Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Case Ruling Notes State of Madras v. Champakam Dorairajan AIR 1951 SC 226 [2] [3] [4] Court ruled that caste-bass per Communal Award violate Article 15(1) of the constitution. Led to the introduction of the First Amendment of the constitution, which invalidated the judgment. M. R. Balaji v. State of Mysore AIR 1963 SC 649 [5]
Major Sandeep Unnikrishnan, AC (15 March 1977 – 28 November 2008) was an Indian Army officer, who was serving in the 51 Special Action Group of the National Security Guard on deputation. He was killed in action during the 2008 Mumbai attacks [ 2 ] and was posthumously awarded the Ashoka Chakra , India's highest peacetime gallantry award, on ...
A two-member bench consisting Justice Kuldip Singh and Justice R. M. Sahai gave the judgment of the case on 30 July 1992 (1992 AIR 1858). [2] For the first time in the post independent India, right to education of the Indian citizens and the State obligation to secure the right came under scrutiny at the premises of the apex court .
Anti-Hindi agitations of Tamil Nadu Date 11 August 1937 – present (87 years, 6 months) Location * Present-day Tamil Nadu, India * Tamil Nadu diaspora Caused by Various attempts by the Government of India (1947–present) and the Government of Madras (during 1937–65) to promote Hindi language in the State Goals To prevent the imposition of Hindi in the State Methods Non-violent ...
Supriyo a.k.a Supriya Chakraborty & Abhay Dang v. Union of India thr. Its Secretary, Ministry of Law and Justice & other connected cases (2023) are a collection of landmark cases of the Supreme Court of India, which were filed to consider whether to extend right to marry and establish a family to sexual and gender minority individuals in India. [4]
By adding Articles 15(6) and 16(6) to the Indian Constitution, the state acquired the authority to impose specific restrictions on reservations for economically weaker sections, with a maximum of 10%. The Superem court compiled all the writ under the case Janhit Abhiyan Vs Union of India.
This was challenged by the Golak Nath family in the courts and the case was referred to the Supreme Court in 1965. The family filed a petition under Article 32 challenging the 1953 Punjab Act on the ground that it denied them their constitutional rights to acquire and hold property and practice any profession (Articles 19(1)(f) and 19(1)(g ...
Mohd. Ahmad Khan v. Shah Bano Begum [1985], [1] commonly referred to as the Shah Bano case, was a controversial maintenance lawsuit in India, in which the Supreme Court delivered a judgment favouring maintenance given to an aggrieved divorced Muslim woman.