K.G. Balakrishnan

Supreme Court settles Railway Employee Seniority Dispute in Non-Technical Clerical Category Selection (21st October 2008)

/ Administrative Law, Administrative Law with Central Administrative Tribunal (Procedure) Rules, 1987, Rule 17, Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT), Central Administrative Tribunal (Procedure) Rules, 1987, Employee Seniority, J.M. Panchal, Judges, K.G. Balakrishnan, Limitation Act, 1963, Limitation Act, 1963 with Section 5, P. Sathasivam, Railway Law, Railway Law with Rule 303, Railway Recruitment Board (RRB)

Date of the Judgment: 21st October 2008 Judges: K.G. Balakrishnan, P. Sathasivam, J.M. Panchal Can seniority be claimed retroactively by railway employees appointed years after the initial selection process due to alleged malpractices? The Supreme Court addressed this issue in a set of appeals concerning the selection of Non-Technical Popular Clerical Category employees in the […]

Supreme Court settles Railway Employee Seniority Dispute in Non-Technical Clerical Category Selection (21st October 2008) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies medical college admission rules in Maharashtra: State of Maharashtra & Ors. vs. Sneha Satyanarayan Agrawal & Ors. (2008)

/ Education Law, Education Law with Rule 1.4, Judges, K.G. Balakrishnan, Medical Admissions, P. Sathasivam

Introduction Date of the Judgment: October 1, 2008 Citation: Where available, provide the case citation in the Indian Supreme Court (INSC) format. Judges: K.G. Balakrishnan, CJI, P. Sathasivam, J. When a student seeks admission to a medical college, how should the rules regarding state and regional quotas be applied? The Supreme Court of India addressed

Supreme Court clarifies medical college admission rules in Maharashtra: State of Maharashtra & Ors. vs. Sneha Satyanarayan Agrawal & Ors. (2008) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Amended Promotion Rules for UP Higher Judicial Service: V.K. Srivastava vs. Govt. of U.P. (2008)

/ Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 233, J.M. Panchal, Judges, K.G. Balakrishnan, Merit-cum-Seniority, P. Sathasivam, Promotion Rules, Retrospective Application, Service Law

Introduction Date of the Judgment: 4th September 2008 The Supreme Court of India, in V.K. Srivastava & Ors. vs. Govt. of U.P. & Anr., addressed a critical question regarding the retrospective application of amended service rules concerning promotions within the Uttar Pradesh Higher Judicial Service. This case highlights the conflict between established seniority rights and

Supreme Court Upholds Amended Promotion Rules for UP Higher Judicial Service: V.K. Srivastava vs. Govt. of U.P. (2008) Read Post »

Supreme Court Review: Re-examining the Appointment of Teachers in Aided Institutions: State of West Bengal vs. Brahmo Samaj Education Society (31st July 2008)

/ Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 19(1)(6), Constitutional Law with Article 19(1)(g), Education Law, Fundamental Rights, J.M. Panchal, Judges, K.G. Balakrishnan, P. Sathasivam, West Bengal College Service Commission Act, 1978

Introduction Date of the Judgment: 31st July 2008 The Supreme Court of India decided to review its earlier judgment in Brahmo Samaj Education Society & Ors. Vs. State of West Bengal & Ors., (2004) 6 SCC 224. The central question revolved around the extent of autonomy that aided minority institutions have in appointing teachers, particularly

Supreme Court Review: Re-examining the Appointment of Teachers in Aided Institutions: State of West Bengal vs. Brahmo Samaj Education Society (31st July 2008) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Murder Conviction Based on Eyewitness Testimony: Ram Kishan vs. State of Uttar Pradesh (2004)

/ Code of Criminal Procedure, Code of Criminal Procedure with Section 161, Dr. AR. Lakshmanan, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 149, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 302, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 323, Judges, K.G. Balakrishnan

Introduction Date of the Judgment: 10/09/2004 Judges: K.G. Balakrishnan and Dr. AR. Lakshmanan Can eyewitness testimony alone be sufficient to uphold a murder conviction, even when there are challenges to the medical evidence? The Supreme Court of India addressed this critical question in the case of Ram Kishan & Ors. vs. State of Uttar Pradesh.

Supreme Court Upholds Murder Conviction Based on Eyewitness Testimony: Ram Kishan vs. State of Uttar Pradesh (2004) Read Post »

Scroll to Top