Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News
Supreme Court noted that petitioner assails the impugned order on ground that the High Court failed to appreciate that the post of PE Teacher stands on a different footing than a teacher in other subjects, as there is no separate category of “Pass Graduate or Hons. Graduate” and there is only one examination for the ‘Pass Graduate’ category for the post of PE Teacher.
The Court upheld the appointment of ten aldermen to the MCD by the Lieutenant Governor without consultation of the State Cabinet.
by Sidharth Sethi† and Shreya Sircar††
This report covers the Supreme Court’s Never Reported Judgment dating back to the year 1953 on determining whether sale deed is a sham.
Supreme Court requested the Chief Justice of the Delhi High Court to assign the hearing of the petition under Section 34 to a Judge other than the Judge who heard and passed the impugned order.
Read July’s share of criminal law discussions at the Supreme Court and various High Courts
“The criteria for exclusion of the creamy layer from the SCs and STs for the purpose of affirmative action could be different from the criteria as applicable to the Other Backward Classes.”
“Article 341 does not create an integrated homogenous class. Sub-classification within the Scheduled Castes does not violate Article 341(2) because the castes are not per se included in or excluded from the List.”
“Legal reform through legislative correction improves the legal system and it would require assessment of the working of the law, its accessibility, utility and abuse as well. Executive branch has a constitutional duty to ensure that the purpose and object of a statute is accomplished while implementing it, along with duty to closely monitor the working of a statute and must have a continuous and a real time assessment of the impact that the statute is having.”
In E.V. Chinnaiah v. State of A.P., (2005) 1 SCC 394, the Supreme Court five Judge Bench held that Scheduled Castes form homogenous classes and there cannot be any sub-division, and that such sub-classification of SC/STs is contrary to Article 341 of the Constitution.
Supreme Court has referred the case to the Supreme Court Mediation Centre to explore the possibility of any out-of-court settlement.
Supreme Court declared that the judgment would have a prospective effect, thus the Bar Councils are not required to refund the enrolment fees collected more than the statutory amount so far.
Supreme Court said that authorizing the Central Government to lay down the terms of mining leases and grant approval to concessions, the MMDR Act seeks to ensure that there is uniformity in the terms for working of mines and extraction of minerals.
“The payments made to the Government cannot be deemed to be a tax merely because the statute provides for their recovery as arrears”.
The imposition of such a requirement was manifestly proper, as judicial officers are required to appreciate the evidence in the State’s language.
The Supreme Court refused to grant interim relief at this stage.
This report covers the Supreme Court’s Never Reported Judgment dating back to the year 1953 on damages for breach of contract.
“When a legislative body enacts a legislation there is a presumption of constitutionality unless proven otherwise, similarly, a policy decision when taken by the competent authority enters the fray of enforcement with a presumption in its favour of being in public interest, unless otherwise shown, demonstrated and proven to be among other grounds, manifestly arbitrary.”
This matter was the oldest pending nine-judge Bench case before the Supreme court. The Bench had reserved its judgment in the matter on 14-03-2024
“An order granting a stay to the operation of the order granting bail during the pendency of the application for cancellation of bail should be passed in very rare cases”