Category: Constitution

Proposal to convert the subject land from leasehold to freehold as per the policy- policy in question cannot be applied in relation to the subject land. Therefore, we find no necessity to delve further into the other issues raised on behalf of the respondent No. 2 that it has no policy to grant freehold rights in its allotments. Suffice it would be to say for the present purpose that the claim of the petitioner for freehold rights in relation to the subject land cannot be accepted.

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH BHASIN INFOTECH AND INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LTD. — Appellant Vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : Dinesh Maheshwari and J.K.…

Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972 Section 40 – Declaration of Wild Life Stock Rules, 2003. – High Court has rightly observed that the application submitted by the appellant herein which was made beyond the period prescribed under Rule 4(2) was liable to be rejected and was rightly rejected by the appropriate authority/Chief Wild Life Warden.

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH VISHALAKSHI AMMA — Appellant Vs. STATE OF KERALA AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : M.R. Shah and Manoj Misra, JJ. ) Civil Appeal…

Constitution of India – Article 226(2) – Even if a small part of the cause of action arises within the territorial jurisdiction of a high court, the same by itself could not have been a determinative factor compelling the High Court to keep the writ petitions alive against the appellant to decide the matter qua the impugned notification, on merit.

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH THE STATE OF GOA — Appellant Vs. SUMMIT ONLINE TRADE SOLUTIONS (P) LTD AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : S. Ravindra Bhat and…

HELD misused/used the solvency certificate dated 07.12.2017 for his own benefit illegally and submitted the same along with his bid and on the basis of the said solvency certificate he got the lease bid. Under the circumstances, the bid by using the solvency certificate dated 07.12.2017 by respondent no.1 was non-est and void ab initio and therefore, the lease in his favour on the basis of such solvency certificate was rightly cancelled by the Collector.

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH DEBIDUTTA MOHANTY — Appellant Vs. RANJAN KUMAR PATTNAIK AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : M. R. Shah and B.V. Nagarathna, JJ. ) Civil…

A person having bachelor’s degree from a recognized University and who is a person of ability, integrity and standing, and having special knowledge and professional experience of not less than 10 years in consumer affairs, law, public affairs, administration, economics, commerce, industry, finance, management, engineering, technology, public health or medicine, shall be treated as qualified for appointment of President and Members of the State Commission

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH THE SECRETARY MINISTRY OF CONSUMER AFFAIRS — Appellant Vs. DR. MAHINDRA BHASKAR LIMAYE AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : M. R. Shah and…

Adani Group-Hindenburg Research – In order to protect Indian investors against volatility of the kind which has been witnessed in the recent past – It is appropriate to constitute an Expert Committee for the assessment of the extant regulatory framework and for making recommendations to strengthen it – This Court hereby constitute a committee consisting of the members.

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH VISHAL TIWARI — Appellant Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Dr. Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud, CJI, Pamidighantam Sri. Narasimha and…

Appointment to the posts of Chief Election Commissioner and the Election Commissioners are concerned, the same shall be done by the President of India on the basis of the advice tendered by a Committee consisting of the Prime Minister of India, the Leader of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha and, in case, there is no such Leader, the Leader of the largest Party in the Opposition in the Lok Sabha having the largest numerical strength, and the Chief Justice of India.

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH ANOOP BARANWAL — Appellant Vs. UNION OF INDIA — Respondent ( Before : K.M. Joseph, Aniruddha Bose, Hrishikesh Roy, C.T. Ravikumar and Ajay Rastogi,…

“Renaming Commission” – For achieving the sublime goals which are enshrined in Part IV – that is the Directive Principles, but bearing in mind the fundamental rights also guaranteed in Part III of the Constitution, which have been described as the two wheels of the chariot of the State, both of which are indispensable, for the smooth progress of the nation, actions must be taken which bond all sections of the society together – Writ petition is dismissed.

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH ASHWINI KUMAR UPADHYAY — Appellant Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : K.M. Joseph and B.V. Nagarathna, JJ. ) Writ…

You missed