Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Supreme Courts Reports is the official publication of the reportable decisions of the Supreme Court of India. It is being published monthly since the inception of the Supreme Court of India in 1950. It is published under the authority of the Supreme Court of India by the Controller of Publications, Government of India, Delhi. [1] [2]
Landmark court decisions in India substantially change the interpretation of existing law. Such a landmark decision may settle the law in more than one way. In present-day common law legal systems it may do so by: [1] [2] Establishing a significant new legal principle or concept;
The G.O had provided caste-based reservation in government jobs and college seats. The Supreme Court's verdict held that providing such reservations violated Article 29 (2) of the Indian Constitution. [2] Here, the court held that Directive Principles of State Policy must conform to and run as subsidiary to the Chapter of Fundamental Rights.
I. R. Coelho (deceased) by LRS. v. State of Tamil Nadu 2007 (2) SCC 1: 2007 AIR(SC) 861: Supreme court advised Tamil Nadu to follow 50% reservation limit Tamil Nadu Reservations were put under the 9th Schedule of the constitution, which had already been upheld by the court. [citation needed] Unni Krishnan, J.P. & Others. v.
Despite attempting to avoid appearing personally before the court, citing security concerns, the Supreme Court ordered Jayalalithaa to do so. [11] Her deposition lasted two days in October 2011. [5] In 2012, Karnataka Advocate General B.V.Acharya, who had spent seven years building the case, resigned as the Special Public Prosecutor. He told ...
However, some states denied the existence of the creamy layer, and a report commissioned by the supreme court was implemented. The case was pressed again in 1999 and, in 2006, the supreme court reaffirmed the creamy layer exclusion and extended it to SCs and STs. [1] This judgement also overruled General Manager Southern Railway v.
Supreme Court of India, in its judgement dated 10 July 2013 while disposing the Lily Thomas v. Union of India case (along with Lok Prahari v. Union of India), [1] ruled that any Member of Parliament (MP), Member of the Legislative Assembly (MLA) or Member of the Legislative Council (MLC) who is convicted of a crime and given a minimum of two years' imprisonment, loses membership of the House ...
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]