M.R. Shah

Supreme Court Rules Work-Charged Service Counts Towards Pension in Uttar Pradesh

/ Arun Mishra, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 14, Judges, M.R. Shah, Pension Benefits, S. Abdul Nazeer, Service Law, Service Law with Regulation 370 of the Uttar Pradesh Civil Services Regulations, Service Law with Rule 3(8) of the U.P. Retirement Benefit Rules, 1961

Supreme Court Rules Work-Charged Service Counts Towards Pension LEGAL ISSUE: Whether work-charged service should be counted as qualifying service for pension benefits. CASE TYPE: Service Law Case Name: Prem Singh vs. State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors. [Judgment Date]: 2nd September 2019 Date of the Judgment: 2nd September 2019 Citation: (2019) INSC 851 Judges: Arun […]

Supreme Court Rules Work-Charged Service Counts Towards Pension in Uttar Pradesh Read Post »

Supreme Court Orders CBI Probe in Custodial Death Case: Union of India vs. Junu Gayary (26 July 2019)

/ A.S. Bopanna, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 142, Constitutional Law with Article 21, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 302, Judges, M.R. Shah

Supreme Court Orders CBI Probe in Custodial Death Case: Union of India vs. Junu Gayary (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a CBI investigation should be ordered in a case of alleged custodial death following an inquiry by the District & Sessions Judge. CASE TYPE: Criminal Case Name: Union of India and others vs. Junu Gayary Judgment

Supreme Court Orders CBI Probe in Custodial Death Case: Union of India vs. Junu Gayary (26 July 2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Land Acquisition: Haryana vs. Sunder Lal (2019)

/ Arun Mishra, Judges, Land Acquisition Act, 1894, Land Acquisition Act, 1894 with Section 4, M.R. Shah, Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 with Section 24(2), Taking Possession

Supreme Court Upholds Land Acquisition: Haryana vs. Sunder Lal (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether possession of land was legally taken by the State after the award was passed in land acquisition proceedings. CASE TYPE: Land Acquisition Case Name: State of Haryana & Ors. vs. Sunder Lal [Judgment Date]: July 22, 2019 Date of the Judgment: July

Supreme Court Upholds Land Acquisition: Haryana vs. Sunder Lal (2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Plaintiff’s Right to Choose Parties in Specific Performance Suit: Gurmit Singh Bhatia vs. Kiran Kant Robinson (2019)

/ Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 with Order 1 Rule 10, Contract Law, D.Y. Chandrachud, Impleadment of Parties, Judges, M.R. Shah, Specific Performance

Supreme Court Upholds Plaintiff’s Right to Choose Parties in Specific Performance Suit Date of the Judgment: July 17, 2019 Citation: Civil Appeal Nos. 5522-5523 of 2019 Judges: Dr. D.Y. Chandrachud, J., M.R. Shah, J. Can a third party, who purchased a property during the pendency of a suit for specific performance, be added as a

Supreme Court Upholds Plaintiff’s Right to Choose Parties in Specific Performance Suit: Gurmit Singh Bhatia vs. Kiran Kant Robinson (2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Land Ceiling Act: Customary Divorce Not Proven in Dungaji Case (2019)

/ A.S. Bopanna, Code of Civil Procedure, Code of Civil Procedure with Section 100, Customary Divorce, Judges, Jurisdiction of Civil Courts, Land Ceiling, M.R. Shah, Madhya Pradesh Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings Act, 1960, Madhya Pradesh Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings Act, 1960 with Section 46, Second Appeal

Supreme Court Upholds Land Ceiling Act: Customary Divorce Not Proven in Dungaji Case (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a customary divorce was valid, and if so, whether land owned by the divorced wife should be included in the husband’s land holdings under the Madhya Pradesh Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings Act, 1960. CASE TYPE: Land Ceiling/Civil Case

Supreme Court Upholds Land Ceiling Act: Customary Divorce Not Proven in Dungaji Case (2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court Clarifies Eligibility for Teacher Eligibility Test (TET) for Candidates Pursuing Teacher Training Courses: Omkar Singh vs. State of Uttar Pradesh (2019)

/ Arun Mishra, Education Law, Judges, M.R. Shah, National Council for Teacher Education (NCTE), Right to Education Act, 2009, Right to Education Act, 2009 with Section 23, S. Abdul Nazeer, Teacher Eligibility Test (TET), Teacher Training Course (TTC), Uttar Pradesh Basic Education Act, 1972, Uttar Pradesh Basic Education Act, 1972 with Section 19, Uttar Pradesh Basic Education Act, 1972 with Section 2(1)(b)

Supreme Court Clarifies Eligibility for Teacher Eligibility Test (TET) for Candidates Pursuing Teacher Training Courses: Omkar Singh vs. State of Uttar Pradesh (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether candidates pursuing a Teacher Training Course (TTC) are eligible to appear for the Teacher Eligibility Test (TET). CASE TYPE: Education Law Case Name: Omkar Singh & Ors. vs. State

Supreme Court Clarifies Eligibility for Teacher Eligibility Test (TET) for Candidates Pursuing Teacher Training Courses: Omkar Singh vs. State of Uttar Pradesh (2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies consumer status under the Consumer Protection Act in REP license claims: The Secretary, Ministry of Commerce & Ors. vs. M/s Vinod and Company (2019)

/ Consumer, Consumer Protection Act, 1986, Consumer Protection Act, 1986 with Section 2(1)(d), Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, Judges, M.R. Shah, Service

Supreme Court clarifies consumer status under the Consumer Protection Act in REP license claims (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a person making a claim under an REP license is a consumer under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. CASE TYPE: Consumer Law Case Name: The Secretary, Ministry of Commerce & Ors. vs. M/s Vinod and Company [Judgment

Supreme Court clarifies consumer status under the Consumer Protection Act in REP license claims: The Secretary, Ministry of Commerce & Ors. vs. M/s Vinod and Company (2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court Invalidates Differential Pension Based on Cut-off Date: All Manipur Pensioners Association vs. State of Manipur (2019)

/ A.S. Bopanna, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 14, Fundamental Rights, Judges, M.R. Shah, Pension Law, Service Law

Supreme Court Invalidates Differential Pension Based on Cut-off Date: All Manipur Pensioners Association vs. State of Manipur (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a cut-off date can be used to create two classes of pensioners for differential pension benefits, violating Article 14 of the Constitution of India. CASE TYPE: Service Law/Pension Law Case Name: All Manipur Pensioners

Supreme Court Invalidates Differential Pension Based on Cut-off Date: All Manipur Pensioners Association vs. State of Manipur (2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Dismissal for Cowardice but Sets Aside Imprisonment in Army Act Case: Dalbir Singh vs. Union of India (2019) INSC 650 (02 July 2019)

/ A.S. Bopanna, Army Act, 1950, Army Act, 1950 with Section 34(c), Court Martial, Disciplinary Proceedings, Judges, M.R. Shah, Military Law

Supreme Court Upholds Dismissal for Cowardice but Sets Aside Imprisonment in Army Act Case Date of the Judgment: 02 July 2019 Citation: (2019) INSC 650 Judges: M.R. Shah, J. and A.S. Bopanna, J. Can a soldier be dismissed for not retaliating against militants and abandoning his post during an attack? The Supreme Court of India

Supreme Court Upholds Dismissal for Cowardice but Sets Aside Imprisonment in Army Act Case: Dalbir Singh vs. Union of India (2019) INSC 650 (02 July 2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies inheritance rights of adopted children in Christian families: Pharez John Abraham vs. Arul Jothi Sivasubramaniam (2019)

/ Civil Procedure Code, Civil Procedure Code with Section 96, Indian Succession Act, Intestate Succession, Judges, L. Nageswara Rao, M.R. Shah

Supreme Court clarifies inheritance rights of adopted children in Christian families: Pharez John Abraham vs. Arul Jothi Sivasubramaniam (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether adopted children in a Christian family have inheritance rights similar to biological children. CASE TYPE: Civil Law – Property Partition Case Name: Pharez John Abraham (Dead) By Lrs. vs Arul Jothi Sivasubramaniam K.

Supreme Court clarifies inheritance rights of adopted children in Christian families: Pharez John Abraham vs. Arul Jothi Sivasubramaniam (2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court Enhances Compensation for Accident Victim with 100% Disability: Parminder Singh vs. New India Assurance Co. Ltd. (2019)

/ Indu Malhotra, Insurance Law, Judges, M.R. Shah, Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 with Section 166, Pay and Recover

Supreme Court Enhances Compensation for Accident Victim with 100% Disability: Parminder Singh vs. New India Assurance Co. Ltd. (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Determining adequate compensation for a motor accident victim with permanent disability. CASE TYPE: Motor Accident Compensation Case Name: Parminder Singh vs. New India Assurance Co. Ltd. & Ors. [Judgment Date]: July 1, 2019 Date

Supreme Court Enhances Compensation for Accident Victim with 100% Disability: Parminder Singh vs. New India Assurance Co. Ltd. (2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Assam Rifles Court’s Jurisdiction in Corruption Cases: Union of India vs. Ranjit Kumar Saha (2019)

/ Assam Rifles Act, 2006, Assam Rifles Act, 2006 with Section 55, Assam Rifles Act, 2006 with Section 56, Civil Offence, Judges, L. Nageswara Rao, M.R. Shah, Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 with Section 25, Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 with Section 4

Supreme Court Upholds Assam Rifles Court’s Jurisdiction in Corruption Cases: Union of India vs. Ranjit Kumar Saha (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the General Assam Rifles Court (GARC) has the jurisdiction to try offenses under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (PC Act) against members of the Assam Rifles. CASE TYPE: Service Law, Criminal Law, Prevention

Supreme Court Upholds Assam Rifles Court’s Jurisdiction in Corruption Cases: Union of India vs. Ranjit Kumar Saha (2019) Read Post »

Scroll to Top