Haryana

Supreme Court Refuses Transfer of Case, Emphasizes Fair Prosecution: Sunil Saini & Ors. vs. State of Haryana & Ors. (2023) Read Post »

Supreme Court Modifies Advance Medical Directive Guidelines: Common Cause vs. Union of India (24 January 2023)

/ Ajay Rastogi, Aniruddha Bose, C.T. Ravikumar, Civil Procedure, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 21, Fundamental Rights, Hrishikesh Roy, Judges, K.M. Joseph, Writ Petition

Supreme Court Modifies Advance Medical Directive Guidelines: Common Cause vs. Union of India (2023) LEGAL ISSUE: Clarification and modification of guidelines for Advance Medical Directives. CASE TYPE: Public Interest Litigation/Constitutional Law Case Name: Common Cause (A Regd. Society) vs. Union of India Judgment Date: 24 January 2023 Date of the Judgment: 24 January 2023 Citation:

Supreme Court Modifies Advance Medical Directive Guidelines: Common Cause vs. Union of India (24 January 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 »

Supreme Court Upholds Property Tax on Carpet Area Basis, Denies Exemption to Charitable Institutions: Parivar Seva Sanstha vs. Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation (24 November 2022)

/ Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 14, Fundamental Rights, Gujarat Provincial Municipal Corporations Act, 1949, Gujarat Provincial Municipal Corporations Act, 1949 with Section 129, Gujarat Provincial Municipal Corporations Act, 1949 with Section 132, Gujarat Provincial Municipal Corporations Act, 1949 with Section 141AA, J.K. Maheshwari, Judges, Sanjiv Khanna

Supreme Court Upholds Property Tax on Carpet Area Basis, Denies Exemption to Charitable Institutions: Parivar Seva Sanstha vs. Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether charitable institutions are exempt from general tax when property tax is levied based on carpet area. CASE TYPE: Municipal Law, Property Tax Case Name: Parivar Seva Sanstha vs. Ahmedabad Municipal

Supreme Court Upholds Property Tax on Carpet Area Basis, Denies Exemption to Charitable Institutions: Parivar Seva Sanstha vs. Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation (24 November 2022) Read Post »

Scroll to Top