Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The Maharaj Libel Case was an 1862 trial in the HM Queen Victoria's Supreme Court of Bombay, in a post Indian Rebellion of 1857 era British India. The case was initiated by Jadunath Brajratanjee Maharaj against Nanabhai Rustomji Ranina and Karsandas Mulji. It stemmed from an editorial article they had published, which accused the Vallabhacharya ...
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.
The Supreme Court reviewed the decision in Golaknath v. State of Punjab, and considered the validity of the article 24th, 25th, 26th and 29th amendments. The case was heard by the largest ever Constitution Bench of 13 Judges. The bench gave eleven separate judgments, which agreed in some points and differed on others. [14]
Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India, AIR 1978 SC 597, was a landmark decision of the Supreme Court of India in which the Court significantly expanded the interpretation of Article 21 of the Constitution of India. It overruled A. K. Gopalan v.
Initially, the Constitution of India provided for a Supreme Court with a chief justice and 7 judges. In the early years, a full bench of the Supreme Court sat together to hear the cases presented before them. As the work of the Court increased and cases began to accumulate, Parliament increased the number of judges (including the chief justice ...
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.
Union Of India by Daniel Latifi in 2001, who was the lawyer of Shah Bano in the Shah Bano case. [2] The Supreme Court tried to maintain a balancing act, attempting to uphold Muslim women's rights without addressing the constitutionality of gender and religious discrimination in personal law. Court reiterated the validity of the Shah Bano judgment.
(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 ...