Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
In Kalyaneshwari vs Union of India, the court cited the misuse of public-interest litigation in business conflicts. A writ petition was filed in the Gujarat High Court seeking the closure of asbestos units, stating that the material was harmful to humans. The high court dismissed the petition, stating that it was filed at the behest of rival ...
Following the enactment of the One Hundred and Third Amendment Act of 2019, several writ petitions were filed, seeking to declare the amendment unconstitutional and in violation of the basic structure concept. By adding Articles 15(6) and 16(6) to the Indian Constitution, the state acquired the authority to impose specific restrictions on ...
On 27 April 2016, five people filed a new writ petition in the Supreme Court challenging the constitutionality of Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code.The petitioners claimed that the issues which they raised in their petition were varied and diverse from those raised in the pending curative petition in the 2013 Koushal v.
A writ was a summons from the Crown to the parties to the action, with on its back the substance of the action set out, together with a 'prayer' requesting a remedy from the court (for example, damages). In 1980, the need for writs to be written in the name of the Crown was ended. From that time, a writ simply required the parties to appear. [16]
(Writ Petition (Civil) 135 of 1970), also known as the Kesavananda Bharati judgement, was a landmark decision of the Supreme Court of India that outlined the basic structure doctrine of the Indian Constitution. [2] The case is also known as the Fundamental Rights Case.
Writ Petition (Civil) No 494 of 2012; (2017) 10 SCC 1; AIR 2017 SC 4161 ... & Anr. vs. Union of India & Ors. ... as the curative petition (challenging Section 377) is ...
Mohammad Salimullah v. Union of India (Writ Petition (Civil) 793 of 2017), is a petition challenging the deportation of Rohingya Muslims who had taken refuge in India to escape persecution in Myanmar. The court however, in an interim order rejected any relief and allowed their deportation subject to proper procedure being followed. [1] [2]
T. S. R. Subramanian & Ors. versus Union of India and Ors., was a landmark decision of the Supreme Court of India in which the Court ruled that civil servants were not bound to follow oral directives. The case began with a public interest civil writ petition filed before the Supreme Court of India and was decided in October 2013. [1] [2] [3]