Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Indian Kanoon is an Indian law search engine. [ 1 ] [ 2 ] It was launched on 4 January 2008. The search engine has been meshed with the highest courts and tribunals of India to provide up-to-date judgements.
The report was widely criticised by members of the Bar. The Delhi High Court Bar Association condemned it as inaccurate [ 8 ] and thirty-four senior advocates wrote a letter to the Times of India calling on the newspaper to issue an apology to Justice Mittal for inaccuracies in their report, and attesting to her work at the Delhi High Court in ...
The 2G spectrum case was a political controversy in which politicians and private officials of the United Progressive Alliance (UPA) coalition government India were allegedly involved in [1] selling or allotting 122 2G spectrum licenses on conditions that provided an advantage to specific telecom operators.
The wooden bar in front of the magistrate's bench in an 18th-century outdoor courtroom in Belgium. The origin of the term bar is from the barring furniture dividing a medieval European courtroom, which defined the areas restricted to lawyers and court personnel from which the general public was excluded.
The case was heard by the full 17-member bench, of which a plurality of 8 accepted the basic structure doctrine as a basis for limiting the ability of the Parliament of Pakistan to amend the Constitution, 4 rejected the premise of such limitations, describing the basic structure doctrine as a "vehicle for judicial aggrandisement of power", and ...
Union of India judgment laid down the limits of the state's powers: it upheld the ceiling of 50 per cent quotas, emphasized the concept of "social backwardness", and prescribed 11 indicators to ascertain backwardness. The nine-Judge Bench judgement also established the concept of qualitative exclusion, such as "creamy layer".
Rule 15(1) Contingency plan: As of 20 May 2024, only five states are compliant with the Rules as amended to date - Tamil Nadu, Rajasthan, Karnataka, Haryana, and Bihar. Though 11 states (Bihar, Chhattisgarh, Goa, Gujarat, Haryana, Himachal Pradesh, Karnataka , Madhya Pradesh, Odisha, Punjab, and Tamil Nadu ) were reported to have prepared the ...
The Supreme Court bench of nine members ruled that taxation powers on minerals and ores is exclusive domain of state governments. However, Parliament can impose upper bar to limit the taxation by states. MMDR Act is nothing to do with tax collection by the Union. It also ruled that royalty, which is in the domain of states, is not a tax . [20]