Regulatory Law Archives

Supreme Court Upholds SEBI’s Regulatory Authority in Adani Group Case (2024)

January 3, 2024 / Judicial Review, Regulatory Law, SEBI (Listing Obligations and Disclosure Requirements) Regulations, 2015, SEBI Act, 1992, SEBI's Regulatory Authority, Securities Contracts (Regulation) Act, 1956, Securities Law

Supreme Court Upholds SEBI’s Regulatory Authority in Adani Group Case (2024) LEGAL ISSUE: The scope of judicial review over the Securities and Exchange Board of India’s (SEBI) regulatory domain and the validity of SEBI’s regulations. CASE TYPE: Securities Law, Regulatory Law Case Name: Vishal Tiwari vs. Union of India & Ors. [Judgment Date]: 3 January […]

Supreme Court Upholds SEBI’s Regulatory Authority in Adani Group Case (2024) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Pet-Coke Allocation Based on Initial Capacity: Sanvira Industries vs. Rain CII Carbon (2023)

July 3, 2023 / Environmental Law, Environmental Law with M.C. Mehta case, Foreign Trade Policy, Pollution Control, Regulatory Law, Regulatory Law with DGFT Notifications

Supreme Court Upholds Pet-Coke Allocation Based on Initial Capacity: Sanvira Industries vs. Rain CII Carbon (2023) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the allocation of imported raw pet-coke (RPC) should be based on the production capacity of a company at the time of the Supreme Court’s initial order or on a later enhanced capacity. CASE TYPE: Environmental Law,

Supreme Court Upholds Pet-Coke Allocation Based on Initial Capacity: Sanvira Industries vs. Rain CII Carbon (2023) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Pet-Coke Allocation Based on Original Capacity: Sanvira Industries vs. Rain CII Carbon (2023)

July 3, 2023 / Environmental Law, Environmental Law with M.C. Mehta case, Import Policy, Import/Export Law, Import/Export Law with DGFT Notification, Pollution Control, Regulatory Law, Regulatory Law with Consent to Operate, Resource Allocation

Supreme Court Upholds Pet-Coke Allocation Based on Original Capacity: Sanvira Industries vs. Rain CII Carbon (2023) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the allocation of imported raw pet-coke (RPC) should be based on the production capacity of a company at the time of the Supreme Court’s initial order, or on a later claimed enhanced capacity. CASE TYPE: Environmental

Supreme Court Upholds Pet-Coke Allocation Based on Original Capacity: Sanvira Industries vs. Rain CII Carbon (2023) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds RBI’s Restrictions on Merchanting Trade of Banned Goods: Akshay N Patel vs. Reserve Bank of India (2021)

December 6, 2021 / B.V. Nagarathna, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 14, Constitutional Law with Article 19(1)(g), Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999, Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999 with Section 10(4), Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999 with Section 11(1), Foreign Trade Policy, Fundamental Rights, Judges, Regulatory Law, Reserve Bank of India, Vikram Nath

Supreme Court Upholds RBI’s Restrictions on Merchanting Trade of Banned Goods: Akshay N Patel vs. Reserve Bank of India (2021) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) can restrict merchanting trade transactions (MTT) for goods whose import or export is banned under India’s Foreign Trade Policy (FTP). CASE TYPE: Constitutional Law, Regulatory Law,

Supreme Court Upholds RBI’s Restrictions on Merchanting Trade of Banned Goods: Akshay N Patel vs. Reserve Bank of India (2021) Read Post »

Supreme Court Clarifies Use of ‘Architect’ Title Under Architects Act: Council of Architecture vs. Mukesh Goyal (2020)

March 17, 2020 / Ajay Rastogi, Architects Act, 1972, Architects Act, 1972 with Section 37, Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, Judges, Registration of Architects, Regulatory Bodies, Regulatory Law, Service Regulations

Supreme Court Clarifies Use of ‘Architect’ Title Under Architects Act: Council of Architecture vs. Mukesh Goyal (2020) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether Section 37 of the Architects Act, 1972, prohibits individuals not registered with the Council of Architecture from practicing architecture or merely restricts the use of the title “Architect”. CASE TYPE: Regulatory/Service Law Case Name: Council

Supreme Court Clarifies Use of ‘Architect’ Title Under Architects Act: Council of Architecture vs. Mukesh Goyal (2020) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Differential Pricing for Coal: S.K.J. Coke Industries vs. Coal India Ltd. (7 February 2020)

February 7, 2020 / Aniruddha Bose, Breach of contract, Colliery Control Order, 1945, Contract Act, Contract Act with Specific Performance, Deepak Gupta, Essential Commodities Act, 1955, Judges, Regulatory Law

Supreme Court Upholds Differential Pricing for Coal: S.K.J. Coke Industries vs. Coal India Ltd. (2020) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a coal consumer is entitled to preferential “linked price” or must pay the higher “Liberalised Sales Scheme” (LSS) price for coal. CASE TYPE: Contract Law, Regulatory Law Case Name: M/s. S.K.J. Coke Industries Ltd.& Anr. vs. Coal

Supreme Court Upholds Differential Pricing for Coal: S.K.J. Coke Industries vs. Coal India Ltd. (7 February 2020) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds APERC’s Power to Determine Wheeling and Grid Support Charges: Transmission Corporation of Andhra Pradesh Limited vs. M/S Rain Calcining Limited & Others (29 November 2019)

November 29, 2019 / Andhra Pradesh Electricity Reforms Act, 1998, Arun Mishra, B.R. Gavai, Electricity Act, 2003, Electricity Law, Judges, M.R. Shah, Regulatory Law, Regulatory Powers, Tariff Determination

Supreme Court Upholds APERC’s Power to Determine Wheeling and Grid Support Charges: Transmission Corporation of Andhra Pradesh Limited vs. M/S Rain Calcining Limited & Others (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the Andhra Pradesh Electricity Regulatory Commission (APERC) has the authority to determine wheeling charges and grid support charges under the Andhra Pradesh Electricity Reforms Act, 1998.

Supreme Court Upholds Tariff Calculation Methodology under Electricity Act: Damodar Valley Corporation vs. Central Electricity Regulatory Commission (2018)

December 3, 2018 / Damodar Valley Corporation Act, 1948, Damodar Valley Corporation Act, 1948 with Section 14, Damodar Valley Corporation Act, 1948 with Section 38, Electricity Act, 2003, Judges, K.M. Joseph, Ranjan Gogoi, Regulatory Law, Sanjay Kishan Kaul, Tariff Regulations

Supreme Court Upholds Tariff Calculation Methodology under Electricity Act: Damodar Valley Corporation vs. Central Electricity Regulatory Commission (2018) Date of the Judgment: December 3, 2018 Citation: 2018 INSC 1053 Judges: Ranjan Gogoi, CJI, Sanjay Kishan Kaul, J., K.M. Joseph, J. Can a power generating company claim interest on its entire capital, in addition to returns

Supreme Court Upholds Tariff Calculation Methodology under Electricity Act: Damodar Valley Corporation vs. Central Electricity Regulatory Commission (2018) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Surcharge on Arc Furnace Industries for Not Shifting to 66 KV Supply: Waryam Steel Castings vs. Punjab State Power Corporation (2017)

June 19, 2017 / Electricity Act, 2003, Electricity Act, 2003 with Section 61, Electricity Act, 2003 with Section 62, Judges, Navin Sinha, Ranjan Gogoi, Regulatory Law, Regulatory Power, Statutory Authority, Tariff Determination

Can a regulatory body impose a surcharge on industries for not complying with voltage supply norms? The Supreme Court of India addressed this question in a case involving arc furnace industries in Punjab. This case clarifies the extent of regulatory power in enforcing electricity supply standards and the validity of surcharges imposed for non-compliance. The

Supreme Court Upholds Surcharge on Arc Furnace Industries for Not Shifting to 66 KV Supply: Waryam Steel Castings vs. Punjab State Power Corporation (2017) Read Post »