Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Puttaswamy v. Union of India; Court: Supreme Court of India: Full case name: Justice K. S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) and Anr. vs Union Of India And Ors. Decided: August 24, 2017 () Citation: Writ Petition (Civil) No 494 of 2012; (2017) 10 SCC 1; AIR 2017 SC 4161: Case history; Related actions: decriminalization of homosexuality; decriminalization of ...
Satyam Infoway Ltd. v. Sifynet Solutions Pvt. Ltd. was the first case to be decided by the Supreme Court of India on the issue of domain name protection, and dealt with two businesses employing variations on the same mark ("Sify") in their respective domain names.
S.P. Gupta v. Union of India [37] Established the Collegium system of the Indian Judicial System. 1993 Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record Association v. Union of India [38] Struck down the 99th Amendment of the Constitution of India and the proposal of the National Judicial Appointments Commission. 1998 In re Special reference 1 [39]
S. R. Bommai v. Union of India; Sarla Mudgal, & others. v. Union of India; Satyam Infoway Ltd. v. Sifynet Solutions Pvt. Ltd. Mohd. Ahmed Khan v. Shah Bano Begum; Shreya Singhal v. Union of India; Sonipat-Kharkhoda IMT land case; Stanislaus v. State of Madhya Pradesh; State of Madras v. Champakam Dorairajan; Supriyo v. Union of India; Suresh ...
The court further held that the reservation for the EWS is a legitimate means to achieve the goal of providing equal opportunities and social justice to all sections of society. It recognized that economic inequality and poverty can also be a form of social disadvantage and that the reservation for the EWS is a step towards addressing this ...
Mohini Jain v. State of Karnataka, a 1992 Supreme Court of India case, occurred when the Government of Karnataka issued a notification that permitted the private medical colleges in the State of Karnataka to charge exorbitant tuition fees from the students admitted other than the "Government seat quota". Miss Mohini Jain, a medical aspirant ...
(case number: Writ Petition (Civil) 356 of 1977; case citation: AIR 1980 SC 1789) [1] is a landmark decision of the Supreme Court of India [2] that applied and evolved the basic structure doctrine of the Constitution of India. [3] In the Minerva Mills case, the Supreme Court provided key clarifications on the interpretation of the basic ...
The decision had a significant influence on Indian constitutional law and has been described as the moment when the Supreme Court of India rejected "three decades of formalist interpretation, and inaugurated a new path where Courts would expand the rights of individuals against the State, instead of limiting or contracting them."