Created byFuzzy Cloud

Legislation

Constitution of India

5,775 Supreme Court judgments cite this Act — showing 1–200.

UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERSversusMUNSHI RAM

2022 INSC 114131 October 2022Dismissed

The case concerned commission vendors of the Northern Railway who, after being absorbed into regular railway service, sought to have 50% of their pre‑absorption service counted as qualifying service for pension benefits, as had been granted to similarly situated vendors in other railway zones. The Union of India appeal

REENA HAZARIKAversusSTATE OF ASSAM

2018 INSC 102931 October 2018Leave Granted & Allowed

The appellant, Reena Hazarika, was convicted under Section 302 IPC for allegedly killing her husband, based largely on circumstantial evidence and the "last seen" theory. On appeal, the Supreme Court examined whether the prosecution had established a continuous chain of circumstances that left no reasonable hypothesis

NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITEDversusPRANAY SETHI AND ORS.

2017 INSC 106831 October 2017Reference answered

The Supreme Court examined the computation of compensation under Sections 163‑A, 166 and 168 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 in death claims, focusing on the appropriate multiplier, the addition of future prospects to the deceased's income, and the quantification of conventional heads such as loss of estate, loss of co

VIRENDRA KRISHNA MISHRAversusUNION OF INDIAAND OTHERS

2014 INSC 102231 October 2014Appeal(s) allowed

Virendra Krishna Mishra, an Information Officer (IO) in the DANICS cadre, challenged the Cadre Review Committee's decision to encadre only three Deputy Resident Commissioner (DRC) posts while excluding Tourist Information Officer (TIO) and IO posts, alleging violation of Article 14 of the Constitution. The Central Admi

STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS.versusNAVNEET VERMA

2007 INSC 111431 October 2007Appeal(s) allowed

Navneet Verma was appointed as an Accounts Executive on a temporary post in the Haryana Bureau of Public Enterprises (HBPE) in July 1993. In December 1994 his services were terminated on the ground that the post had been abolished. Verma contended that the abolition was a pretext to remove him due to personal grievance

M.D., BHADRA SHAHAKARI S.K. NIYAMITAversusPRESIDENT, CHITRADURGA MAZDOOR SANGH AND ORS.

2006 INSC 75731 October 2006Disposed off

The Chitradurga Mazdoor Sangh filed a writ petition in the Karnataka High Court seeking enforcement of a 1998 settlement and payment of 40% back wages to 51 reinstated workmen of a cooperative sugar factory. The High Court ordered the factory to implement the settlement and pay the back wages. The factory appealed, con

JAIPUR DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITYversusRAM SAHAI AND ANR .

2006 INSC 77231 October 2006Case Partly allowed

The Jaipur Development Authority (JDA), a State entity, terminated the services of daily‑wage worker Ram Sahai on 1 July 1987. Sahai had not completed 240 days of continuous service and the Labour Court held that JDA had violated Sections 25G and 25H of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, ordering his reinstatement with

T.M.A. PAL FOUNDATION AND ORS.versusSTATE OF KARNATAKA AND ORS.

2002 INSC 45431 October 2002

The case involved challenges by private educational institutions, both minority and non-minority, against government regulations on their administration. The Supreme Court's 11-judge bench addressed five main issues concerning the right to establish educational institutions, reconsideration of the Unnikrishnan scheme,

UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.versusADANI EXPORTS LTD. AND ANR.

2001 INSC 54631 October 2001Appeal(s) allowed

The Union of India and others appealed against the Gujarat High Court’s order allowing special civil applications filed by Adani Exports Ltd. and others seeking the benefit of a Pass‑Book Scheme under the Import‑Export Policy for shrimp exports. The central issue was whether the Gujarat High Court at Ahmedabad possesse

DR. MAHAK SINGHversusCHANCELLOR, CH. CHARAN SINGH UNIVERSITY, MEERUT AND ORS.

1996 INSC 125931 October 1996Dismissed

Three senior lecturers (Dr. Mahak Singh, Dr. S.P. Singh and Dr. Rajvir Singh) of a college affiliated to Meerut University contested who should be appointed Acting Principal after the principal’s vacancy in October 1993. All were senior lecturers drawing the same salary, but their dates of promotion to senior lecturer

STATE OF TAMIL NADUversusM/S. AROORAN SUGARS LTD.

1996 INSC 125831 October 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent, Arooran Sugars Ltd., owned over 3,400 acres of land that was declared surplus under the Tamil Nadu Land Reforms (Fixation of Ceiling on Land) Act, 1961. The original compensation rate was nine times the net annual income, but the 1972 Fourth Amendment reduced it to two times. A 1974 amendment (Act 7 of

BINAY KUMAR SINGHversusTHE STATE OF BIHAR

1996 INSC 126031 October 1996Dismissed

The case arose from a 1980 massacre in Paras Bigha, Bihar, where 13 people were killed and many injured. The appellants were convicted under Sections 302 and 149 of the IPC for participation in an unlawful assembly. They challenged the conviction on several grounds, including that the FIR should have been based on an e

UNION TERRITORY, CHANDIGARHversusKRISHAN BHANDARI

1996 INSC 126231 October 1996Appeal(s) allowed

Krishan Bhandari, originally appointed as a temporary Science Master in the Union Territory of Chandigarh, was later transferred to the post of Science Supervisor on his own pay scale and later confirmed as a Science Master. He claimed that, because he performed the same duties as a District Science Supervisor in Punja

WORKMEN REPRESENTED BY SECRETARYversusMANAGEMENT OF REPTAKOS BRETT. AND CO. LTD. AND ANR.

1991 INSC 28131 October 1991Appeal(s) allowed

The Madras‑based Reptakos Brett & Co. had for about thirty years paid its workmen a slab system of Dearness Allowance (DA) linked both to the cost‑of‑living index and to basic wages. In 1983 a dispute led the Industrial Tribunal to abolish the slab system and to order DA to be linked only to the cost‑of‑living index; t

KARAM CHANDversusHARYANA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD & ORS.

1988 INSC 33631 October 1988Case Allowed

Karam Chand, a Scheduled Caste clerk, was promoted in 1973 to Deputy Superintendent of the Haryana State Electricity Board under a reservation quota. The promotion order contained a note that the promotion would not confer seniority over others, and the Board later fixed his seniority based on inter‑se seniority in his

S.S. KARMALKAR & OTHERS ETC.versusIBRAHIM HUSSENI TAMBOLI & OTHERS ETC.

1988 INSC 33731 October 1988Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants were promoted to Awai Karkun posts in the Food & Civil Supplies Department, Sholapur, while private respondents holding those posts were ordered to be repatriated to the Revenue Department. The respondents challenged the order as violative of Articles 14, 16 and 309 of the Constitution. The trial court,

DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFLCER. & ANRversusG.V. SUDHAKAR RAO & ORS.,

1985 INSC 23331 October 1985Appeal(s) allowed

The Forest Range Officer seized teak timber worth Rs.1,71,000 from G.V. Sudhakar Rao and produced it before the Divisional Forest Officer, the Authorized Officer under s.44(2A) of the Andhra Pradesh Forest Act, 1967, seeking confiscation. While confiscation proceedings were pending, a criminal complaint was also filed

M/S. MSCO. PVT. LTD.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

1984 INSC 20631 October 1984Dismissed

M/S. MSCO Pvt. Ltd. imported stainless‑steel plates under a 1977 customs notification that granted a concessional duty provided the goods were used to manufacture specified articles and the finished articles were sold only to "industrial units". The company supplied certificates that the plates were used accordingly, b

IN RE: PRASHANT BHUSHAN AND ANR.versusIN RE:

2020 INSC 48931 August 2020Disposed off

The Supreme Court, hearing a suo motu criminal contempt petition against senior advocate Prashant Bhushan, affirmed his conviction for scandalising the judiciary through tweets and an affidavit alleging misconduct by judges. The Court held that the defence of truth under Section 13 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 r

TAMIL NADU MEDICAL OFFICERS ASSOCIATION & ORSversusUNION OF INDIA & OTHERS

2018 INSC 33231 August 2020Disposed off

The petitions challenged the validity of Regulation 9 of the Medical Council of India (MCI) Post‑Graduate Medical Education Regulations, 2000, alleging that it barred State governments from reserving seats for in‑service doctors in postgraduate degree courses. The Court examined the constitutional distribution of power

MUKESH SINGHversusSTATE (NARCOTIC BRANCH OF DELHI)

2020 INSC 52431 August 2020Reference answered

Mukesh Singh challenged his conviction under the NDPS Act on the ground that the police officer who lodged the FIR was also the investigating officer, alleging that this dual role vitiated the trial. The Supreme Court examined the statutory scheme of the CrPC (ss.154, 156, 157) and the NDPS Act (ss.41‑44, 50‑53, 58, 35

M/S. INNOVENTIVE INDUSTRLES LTD.versusICICI BANK & ANR.

2017 INSC 83731 August 2017Dismissed

Innoventive Industries Ltd., a corporate debtor, defaulted on its financial obligations and a financial creditor (ICICI Bank) filed an application under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC). The debtor argued that a notification under the Maharashtra Relief Undertakings (Special Provisions) Act,

KEDAR NATH YADAVversusSTATE OF WEST BENGAL & ORS.

2016 INSC 63931 August 2016Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined the acquisition of about 1,000 acres of land in Singur, West Bengal for Tata Motors' small‑car project. The Court held that the acquisition was made at the instance of a private company, not for a public purpose, and that the State failed to follow the mandatory procedures under Part VII of t

M.C. GUPTAversusCENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION, DEHRADUN

2012 INSC 36831 August 2012Disposed off

The appellants, M.C. Gupta and Mohan Lal Gupta, were convicted for misappropriating company funds by issuing a bank draft in 1988, an offence that occurred before the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 came into force. An FIR was lodged in 1990 under the repealed Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947, and the trial court

NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.versusPARVATHNENI & ANR.

2009 INSC 109331 August 2009Matter referred to larger bench

National Insurance Co. Ltd. filed a Special Leave Petition challenging a High Court order that directed it to pay compensation to claimants, despite the insurer's contention that there was no valid insurance coverage on the date of the accident because the renewal premium cheque was dishonoured. The insurer argued that

DY. COMMISSIONER OF PROHIBITION AND EXCISE, NIZAMABAD DIVISION, NIZAMABAD, ANDHRA PRADESH AND ANR.versusM/S. BALAJI CATTLE FEEDS AND ANR.

2004 INSC 48731 August 2004Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Andhra Pradesh appealed a High Court order that quashed criminal proceedings and ordered the release of a seized tanker carrying molasses, which had been detained under the Andhra Pradesh Excise Act, 1968 and Prohibition Act, 1995 on suspicion of being used for illicit spirit manufacture. The High Court ha

STATE OF U.P. AND ORS.versusMANISHA DWIVEDI AND ANR.

2001 INSC 41631 August 2001Dismissed

The State of U.P. and others filed special leave petitions under Article 136 of the Constitution against interlocutory orders of the Allahabad High Court dated 2 September 1999 and 12 January 2000. The petitions were filed more than a year after the latter order, and the petitioners could not explain the delay. The Sup

STATE OF U.P. AND ANR.versusRAM KISHORE AND ANR.

1999 INSC 37131 August 1999Appeal(s) allowed

Ram Kishore was initially appointed as a trainee tube‑well operator and was terminated for unauthorized absence. He was subsequently given a fresh three‑month temporary appointment, which was again extended, but his performance remained unsatisfactory and he again absented himself without leave, leading to a second ter

MANJUSHREE PATHAKversusTHE ASSAM INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD.

1999 INSC 37231 August 1999Appeal(s) allowed

Manjushree Pathak, after 23 years of service with Assam Industrial Development Corporation Ltd., applied for voluntary retirement under the AIDC Voluntary Retirement Scheme, 1992, seeking immediate effect. The recommending authority approved the application, but the Managing Director failed to act despite several remin

DR. ARUNDHATI AJIT PARGAONKARversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS.

1994 INSC 34331 August 1994

Dr. Arundhati Pargaonkar was appointed on a purely temporary basis in 1978 to the permanent Class‑II post of Lecturer in Dentistry at B.J. Medical College, Pune. She served continuously for nine years and claimed that, under the State Government's 19 September 1975 Temporary Government Services Regularisation Resolutio

SMT. SHANTI DEVI AND ORS.versusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ORS .

1994 INSC 34031 August 1994Dismissed

The appellants challenged the acquisition of land under the Rajasthan Land Acquisition Act, claiming that a subsequent order dated 4 November 1985 had regularised the conversion of agricultural land to non‑agricultural use and vested title in them. They relied on this order, which was produced for the first time before

S.B. MATHUR AND OTHERS.versusHONBLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE OF DELHI HIGH COURT, AND OTHERS

1988 INSC 25931 August 1988Dismissed

The petitioners, Superintendents of the Delhi High Court, challenged the treatment of their posts as equal status with Court Masters (Readers) and Private Secretaries, arguing that it violated Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution. They also contested the restriction of the "zone of consideration" for promotion to Ass

RAMESHWAR PRASADversusSTATE OF BIHAR AND ORS.

1979 INSC 16431 August 1979Dismissed

Rameshwar Prasad filed a writ petition under Article 32 challenging the Governor's order that superseded his promotion to Additional District Judge by promoting other subordinate judges. He contended that his unblemished judicial record warranted promotion and that the High Court's recommendation to exclude him violate

PADI KAUSHIK REDDY ETC.versusTHE STATE OF TELANGANA AND OTHERS ETC.

2025 INSC 91231 July 2025Appeal(s) allowed

Three BRS MLAs who were elected to the Telangana Legislative Assembly joined the INC, prompting two other BRS MLAs to file disqualification petitions under the Tenth Schedule. The Speaker delayed issuing notices for over seven months, leading the petitioners to approach the High Court, which only directed the Speaker t

S.N. VIJAYLAKSHMI & ORS.versusSTATE OF KARNATAKA & ANR.

2025 INSC 91731 July 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, owners of a Bangalore property, entered into an Agreement to Sell (ATS) with the complainant, who later alleged they cheated him and filed a private complaint that led to an FIR charging them under multiple IPC sections. The High Court dismissed the appellants' petition to quash the FIR, but the Supreme

SUKH SAGAR MEDICAL COLLEGE & HOSPITALversusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH & ORS.

2020 INSC 47431 July 2020Dismissed

The Gujarat Sukh Sagar Medical College & Hospital Trust obtained an Essentiality Certificate in 2014 to establish a medical college in Jabalpur, Madhya Pradesh. Despite conditional permission for the 2016‑17 academic year, the Medical Council of India (MCI) repeatedly denied renewal of permission for three successive s

SREENIVASA COOPERATIVE BUILDING SOCIETYversusPUVVADA RAMA (DEAD) BY LRS. AND ORS.

2018 INSC 65131 July 2018Dismissed

Lakshmi Sreenivasa Cooperative Building Society filed suits for specific performance of alleged sale agreements of land against Puvvada Rama (deceased) and others. The trial court dismissed the suits, finding the Society failed to prove execution of the agreements, payment of earnest money, and possession, noting the a

JANHIT MANCH & ANR.versusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS.

2017 INSC 68731 July 2017Disposed off

The petitioners filed a public interest litigation (PIL No.17 of 2017) in the Bombay High Court challenging a Municipal Commissioner order dated 31‑08‑2016 concerning refuge areas and floor‑space‑index (FSI) in a high‑rise building. The same issues were already pending before the Supreme Court in several Special Leave

SANJAY GUPTA & ORS.versusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ORS.

2014 INSC 51331 July 2014Hearing Adjourned

A fire broke out at a consumer exhibition in Meerut on 10 April 2006, killing 64 people and injuring more than a hundred. The victims filed a writ petition under Article 32 of the Constitution seeking damages from the State of Uttar Pradesh and the event organizers. The State had appointed a one‑man Commission of Inqui

M.M. COOPERATIVE BANK LTD.versusJ.P. BHIMANI & ANR.

2009 INSC 98431 July 2009Dismissed

The Madhavpura Mercantile Cooperative Bank uncovered a large‑scale fraud involving crores of rupees and filed a criminal complaint under several IPC sections against its chairman, managing director, other officers and businessmen, including J.P. Bhimani. The accused was denied bail by the Sessions Court but the Gujarat

STATE OF PUNJAB & ANR.versusMOHAMMED IQBAL BHATTI

2009 INSC 98831 July 2009Dismissed

The respondent, a Block Development and Panchayat Officer, faced an FIR under the Prevention of Corruption Act. The State, through the Minister, initially refused sanction for prosecution on 15‑12‑2002/2003. After a change of government, the same authority granted sanction on 14‑9‑2004 without any new material being pl

MUKESH KUMAR AGRAWALversusSTATE OF U.P. & ORS.

2009 INSC 99231 July 2009Dismissed

The appellant, a licensed dealer of high‑speed diesel oil, challenged the cancellation of his licence under the Uttar Pradesh High Speed Diesel Oil and Light Diesel Oil (Maintenance of Supplies and Distribution) Order, 1981, alleging that the cancellation was based on vague allegations of malice by a political rival an

AJAYA KUMAR DASversusSTATE OF ORISSA & ORS.

2009 INSC 97831 July 2009Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a government employee originally appointed as Overseer and later re-designated as Sub-Assistant Engineer, was promoted to Assistant Engineer in 1981. His pay on promotion was fixed at Rs. 850 per month, lower than the Rs. 950 he claimed was due under Rule 74(b) of the Orissa Service Code, which mandates

THE DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER, KSRTCversusMAHADEVA SHETTY AND ANR.

2003 INSC 35731 July 2003Appeal(s) allowed

Mahadeva Shetty, a mason, suffered 100% disability after a bus owned by the Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation (KSRTC) plunged into a ravine. He claimed compensation under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 and the Tribunal awarded Rs.2.20 lakhs. The Karnataka High Court enhanced the award to Rs.6.25 l

HON'BLE SHRI RANGANATH MISHRAversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

2003 INSC 35131 July 2003Disposed off

The petitioner, a former Supreme Court judge, wrote a letter to the Chief Justice seeking directions for the State to educate citizens about their fundamental duties, and the letter was treated as a writ petition under Article 32. The Court appointed Shri K. Parasaran as amicus curiae and considered the recommendations

DISTRICT MINING OFFICER AND ORS.versusTATA IRON AND STEEL CO. AND ANR.

2001 INSC 32431 July 2001Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined the Cess and Other Taxes on Minerals (Validation) Act, 1992 to determine whether it merely validated cess and tax already collected under invalid State laws or also authorised fresh levy and collection of amounts due up to 4 April 1991. The Court held that the Act validates only the levy and

RAM DEO CHAUHAN ALIAS RAJ NATH CHAUHANversusSTATE OF ASSAM

2000 INSC 36431 July 2000Dismissed

Ram Deo Chauhan (alias Raj Nath Chauhan) was convicted of the pre‑planned, cold‑blooded murder of four members of a family, including a two‑year‑old child and two women, and of causing injuries to two other persons. The trial and high courts relied on a chain of circumstantial evidence and a confessional statement to u

CENTRAL BANK OF INDIAversusS. SATYAM AND OTHERS

1996 INSC 81231 July 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court considered a civil appeal by the Central Bank of India against a High Court order that granted re‑employment relief to a group of workmen who had been retrenched between 1974 and 1976. The workmen filed a writ petition in 1982 invoking Section 25‑H of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, seeking prefere

SUSHILA SAW MILLversusSTATE OF ORISSA AND ORS.

1995 INSC 43231 July 1995Dismissed

The petitioner, Sushila Saw Mill, operated a saw mill in Keonjhar district of Orissa, which lay within a "prohibited area" defined as a reserved forest or within 10 km of its boundary. Under the Orissa Saw Mills & Saw Pits (Control) Act, 1991, Section 4(1) imposes a total embargo on establishing or operating saw mills

BAKSHI SARDARI LAL (DEAD) THROUGH LRS & ORS. ETC.versusUNION OF INDIA & ANR.

1987 INSC 19131 July 1987Dismissed

Eighteen Delhi Armed Police officers were dismissed in 1967 under Article 311(2) proviso clause (c) without an inquiry. The Supreme Court quashed those orders in 1971, reinstating the officers, but the Government issued fresh dismissal orders in June 1971 invoking the President's personal satisfaction. The petitioners

BALKISHAN A. DEVIDAYAL ETC.versusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA ETC.

1980 INSC 14431 July 1980Dismissed

The appellant was charged under the Railway Property (Unlawful Possession) Act, 1966 for allegedly possessing railway property obtained through forged receipts. An RPF inspector recorded his statements during an inquiry, but the trial magistrate denied the appellant access to copies of documents and statements, leading

MINERVA MILLS LTD. & ORSversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

1980 INSC 14231 July 1980Disposed off

Minerva Mills Ltd., a textile company, was nationalized under the Sick Textile Undertakings (Nationalisation) Act, 1974, following an investigation and takeover order under the Industries (Development and Regulation) Act, 1951. The petitioners challenged the constitutional validity of certain provisions of the National

IN RE: DISTRIBUTION OF ESSENTIAL SUPPLIES AND SERVICES DURING PANDEMICversus.

2021 INSC 30231 May 2021Directions issued

The Supreme Court, hearing a suo motu writ petition concerning the management of the COVID‑19 pandemic, examined the Central Government's Liberalised Vaccination Policy, which shifted free vaccination for the 18‑44 age group to State/UT governments and private hospitals and introduced differential pricing. The petition

LINCAI GAMANGO AND ORS.versusDAYANIDHI JENA AND ORS.

2004 INSC 38831 May 2004Dismissed

The appellants, members of a Scheduled Tribe, claimed that land in a scheduled area of Orissa had been forcibly occupied by non‑tribal respondents. The Competent Authority ordered restoration of possession to the appellants, but the trial court dismissed the petition on the ground that the respondents' possession for o

ZULFIQUAR HAIDER & ANR.versusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ORS.

2025 INSC 48031 March 2025Disposed off

The appellants' residential buildings in Prayagraj were demolished by the Prayagraj Development Authority (PDA) under Section 27 of the Uttar Pradesh Urban Planning and Development Act, 1973. The PDA issued a show‑cause notice on 18 December 2020 but merely affixed it without making genuine attempts at personal service

DR. Y. IBEHAIBI DEVI (D) BY LRS. & ORS.versusTHE STATE OF MANIPUR REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER (HIGHER AND TECHICAL EDUCATION) GOVERNMENT OF MANIPUR & ANR.

2022 INSC 37531 March 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, eight retired assistant professors and a college librarian from Manipur, claimed a revised pension entitlement effective from 1 April 2010 based on an Office Memorandum (OM) dated 5 May 2010, which was issued by the Governor and had statutory force. The State Government issued a later OM on 24 December

REP. BY SEC. AND ORSversusK. BALU & ANR.

2017 INSC 30231 March 2017Disposed off

The Supreme Court revisited its earlier directions prohibiting the grant of liquor licences within 500 metres of national and state highways, hearing numerous interlocutory applications for extensions or modifications. It held that the Court’s directions, grounded in public‑health policy and the constitutional right to

K.J.S. BUTTARversusUNION OF INDIA AND ANR.

2011 INSC 24931 March 2011Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a former Indian Army captain who was invalided out in 1979 with a 50% disability, sought a War Injury Pension, an increase of his disability rating to 75%, a service element for his full ten‑year short service commission, and revised pension rates, relying on the Ministry of Defence letter dated 31‑Jan‑2

DEEPAK AGARWAL & ANR.versusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ORS.

2011 INSC 25031 March 2011Dismissed

The appellants, a Technical Officer and a Statistical Officer in the Uttar Pradesh Excise Group ‘A’ Service, challenged a 1999 amendment that excluded their cadres from promotion to Deputy Excise Commissioner, arguing that ten vacancies that arose before the amendment should be filled under the old 1983 rules. The Supr

DALCO ENGINEERING PRIVATE LTD.versusSHREE SATISH PRABHAKAR PADHYE AND ORS.

2010 INSC 18331 March 2010

The case concerned two writ petitions challenging the termination of a disabled employee by a private limited company and the termination of a contract with a public trust. Both petitioners sought relief under section 47 of the Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation)

KRISHNA KUMAR BIRLAversusRAJENDRA SINGH LODHA AND OTHERS

2008 INSC 42431 March 2008Disposed off

The case concerned the grant of probate of a 1999 will of Smt. Priyamvada Devi Birla (PDB) and earlier 1982 mutual wills executed by her and her husband. Several members of the Birla family filed caveats claiming a "caveatable interest" in the estate, while Rajendra Singh Lodha (RSL) sought probate and the discharge of

NAHAR SINGHversusFOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA & ORS.

2008 INSC 42531 March 2008Dismissed

Nahar Singh, an Assistant Grade‑III clerk in a Food Corporation of India godown, was found responsible for a shortage of 295 bags of wheat and 195 gunny bags discovered during a physical verification in January 1980. A departmental inquiry concluded that Singh, along with the in‑charge, was complicit in the loss, and t

COLLECTOR & DIST. MAGISTRATE AND ORS.versusS. SULTAN

2008 INSC 42831 March 2008Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined the validity of a preventive detention order issued under the Andhra Pradesh Prevention of Dangerous Activities Act, 1986 against several individuals described as "goondas". The High Court had quashed the order on the grounds that the cited incidents were stale, did not affect public order, a

B.S.N.L. LTD. & ANR.versusBHUPENDER MINHAS & ORS.

2008 INSC 43131 March 2008Disposed off

The dispute concerned a disqualification clause in BSNL’s Notice Inviting Tender (NIT) that barred any contractor whose near‑relative was employed in any BSNL unit from submitting a bid. The petitioners argued that the restriction was arbitrary, especially when the relative held a low‑grade post (Class III or IV), and

STATE OF MAHARASHTRAversusSANT DNYANESHWAR SHIKSHAN SHASTRA MAHAVIDYALAYA AND ORS.

2006 INSC 19031 March 2006Dismissed

The petitioners, a public trust seeking to start a B.Ed. college, obtained recognition from the National Council for Teacher Education (NCTE) under the National Council for Teacher Education Act, 1993, but the Maharashtra Government refused to issue a No‑Objection Certificate (NOC) based on a policy decision not to gra

BRIJ MOHAN LALversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

2005 INSC 17131 March 2005

The petition challenged the discontinuation of the Fast Track Courts Scheme after 31 March 2005, arguing that the State’s failure to maintain the scheme would violate the constitutional right to speedy justice under Article 21. The respondents, Union of India and several states, contended that financial constraints and

KULDEEP SINGH AND ANR.versusSTATE OF TAMIL NADU AND ORS .

2005 INSC 17431 March 2005Disposed off

Petitioners, a renal patient in Tamil Nadu and his brother from Punjab, applied for a No‑Objection Certificate (NOC) under the Transplantation of Human Organs Act, 1994, to enable a kidney donation by the brother, who was not a near relative. The Tamil Nadu authorities directed the petitioners to seek the NOC from Punj

COUNCIL OF SCIENTIFIC AND INDUSTRIAL RESEARCH AND ORS.versusDR. AJAY KUMAR JAIN

2000 INSC 17731 March 2000Case Partly allowed

Dr. Ajay Kumar Jain served as a Pool Officer under the Scientists' Pool Scheme for three years with a salary of Rs. 3,737 per month. After the scheme expired, he was appointed as a Scientist Fellow under the Quick Hire Scheme on a contract not exceeding three years, initially for one year and later extended by six mont

MOHAMMED GAZIversusSTATE OF M.P. AND ORS.

2000 INSC 17931 March 2000Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Madhya Pradesh issued a tender for the sale of perishable Tendu leaves. After the highest bid of another bidder (Respondent No.4) was cancelled, Mohammed Gazi was declared the highest bidder and deposited Rs 2,68,217.72 as earnest money. While Gazi was preparing to execute the purchase agreement, Responden

MANJU RAMESH NAHAR ETC.versusUNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

1999 INSC 14731 March 1999Appeal(s) allowed

The husband of the appellant, Ramesh Nahar, was detained under Section 3 of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 on 3 February 1997. The detention order was not executed until 23 April 1998, a delay of more than a year, with the respondents offering only a vague claim th

L.C.A.R.versusSATISH KUMAR AND ANR.

1998 INSC 16431 March 1998Case Allowed

The Agricultural Research Service (ICAR) revised its scientists' pay scales and service rules retrospectively to align with the UGC pay package effective 1 January 1986. The respondent, a Scientist S‑1 appointed in 1982, claimed a vested right to promotion under the old five‑yearly assessment scheme, which would have m

THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS.versusRANBINDRA NATH SENGUPTA AND ORS.

1998 INSC 16731 March 1998Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined the West Bengal government's policy on House Rent Allowance (HRA) which differentiates between employees living in government‑provided accommodation (who pay a nominal licence fee) and those renting privately. The petitioners, government employees residing in government flats, claimed the pol

SMT. PREM LATA SHARMAversusDISTRICT MAGISTRATE, MATHURA AND ORS.

1998 INSC 16831 March 1998Case Allowed

The petitioner, the wife of Suresh Chander Sharma, challenged his preventive detention under the National Security Act, 1980. The detenu had made a representation to the State Government within the prescribed time, which was rejected, and the representation was forwarded to the Central Government, which also rejected i

DR. KASHINATH G. JALMI AND ANR. ETC. ETC.versusSPEAKER AND ORS.

1993 INSC 12831 March 1993Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned three writ petitions filed in the Bombay High Court challenging orders of the Acting Speaker of the Goa Legislative Assembly that purportedly reviewed and set aside earlier disqualification orders of members under the Tenth Schedule (anti‑defection law). The High Court dismissed the petitions at the

STATE OF U. P.versusHANIF

1992 INSC 9531 March 1992Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Uttar Pradesh convicted Hanif under sections 7 and 16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 for selling adulterated milk, sentencing him to six months' rigorous imprisonment and a fine. The conviction was affirmed by the Sessions Court but set aside by the Allahabad High Court on the ground that

MOHD. FIDA KARIM AND ANR.versusSTATE OF BIHAR AND ORS.

1992 INSC 9431 March 1992Dismissed

The State of Bihar, under the Bihar Excise Act, 1915, initially adopted a policy in January 1990 granting five‑year settlements of liquor‑shop licences subject to annual renewal and certain conditions. The appellants paid the first year’s fee and claimed a contractual right to continue their licences for the full five‑

BUILDERS ASSOCIATION OF INDIA & ORS. ETC. ETC.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS. ETC. ETC.

1989 INSC 11231 March 1989Disposed off

The Builders Association of India and other contractors challenged the levy of sales tax by several State governments on the turnover of works contracts after the Constitution (Forty‑sixth Amendment) Act, 1982 introduced clause 29A to Article 366, deeming the transfer of property in goods used in works contracts a "sal

DARSHAN SINGH @ BHASURI & ORS.versusSTATE OF PUNJAB

1983 INSC 2931 March 1983Case Partly allowed

The Supreme Court examined the murder case of five persons and injuries to three others in Kaila village, where ten accused were tried under sections 302, 120B and 149 of the IPC. The prosecution relied on three eye‑witnesses, a dying declaration of Sohan Singh, and firearms recovered from the accused, while the FIR fi

M. KARUNANIDHI ETC.versusH.V. HANDE & ORS. ETC.

1983 INSC 3031 March 1983Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined several election petitions filed by Dr. H.V. Hande challenging the election of M. Karunanidhi. The petitioners had deposited the required Rs.2,000 security for costs in the Reserve Bank of India on a pre‑receipted challan, and the petition included a photograph of a fancy banner but no copy o

STATE OF U.P. AND ANR.versusM. J. SIDDIQUI AND ORS.

1980 INSC 5931 March 1980Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned the fixation of inter‑se seniority after the merger of Uttar Pradesh’s Provincial Medical Service (PMS) I and II into a single Pradeshik Medical Service. The appellants were direct recruits to PMS I appointed on a temporary basis before the merger, while the petitioners were officers promoted from th

JOSEPH SHINEversusUNION OF INDIA

2023 INSC 8731 January 2023Disposed off

The Union of India filed a miscellaneous application seeking clarification of the Supreme Court’s decision in Joseph Shine v. Union of India, which struck down Section 497 of the IPC, asking whether the judgment also affects the applicability of Sections 45, 63 of the Army Act, 1950 and analogous provisions in the Air

NATIONAL HIGH SPEED RAIL CORPORATION LIMITEDversusMONTECARLO LIMITED & ANR

2022 INSC 12431 January 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The National High Speed Rail Corporation Limited (NHSRCL) issued a tender for the Mumbai‑Ahmedabad Bullet Train project, which is funded by a loan from Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA). Monte Carlo Limited submitted a technical bid that was rejected by NHSRCL as non‑responsive due to material deviations, a

BASHEERA BEGAMversusMOHAMMED IBRAHIM & ORS.

2020 INSC 11631 January 2020Dismissed

The case concerned the alleged murder of D2 and D1 in December 1990, for which eight accused were convicted under sections 120B, 302 and 34 of the IPC. The prosecution relied on circumstantial evidence – a lorry purchase, broken glass, alleged iron‑rod attacks and a purported conspiracy at a hotel – but failed to prove

N. SANKARANARAYANANversusTHE CHAIRMAN, TAMIL NADU HOUSING BOARD & ORS.

2019 INSC 11731 January 2019Dismissed

The appellant, N. Sankaranarayanan, filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution seeking a mandamus against the Tamil Nadu Housing Board and other authorities to restrain his family members (respondent Nos. 2 and 3) from operating a petrol pump and a marriage hall on a piece of land that was the subject

STATE OF HARYANA AND ANOTHER ETC.versusMOHINDER SINGH AND OTHERS ETC.

2017 INSC 8131 January 2017Dismissed

The State of Haryana employed conductors and drivers under the Haryana Transport Department (Group C) Haryana Roadways Service (Amended) Rules, 2003, initially paying them as daily wagers, then as contract labourers, and finally on the regular pay‑scale. One hundred ninety‑five employees filed writ petitions seeking re

MRS. IVY C.DA.CONCEICAOversusSTATE OF GOA & ORS.

2017 INSC 8831 January 2017Appeal(s) allowed

Mrs. Ivy C. Da Conceicao, a Grade‑I teacher with 21 years of service, claimed she was the most senior and qualified candidate for the post of principal in a minority‑run school in Goa, but the school appointed junior teachers in violation of the Goa School Education Rules. The school relied on its autonomy under Articl

GOVT. OF A.P. AND ORS.versusMOHD. NARSULLAH KHAN

2006 INSC 4931 January 2006Appeal(s) allowed

Mohd. Narsullah Khan, a Head Constable, was on bandobust duty during the visit of US President Bill Clinton when he allegedly removed and concealed a CCTV lens, an act captured on the premises' closed‑circuit TV. A disciplinary inquiry examined four witnesses, found the charge of theft proved beyond reasonable doubt, a

L.K.VERMAversusH.M.T. LTD. AND ANR.

2006 INSC 5231 January 2006Dismissed

L.K. Verma, a Safety Officer, was charged with using abusive language and threatening a superior and was placed under suspension. He appealed the suspension to the Labour Commissioner under Rule 14 of the U.P. Factories (Safety Officers) Rules, 1984, but was dismissed from service while the appeal was pending. The Labo

S.N. DHINGRA AND ORS.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

2001 INSC 6031 January 2001Dismissed

The petitioners, who were direct recruits to the Delhi Higher Judicial Service (DHJS) in 1988, challenged a gradation list prepared by the Delhi High Court that included five promotee respondents appointed as Chief Metropolitan Magistrates in 1986. The respondents argued that their appointments, though labelled "fortui

AIR INDIAversusCOCHIN INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT LTD

2000 INSC 3931 January 2000Appeal(s) allowed

Cochin International Airport Ltd (CIAL) invited offers for ground handling services and received proposals from Air India and Cambatta Aviation Ltd. The evaluation committee recommended Cambatta, but the Government of India recommended Air India on the basis of its status as the national carrier. CIAL subsequently awar

STATE OF UTTAR PRADESHversusDR. DINA NATH SHUKLA AND ANR.

1997 INSC 8331 January 1997Disposed off

The State of Uttar Pradesh appealed against a High Court judgment that declared a government clarification on reservation in university recruitment invalid. The clarification treated the University of Allahabad and its colleges as a single unit for applying the Uttar Pradesh Public Services (Reservation for Scheduled C

SURJIT SINGHversusSTATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS.

1996 INSC 15731 January 1996Appeal(s) allowed

Surjit Singh, a Deputy Superintendent of Police, underwent emergency bypass surgery in London while on leave and claimed Rs 3 lakh reimbursement. The State of Punjab initially refused, later paying Rs 40,000 based on AIIMS rates. Singh appealed, seeking reimbursement at the higher rates of Escorts Heart Institute, a ho

M.R. PARASHAR AND ORS.versusDR. FAROOQ ABDULLAH AND ORS.

1984 INSC 2331 January 1984Dismissed

The petition sought to hold the Chief Minister of Jammu & Kashmir, Dr. Farooq Abdullah, in criminal contempt for allegedly denouncing the judiciary in statements published in the Daily Kashmir Times. The editor of the newspaper asserted the report was accurate, while the Chief Minister denied making the statements. No

M.C.MEHTAversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

1996 INSC 153430 December 1996Disposed off

The Supreme Court entertained a public‑interest writ petition filed by environmental activist M.C. Mehta alleging that emissions from coke/coal‑using industries in the Taj Trapezium Zone (TTZ) were causing severe atmospheric pollution and damaging the Taj Mahal. Expert reports (NEERI, Varadharajan Committee) establishe

ANIL KUMAR SINGHversusV!JAY PAL SINGH & ORS.

2017 INSC 116130 November 2017Appeal(s) allowed

Anil Kumar Singh filed a civil suit for a permanent injunction over a parcel of land and obtained an ex‑parte temporary injunction. He later filed an application under Order XXIII Rule 1 of the CPC seeking to withdraw the suit, which the trial court allowed subject to payment of Rs 350 as costs to the defendant, a deci

THE DEPUTY INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE & ANR.versusS. SAMUTHIRAM

2012 INSC 55030 November 2012Appeal(s) allowed

S. Samuthiram, a police officer of the Tamil Nadu Armed Reserve, was charged with eve‑teasing a married woman at a bus stand while intoxicated and with being absent from duty. A departmental inquiry found the charges proved and dismissed him from service. While his service appeal was pending, a criminal court acquitted

GAJANAN SAMADHAN LANDEversusSANJAY SHYAMRAO DHOTRE

2011 INSC 82630 November 2011Dismissed

The appellant, a voter, challenged the election of the respondent, a Lok Sabha MP, alleging disqualification under Section 100(1)(a) of the Representation of People Act, 1951 on the ground that he was a director of the Maharashtra Seeds Corporation, a government‑owned company. The High Court held that the respondent wa

ARUN LAL & ORS.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2010 INSC 83530 November 2010Dismissed

The Government of India had granted 3.563 acres of land in the Agra Cantonment to Hamid Ali Khan, who built a bungalow and later sold it with its appurtenant land to the petitioners. The petitioners sued the Union of India for arrears of rent, damages, and vacant possession of the bungalow and the surrounding land, whi

DR. ASHISH RANJANversusDR. ANUPAMA TANDON AND ANR.

2010 INSC 83630 November 2010Disposed off

The Supreme Court heard a contempt petition filed by Dr. Ashish Ranjan, who alleged that Dr. Anupama Tandon and her mother deliberately violated a Lok Adalat compromise order dated 3 May 2008 that granted the mother physical custody of their child and the father visitation rights. The Court found that the respondents h

DESHRAJversusBODHRAJ

2007 INSC 121230 November 2007

In the 2003 Himachal Pradesh Legislative Assembly election for the SC‑reserved 35‑Gangath constituency, the respondent Bodh Raj was declared elected, claiming membership of the Scheduled Caste Lohar and supporting it with a caste certificate issued by an Executive Magistrate. The appellant Deshraj challenged the electi

RUTH SORENversusMANAGING COMMITTEE, EAST I.S.S.D.A. AND ORS.

2000 INSC 55530 November 2000Dismissed

Ruth Soren, a former employee of an educational institution, was terminated and filed an application under Section 26(2) of the Bihar Shops and Establishments Act, 1953 before the Labour Court seeking reinstatement. The Labour Court ordered her reinstatement, but the institution appealed, contending that it was not an

DISTT. MANAGER, APSRTC, VIJAYAWADAversusK. SIVAJI AND ORS.

2000 INSC 55830 November 2000Appeal(s) allowed

The Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation (APSRTC) employed workers who claimed wages for work performed on holidays declared under the Andhra Pradesh Factories and Establishments (National Festival and Other Holidays) Act, 1974. APSRTC contended that Section 11(1)(c) of that Act excluded it because it was an

STATE OF PUNJABversusV.K. KHANNA AND ORS.

2000 INSC 55930 November 2000Dismissed

The former Chief Secretary of Punjab, V.K. Khanna, referred two cases to the CBI with the then Chief Minister’s approval; after a change of government the new administration withdrew the referrals and issued a charge‑sheet alleging malafide intent, bias and procedural violations. Khanna challenged the charge‑sheet befo

TATA IRON AND STEEL CO. LTD.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

2000 INSC 56030 November 2000Dismissed

Tata Iron and Steel Co. Ltd. (the appellant) exported engineering goods using its own steel, which was not procured at the Joint Plant Committee (JPC) price that includes several levies. The Engineering Export Promotion Council (EEPC) later held that the appellant was not entitled to the International Price Reimburseme

SMT. MARUA DEI @ MAKU DEI AND ORS.versusMURALIDHAR NANDA AND ORS.

1998 INSC 44630 November 1998Dismissed

The appellants sought a declaration that their family shrine, which originated as samadhis, was a private spiritual institution and not a public temple under the Orissa Hindu Religious Endowments Act, 1951. The respondents contended that the shrine had evolved into a public temple where Hindu deities were regularly wor

STATE OF MAHARASHTRAversusISHWAR PIRAJI KALPATRI AND ORS.

1995 INSC 81830 November 1995Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent, a senior police officer, was investigated under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 for possessing assets disproportionate to his known income. After a FIR was lodged, the Maharashtra government granted sanction under Section 197 of the CrPC and a charge‑sheet was filed. The Bombay High Court, invoki

YOGENDRA NARAYAN CHOWDHURY AND ORS.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

1995 INSC 81330 November 1995Dismissed

The Supreme Court considered the classification of mazdoors employed in the military engineering department following the recommendations of the Third Pay Commission. Some workers, after passing a prescribed test, were initially placed in the skilled category but were later re‑fit into the semi‑skilled category with an

ORBIT ELECTRICALS PRIVATE LIMITEDversusDEEPAK KISHAN CHHABRIA & ORS.

2023 INSC 96730 October 2023Disposed off

The Supreme Court had directed the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) to postpone pronouncing its judgment in a pending appeal until the result of Finolex Cables Limited's Annual General Meeting (AGM) was declared. Despite being apprised of this order, the NCLAT bench pronounced its judgment on 13 October

J. S. LUTHRA ACADEMY & ANOTHERversusSTATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR & OTHERS

2018 INSC 101830 October 2018Appeal(s) allowed

The J.S. Luthra Academy, a private educational institution, was evicted from a Wakf‑owned site and sought alternative land from the Jammu & Kashmir government, which allotted four kanals in Channi Himmat, charging full price for two kanals and granting the other two for free. Residents challenged the allotment, arguing

STATE OF A.P.versusSMT. PRAMEELA MODI AND ORS

2006 INSC 74630 October 2006Dismissed

The dispute concerned a 3.27‑gunta parcel in Khairatabad village, originally granted to Smt. Prameela Modi by a supplementary Sethwar issued by the Nizam government in 1947 and subsequently confirmed by various revenue authorities. The State of Andhra Pradesh later claimed the land as Government property (Survey No. 11

REGIONAL PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONERversusSANATAN DHARAM GIRLS SECONDARY SCHOOL AND ORS.

2006 INSC 74730 October 2006Dismissed

The Regional Provident Fund Commissioner (RPFC) sought to enforce the Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (EPF Act) against Sanatan Dharm Girls Secondary School and other non‑governmental educational institutions in Rajasthan. The State had enacted the Rajasthan Non‑Government Educational

ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.versusT.S. SASTRY

2003 INSC 58630 October 2003Dismissed

The respondent, an Inspector Grade I, was placed on a waiting list for promotion to Assistant Administrative Officer (Development) after a panel of eight names was prepared. During the panel's validity, two new posts were created, and the respondent claimed promotion, but the insurer filled the vacancies by transferrin

APANGSHU MOHAN LODH AND ORS.versusSTATE OF TRIPURA AND ORS.

2003 INSC 58730 October 2003Dismissed

The appellants, practising advocates, were appointed as part‑time lecturers in a medical college in Tripura on a fixed contractual pay. They filed a writ petition under Article 226 seeking proportionate equal pay for equal work, i.e., the minimum pay scale of regular assistant professors. A single judge of the Gauhati

HINDUSTAN PAPER CORPORATIONversusPURNENDU CHAKROBARTY AND ORS.

1996 INSC 125530 October 1996Disposed off

Purnendu Chakrobarty, a senior employee of Hindustan Paper Corporation, was charged in a murder case and repeatedly applied for leave without proper sanction or medical certificates, resulting in unauthorised absence for more than eight consecutive days. The corporation invoked Rule 23(vi)(E) of its Conduct, Discipline

HOUSING BOARD OF HARYANAversusHARYANA HOUSING BOARD EMPLOYEES UNION AND ORS.

1995 INSC 64330 October 1995Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined whether the Haryana Housing Board (HHB) qualifies as a "local authority" under section 32(iv) of the Payment of Bonus Act, 1965. The Board is a statutory corporation whose members are appointed by the State Government and whose functions are subject to extensive governmental control, includin

RAM SHARAN YADAVversusTHAKUR MUNESHWAR NATH SINGH AND ORS.

1984 INSC 20430 October 1984Dismissed

Ram Sharan Yadav, a Communist Party candidate, was elected to the Bihar Legislative Assembly in 1977. The defeated candidate, Thakur Muneshwar Nath Singh, filed an election petition alleging that Yadav had engaged in corrupt practices of undue influence under Section 123(2) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951

G. M. SHAHversusSTATE OF JAMMU & KASHMIR

1979 INSC 22630 October 1979Case Allowed

The Supreme Court entertained a writ petition under Article 32 challenging the detention of Shabir Ahmed Shah under Section 8(2) of the Jammu & Kashmir Public Safety Act, 1978. The petitioners argued that the grounds of detention were vague and did not fall within the statutory definitions of "acting in any manner prej

ATUL KUMARversusTHE CHAIRMAN (JOINT SEAT ALLOCATION AUTHORITY) AND OTHERS

2024 INSC 74930 September 2024Disposed off

The petitioner, a Scheduled Caste student, secured a seat in Electrical Engineering at IIT Dhanbad after ranking 1455 in his category in JEE Advanced 2024. He attempted to pay the required admission fee of Rs 17,500 before the 5 pm deadline on 24 June 2024, logging into the portal six times between 3:12 pm and 4:57 pm,

AIRPORT AUTHORITY OF INDIAversusCENTRE FOR AVIATION POLICY, SAFETY & RESEARCH (CAPSR) & OTHERS

2022 INSC 104730 September 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The Airport Authority of India (AAI) issued Request for Proposals for ground handling services at various airport groups, setting eligibility criteria that included regional clustering, a 36‑month experience requirement for scheduled flights, and a minimum annual turnover of Rs 30 crore (later reduced to Rs 18 crore).

EXECUTIVE ENGINEER (R AND B) AND OTHERSversusGOKUL CHANDRA KANUNGO (DEAD) THR. HIS LRS.

2022 INSC 104330 September 2022Case Partly allowed

The appellants, contractors, obtained an arbitral award that granted them a sum of money plus interest at 18% per annum for the pre‑reference, pendente lite and post‑award periods. The arbitrator did not provide any reasons for fixing the rate of interest. The respondents had remained silent for long periods (1977‑1989

STATE OF U.P. AND ORS.versusZ.U. ANSARI

2016 INSC 93430 September 2016Matter referred to larger bench

Z.U. Ansari, a retired Junior Engineer of the Uttar Pradesh Rural Engineering Department, was subjected to disciplinary proceedings for alleged financial irregularities. The proceedings were initiated after the Minister-in-charge of the department sanctioned the enquiry, invoking Regulation 351‑A of the Civil Services

SELVI J. JAYALALITHAA & ORS.versusSTATE OF KARNATAKA & ORS.

2013 INSC 66330 September 2013Disposed off

The petitioners, accused of possessing assets disproportionate to their known income under the Prevention of Corruption Act, had their trial transferred to Karnataka where the Supreme Court directed the appointment of a Special Public Prosecutor (SPP). After a seven‑month tenure, the Karnataka Government withdrew the a

STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS .versusSHANKAR LAL PARMAR

2011 INSC 73330 September 2011Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Rajasthan issued an Office Order in 1992 granting Selection Grades to Class IV and subordinate employees after 9, 18 and 27 years of service, provided their service record was satisfactory. A 1992 circular initially held that a censure would not affect eligibility, but a later Office Order in 1995 clarifie

DNYANESHWAR RANGANATH BHANDARE & ANR.versusSADHU DADU SHETTIGAR (SHETTY) & ANR.

2011 INSC 73030 September 2011Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, sons of a deceased property owner, claimed ownership of two rooms and alleged that the respondents were merely gratuitous licencees, while the respondents asserted they were tenants paying rent since 1982. The trial court found the respondents were licencees and granted possession to the appellants; the

STATE OF HARYANAversusMUKESH KUMAR & ORS.

2011 INSC 73130 September 2011Dismissed

The State of Haryana, through the Superintendent of Police, filed a civil suit claiming ownership of a parcel of land on the basis of adverse possession. The defendants, who were the registered owners, contested the claim, and the trial court, appellate court, and High Court all dismissed the suit, holding that the Sta

SAJI GEEVARGHESEversusACCOUNTS OFFICER (TELEPHONE REVENUE) & ORS.

2008 INSC 110630 September 2008Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a telephone subscriber, challenged three telephone bills that he alleged were excessive due to meter reading errors. The dispute was referred to statutory arbitration under Section 78 of the Telegraph Act, 1885, where the arbitrator allowed a modest rebate on only one bill and upheld the others. The appe

RAKESH VIJversusRAMINDER PAL SINGH SETHI

2005 INSC 46030 September 2005

The appellant, Rakesh Vij, challenged an eviction order against his father’s tenancy in a shop‑cum‑flat in Chandigarh, arguing that the landlord could not evict a tenant from a non‑residential building under the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949 as amended in 1974. The Court examined the effect of the 1956 A

T.P. MOIDEEN KOYAversusGOVERNMENT OF KERALA AND ORS.

2004 INSC 56530 September 2004Dismissed

The petitioner T.P. Moideen Koya challenged a detention order issued under the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974, claiming it was illegal because he was already in custody and the order failed to consider that fact. The same issue had been raised earlier in a habeas corpu

RABINDRA NATH GHOSALversusUNIVERSITY OF CALCUTTA AND ORS.

2002 INSC 41330 September 2002Dismissed

Rabindra Nath Ghosal appeared for an M.A. examination in 1984 but his result was not declared for several years. He later pursued another course, wrote to the University, and filed a writ petition for mandamus to compel publication of his result, which was eventually declared (he had failed). A single High Court judge

PRAKASH K. AND ANR.versusTHE STATE OF KARNATAKA AND ORS.

1996 INSC 112530 September 1996Dismissed

The Karnataka Service Commission recruited teachers before 17 November 1993, appointing candidates in excess of the 50% reservation for backward classes and weaker sections. The appointments were challenged on 15 June 1995, more than a year after the selections were made. The Karnataka Administrative Tribunal held that

AVINASH NAGRAversusNAVODAYA VIDYALAYA SAMITI ETC.

1996 INSC 112630 September 1996Dismissed

Avinash Nagra, a temporary postgraduate teacher at Navodaya Vidyalaya, was terminated on the ground of immoral sexual behaviour towards a girl student. The termination was effected under the Navodaya Vidyalaya notification of 23 December 1993, which permits dispensing with a regular disciplinary inquiry in cases of mor

K.R. SRINIVASversusR.M. PREMCHAND AND ORS.

1994 INSC 42730 September 1994Appeal(s) allowed

K.R. Srinivas, son of the then Vice‑Chancellor of Andhra University, obtained a higher mark after revaluation of his answer sheets, which had been destroyed as per university regulations. Dr. R.M. Premchand, a research scholar, filed a public‑interest writ petition under Article 226 challenging the result, alleging pro

RAM CHAND AND ORS.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

1993 INSC 31530 September 1993Disposed off

The petitioners challenged land acquisition proceedings initiated between 1959 and 1965, alleging that the government delayed making awards and paying compensation for more than fourteen years after declarations under Section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The Court examined whether such delay violated the statut

BASANT ROADWAYSversusSTATE TRANSPORT APPELLATE TRIBUNAL & ORS.

1986 INSC 20630 September 1986Dismissed

Basant Roadways filed a Special Leave Petition before the Supreme Court challenging an interim order of the Madhya Pradesh High Court. The Supreme Court held that, as the petition was against an interim order, it would not interfere with the High Court's decision and dismissed the petition. While doing so, the Court ex

RURAL LITIGATION & ENTITLEMENT KENDRA, DEHRADUNversusSTATE OF U.P. & ORS.

1985 INSC 21930 September 1985Disposed off

The Supreme Court entertained two writ petitions filed under Article 32 challenging the operation of limestone quarries in the Dehradun‑Mussoorie area. A court‑appointed Bhargav Committee and a government Working Group had classified the quarries into categories A, B and C based on environmental and social impact. The

UNION OF INDIA & ORS.versusGODFREY PHILIPS INDIA LTD. ETC, ETC.

1985 INSC 21130 September 1985

The respondents, cigarette manufacturers, packed cigarettes in primary packets, secondary cartons and finally in corrugated fibre‑board containers and argued that the cost of the final containers should not be part of the "value" for excise duty. The Union of India contended that all packing, whether primary or seconda

INDRAJIT BARIJA & ORS. ETC.versusELECTION COMMLSSION OF INDIA & ORS.

1985 INSC 21030 September 1985Dismissed

The petitioners challenged the 1983 Assam Legislative Assembly election, alleging that the electoral rolls of 1979 were defective because they had not been revised as required by the Representation of the People Act, 1950 and allegedly contained non‑citizens. They filed writ petitions under Article 226 of the Constitut

SOOSAI ETC.versusUNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

1985 INSC 21530 September 1985Dismissed

The petitioners, members of the Adi‑Dravida caste who had converted to Christianity, were denied free bunks under a central welfare scheme for Scheduled Castes because a Tamil Nadu order incorporated paragraph 3 of the Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order, 1950, which excludes persons of religions other than Hinduism

SURAJ SINGH GUJAR & ANR.versusTHE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH & ORS.

2024 INSC 66130 August 2024Disposed off

The appellants were convicted under IPC sections 323, 324 and 325 read with section 34 for an assault incident that occurred between close relatives. They later executed a compromise deed on 29 January 2024, seeking the Court’s permission to compound the offences. The Supreme Court examined whether the conviction for t

MAHADEO & ORSversusSMT. SOVAN DEVI & ORS

2022 INSC 88830 August 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The widow of a permanently disabled ex‑serviceman, Smt. Sovan Devi, claimed that a 1971 inter‑departmental letter from the Soldier Welfare Department to the District Collector constituted a valid allotment of 25 bighas of land to her late husband under the Rajasthan Special Assistance to Disabled Ex‑Servicemen Rules, 1

BIR SINGHversusDELHI JAL BOARD & ORS.

2018 INSC 76630 August 2018Reference answered

The Supreme Court examined whether the Presidential Orders under Articles 341 and 342, which list Scheduled Castes (SC) and Scheduled Tribes (ST) for each State or Union Territory (UT), limit a State or UT's power under Article 16(4) to provide reservation for backward classes. It held that reservation must be confined

DR. JAGAT NARAIN SUBHARTI CHARITABLE TRUST AND ANR.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

2017 INSC 82530 August 2017Case Allowed

The Dr. Jagat Narain Subharti Charitable Trust applied for permission to establish a new medical college in Dehradun for the 2016‑17 session. The Medical Council of India (MCI) flagged deficiencies in faculty, residents, OPD attendance, bed occupancy and questioned land‑ownership compliance, leading the Central Governm

ANEESH D. LAWANDE & OTHERSversusTHE STATE OF GOA AND OTHERS

2013 INSC 58030 August 2013Disposed off

The petitioners, students admitted to postgraduate medical and dental courses in Goa on the basis of NEET ranks, challenged the State of Goa's order cancelling their admissions after the Supreme Court had protected those admissions. The Supreme Court held that the State could not rescind the NEET‑based admissions, as t

KRISHI UPAJ MANDI SAMITI, NARSINGHPURversusM/S. SHIV SHAKTI KHANSARI UDYOG AND OTHERS

2012 INSC 36430 August 2012Dismissed

The respondents, operators of sugar factories in Madhya Pradesh, challenged notices issued by market committees that required them to obtain licences under the Madhya Pradesh Krishi Upaj Mandi Act, 1972 and to pay market fees on purchases of sugarcane. The High Court quashed the notices, holding that the transactions w

RAJAN PUROHIT & ORS.versusRAJASTHAN UNIVERSITY OF HEALTH SCIENCE & ORS.

2012 INSC 36330 August 2012Case Partly allowed

The Supreme Court examined admissions to a private unaided medical college in Rajasthan where 117 students were admitted without a competitive entrance test, contrary to Regulation 5(2) of the MCI Regulations. The Court held that there was no consensual agreement between the college and the State to admit students on t

SANJOY NARAYAN EDITOR IN CHIEF HINDUSTAN & ORS.versusHON. HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD THR. R.G.

2011 INSC 62330 August 2011Disposed off

The Hindustan Times published an article on 20 September 2010 containing adverse and unverified information about the then Chief Justice of the Allahabad High Court, leading to contempt of court proceedings under the Contempt of Courts Act. The appellants, including Sanjoy Narayan, Editor‑in‑Chief of Hindustan, appeale

MRS. ASHA SHARMAversusCHANDIGARH ADMINISTRATION AND ORS.

2011 INSC 62630 August 2011Disposed off

The appellant, a retired IAS officer appointed as State Information Commissioner, sought to retain the government house she occupied in Chandigarh beyond the four‑to‑six‑month period prescribed under Rule 13 of the Government Residences (Chandigarh Administration General Pool) Allotment Rules, 1996. The Estate Officer

INDIAN BANK AND ANR.versusN. VENKATRAMANI

2007 INSC 87930 August 2007Disposed off

N. Venkataramani, an employee of Indian Bank, voluntarily retired after 14 years, 9 months and 17 days of service. The bank denied his claim for pension on the ground that he had not completed the statutory minimum of 15 years. The Madras High Court set aside the bank’s order and directed the grant of pension, interpre

RAM PREETI YADAVversusMAHENDRA PRATAP YADAV AND ORS.

2007 INSC 88130 August 2007Disposed off

Mahendra Pratap Yadav (Respondent No.1) had his Intermediate examination result cancelled after using a provisional marksheet to pursue further studies and employment. He challenged the cancellation, and while the Supreme Court set aside the result, it observed that if any rule permitted him to re‑appear, the Board cou

STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ORS.versusJAGDISH CHOPRA

2007 INSC 88230 August 2007Disposed off

In Rajasthan, teachers are recruited annually under the Rajasthan Education Subordinate Service Rules, 1971. Jagdish Chopra, placed at serial No.10 in the 1995-96 merit list, was not appointed after the candidate at serial No.8 failed to join and the vacancy was carried forward. He filed a writ petition; the High Court

A.P.S.R.T.C. REP. BY ITS CHIEF LAW OFFICERversusM. PENTAIAH CHARY

2007 INSC 88330 August 2007Disposed off

The respondent, a 38‑year‑old carpenter with six dependents, was permanently disabled after being hit by a bus owned by the Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation on 26 January 1995. He claimed damages under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act; the tribunal awarded Rs 85,000 and the High Court enhanced the a

STATE OF WEST BENGALversusHARESH C. BANERJEE AND ORS.

2006 INSC 56630 August 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The appeal concerned the constitutional validity of Rule 10(1) of the West Bengal Services (Death-cum-Retirement Benefit) Rules, 1971, which authorises the Governor to withhold or recover part of a pension where a former government servant is found guilty of misconduct, negligence or other acts causing pecuniary loss t

UNION OF INDIA AND ANR.versusAYUB ALI

2006 INSC 56830 August 2006Disposed off

The respondent, a Class II contractor, was denied revalidation of his enlistment on the ground of insufficient marks, which were based on delay in completion of work and quality of work. He filed a writ petition which was allowed by a Single Judge of the Delhi High Court. The Division Bench dismissed the Letters Patent

ATMA RAMversusSHAKUNTALA RANI

2005 INSC 39130 August 2005Dismissed

The tenant, Atma Ram, repeatedly sent money orders for rent which the landlord refused to accept and later deposited the arrears for February 1992 to January 1995 under the Punjab Relief of Indebtedness Act, 1934. The landlord rejected that deposit and the tenant subsequently deposited rent for February 1995 to July 19

RURAL LITIGATION & ENTITLEMENT KENDRAversusSTATE OF U.P.

1988 INSC 25430 August 1988Disposed off

The Supreme Court entertained a public‑interest writ filed by Rural Litigation & Entitlement Kendra alleging illegal limestone mining in the Mussoorie‑Dehradun belt that was harming the ecology and forest cover. Several expert committees (Bhargava, Working Group, Bandyopadhyay) classified the mines into categories A, B

JIWANI DEVI PARAKIversusFIRST LAND ACQUISITION COLLECTOR, CALCUTTA AND ORS.

1984 INSC 16530 August 1984Disposed off

The petitioner, a lessee of premises in Calcutta, challenged the State’s continued requisition of part of his building under the West Bengal Premises Requisition and Control (Temporary Provision) Act, 1947, which had been renewed repeatedly since 1958 for a government showroom. He argued that the Act could not become p

MADDURI GANGARAJU @ BABU RAOversusMADDURI SUNANDA & OTHERS

2025 INSC 99130 July 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The marriage between Madduri Venkateswara Rao and Madduri Sunanda was dissolved by a California divorce decree in 2007. After returning to India, Sunanda filed a matrimonial suit, a domestic violence case, and an FIR under sections 494 and 498A IPC against her husband and his relatives. The parties later resolved all d

YASH DEVELOPERSversusHARIHAR KRUPA CO-OPERATIVE HOUSING SOCIETY LIMITED & ORS.

2024 INSC 55930 July 2024Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined the termination of a development agreement between Yash Developers (appellant) and Harihar Krupa Co‑Operative Housing Society (respondent) under Section 13 of the Maharashtra Slum Areas (Improvement, Clearance and Redevelopment) Act, 1971, which had been upheld by the Bombay High Court. The C

GAURAV KUMARversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

2024 INSC 55830 July 2024Disposed off

Gaurav Kumar filed a writ petition challenging the fees levied by State Bar Councils (SBCs) at the time of enrolment, alleging that the amounts far exceed the Rs. 750 (general) and Rs. 125 (SC/ST) prescribed in Section 24(1)(f) of the Advocates Act, 1961, and that additional miscellaneous fees are being made a conditio

COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS (IMPORT), MUMBAIversusM/S. DILIP KUMAR AND COMPANY & ORS.

2018 INSC 64630 July 2018Reference answered

The case concerned the interpretation of Customs Notification No. 20/1999, under which the respondents claimed a concessional customs duty rate for imported vitamin E50 feed powder. The Customs department denied the benefit, classifying the goods under a higher duty heading, leading to a series of appeals up to the Sup

SECR. GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS.versusGRADE-I DASS OFFICERS ASSOCIATION & ORS.

2014 INSC 51030 July 2014Appeal(s) allowed

The respondents, Grade‑I officers of the Delhi Administration Subordinate Service (DASS), claimed a second financial upgradation under the Assured Career Progression Scheme (ACPS) after completing 24 years of service. Because the feeder grade (Grade‑I DASS) and the next promotional grade (Grade‑II of the Delhi Andaman

SMT. MOUMITA PODDARversusINDIAN OIL CORPORATION LTD. & ANR.

2010 INSC 45630 July 2010Dismissed

The Supreme Court heard appeals by Smt. Moumita Poddar challenging the appointment of a retail outlet dealership to respondent No.2 (Alpana Saha) by Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. The High Court had set aside the entire selection on the ground that the Selection Committee failed to follow the policy circular dated 4‑Sept‑

ANIL MISHRAversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS

2008 INSC 87830 July 2008Dismissed

Anil Mishra, a Deputy Commissioner of Central Excise & Customs, challenged an adverse entry for the year 2000‑01. He filed representations to the Chief Commissioner and the Central Government, both of which were rejected. He then moved an Original Application before the Central Administrative Tribunal alleging the entr

INDIAN AIRLINES OFFICERS' ASSOCIATIONversusINDIAN AIRLINES LTD. & ORS.

2007 INSC 79530 July 2007Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined the Government's policy to merge Vayudoot with Indian Airlines and the subsequent absorption of Vayudoot employees (SHOD) into Indian Airlines, focusing on seniority and promotion issues. The petitioners argued that the merger was not formally completed, that the cut‑off date of 10‑Mar‑1998 f

HYTHRO POWER CORPORATION LTD.versusDELHI TRANSCO LTD.

2003 INSC 34730 July 2003Appeal(s) allowed

Hythro Power Corporation Ltd. sought to refer its dispute with Delhi Transco Ltd. to arbitration under an arbitration clause contained in a Notice Inviting Tender (NIT). The Single Judge of the Delhi High Court, acting as the nominee of the Chief Justice under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, r

JAVED AND ORS.versusSTATE OF HARYANA AND ORS.

2003 INSC 34230 July 2003Dismissed

The petitioners were disqualified from contesting or holding Panchayat offices under Sections 175(1)(q) and 177(1) of the Haryana Panchayati Raj Act, 1994 because they had more than two living children. They challenged the provisions as arbitrary, discriminatory and violative of Articles 14, 21 and 25 of the Constituti

DAVID JUDEversusHANNAH GRACE JUDE AND ORS.

2003 INSC 34830 July 2003Disposed off

The husband filed a contempt petition against his wife and her mother for violating an unconditional undertaking given to the Supreme Court that the child would be brought back to India and that they would appear before the Family Court when required. Despite multiple notices and adjournments, the wife remained absent

HARSHENDRA CHOUBISA AND ORS.versusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ORS.

2002 INSC 31430 July 2002Disposed off

The Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Rules, 1996 (Rule 273) allowed a 10% bonus for state residents, another 10% for district residents and 5% for rural‑area residents in the merit list for Gram Sewak and Panchayat Secretary posts. Writ petitions challenged this as violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution. The Rajas

KAILASH CHAND SHARMA ETC. ETC.versusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ORS.

2002 INSC 31530 July 2002Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined a 1998 circular issued under the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Rules that granted 10% bonus marks to district residents and 5% to rural‑area residents in the selection of primary‑school teachers. Unsuccessful candidates challenged the circular, arguing it violated Articles 14 and 16 of the Constit

DANDA RAJESHWARIversusBODAVULA HANUMAYAMMA AND ORS.

1996 INSC 80230 July 1996Dismissed

The petitioners challenged a High Court order directing them to file an election petition within three weeks of the writ petition's disposal and to have the Election Tribunal decide the matter without considering the statutory limitation of 30 days prescribed under Rule 3 of the Andhra Pradesh Panchayat Raj (Election T

M.S.R. PRASADversusBOMMISETTI SUBBA RAO AND ORS.

1996 INSC 80530 July 1996Dismissed

The petitioner obtained an injunction from a civil court restraining the respondent from constructing a building that allegedly infringed his easement of air and light. The respondent filed a writ petition under Article 226 against the Municipal Corporation, claiming the construction was authorized, and the High Court

OMBIR SINGH AND OTHERS ETC. ETC.versusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER ETC. ETC.

1992 INSC 18830 July 1992Dismissed

The petitioners, doctors who had passed MBBS, challenged the Uttar Pradesh government's rule that required a minimum of 50% marks for general candidates and 40% for SC/ST candidates in the Post‑Graduate Medical Entrance Examination (PGMEE) 1992. They argued that the rule left 217 of 535 seats vacant and violated Articl

SUNEEL JATLEY ETC.versusSTATE OF HARYANA ETC .

1984 INSC 13230 July 1984Case Allowed

The State of Haryana, through Maharshi Dayanand University, reserved 25 MBBS seats for candidates who had studied up to class 8 in a common rural school. The petitioners challenged this reservation as violative of Articles 14, 15(4) and 29(2) of the Constitution, arguing that the classification was arbitrary, lacked in

REYNOLD RAJAMANI & ANR.versusUNION OF INDIA & ANR.

1982 INSC 5930 July 1982Dismissed

Reynold Rajamani and his wife, married under the Indian Christian Marriage Act, filed a joint petition under Section 28 of the Special Marriage Act seeking divorce by mutual consent. The trial court dismissed the petition, and the couple attempted to rely on Section 7 of the Indian Divorce Act 1869 read with Section 1(

B.R. RAMABHADRIAHversusSECRETARY, FOOD & AGRICULTURE DEPARTMENT ANDHRA PRADESH & ORS.

1981 INSC 13430 July 1981Appeal(s) allowed

B.R. Ramabhadriah, a Forest Department officer, challenged a provisional integrated gradation list of Forest Officers issued under the States Reorganisation Act, 1947, alleging that his seniority over the 6th respondent and over five officers from the Telangana region was incorrectly fixed. The Central Government later

C. C. PADMANABHAN & OTHERSversusTHE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS AND OTHERS

1980 INSC 14030 July 1980Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, who were Assistant Educational Officers (AEO) in the Kerala Education Service, were ordered by a 1977 government letter to be transferred back to the lower post of High School Assistant (HSA) after six years of service. They challenged the reversion as violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution

STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS ETC.versusRAMAN LAL KESHAV LAL & ORS. ETC.

1980 INSC 13930 July 1980Disposed off

The petitioners, former municipal employees now serving in gram or nagar panchayats, sought orders directing the Gujarat government to equate their posts with those in the Panchayat Service, fix seniority, pay scales and extend pay‑commission benefits, arguing that the Panchayat Service is a civil service of the State.

H.C. KULWANT SINGH & ORS.versusH.C. DAYA RAM & ORS.

2014 INSC 42330 June 2014Dismissed

The case concerned the promotion of constables to head constables under the Punjab Police Rules, 1934, which were amended in 1982 and 1988. The tribunal had held that constables confirmed before the 1988 amendment possessed a vested right to promotion based on seniority, and it ordered a fresh seniority list, which the

U.0.I.versusS.P. NAYYAR

2014 INSC 43630 June 2014Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent, S.P. Nayyar, a Commandant in the Border Security Force, sought promotion to Additional DIG. The Departmental Promotion Committee (DPC) did not recommend him, alleging he was not fit, despite his ACRs being graded ‘Very Good’ by the Initiating and Reviewing Officers. He alleged that the Accepting Officer

DR. (MRS.) MALATHI RAVI, M.D.versusDR. B.V. RAVI M.D.

2014 INSC 42630 June 2014Disposed off

The husband, Dr. B.V. Ravi, filed a petition for divorce under Section 13(1)(ib) of the Hindu Marriage Act alleging desertion, and also sought restitution of conjugal rights. The Family Court found no proof of desertion and granted restitution, but the wife, Dr. Malathi Ravi, later lodged FIRs against the husband, lead

RAM KARAN (DEAD) THROUGH LRS. & ORS.versusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ORS.

2014 INSC 43330 June 2014Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Ram Karan (deceased) through legal representatives, purchased agricultural land in 1962 from a Scheduled Caste vendor and obtained mutation in 1966. The State of Rajasthan, via a Tehsildar, filed a suit under Section 175 of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act in 1993 seeking ejectment, alleging the sale violated t

PT. SHAMBOO NATH TIKOO AND OTHERSversusSARDAR GIAN SINGH AND OTHERS

1995 INSC 38130 June 1995

The plaintiffs, Hindus, sued the Sikh defendants for ejectment from two rooms of the southern Dharamshalla of the Martand shrine and for a permanent injunction restraining the defendants from interfering with Hindu religious ceremonies and from holding Dewans in the open space of the shrine. The defendants claimed titl

GOVERNMENT OF UNION TERRITORY OF PONDICHERRYversusMOHAMMED HUSSAIN (DEAD) BY L.RS.

1994 INSC 22730 June 1994Appeal(s) allowed

The Government of Pondicherry challenged the inclusion of shares of two minor sons who attained majority between the appointed day (24‑Jan‑1971) and the notified date in the calculation of the family’s land‑holding ceiling under the Pondicherry Land Reforms Act, 1973. The Land Tribunal had allowed the respondent’s obje

GAYATRI BALASAMYversusM/S ISG NOVASOFT TECHNOLOGIES LIMITED

2025 INSC 60530 April 2025Disposed off

The Supreme Court was asked to resolve a long‑standing controversy over whether courts exercising jurisdiction under Sections 34 and 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 can modify an arbitral award. The issue arose from the earlier decision in Project Director, NHAI v. M. Hakeem, where the Court held that

PAVUL YESU DHASANversusTHE REGISTRAR, STATE HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION OF TAMIL NADU & ORS.

2025 INSC 67730 April 2025Dismissed

The appellant, an Inspector of Police, refused to register a First Information Report (FIR) lodged by the complainant and used objectionable language while speaking to the complainant's mother. The State Human Rights Commission of Tamil Nadu held that this conduct violated the complainant's human rights and directed th

Search Indian case law

Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.

Search by issue, statute, judge or citationSign in to search