Constitutional Law

Supreme Court Upholds Cancellation of West Bengal School Service Commission Recruitment: State of West Bengal vs. Baishakhi Bhattacharyya (2025)

/ Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 14, Constitutional Law with Article 16, Judges, Recruitment Rules, Sanjay Kumar, Sanjiv Khanna, Service Law

Introduction Date of the Judgment: April 03, 2025 Judges: Sanjiv Khanna, CJI, Sanjay Kumar, J. The Supreme Court of India recently addressed the widespread irregularities in the 2016 selection process conducted by the West Bengal Central School Service Commission (WBSSC). This case, State of West Bengal vs. Baishakhi Bhattacharyya, examined allegations of manipulation and fraud […]

Supreme Court Upholds Cancellation of West Bengal School Service Commission Recruitment: State of West Bengal vs. Baishakhi Bhattacharyya (2025) Read Post »

Supreme Court directs petitioners to approach respective High Courts regarding challenges to Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Acts (2025)

/ B.V. Nagarathna, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 14, Constitutional Law with Article 19(1)(g), Fundamental Rights, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments, Judges, Religious Law, Satish Chandra Sharma

Introduction Date of the Judgment: April 01, 2025 The Supreme Court of India addressed a batch of writ petitions challenging the constitutional validity of various provisions of the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Acts enacted by the States of Tamil Nadu, Andhra Pradesh, and Telangana, as well as the Union Territory of Puducherry. The central

Supreme Court directs petitioners to approach respective High Courts regarding challenges to Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Acts (2025) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Cancellation of Assam Forest Guard Selection List in Recruitment Case: State of Assam vs. Arabinda Rabha (March 7, 2025)

/ Cancellation of Selection List, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 142, Constitutional Law with Article 162, Constitutional Law with Article 226, Dipankar Datta, Judges, Manmohan, Recruitment, Service Law

Introduction Date of the Judgment: March 7, 2025 Citation: 2025 INSC 334 Judges: Dipankar Datta, J., Manmohan, J. When can a government cancel a recruitment process midway? The Supreme Court of India recently addressed this critical question in a case concerning the Assam Forest Protection Force. The core issue revolved around the validity of the

Supreme Court Upholds Cancellation of Assam Forest Guard Selection List in Recruitment Case: State of Assam vs. Arabinda Rabha (March 7, 2025) Read Post »

Supreme Court Orders Recount in Gram Panchayat Election Dispute: Vijay Bahadur vs. Sunil Kumar (2025)

/ Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 226, Constitutional Law with Article 243-O, Judges, Nongmeikapam Kotiswar Singh, Sanjay Karol, U.P. Panchayat Raj Act, 1947, U.P. Panchayat Raj Act, 1947 with Section 12-C

Introduction Date of the Judgment: March 6, 2025 Citation: 2025 INSC 332 Judges: Sanjay Karol, J., Nongmeikapam Kotiswar Singh, J. In a significant ruling, the Supreme Court of India has addressed the critical issue of electoral integrity in local governance. The question before the Court was whether a recount of votes should be ordered in

Supreme Court Orders Recount in Gram Panchayat Election Dispute: Vijay Bahadur vs. Sunil Kumar (2025) Read Post »

Supreme Court settles the question of guardianship of a disabled adult: Sharmila Velamur vs. V. Sanjay (2025)

/ Best Interests of the Child, Constitutional Law, Dipankar Datta, Family Law, Guardianship, Judges, Surya Kant, Ujjal Bhuyan

Introduction Date of the Judgment: March 3, 2025 Citation: 2025 INSC 299 Judges: Surya Kant, J., Dipankar Datta, J., Ujjal Bhuyan, J. When parents disagree about the care and residence of an adult child with disabilities, who decides what’s best? The Supreme Court of India recently addressed this delicate question in Sharmila Velamur vs. V.

Supreme Court settles the question of guardianship of a disabled adult: Sharmila Velamur vs. V. Sanjay (2025) Read Post »

Supreme Court Reinstates Terminated Women Judicial Officers, Emphasizes Fair Probation Assessment: Sarita Choudhary vs. High Court of Madhya Pradesh (28 February 2025)

/ B. V. Nagarathna, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 311(2), Judges, Madhya Pradesh Judicial Service Rules, 1994, Madhya Pradesh Judicial Service Rules, 1994 with Rule 11, Nongmeikapam Kotiswar Singh

Date of the Judgment: 28 February 2025 Judges: B. V. Nagarathna, Nongmeikapam Kotiswar Singh The Supreme Court of India addressed the termination of two women judicial officers during their probation period, examining whether the High Court’s actions were punitive or arbitrary. The Court considered the importance of fair probation assessments and the need for a

Supreme Court Reinstates Terminated Women Judicial Officers, Emphasizes Fair Probation Assessment: Sarita Choudhary vs. High Court of Madhya Pradesh (28 February 2025) Read Post »

Supreme Court settles the maintainability of writ petition challenging the decision of Ethics Committee: Dr. Sunil Kumar Singh vs. Bihar Legislative Council (2025) INSC 264 (25 February 2025)

/ Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 212(1), Constitutional Law with Article 32, Fundamental Rights, Judges, Nongmeikapam Kotiswar Singh, Representation of the People Act, 1951, Representation of the People Act, 1951 with Section 151A, Surya Kant

Date of the Judgment: 25 February 2025 Citation: 2025 INSC 264 Judges: Surya Kant, J., Nongmeikapam Kotiswar Singh, J. Can a legislative body’s decision to expel a member be challenged in court? The Supreme Court of India addressed this critical question in the case of Dr. Sunil Kumar Singh vs. Bihar Legislative Council. The court

Supreme Court settles the maintainability of writ petition challenging the decision of Ethics Committee: Dr. Sunil Kumar Singh vs. Bihar Legislative Council (2025) INSC 264 (25 February 2025) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies procurement policy for MSMEs: Lifecare Innovations vs. Union of India (25 February 2025)

/ Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 14, Constitutional Law with Article 19, Judges, Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006, Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006 with Section 11, Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha, Sandeep Mehta

Date of the Judgment: 25 February 2025 Citation: 2025 INSC 269 Judges: Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha, J., Sandeep Mehta, J. Can the government’s procurement policy for Micro, Small, and Medium Enterprises (MSMEs) be enforced, and what are the obligations of government bodies in promoting these enterprises? The Supreme Court of India addressed these critical questions in

Supreme Court clarifies procurement policy for MSMEs: Lifecare Innovations vs. Union of India (25 February 2025) Read Post »

Supreme Court Clarifies Pension Calculation for Odisha Job Contract Employees: State of Odisha & Ors. vs. Sudhansu Sekhar Jena (21 February 2025)

/ Ahsanuddin Amanullah, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 14, Job Contract Employees, Judges, Regularization, Service Law, Sudhanshu Dhulia, Work-Charged Employees

Date of the Judgment: 21 February 2025 Citation: 2025 INSC 259 Judges: Sudhanshu Dhulia, J., Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J. Can the service period of job contract employees be fully counted for pension benefits upon regularization? The Supreme Court of India addressed this critical question in a batch of appeals filed by the State of Odisha, settling

Supreme Court Clarifies Pension Calculation for Odisha Job Contract Employees: State of Odisha & Ors. vs. Sudhansu Sekhar Jena (21 February 2025) Read Post »

Supreme Court allows MBBS admission for disabled student, emphasizing functional assessment: Anmol vs. Union of India (2025) INSC 256 (21 February 2025)

/ B.R. Gavai, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 41, Functional Assessment, Judges, K.V. Viswanathan, Reasonable Accommodation, Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016

Introduction Date of the Judgment: 21st February, 2025 Citation: 2025 INSC 256 Judges: B.R. Gavai, J., K.V. Viswanathan, J. Can a medical aspirant be denied admission solely based on the percentage of disability, without a proper assessment of their functional capabilities? The Supreme Court of India addressed this critical question in the case of Anmol

Supreme Court allows MBBS admission for disabled student, emphasizing functional assessment: Anmol vs. Union of India (2025) INSC 256 (21 February 2025) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies the scope of High Court’s intervention in personal insolvency proceedings under IBC: Bank of Baroda vs. Farooq Ali Khan (20 February 2025)

/ Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 226, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC), Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC) with Section 100, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC) with Section 95, Insolvency Resolution Process, Judges, Manoj Misra, Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha

Date of the Judgment: 20 February 2025 Citation: 2025 INSC 253 Judges: Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha, J., Manoj Misra, J. Can a High Court interfere with personal insolvency proceedings initiated under Section 95 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) by claiming a waiver of liability? The Supreme Court addressed this critical question in the case

Supreme Court clarifies the scope of High Court’s intervention in personal insolvency proceedings under IBC: Bank of Baroda vs. Farooq Ali Khan (20 February 2025) Read Post »

Supreme Court Clarifies Duties of Advocates-on-Record and Raises Concerns on Senior Advocate Designations: Jitender @ Kalla vs. State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi) (20 February 2025)

/ Abhay S. Oka, Advocates Act, 1961, Advocates Act, 1961 with Section 16, Advocates Act, 1961 with Section 29, Advocates Act, 1961 with Section 30, Augustine George Masih, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 145, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 302, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 307, Judges

Introduction Date of the Judgment: 20 February 2025 Citation: 2025 INSC 249 Judges: Abhay S. Oka, J., Augustine George Masih, J. What are the duties and obligations of an Advocate-on-Record in the Supreme Court? The Supreme Court of India, in Jitender @ Kalla vs. State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi), addressed this critical question while

Supreme Court Clarifies Duties of Advocates-on-Record and Raises Concerns on Senior Advocate Designations: Jitender @ Kalla vs. State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi) (20 February 2025) Read Post »

Scroll to Top