Created byFuzzy Cloud

Legislation

Constitution of India

5,773 Supreme Court judgments cite this Act — showing 2,401–2,600.

DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITYversusTEJPAL & ORS.

2024 INSC 45617 May 2024Disposed off

The Delhi Development Authority and other government bodies filed a batch of appeals and petitions seeking condonation of delay for challenging High Court orders that declared land acquisition proceedings under the 1894 Act to have lapsed under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act. The appellants argued that subsequent judici

REF:versusSMT. SAYALEE SANJEEV JOSHI, MEMBER, MAHARASHTRA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION

2007 INSC 61217 May 2007Reference answered

The Supreme Court examined a reference under Article 317 of the Constitution concerning Ms. Sayalee Sanjeev Joshi, a member of the Maharashtra Public Service Commission, who was arrested in connection with alleged malpractices in the 1999 examination. The Court considered four charges: protecting certain candidates, in

TEJSHREE GHAG ETC. ETC.versusPRAKASH PARASHURAM PATIL AND ORS. ETC. ETC.

2007 INSC 61817 May 2007Dismissed

The petitioners, appointed as Assistant Deputy Educational Inspectors, were transferred to lower‑pay posts, resulting in loss of salary and seniority. They challenged the transfers before the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal, which dismissed their applications, and the High Court later set aside the tribunal’s order

M/S. TANNA AND MODIversusC.L.T. MUMBAI XXV AND ORS.

2007 INSC 62017 May 2007Dismissed

The appellant, a partnership firm, made a voluntary disclosure under the Voluntary Disclosure of Income Scheme, 1997 and received a certificate of immunity. Later, a search and seizure operation on the firm’s partners uncovered undisclosed income that the firm had failed to reveal in its VDIS application. The Commissio

ASHOK KUMAR THAKURversusUNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS ETC.

2007 INSC 62317 May 2007Matter referred to larger bench

Ashoka Kumar Thakur filed writ petitions challenging the 93rd Constitution Amendment (which inserted Article 15(5)) and the Central Educational Institutions (Reservation in Admission) Act, 2006. The Union of India argued that the matters raised substantial questions of law and constitutional interpretation, invoking Ar

DR. SAURABH CHOUDHARY AND ORS.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

2004 INSC 38117 May 2004

The Supreme Court was asked to clarify the effect of its earlier judgment in Dr. Saurabh Chaudhary (2003) which increased the All‑India quota for postgraduate medical seats from 25% to 50% and mandated a common entrance test. The Union of India sought a prospective application of that judgment because the admission pro

M. JHANGIR BHATUSHA ETC. ETC.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS. ETC. ETC.

1989 INSC 19517 May 1989Dismissed

The private importers of edible oils challenged the differential customs duty rates granted to the State Trading Corporation (STC) under Section 25(2) of the Customs Act, 1962, alleging a violation of Article 14. The government had canalised edible‑oil imports through STC and, citing high international prices and the n

SHAHED KAMAL & ORS.versusM/S A. SURTI DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD. & ANR.

2025 INSC 50217 April 2025Appeal(s) allowed

Homebuyers dissatisfied with the services of a builder erected a public banner listing various grievances, which the builder claimed was defamatory and filed a criminal complaint under Section 500 read with Section 34 of the IPC. The appellants argued that the banner was a peaceful protest made in good faith to protect

CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATIONversusSANTOSH KARNANI & ANR

2023 INSC 38017 April 2023Disposed off

The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) investigated a trap operation in which Additional Commissioner of Income Tax Santosh Karnani allegedly demanded and accepted a bribe of Rs 30 lakhs to influence a tax assessment of Safal Construction. The complainant recorded the demand and the subsequent acknowledgment of paym

M/S SOUTH INDIAN BANK LTD. & ORS.versusNAVEEN MATHEW PHILIP & ANR. ETC. ETC.

2023 INSC 37917 April 2023Disposed off

The appellants, South Indian Bank Ltd. and others, appealed against the Kerala High Court’s orders allowing borrowers to defer loan repayment under the SARFAESI Act. The borrowers had filed writ petitions under Article 226 challenging notices issued under Sections 13(2) and 13(4) of the SARFAESI Act, even though the De

DR. THINGUJAM ACHOUBA SINGH & ORS.versusDR. H. NABACHANDRA SINGH & ORS. ETC.

2020 INSC 34217 April 2020Appeal(s) allowed

The Regional Institute of Medical Sciences (RIMS), a society under the Societies Registration Act, issued an advertisement on 16‑08‑2016 for the post of Director. Three writ petitions challenged the advertisement on grounds of lack of age‑relaxation, alleged non‑conformity of experience requirements with Medical Counci

LT. CDR. M. RAMESHversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2018 INSC 35717 April 2018Disposed off

The Union introduced a Limited Competitive Examination (LCE) in 2012 to recruit officers to the Indian Police Service (IPS) but never declared the results. In 2018 the Union decided to scrap the LCE, prompting candidates who had appeared for the exam to seek declaration of results and appointment. The Supreme Court hel

VIPULBHAI MANSINGBHAI CHAUDHARYversusSTATE OF GUJARAT & ANOTHER

2017 INSC 35417 April 2017Disposed off

Vipulbhai Mansingbhai Chaudhary, who continued as Chairman of a district cooperative milk union beyond his three‑year term, was served a show‑cause notice under s.76B(1) and (2) of the Gujarat Co‑operative Societies Act, 1961. The Registrar removed him and disqualified him for three years; a later order extended the di

H. LAKSHMAIAH REDDY & ORS.versusL. VENKATESH REDDY

2015 INSC 33517 April 2015Appeal(s) allowed

The plaintiff, son of Guramma and the first defendant, claimed ownership of a property originally purchased by his mother and later mutated in his name after her death, asserting that the first defendant had relinquished his half‑share. The first defendant, who later remarried, contested this, arguing that mutation doe

MOHAN LALversusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN

2015 INSC 33417 April 2015Dismissed

Mohan Lal was convicted for possession of 10 kg of opium under Section 18 of the NDPS Act and for theft under Sections 457 and 380 of the IPC. He argued that the offence occurred before the NDPS Act came into force, that applying the Act was retrospective and violative of Art.20(1) of the Constitution, that the seizure

ASSOCIATION OF UNIFIED TELE SERVICES PROVIDERS & OTHERSversusUNION OF INDIA

2014 INSC 29417 April 2014Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined whether the Comptroller and Auditor General of India (CAG) could audit the accounts of private telecom service providers under the Unified Access Services (UAS) licences to verify revenue sharing with the Union. Service providers argued that the CAG’s powers under Article 149 of the Constitut

JATYA PAL SINGH & ORS.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2013 INSC 26417 April 2013Dismissed

The appellants, former employees of the Overseas Communication Service (OCS), were transferred to Videsh Sanchar Nigam Limited (VSNL) and later to Tata Communications Limited (TCL) after the government's disinvestment. They challenged the termination of their services, arguing that VSNL/TCL was a "State" or "other auth

KURAPATI MARIA DASversusDR. AMBEDKAR SEVA SAMAJAN & ORS.

2009 INSC 55217 April 2009Dismissed

Kurapati Maria Das was elected as a councilor and subsequently as chairperson of Bapatla Municipal Council, a seat reserved for the Scheduled Caste (Mala). Petitioners alleged that he was not a Scheduled Caste member but a Christian belonging to a Backward Class and that he had obtained caste certificates fraudulently.

U .P. POWER CORPORATION LTD. AND ANR.versusBIJLI MAZDOOR SANGH AND ORS.

[2007] 5 S.C.R. 25617 April 2007Appeal(s) allowed

U.P. Power Corporation Ltd terminated two daily‑wage Chowkidars in 1979. The Industrial Tribunal held the termination illegal under s.25‑F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 and s.6‑N of the U.P. Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, ordered their reinstatement and deemed them regularised after three years. The High Court d

NARENDERA NATH KHAWAREversusPARASNATH KHAWARE AND ORS.

2003 INSC 24017 April 2003Disposed off

The complainant, Narendra Nath Khaware, filed a Special Leave Petition under Article 136 of the Constitution challenging the High Court's dismissal of the State's appeal against the acquittal of seven accused in the murder of his son, Diwakar Khaware. The Supreme Court held that a private person may invoke Article 136

SECRETARY, ANDHRA PRADESH PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSIONversusY.V.V.R. SRINIVASULU AND ORS.

2003 INSC 24217 April 2003Appeal(s) allowed

The Andhra Pradesh Public Service Commission invited applications for Group‑HA services and selected candidates on the basis of written examination and interview. Three respondents, who possessed an additional law degree but did not disclose it in their applications, were not appointed and claimed that the service rule

M/S. SOMAIYA ORGANICS (INDIA) LTD.versusSTATE OF UTT AR PRADESH AND ANR.

2001 INSC 21117 April 2001Case Partly allowed

The appellant, Mis. Somaiya Organics (India) Ltd., manufactured industrial alcohol and was initially exempt from a vend fee under the U.P. Excise Act, 1910. The exemption was withdrawn in 1979 and the company filed writ petitions; the High Court ordered it to give a bank guarantee and/or deposit amounts in a separate a

STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS.versusTARA SINGH SHAHI

1996 INSC 54017 April 1996Appeal(s) allowed

Guru Nanak College, a private institution affiliated to Guru Nanak Dev University, was taken over by the State of Punjab under a gift deed dated 11 July 1983. The deed stipulated that only staff possessing the requisite qualifications would be absorbed as new entrants and that the incumbent Principal would be taken in

KAMLESHKUMAR ISHWARDAS PATEL ETC. ETC.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS. ETC. ETC.

1995 INSC 26217 April 1995

The Supreme Court examined whether an officer specially empowered under the COFEPOSA Act or the PIT NDPS Act to make a preventive detention order is required to consider the detainee's representation against that order. It held that the officer who makes the order is the detaining authority and must afford the detainee

SMT. PREM DEVI & ANOTHERversusDELHI ADMINISTRATION & ORS.

1989 INSC 13217 April 1989Case Allowed

The Supreme Court considered the case of two former employees of Nari Niketan, an institution fully funded and controlled by the Delhi Administration, who after the institution’s takeover in 1979 were absorbed into the Delhi Administration’s service on the same pay scale. Upon retirement they were denied pensionary ben

MANICK CHAND PAUL & OTHERS ETC.versusUNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

1984 INSC 8217 April 1984Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined writ petitions filed by licensed gold dealers challenging several provisions of the Gold Control Act, 1968 (as amended) and its associated rules on the grounds that they violated Articles 14, 19(1)(g), 301 and 302 of the Constitution. The petitioners argued that sections 16(7), 52, 79 (and it

ABDUL REHMAN ANTULAYversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS. ETC.

1984 INSC 8517 April 1984Dismissed

The petitioners filed a writ petition under Article 32 of the Constitution challenging the validity of an order and judgment previously passed by this Court. The central issue was whether the Supreme Court could entertain a writ petition against its own order or judgment. The Court held that a writ petition cannot be u

UMA SHANKAR SHARMAversusTHE UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

1980 INSC 8817 April 1980Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant was appointed as a temporary Inspector of Central Excise on the basis that he was a sportsman who had represented his university in an Inter‑University Tournament. He had qualified and been selected to represent Mithila University in the 1972 tournament but was unable to participate due to a serious illne

JAVED NIAZ BEG AND ANR.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ANR.

1980 INSC 8717 April 1980Dismissed

The petitioners, candidates from the Hindi belt, challenged a 1979 notification that exempted candidates from the North Eastern States and Union Territories (Arunachal Pradesh, Manipur, Meghalaya, Mizoram, Nagaland) from taking Paper I on Indian Languages in the Civil Services Examination, alleging discrimination and v

VISHVJEET AND OTHERSversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND ANOTHER

2026 INSC 25417 March 2026Disposed off

The petitioners, contractual toll‑collection employees, were arrested after an altercation with an advocate who allegedly refused to pay toll charges, leading to an FIR under several sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. While one lawyer filed a bail application, members of the Barabanki Bar and the Bar Council enga

BANK OF INDIA & ORS.versusMUTHYALA SAIBABA SURYANARAYANA MURTHY & ANR.

2025 INSC 37317 March 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant Bank of India issued a circular in August 2010 inviting eligible retired employees to opt for its Employees’ Pension Scheme by 30 October 2010. The respondent, a retired employee, returned to India before the deadline but failed to submit his application within the stipulated period, citing surgery and la

AFJAL ALI SHA @ ABJAL SHAUKAT SHAversusSTATE OF WEST BENGAL & ORS

2023 INSC 25717 March 2023Directions issued

The petitioner, brother of a murder victim, sought transfer of the criminal trial from West Bengal to Assam, alleging bias, witness intimidation, and procedural irregularities including a state‑issued notification to withdraw prosecution. The High Court set aside the withdrawal order and directed the trial to continue,

MODI RUBBER LIMITEDversusCONTINENTAL CARBON INDIA LTD.

2023 INSC 24617 March 2023Disposed off

Modi Rubber Ltd., a sick industrial company, obtained a rehabilitation scheme approved by the BIFR under the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985, which scaled down the dues of unsecured creditors, including Continental Carbon India Ltd. The Delhi High Court held that an unsecured creditor could ref

GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI THROUGH THE SECRETARY, LAND AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT & ANOTHERversusM/S. K.L. RATHI STEELS LIMITED AND OTHERS

2023 INSC 25917 March 2023Matter referred to larger bench

The Government of NCT of Delhi and the Delhi Development Authority sought review of several civil appeals that had been dismissed on the basis of the Supreme Court’s decision in Pune Municipal Corporation v. Harakchand Misirimal Solanki, which interpreted Section 24(2) of the 2013 Land Acquisition Act. After the Consti

BIJAY KUMAR SHARMA & ORS.versusRANCHI UNIVERSITY & ORS.

2021 INSC 19117 March 2021Dismissed

The State Government of Bihar issued a Departmental Order (D.O.) on 28 July 1981 to merge the pay scales of Lower Division and Upper Division Assistants/Clerks in Patna University, later extending the scheme to other universities. Subsequent communications in 1982, 1989 and 1990 led the Vice‑Chancellor of Ranchi Univer

UNION OF INDIA & ORS.versusLT. CDR. ANNIE NAGARAJA & ORS.

2020 INSC 30017 March 2020Disposed off

The case concerned women Short Service Commission (SSC) officers of the Indian Navy who, after completing fourteen years of service, were denied consideration for Permanent Commission (PC) despite policy letters and regulations indicating such a right. The petitioners challenged the 2008 policy letter that made PC gran

DELHI INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT LTD.versusINTERNATIONAL LEASE FINANCE CORPN. & OTHERS

2015 INSC 23017 March 2015Appeal(s) allowed

Delhi International Airport Ltd (DIAL) detained eight aircraft leased by International Lease Finance Corp (ILFC) for non‑payment of landing, parking and housing charges amounting to over Rs 10 crore. The Delhi High Court ordered the release of the aircraft on the basis of minutes of a meeting held on 26 March 2013 invo

STATE OF M.P. & ORS.versusMALA BANERJEE

2015 INSC 22717 March 2015Dismissed

The case concerned whether lecturers/teachers employed by the Madhya Pradesh Education and Tribal Welfare Department were entitled to the second increment (Kramonnati) under the Kramonnati Scheme introduced on 19 April 1999. The State Government had granted this benefit to teachers only from 1 August 2003, arguing that

VIKRAM CEMENT & ANR.versusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH & ORS.

2015 INSC 22517 March 2015Appeal(s) allowed

Vikram Cement and two other units of Grasim Industries, which paid entry tax on coal, gypsum and bauxite under the Madhya Pradesh Entry Tax Act, 1976, challenged a State notification dated 4 May 1999 that reduced the tax rate to 1% for the period 1.5.1997‑30.9.1997 but attached an Explanation that any tax already paid

STATE OF H.P. & ANR.versusANJANA DEVI & ORS.

2009 INSC 35817 March 2009Appeal(s) allowed

The appeal concerned two ex‑servicemen who were appointed to general (non‑reserved) technical posts in the Himachal Pradesh State Public Works Department before reservation for ex‑servicemen in technical services came into force on 3 May 1983. They claimed the option to accept a later reserved vacancy and sought to hav

GUJARAT AMBUJA CEMENTS LTD. AND ANR.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ANR.

2005 INSC 15617 March 2005Dismissed

The petitioners, customers of goods‑transport operators and clearing‑and‑forwarding agents, challenged the constitutional validity of Sections 116 and 117 of the Finance Act 2000 and Section 158 of the Finance Act 2003 which retrospectively validated service‑tax levies that had been struck down in *Laghu Udyog Bharati*

M/S. S.J.S. BUSINESS ENTERPRISES (P) LTD.versusSTATE OF BIHAR AND ORS.

2004 INSC 18117 March 2004Leave Granted & Allowed

The appellant, S.J.S. Business Enterprises Ltd., had obtained a loan from Bihar State Credit and Investment Corporation Ltd. (BICICO) for a hotel project but defaulted, prompting BICICO to invoke Section 29 of the State Financial Corporations Act, 1951 to sell the hotel. After a series of valuations, BICICO issued a se

MAKTOOL SINGHversusSTATE OF PUNJAB

1999 INSC 11117 March 1999Disposed off

The appellant, Maktool Singh, challenged the conviction and sentence imposed under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act, 1985, seeking suspension of the sentence pending appeal. The High Court refused suspension, prompting an appeal to the Supreme Court. The Court examined whether Section 32A of th

UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.versusBRIJ LAL THAKUR

1997 INSC 27817 March 1997Appeal(s) allowed

The vacancy for an E.C.G. Technician in the Northern Railway Hospital was filled by promoting a Scheduled Caste candidate, Prakash Kaur, under a 40‑point roster and rule of rotation that reserved the post for SCs. An unsuccessful general‑category candidate challenged the promotion, arguing that reserving a solitary pos

UNION OF INDIAversusP.N. MENON AND ORS.

1994 INSC 11817 March 1994Appeal(s) allowed

The Union of India appealed against a High Court order that had upheld a writ petition filed by retired government servants (P.N. Menon and others) who argued that Office Memorandum No. F‑19(4)‑E.V./79 of 25 May 1979, which treated a portion of dearness allowance as "dearness pay" for pension and gratuity calculations,

NARENDRA KUMAR AND ANR. ETC.versusDHARAM DUTT AND ANR. ETC.

1993 INSC 9917 March 1993Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined several writ petitions filed by employees of the New Delhi Municipal Committee (NDMC) seeking the benefit of the Shiv Shankar Committee (SSC) pay‑scales on the ground of equal pay for equal work under Article 39(d) of the Constitution. The petitions concerned various categories – auto‑worksho

SUBHELAL @ SUSHIL SAHUversusTHE STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

2025 INSC 24217 February 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Subhelal @ Sushil Sahu, was charged with offences under Sections 420, 201, 120‑B read with Section 34 of the IPC in a crypto‑currency scam involving about Rs.4 crore, of which Rs.35 lakh was attributed to him. He had been in custody since December 2023 while the trial, conducted before a Chief Judicial M

JAIDEEP BOSEversusM/S BID AND HAMMER AUCTIONEERS PRIVATE LIMITED

2025 INSC 24117 February 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The complainant filed a private criminal defamation complaint under Section 200 CrPC alleging that fourteen news articles published in various newspapers defamed the authenticity of paintings to be auctioned by the complainant. The trial magistrate took cognizance, registered the complaint and issued summons to the acc

S. M. PASHA & ORSversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS.

2023 INSC 13117 February 2023Disposed off

The petitioners, who are tenants occupying certain premises, filed Special Leave Petitions (SLPs) challenging the termination of a development agreement that favored respondent No. 5, a developer. While the SLPs were pending, the Maharashtra Housing and Area Development Authority (MHADA) terminated that agreement and e

SHELLY OBEROI & ANR.versusOFFICE OF LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR OF DELHI & ORS.

2023 INSC 13217 February 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The petitioners, including a prospective mayoral candidate, challenged the conduct of the first meeting of the Delhi Municipal Corporation after the 2022 elections, seeking clarification on whether members nominated under Section 3(3)(b)(i) of the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, 1957 have voting rights in the election

ADANI GAS LIMITEDversusPETROLEUM AND NATURAL GAS REGULATORY BOARD AND ORS.

2020 INSC 19917 February 2020Dismissed

The Petroleum and Natural Gas Regulatory Board (PNGRB) conducted the ninth round of bidding for city or local natural gas distribution networks (CGD) in 2018. After opening technical bids, the Board introduced an internal note on 23 July 2018 that suggested a 2%–100% range of total households (based on the 2011 Census)

PRAVEENBHAI S. KHAMBHAYATAversusUNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. & ORS.

2015 INSC 12817 February 2015Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, owner of two vehicles, claimed that United India Insurance Company should indemnify him for the death of his employee, Ramesh Lalmani Yadav, who was a cleaner and died while filling water in the radiator of a second vehicle on the employer's direction. The Labour Court held the owner jointly liable with

UNION OF INDIA ETC.versusGIANI

2011 INSC 13217 February 2011Case Partly allowed

The Union of India appealed against a High Court order that awarded land owners compensation under Section 23(1A) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The acquisition proceedings began in 1965 and the Collector's award was passed on 9 July 1980, before the amendment (Act 68 of 1984) that introduced Section 23(1A) became

B. MANMAD REDDY & ORS.versusCHANDRA PRAKASH REDDY & ORS.

2010 INSC 10517 February 2010Dismissed

The Supreme Court considered appeals filed by direct recruits to the Andhra Pradesh State Educational Service challenging the constitutionality of Note 6 to Rule 3 of the Andhra Pradesh Education Service Rules, which allocated promotion vacancies in Class II Category 1 posts on the basis of whether an officer was a dir

SNEH GUPTAversusDEVI SARUP & ORS.

2009 INSC 20117 February 2009Dismissed

The appellant, Sneh Gupta, an heir of Munni Devi, challenged a compromise decree that had been entered into by the original plaintiff Veena Nirwani and certain defendants during the pendency of two suits concerning land mutation and alleged fraud. The compromise resulted in the withdrawal of both suits, but Gupta and o

COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, CALCUTTA ETC. ETC.versusM/S. INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LTD. AND ANR.

2004 INSC 12017 February 2004Dismissed

The Commissioner of Customs issued a show‑cause notice to Indian Oil Corporation alleging that the company had misdeclared the value of imported petroleum products by including demurrage charges paid to ship owners. The Revenue demanded additional customs duty and penalty, but the Customs Excise and Gold (Control) Appe

GITHA HARIHARAN AND ANR .versusRESERVE BANK OF INDIA AND ANR.

1999 INSC 6617 February 1999Disposed off

The petitioners, a mother and father, applied to the Reserve Bank of India for relief bonds in their minor son's name, with the mother signing as guardian. RBI rejected the application, insisting on the father's signature or a guardianship certificate, relying on Section 6(a) of the Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act,

STATE OF KERALA AND ORS. ETC.versusO.C. KUTTAN AND ORS. ETC.

1999 INSC 6717 February 1999Appeal(s) allowed

On July 23, 1996 a FIR was lodged under IPC sections 366A, 372, 376 and 344 r/w 34 and the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act based on a victim's detailed statement of exploitation and sexual assault. Five influential accused filed writ petitions in the Kerala High Court seeking quashing of the FIR, and the High Court, a

M.H. DEVENDRAPPAversusTHE KARNATAKA STATE SMALL INDUSTRIES DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION

1998 INSC 9717 February 1998Dismissed

The appellant, an Assistant Manager of Karnataka State Small Industries Development Corporation and President of its Employees' Welfare Association, wrote a letter to the Governor alleging mismanagement and issued a press statement criticizing a senior official. The corporation charged him under Rule 22 of its service

THE STATE OF TAMIL NADU AND ORS.versusA. GURUSAMY

1997 INSC 14717 February 1997Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent, A. Gurusamy, obtained a certificate in 1971 claiming Scheduled Tribe (Kattunaicken) status, which was later cancelled after an enquiry revealed he belonged to a Scheduled Caste (Thotti). He filed a civil suit seeking a declaration that he is a Scheduled Tribe; the trial court and appellate court granted

VINAY PRAKASH AND ORS.versusSTATE OF BIHAR & ORS.

1997 INSC 15217 February 1997Dismissed

The petitioners, members of the Lohar community in Bihar, sought recognition as a Scheduled Tribe (ST) under the name "Lohara" based on a Presidential notification. The Supreme Court examined whether the erroneous inclusion of "Lohars" in the Hindi translation of the notification, absent in the English version, could c

GUJCHEM DISTILLERS INDIA LTD.versusSTATE OF GUJARAT AND ANR.

1992 INSC 4717 February 1992Dismissed

Gujchem Distillers India Ltd, a manufacturer of industrial alcohol, was required under a licence to pay supervisory charges to a staff appointed by the Gujarat State under Section 58(A) of the Bombay Prohibition Act, 1949. The company challenged the constitutional validity of that provision, arguing that the State had

RAMENDRA SINGHversusJAGDISH PRASAD AND ORS.

1984 INSC 3617 February 1984Dismissed

The case arose from the Bihar Public Works Department's appointment of twelve mechanical sub‑overseers on a temporary basis during a World Bank project in 1964. The appointments were made retrospectively, with effect from the date of publication of their diploma examination results, and were later challenged as violati

RAMESHCHANDRA KACHARDAS PORWAL & ORS.versusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS. ETC.

1981 INSC 3617 February 1981Dismissed

The petitioners, wholesale traders in onions, potatoes and other produce, challenged notifications under the Maharashtra Agricultural Produce Marketing (Regulation) Act, 1963 that required them to shift their business to newly declared principal market yards and to conduct all marketing of declared agricultural produce

STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AND ANR.versusPARKASH CHAND

2019 INSC 5517 January 2019Appeal(s) allowed

The father of Parkash Chand, a peon in the Himachal Pradesh Revenue Department, died in service in 1997 while Chand was a minor. After attaining majority, Chand applied for a compassionate appointment but his request was rejected on the ground that his elder brother was already employed with a state undertaking. Chand

SPEAKER, ORISSA LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLYversusUTKAL KESHARI PARIDA

2013 INSC 3817 January 2013Dismissed

Four legislators elected on a National Congress Party (NCP) ticket defected to the ruling Biju Janata Dal (BJD) in the Orissa Legislative Assembly. The NCP state president filed disqualification petitions before the Speaker under the Orissa Legislative Assembly (Disqualification on Ground of Defection) Rules, 1987, see

KALLAKKURICHI TALUK RETIRED OFFICIAL ASSOCIATION, TAMILNADU, ETC.versusSTATE OF TAMILNADU

2013 INSC 4017 January 2013Appeal(s) allowed

The Kallakkurichi Taluk Retired Officials Association challenged a Tamil Nadu Government Order dated 9 August 1989 that treated the component of dearness allowance as dearness pay for pension calculation differently for employees retiring before and after 1 June 1988, resulting in a lower pension for the latter group.

STATE OF KARNATAKAversusVISHWABHARATHI HOUSE BUILDING COOPERATIVE SOCIETY AND ORS.

2003 INSC 1917 January 2003Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined the constitutional validity of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, particularly the Parliament's power to create a three‑tier consumer dispute redressal system parallel to the regular courts. The petitioners argued that Parliament lacked competence to establish such tribunals and that the Act

M/S. ORISSA TEXTILE AND STEEL LTD.versusSTATE OE ORISSA AND ORS.

2002 INSC 3117 January 2002Directions issued

The Supreme Court examined the constitutional validity of the amended Section 25‑0 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (and the identical Section 6‑W of the U.P. Industrial Disputes Act) which governs the closure of large industrial undertakings. The Court considered whether the procedural and substantive defects iden

THE STATE BANK OF INDOREversusGO VIND RAO

1997 INSC 3317 January 1997Appeal(s) allowed

Govindrao, an agent of the State Bank of Indore, was charged with causing loss to the bank by allowing large loans to be granted in violation of banking rules, which later became irrecoverable. The disciplinary authority dismissed him from service, and his subsequent appeals—including a special appeal—were rejected. Af

CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATIONversusSUBODH KUMAR DUTTA AND ANR.

1997 INSC 3517 January 1997Disposed off

The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) filed a charge sheet against Subodh Kumar Dutta under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 for allegedly accepting a bribe of Rs. 700. A Special Judge, appointed under the West Bengal Special Courts Act, 1949, took cognizance of the offence on 9 July 1988. The 1947 Act was re

STATE OF UP AND ANR. ETC.versusC.O.D. CHHEOKI EMPLOYEES' CO-OP SOCIETY LTD. AND ORS. ETC.

1997 INSC 4017 January 1997Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Uttar Pradesh challenged provisions of the Uttar Pradesh Co-operative Societies Act, 1965 and the 1968 Rules that reserve seats for Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, Other Backward Classes and women in the Committee of Management of co‑operative societies, arguing that the reservation and nomination powe

AFZAL AND ANR.versusSTATE OF HARYANA AND ORS.

1996 INSC 8417 January 1996Disposed off

Two minor boys were illegally detained by police to coerce a criminal suspect. The Supreme Court ordered the police to file counter‑affidavits denying the detention, but the affidavits were later found to be false and the signature of Superintendent M.S. Ahlawat was forged by a head constable on instructions from senio

THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, HYDERABAD SPECIAL BENCH, HYDERABADversusTHE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (ASSTTS.) III , HYDRABAD , ANDHRA PRADESH AND ORS.

1996 INSC 8617 January 1996Disposed off

Three income‑tax appeals before the Hyderabad Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) involved a common question of law under section 115‑J of the Income Tax Act. The President of the ITAT, exercising his power under section 255(3), constituted a Special Bench of three members to hear the appeals, which were

E.K. CHANDRASENAN ETC. ETC.versusSTATE OF KERALA

1995 INSC 4317 January 1995Disposed off

The case involved ten accused who were charged with conspiracy to supply spurious liquor that caused 70 deaths and permanent loss of sight to 24 persons. The High Court convicted five of them under sections 326, 328 and 272 of the IPC and sentenced them to rigorous imprisonment. The appellants filed appeals under Artic

RAM DEO BHANDARI AND ORS. ETC. ETC.versusELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA AND ORS. ETC. ETC.

1995 INSC 4217 January 1995Disposed off

The Supreme Court considered writ petitions filed under Article 32 challenging a press note issued by the Election Commission that elections in Bihar and Orissa would not be held unless photo identity cards were supplied to all eligible voters. The Commission had earlier directed states, under Rule 28 of the Registrati

REVENUE OFFICER & ORS.versusPRAFULLA KUMAR PATI & ORS.

1990 INSC 1317 January 1990Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, Revenue Officer and others, sought restoration of lands sold by two respondents (identified as "Rajaka" in sale deeds) to a Brahmin purchaser. The respondents produced caste certificates and records showing they belong to the "Dhoba" community, a Scheduled Caste under the Constitution (Scheduled Castes)

STATE OF U.P. & ORS.versusMAHARAJA DHARMANDER PRASAD SINGH ETC

1989 INSC 1617 January 1989Case Partly allowed

The lessees of a Nazool lease applied to the Lucknow Development Authority for permission to construct a multi‑storeyed building, which was granted on 31 January 1985. The State Government later issued directions alleging violations of lease conditions and, after a show‑cause notice, cancelled the lease and the buildin

RAMESH CHANDversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

1985 INSC 517 January 1985Appeal(s) allowed

Ramesh Chand was convicted under sections 302 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code for the murder of Om Prakash based on the prosecution's claim that he, along with two others, stabbed the victim at night near Hindon Bridge and was found with a blood‑stained knife. The defence argued that Chand was merely the taxi driver, t

U.P. AVAS EVAM VIKAS PARISHAD THROUGH HOUSING COMMISSIONER & ANR.versusNOOR MOHAMMAD & ORS.

2021 INSC 90116 December 2021Appeal(s) allowed

The Uttar Pradesh Avas Evam Vikas Parishad (appellant) sought to cancel a notification dated 15 September 2005 that rescinded an earlier notification of 7 April 2003 which had released land from acquisition under Section 48(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The land owners (respondents) had obtained the 2003 notifi

P. SATYANARAYANAversusNANDYALA RAMA KRISHNA REDDY

2021 INSC 90816 December 2021Dismissed

The respondent-plaintiff filed a suit seeking a declaration of ownership of agricultural land and an interim injunction against the petitioner. The trial court dismissed the interim injunction, but the High Court reversed that order, granting the injunction based on a certificate issued under Section 38‑E of the Andhra

MUKUL KUMAR TYAGIversusTHE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND ORS.

2019 INSC 138016 December 2019Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined the recruitment of Technician Grade‑II officers by Uttar Pradesh Power Corporation Ltd. and the Uttar Pradesh Electricity Service Commission, where the advertisement required a Certificate of Computer Concept (CCC) or an equivalent qualification. Candidates were allowed to self‑declare equiva

AHMEDABAD MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONversusGTL INFRASTRUCTURE LTD. & ORS. ETC.

2016 INSC 115316 December 2016Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined whether Gujarat's municipal tax provisions could levy a tax on mobile telephone towers. The petitioners (Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation) argued that mobile towers are not "land or building" under Entry 49 of List II of the Seventh Schedule, rendering the tax ultra‑violet. The Court interpret

STATE BANK OF INDIAversusSANTOSH GUPTA AND ANR. ETC.

2016 INSC 115716 December 2016Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined whether the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI) could be applied in the State of Jammu & Kashmir. The High Court had held that key provisions of SARFAESI were ultra‑vires Parliament because they conflicted with Sectio

K.B. RAMACHANDRA RAJE URS (DEAD) BY LRS.versusSTATE OF KARNATAKA& ORS. ETC.

2015 INSC 92816 December 2015Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined the acquisition of 94 acres 28 gunthas of land in Vijayashreepura under the Mysore Improvement Act, 1903, which was used to allot 55 acres to JSS Mahavidyapeetha (respondent No.28). The Court found that the statutory requirement of a published scheme before issuing a preliminary notification

SUPREME COURT ADVOCATES-ON-RECORD ASSOCIATION AND ANOTHERversusUNION OF INDIA

2015 INSC 28516 December 2015Disposed off

The Supreme Court heard a batch of writ petitions filed by the Supreme Court Advocates‑on‑Record Association seeking reforms in the collegium system for appointing judges to the higher judiciary. Various stakeholders, including senior counsel and the Bar Council of India, submitted suggestions on transparency, eligibil

P. MAHALINGAMversusMONICA KUMAR & ANR.

2011 INSC 84716 December 2011Disposed off

The appellants, medical students, alleged that they were brutally assaulted by police officers while serving a dasti summons issued by the Supreme Court to the SHO of Sector 39 Police Station, Noida. The High Court dismissed their petition for a CBI inquiry on the ground that no FIR had been registered and directed the

D.N. JEEVARAJU & ANR.versusD. SUDHAKAR & ORS. ETC.

2010 INSC 89316 December 2010Dismissed

Five independent MLAs who had supported the BJP government in Karnataka withdrew their support and were disqualified under paragraph 2(2) of the Tenth Schedule. They filed writ petitions challenging the disqualification and sought to amend paragraph 9 of their petitions, which mistakenly stated that they had not left t

DIRECTOR, C.B.I. & ANR.versusD.P. SINGH

2009 INSC 131216 December 2009Appeal(s) allowed

D.P. Singh, a Uttar Pradesh Police Sub‑Inspector, was deputed to the CBI in 1966 and later appointed to higher posts on deputation quota, including an ad‑hoc appointment as Deputy Superintendent of Police (Dy.SP) in 1977. He was formally absorbed into the CBI as Dy.SP on 29 June 1987 after a UPSC recommendation. Singh

LAJPAT RAI MEHTAversusSECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT OF PUNJAB, DEPARTMENT OF IRRIGATION & POWER

2008 INSC 144516 December 2008Dismissed

Lajpat Rai Mehta, a draftsman in the Punjab Irrigation & Power Department, was on unauthorized leave from 30 April 1981 until his superannuation on 30 September 1994. He sued for a declaration that he was entitled to pension and other retiral benefits. The trial court dismissed the suit, but the first appellate court r

SAU KUSUMversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS.

2008 INSC 144716 December 2008Appeal(s) allowed

Smt. Sau Kusum, claiming to belong to the carpenter caste (known as Badhai in Madhya Pradesh and Sutar in Maharashtra), contested a panchayat election in Maharashtra for a seat reserved for OBCs. Her election was challenged on the ground that she was not an OBC and not a permanent resident of Maharashtra prior to 1967.

MAHESH YADAV & ANR.versusRAJESHWAR SINGH & ORS.

2008 INSC 145116 December 2008Appeal(s) allowed

In a suit for declaration of title and possession of land, six defendants were impleaded. Defendants 2 and 5 entered into a compromise with the plaintiff, while an ex‑parte decree was passed against defendants 1 and 6. The latter filed an application under Order IX Rule 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure to set aside th

PARENTS ASSOCIATION OF STUDENTSversusM.A. KHAN AND ANOTHER

2008 INSC 145216 December 2008Disposed off

The Parents Association of Students filed a writ petition seeking regulation of professional education fees in Uttar Pradesh. After the High Court’s Single Judge gave directions, the State issued a government order allowing a medical college (run by respondent No.1, M.A. Khan) to collect fees, which the association all

N.K. RAJGARHIAversusM/S. MAHAVIR PLANTATION LTD. AND ORS.

2005 INSC 62616 December 2005Dismissed

N.K. Rajgarhia sued Mahavir Plantation Ltd. for recovery of Rs. 75 lakh. The parties compromised, and a consent decree for Rs. 41,69,110 was passed, with a clause that dishonour of any cheque would make the whole balance payable and executable. The respondent defaulted, leading to execution proceedings and a further se

STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS.versusSATNAM KAUR AND ORS.

2005 INSC 62716 December 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Punjab advertised 31 posts and selected candidates through a process that was later challenged in a writ petition by some unsuccessful applicants, with only 18 of the selected candidates made parties. The Punjab & Haryana High Court quashed the entire selection process, a decision upheld by the Supreme Cou

STATE OF U.P.versusNEERAJ AWASTHI AND ORS.

2005 INSC 62916 December 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The Uttar Pradesh State Agricultural Produce Market Board appointed 1,021 employees between April 1996 and October 1997 without complying with the statutory provisions of the Uttar Pradesh Krishi Utpadan Mandi Adhiniyam, 1964 and its service regulations. The State later cancelled those appointments on a last‑come‑first

SONA CHANDI OAL COMMITTEE AND ORS.versusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2004 INSC 71916 December 2004Dismissed

The appellants, licensed money lenders, challenged the inspection fee levied under Section 9‑A of the Bombay Money‑Lenders Act, 1946 for renewal of their licences, contending that it was a tax in disguise, excessive and violative of Article 14. The State argued that the fee was a regulatory charge necessary for inspect

PEOPLE'S UNION FOR CIVIL LIBERTIES AND ANR.versusUNION OF INDIA

2003 INSC 72116 December 2003Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined a batch of writ petitions challenging the constitutional validity of the Prevention of Terrorist Act, 2002 (POTA). The petitioners argued that Parliament lacked legislative competence and that several provisions violated fundamental rights, including the right to privacy, freedom of speech, a

SMT. HARBANS KAURversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

1994 INSC 61516 December 1994Hearing Adjourned

Smt. Harbans Kaur filed a writ of habeas corpus under Article 32 alleging that her three sons were illegally detained, tortured and that one son, Gurbax Singh, died in police custody. The Court observed that two sons, Surinder Pal Singh and Sarvjeet Singh, had been produced before a Judicial Magistrate and remanded to

SH. P.K. SARIN AND ANR. ETC. ETCversusSTATE OF U.PAND ORS ETC.

1994 INSC 61816 December 1994Dismissed

The petitioners, members of the Uttar Pradesh Civil Service (Judicial Branch), challenged two 1975 notifications issued by the Governor under Article 237 of the Constitution which transformed the Uttar Pradesh Judicial Officers Service into a separate judicial service and made its members eligible for promotion only to

PIYUSH KANTILAL MEHTAversusCOMMISSIONER OF POLICE, AHMEDABAD CITY AND ANOTHER

1988 INSC 36916 December 1988Case Allowed

The petitioner, Piyush Kantilal Mehta, was detained under the Gujarat Prevention of Anti-Social Activities Act, 1985 on the ground that he was a bootlegger who used force and created fear, allegedly affecting public order. He challenged the detention, arguing that the grounds were vague, that mere bootlegging does not

KEHAR SINGH AND ANR. ETC.versusUNION OF INDIA & ANR.

1988 INSC 36816 December 1988Disposed off

Kehar Singh was convicted and sentenced to death for his role in the assassination of Prime Minister Indira Gandhi. After his appeals and a review petition were dismissed, his son petitioned the President under Article 72 for a pardon, claiming innocence and seeking an oral hearing. The President refused both the heari

NIRMAL KUMAR CHOUDHARY & ORS. ETC.versusSTATE OF BIHAR AND ORS., ETC.

1987 INSC 37916 December 1987Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned the amalgamation of three separate engineering wings—Irrigation, Minor Irrigation and River Valley Projects—within the Bihar Department of Agriculture and the preparation of a combined gradation list. The State had merged the Irrigation and River Valley cadres in 1969 and later merged the Minor Irrig

KAILASH SONKARversusSMT. MAYA DEVI

1983 INSC 20016 December 1983Dismissed

The case concerned an election dispute in Madhya Pradesh where the respondent, Maya Devi, claimed to belong to the Katia scheduled caste despite being born to Christian parents. The appellant challenged her eligibility, arguing that conversion to Christianity caused a loss of caste and that reconversion could not reviv

P.K.RAMACHANDRA IYER & ORS.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

1983 INSC 20416 December 1983Appeal(s) allowed

The case arose from several writ and review petitions filed by senior scientists of the Indian Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR) and its affiliates alleging discrimination in pay scales, illegal selection procedures, and denial of statutory rights. The petitioners claimed that ICAR, though registered as a society

WG CDR A U TAYYABA (RETD) AND OTHERSversusUNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

2022 INSC 120616 November 2022Disposed off

The appellants, women Short Service Commissioned Officers (SSCO) of the Indian Air Force recruited between 1993-1998, were promised a Permanent Commission (PC) after five years of service under a 1991 policy circular and recruitment advertisements. Instead, they were granted extensions and denied PC, leading to a Publi

NANDINI SHARMA AND ANR.versusREGISTRAR SUPREME COURT OF INDIA AND ORS.

2022 INSC 120916 November 2022Dismissed

Nandini Sharma and another filed a writ petition under Article 32 challenging Rule 1(b), Rule 5 and Rule 7(c) of Order IV of the Supreme Court Rules, 2013, alleging that conferring exclusive rights to practice before the Supreme Court on Advocates on Record (AOR) is unreasonable, discriminatory and violative of Article

STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ANR.versusGORAKHNATH SITARAM KAMBLE & ORS.

2010 INSC 78316 November 2010Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent, a government teacher appointed in 1978, sought correction of his date of birth recorded in his service book after 28 years of service, alleging a clerical error. The Education Officer and Head Master rejected his application, citing Rule 38(2)(f) of the Maharashtra Civil Services (General Conditions) Ru

KRISHI UTPADAN MANDI PARISHAD AND ANR.versusI.T.C. LTD.

2006 INSC 85416 November 2006Disposed off

The appellant Mandi Parishad sought market fee on cut tobacco processed by ITC Ltd in Saharanpur and sent to its own factory in Calcutta and to contract manufacturers. The Mandi Samiti’s President exempted the consignment to Calcutta but referred the contract‑manufacturer case to the Director, who ordered a fresh decis

RAJESH RANJAN YADAV @ PAPPU YADAVversusCBI THROUGH ITS DIRECTOR

2006 INSC 85616 November 2006Dismissed

Rajesh Ranjan Yadav, a four‑time Member of Parliament, was charged with a triple murder under IPC sections 302, 34 and 120B, and under Section 27 of the Arms Act. After being in judicial custody for more than six years, he repeatedly applied for bail, arguing that continued detention violated his fundamental right to l

A.P. AGGRAWALversusGOVT. OF NATIONAL CAPITAL TERRITORY OF DELHI AND ANR.

1999 INSC 52016 November 1999Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, A.P. Aggarwal, was the second name on a selection panel for the post of Member, Sales‑Tax Appellate Tribunal. After the first appointee resigned within six months, the Central Government, contrary to Office Memorandum No. 39021118/84 dated 14‑May‑1987 and Section 13(4) of the Delhi Sales‑Tax Act, 1975, i

ASHWANI KUMAR AND ORS. ETC. ETC.versusSTATE OF BIHAR AND ORS. ETC. ETC.

1995 INSC 74316 November 1995Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined the massive appointment of over 6,000 Class III and IV employees by Dr. A.A. Mallick, Deputy Director of the Tuberculosis Scheme, without written orders and in violation of the 1980 and 1982 recruitment circulars. The appellants claimed that their casual appointments were not to any post, tha

AMITA KAUSHISH AND ORS.versusSANJAY KAUSHISH AND ORS.

1995 INSC 74816 November 1995Disposed off

The Supreme Court entertained an appeal under Article 136 seeking special leave to direct the Delhi High Court to fix an early date for the final hearing of a pending appeal. The High Court had earlier ordered the matter to be listed for hearing on October 17, 1994, but the date had lapsed and the appeal remained undec

JAI NARAIN RAMversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ORS.

1995 INSC 74916 November 1995Appeal(s) allowed

In 1988 the Uttar Pradesh government advertised fifteen Treasury Officer‑Accounts Officer posts, four of which were reserved for Scheduled Caste (SC) candidates. The State Public Service Commission (PSC) recommended four names, but those candidates never joined the service. The appellant, Jai Narain Ram, was the fourth

STATE OF M.P. AND ORS.versusSHYAMA PARDHI ETC. ETC.

1995 INSC 75016 November 1995Appeal(s) allowed

The Madhya Pradesh Public Health and Family Welfare Department’s 1989 recruitment rules for Auxiliary Nurse‑cum‑Midwife (ANM) required a 10+2 qualification with Physics, Chemistry and Biology. The respondents, who lacked this qualification, were nevertheless selected by the District Medical Officer for training and sub

STATE OF TAMIL NADU AND ANR. ETC.versusMAHALAKSHMI AMMAL AND ORS. ETC.

1995 INSC 75116 November 1995Appeal(s) allowed

The State acquired land under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, publishing a notification in 1978, making an award in 1986 and taking possession later that year. The respondents challenged the acquisition on grounds of alleged discrimination under Article 14, the effect of an errata notification, irregular service of not

UNION OF INDIAversusKOLLUNI RAMAIAH AND ORS.

1993 INSC 36916 November 1993

The Union of India sought to set aside an award that granted solatium (15%) and interest (6%) in a land acquisition case under the Requisitioning and Acquisition of Immovable Property Act, 1952. The land, requisitioned for defence, was initially compensated at Rs 10 per square yard; the Arbitrator raised it to Rs 15 an

INDRA SAWHNEY AND ORS. ETC. ETC.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS. ETC. ETC.

[1992] SUPP. 2 S.C.R. 45416 November 1992Disposed off

The case challenged the Office Memorandums of 1990 and 1991 providing 27% reservation for Socially and Educationally Backward Classes (SEBCs) and 10% for economically backward sections in central government services. The Supreme Court, in a 9-judge bench decision, settled the legal position on reservations under Articl

KAILASH CHANDER SHARMAversusSTATE OF HARYANA AND ORS.

1989 INSC 34916 November 1989Disposed off

K.C. Sharma was selected by the Haryana Public Service Commission for the post of Assistant District Attorney and placed 39th in the merit list. The State of Haryana had undertaken that any vacancy arising within one year would be filled by the selected candidates in order of merit, but later claimed that only 37 gener

GENERAL LABOUR UNION (RED FLAG) BOMBAYversusB. V. CHAVAN AND ORS.

1984 INSC 21416 November 1984Disposed off

The General Labour Union (Red Flag) Bombay filed two complaints alleging that the employers, Delta Wires Pvt. Ltd. and Delta Spokes Manufacturing Co., had imposed a lock‑out in violation of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 and the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1

BISHNU RAM BORAH & ANR.versusPARAG SAIKIA & ORS.

1983 INSC 17716 November 1983Disposed off

The dispute concerned the grant of a liquor licence for Jorhat Country Spirit Shop No. I under the Assam Excise Rules, which give preference to "educated unemployed youth". The Board of Revenue upheld the licence in favour of the appellants, Bishnu Ram Borah and Bipin Chand Borah, rejecting the claims of respondents Pa

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL U.P. LUCKNOW & ORS.versusSUSHIL KUMAR & ORS.

2025 INSC 124116 October 2025Disposed off

The Uttar Pradesh Legislative Council’s recruitment process for staff was challenged on grounds of unfairness, arbitrariness and collusiveness, leading to writ petitions and a special appeal. The High Court, while hearing the special appeal, directed a suo motu public interest litigation and ordered a preliminary enqui

LALU YADAVversusTHE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ORS.

2024 INSC 78216 October 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Lalu Yadav, was charged under Sections 376 and 313 of the IPC for alleged rape on a false promise of marriage, based on an FIR filed in 2018 for incidents allegedly occurring between 2013 and 2018. The complainant claimed that Yadav had deceived her, established a physical relationship without consent, a

XversusM/S SHAPOORJI PALLONJI AND COMPANY PVT. LTD. & ORS.

2023 INSC 91916 October 2023Disposed off

The petitioner, a 27‑year‑old mother of two, filed a writ petition under Article 32 seeking a medical termination of her pregnancy after discovering she was about 24 weeks pregnant, citing postpartum depression and financial constraints. The Court initially ordered termination, but a doctor from the AIIMS Medical Board

STATE OF U.P.versusSUDHIR KUMAR SINGH AND ORS.

2020 INSC 60316 October 2020Disposed off

The Uttar Pradesh State Warehousing Corporation repeatedly cancelled e‑tenders for handling and transport of foodgrains, eventually terminating the contract awarded to Sudhir Kumar Singh (Respondent No.1). Singh filed a writ petition under Art.226 challenging the cancellation, alleging a breach of the audi alteram part

HARIBHAI MALAVIYA AND ORS.versusTHE STATE OF GUJARAT AND ANR.

2019 INSC 114616 October 2019Disposed off

An FIR alleging land‑grab and extortion was filed in 2009, leading to a police investigation and a charge‑sheet. After the magistrate took cognizance and issued summons, the accused applied under s.173(8) CrPC for further investigation and for the magistrate to order a fresh FIR; the magistrate rejected these applicati

SANT RAMversusDHAN KAUR & ORS.

2015 INSC 79116 October 2015Appeal(s) allowed

The petitioner sought clarification of a Supreme Court order dated 21‑04‑2009, which recorded his statement that he would not press the prayer for mesne profits. The lower courts had awarded mesne profits of Rs.30 per month (with 10% increase every three years) and interest, while the petitioner had given up his claim

C. CHAKKARAVARTY AND ORS.versusTMT. M. SATYAVATHY, IAS AND ORS.

2015 INSC 79516 October 2015Disposed off

Petitioners C. Chakkaravarty and others filed a contempt petition under Article 129 of the Constitution and Section 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, alleging that the respondents, the Government of Pondicherry, violated the Supreme Court’s 2010 judgment in N. Suresh Nathan v. Union of India which mandated that promoti

SUPREME COURT ADVOCATES-ON-RECORD ASSOCIATION AND ANOTHERversusUNION OF INDIA

2015 INSC 28516 October 2015

The Supreme Court of India considered the constitutional validity of the Constitution (Ninety-ninth Amendment) Act, 2014 and the National Judicial Appointments Commission Act, 2014, which sought to replace the collegium system of appointing judges to the higher judiciary with a six-member National Judicial Appointments

J.V. BAHARUNI & ANR.versusSTATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.

2014 INSC 73216 October 2014Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants were convicted under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act for issuing dishonoured cheques. The trial magistrate recorded evidence and a successor magistrate delivered the judgment, leading the Gujarat High Court to order a de novo trial on the ground that the case was a summary trial and Section

STATE OF UTTARANCHAL & ORS.versusC.S.R.K.S. MEDICAL HEALTH SERVICES, UTTARANCHAL

2014 INSC 73116 October 2014Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined the applicability of the Uttaranchal Government Servants (Criterion for Recruitment by Promotion) Rules, 2004 to promotions from Group D to Group C posts. It held that Rule 1(3) excludes the need for Public Service Commission consultation for such promotions, and Rule 2 gives the 2004 Rules a

STATE OF GUJARAT AND ANR.versusGUJARAT REVENUE TRIBUNAL BAR ASSOCIATION AND ANR.

2012 INSC 47616 October 2012Dismissed

The State of Gujarat appointed the Secretary to the Government as President of the Gujarat Revenue Tribunal, a move challenged on the ground that the post is a judicial office and requires the High Court's consultation under Article 234 of the Constitution. The Gujarat High Court held that the Tribunal is a "court" and

MANOJ SHARMAversusSTATE & ORS.

2008 INSC 116616 October 2008Appeal(s) allowed

Manoj Sharma was charged in an FIR for offences including cheating, forgery and fraud under Sections 420, 468, 471, 34 and 120‑B IPC. The complainant and the accused later reached an amicable settlement and the complainant withdrew the allegations. The Delhi High Court refused to quash the FIR, prompting an appeal to t

SUSHIL KUMARversusRAKESH KUMAR

2003 INSC 55316 October 2003Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant challenged the election of the respondent to the Bihar Legislative Assembly on the ground that the respondent was under 25 years of age at the time of filing his nomination, violating Article 173(b) of the Constitution and Section 36(2) of the Representation of the People Act. The High Court dismissed the

STATE OF NAGALAND AND ANR.versusTOULVI KIBAMI AND ANR.

2003 INSC 55616 October 2003Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned the promotion of a diploma‑holding Superintending Engineer to the post of Additional Chief Engineer in Nagaland. The High Court set aside the promotion on the ground that only degree‑holders were eligible, but the Letters Patent Bench reversed that decision and directed the State to consider meritori

SURESHCHANDRA SINGH AND ORS.versusFERTILIZER CORPN. OF INDIA LTD. AND ORS.

2003 INSC 56016 October 2003Dismissed

The Government of India, following the Fifth Central Pay Commission, issued an Office Memorandum (OM) on 13 May 1998 to raise the retirement age of Central Government employees from 58 to 60 years, stipulating that it would take effect only after amendment of the relevant rules. The Ministry of Industry issued a second

UNION OF INDIA AND ANR.versusP.D. YADAV

2001 INSC 50916 October 2001Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined orders that forfeited the pensions of four military officers who had been convicted by General Court Martials and dismissed or cashiered. The respondents challenged the forfeiture on the grounds that the Army Pension Regulation 16(a) and Navy Pension Regulation 15(2) were inconsistent with th

STATE OF U.P.versusRAMESH CHANDRA SHARMA AND ORS.

1995 INSC 62816 October 1995Case Partly allowed

Three advocates appointed as Additional District Government Counsel (Criminal) in Uttar Pradesh had their term renewed repeatedly until the State Government denied further renewal on 1 October 1992. The Allahabad High Court quashed the denial as an arbitrary action, holding that the reason given—lack of a district reco

K.M. MOHAMAD ABDUL KHADER FIRMversusSTATE OF TAMIL NADU & ORS.

1984 INSC 19416 October 1984Dismissed

The petitioners challenged the constitutional validity of the Tamil Nadu Additional Sales Tax Act, 1976 (Act II of 1976) which amended the 1970 Act by introducing graded tax rates based on taxable turnover and prohibiting the passing on of the tax to consumers. They argued that the amendment exceeded the State’s legisl

THE STATE OF HARYANAversusJAI SINGH AND OTHERS

2025 INSC 112216 September 2025Dismissed

The State of Haryana amended the Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulation) Act, 1961 by inserting sub‑clause (6) to s.2(g) through Haryana Act No. 9 of 1992, which declared that lands reserved for village common purposes under the East Punjab Holdings (Consolidation and Prevention of Fragmentation) Act, 1948 would vest

NEETU KUMAR NAGAICHversusTHE STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND OTHERS

2020 INSC 54916 September 2020Case Allowed

Neetu Kumar Nagaich, the mother of a 21‑year‑old law student who died under suspicious circumstances, filed a writ petition under Article 32 seeking a de novo investigation of the homicide after alleging serious deficiencies in the Rajasthan police investigation and the filing of a closure report. The Supreme Court not

SONI KUMARIversusDEEPAK KUMAR

2015 INSC 66916 September 2015Appeal(s) allowed

Soni Kumari and Deepak Kumar, married in 2009, lived separately from 2014 due to irreconcilable differences and filed a joint petition for divorce by mutual consent under Section 13‑8(1) of the Hindu Marriage Act. The Family Court allowed the first motion but refused to waive the statutory six‑month cooling‑off period

SHRI KRISHAN AND ORS.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

2014 INSC 100816 September 2014Dismissed

The petitioners, canteen workers at the Mess/Canteen of the S&T Training Centre of Northern Railway, sought regularisation as railway employees, claiming they worked in a non‑statutory recognised canteen. The Central Administrative Tribunal held they were employed in a non‑statutory non‑recognised canteen because no sa

STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ANR.versusBAL KISHAN MATHUR (D) THROUGH LRS. & ORS.

2013 INSC 62216 September 2013Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Rajasthan filed a special writ appeal (DB Special Appeal Writ No.02033 of 2007) against an order of a Single Judge dated 19.05.2006 concerning an eviction under the Rajasthan Public Premises Act. The appeal was filed 98 days late; in the condonation application the State mistakenly recorded the filing date

SURENDRA PAL & ORS.versusSTATE OF U.P. & ANR.

2010 INSC 62216 September 2010Dismissed

The appellants, who had earlier demanded a compromise in a kidnapping case, allegedly opened fire with country‑made pistols and a rifle, killing three members of the victim's family and injuring three others. The first informant, PW‑1, lodged an FIR within five hours of the incident and identified the accused in both m

KEDAR NARAYAN PARIDA AND ORS.versusSTATE OF ORISSA AND ANR.

2009 INSC 114416 September 2009Dismissed

The petitioners were accused of murdering a woman’s husband; although the FIR named 19 persons, only a few were initially charge‑sheeted, allegedly due to the influence of a local MLA who provided alibis. The High Court, invoking its inherent powers under Article 226, directed the police to file charge‑sheets against a

MD. MUNNAversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

2005 INSC 42216 September 2005Dismissed

The petitioner Md. Munna, convicted of murder and sentenced to imprisonment for life, filed a writ petition under Article 32 seeking a writ of habeas corpus, claiming that having served more than 21 years he should be released, contending that life imprisonment is equivalent to a term of 20 years under the West Bengal

MAHATMA GANDHI MISSIONversusCITY AND INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD. AND ORS.

2005 INSC 42316 September 2005Dismissed

The Mahatma Gandhi Mission, a charitable trust, sought land from CIDCO for a college, hospital, club, stadium and staff quarters. While agreements were executed for the college, hospital, club and stadium, no deed or possession was ever given for the staff quarters. CIDCO cancelled the allotment of the disputed land an

CENTRE FOR PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATIONversusUNION OF INDIA AND ANR.

2003 INSC 48216 September 2003Appeal(s) allowed

The Centre for Public Interest Litigation challenged the Government of India's decision to sell majority shares of Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd (HPCL) and Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd (BPCL) to private parties without amending the ESSO (Acquisition of Undertaking in India) Act, 1974, the Burma Shell Act, 197

STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS.versusMANJIT SINGH AND ORS.

2003 INSC 48716 September 2003Dismissed

The Punjab Public Service Commission (PSC) advertised 500 medical officer posts with reservations for Scheduled Castes and Balmikis/Majhbi Sikhs. The State Government’s policy was that candidates from reserved categories possessing the minimum qualifications should not be subjected to any test. Contrary to this, the PS

YOGINATH D. BAGDEversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR.

1999 INSC 41416 September 1999Appeal(s) allowed

Y.D. Bagde, a judicial officer of the Maharashtra subordinate judiciary, was charged with corrupt practices and an enquiry officer found the charges not proved, recommending reinstatement. The High Court's Disciplinary Committee disagreed, issued a show‑cause notice and recommended dismissal without giving Bagde a hear

AJIT SINGH AND ORS.versusTHE STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS.

1999 INSC 40716 September 1999Disposed off

The Supreme Court considered three interlocutory applications filed by the State of Punjab seeking clarification of its earlier judgments in Ajit Singh (1996) and Virpal Singh (1993) regarding seniority of reserved‑category officers promoted at roster points. The Court held that such roster‑point promotees cannot claim

KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD AND ANR.versusVALSALA K. AND ANR. ETC. ETC.

1999 INSC 41216 September 1999Dismissed

The Supreme Court considered whether the 1995 amendment to Sections 4 and 4A of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923, which increased compensation amounts and interest rates, applied to claims arising from accidents that occurred before the amendment’s effective date of 15 September 1995. Relying on the earlier decisio

RAO SOMASHEKARA AND ORS.versusSTATE OF KARNATAKA AND ANR.

1997 INSC 65716 September 1997Dismissed

The petitioners, secondary school teachers in Karnataka who were originally allotted from the former State of Hyderabad, claimed that the pay‑scale disparity persisting from 1 January 1957 to 31 December 1969 violated Article 14 of the Constitution. The State had, based on the Justice Tukol Commission report, equalised

KULDIP SINGHversusSTATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS

1996 INSC 105716 September 1996Dismissed

Head Constable Kuldip Singh was dismissed from the Punjab Police without a departmental enquiry under proviso (b) of Article 311(2) of the Constitution, on the ground that it was not reasonably practicable to hold an enquiry because witnesses feared for their lives. The dismissal was based primarily on a confession he

UNION OF INDIA ETC. ETC.versusHARI KRISHAN KHOSLA (DEAD) BY LRS. ETC. ETC.

1992 INSC 24916 September 1992Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned a large tract of land requisitioned in 1967 under the Defence of India Act and later acquired by the Central Government under Section 7 of the Requisitioning and Acquisition of Immovable Property Act, 1952. The compensation determined by the Competent Authority was refused to be paid, leading the own

PESALA NOOKARAJUversusTHE GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH & ORS

2023 INSC 73416 August 2023Dismissed

Pesala Nookaraju, a bootlegger, was preventively detained under Section 3(2) of the Andhra Pradesh Prevention of Dangerous Activities Act, 1986, with a 12‑month order confirmed by the State Government. He challenged the detention through a writ of habeas corpus, arguing that the proviso to Section 3(2) limits detention

SANDEEP ALIAS KALAversusSUPREME COURT OF INDIA

2022 INSC 83516 August 2022Disposed off

Sandeep alias Kala was acquitted of murder in the trial court, but the High Court reversed the acquittal and sentenced him to life imprisonment. He appealed to the Supreme Court under Section 2(a) of the Supreme Court (Enlargement of Criminal Appellate Jurisdiction) Act, 1970 and Section 379 of the CrPC, and the appeal

STATE OF U.P. & ORS.versusDR. DINESH SINGH CHAUHAN

2016 INSC 60416 August 2016Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined the validity of a Uttar Pradesh Government Order that reserved 30% of postgraduate medical degree seats for in‑service doctors, a scheme challenged as violative of Regulation 9 of the Medical Council of India (MCI) Post‑Graduate Medical Education Regulations, 2000. The Court held that Regulat

M/S V.K.M. KATTHA INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD.versusSTATE OF HARYANA & ORS.

2013 INSC 53816 August 2013Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, V.K.M. Kattha Industries Pvt. Ltd., a running industrial unit, challenged a land acquisition notification issued by the Haryana Government under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 for the development of an industrial estate. The company argued that the notification was not published in the local

VICE CHANCELLOR, GURU GHASIDAS UNIVERSITYversusCRAIG MCLEOD

2012 INSC 33416 August 2012Disposed off

The Vice Chancellor of Guru Ghasidas University sought to discipline a student, Craig McLeod, for allegedly assaulting a professor, suspending him and restraining his campus access. The High Court stayed the university's interim orders, prompting the university to appeal to the Supreme Court under Article 136. The Supr

LATA WADHWA AND ORS.versusSTATE OF BIHAR AND ORS.

2001 INSC 37016 August 2001Disposed off

A fire during a Tata Iron and Steel Company celebration in Jamshedpur killed 60 and injured 113. The victims filed a writ petition under Articles 21 and 32 seeking compensation from the State of Bihar and the company. The Supreme Court appointed former CJI Y.V. Chandrachud to determine compensation using the multiplier

STATE OF MAHARASHTRAversusMANUBHAI PRAGAJI VASHI AND ORS.

1995 INSC 46316 August 1995Dismissed

The Supreme Court upheld a Bombay High Court order directing the State of Maharashtra to extend its grant‑in‑aid and pension‑cum‑gratuity schemes to all recognised private law colleges. The Court held that the State’s refusal to provide these benefits to private law colleges, while extending them to other non‑governmen

K. C. GUPTA AND 117 OTHERSversusLT. GOVERNOR OF DELHI AND 43 ORS.

1994 INSC 31916 August 1994Case Partly allowed

The case concerned the merger of teachers from the Municipal Corporation of Delhi into the Delhi Administration in 1970, creating an Administration Cadre and a Special (diminishing) Cadre. Disputes arose over how promotion ratios and seniority should be calculated between the two cadres, especially for Trained Graduate

STATE OF ORISSA AND ORS.versusSUDHIR KUMAR BISWAL AND ORS.

1994 INSC 32116 August 1994Disposed off

The State of Orissa challenged two provisions of the Orissa District Revenue Service (Method of Recruitment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 1983. The first was the proviso to Rule 5(1) allowing relaxation of the maximum age limit for certain categories, which the Orissa Administrative Tribunal held gave the Governmen

CAPTAIN VIRENDER KUMARversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

1993 INSC 26316 August 1993Dismissed

Captain V. Kumar, an advocate, filed a public interest petition before the Supreme Court alleging the need to cleanse the judiciary and seeking suo motu contempt action against the Registry. The Court observed that the petition was drafted in undignified language, contained unwarranted adjectives, and the petitioner be

RATTAN LAL & ORS. ETC.ETC.versusSTATE OF HARYANA & ORS.

1985 INSC 17716 August 1985Dismissed

The petitioners challenged the Haryana State Government’s practice of repeatedly appointing teachers on an ad‑hoc basis at the start of each academic year and terminating them before the next summer vacation, thereby denying them regular service benefits. The Supreme Court examined whether such a policy violated the eq

DHANANJOY DASversusDISTRICT MAGISTRATE & ANR.

1982 INSC 6316 August 1982Dismissed

The appellant, Dhananjoy Das, was detained under Section 3(3) of the National Security Act, 1980 and was served with four paragraphs of grounds. He challenged the order on the basis that the first paragraph was vague and that the grounds related to law and order rather than public order, violating his rights under Arti

SATENDER KUMAR ANTILversusCENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION & ANR.

2025 INSC 90916 July 2025Dismissed

The State of Haryana filed an application seeking modification of a Supreme Court order that required police to serve notices under Section 35 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, only through the mode prescribed in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, and not via electronic means such as WhatsApp.

TOSH KUMAR SHARMAversusHIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD & ORS. R1: HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD R2: STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH R3: SELECTION & APPOINTMENT COMMITTEE OF U.P.H.J.S. EXAMINATION

2025 INSC 92116 July 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Tosh Kumar Sharma, had ranked 38th in the merit list for the 2016 direct recruitment to the Uttar Pradesh Higher Judicial Service, where 37 General Category posts were advertised. The High Court forwarded the top 37 names for appointment, but the Governor approved only 36, leaving one vacancy. The appell

MALA DEVIversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2025 INSC 85516 July 2025Appeal(s) allowed

Mala Devi, the widow of a temporary railway employee who died in harness after 9 years 8 months of service, sought family pension under the Railway Pension Rules, 1993. The Central Administrative Tribunal and the Patna High Court dismissed her claim, holding that her husband’s service was not regularized and that the t

BIHAR STAFF SELECTION COMMISSION & ANR.versusHIMAL KUMARI & ANR. ETC.

2024 INSC 53116 July 2024Dismissed

The Bihar Staff Selection Commission advertised 152 City Manager posts, requiring a minimum qualifying percentage in the written test (32% for women) and awarding additional marks for experience. Respondent No.1, a female candidate with no experience, scored 22.5 out of 70 marks in the written exam, which equals 32.14%

K. P. NATARAJAN & ANR.versusMUTHALAMMAL & ORS.

2021 INSC 33716 July 2021Dismissed

The petitioners filed a suit for specific performance of a sale deed, naming a minor as the third defendant and seeking the appointment of a guardian under Order XXXII, Rule 3 of the CPC. The trial court passed an ex‑parte decree and allowed execution without properly appointing a guardian, later dismissing the respond

G H STATE BANK OF INDIA & ORS.versusMOHAMMAD BADRUDDIN

2019 INSC 76416 July 2019Disposed off

The State Bank of India (SBI) conducted a departmental inquiry against Mohammad Badruddin on five charges, finding only charge No. 4 proved. The Disciplinary Authority, disagreeing with the Inquiry Officer on charges 1 and 5, imposed removal from service, while an earlier appellate authority had altered a compulsory re

M/S. HOTEL QUEEN ROAD PVT. LTD. & ORS.versusMR. RAM PARSHOTAM MITTAL & ORS.

2013 INSC 46816 July 2013Dismissed

The Delhi High Court, after substantially hearing an appeal, allowed the appellants to withdraw the appeal and extended the interim relief granted earlier until 10 May 2010. The appellants contended that the High Court, having become functus officio upon permitting withdrawal, could not lawfully extend interim relief o

GIRIMALLAPPAversusTHE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER M & MIP & ANR

2012 INSC 28716 July 2012Dismissed

The petitioner’s 11‑acre land in Gobbur village was acquired under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 and initially awarded a market value of Rs. 3,800 per acre. He later sought a higher valuation through a Section 28‑A application, a remedy intended only for poor and inarticulate persons, and obtained Rs. 

M/S. DULARI EXPORTS LTD. & ORS.versusH.S.L.D.C. LTD. & ORS.

2009 INSC 91416 July 2009Dismissed

Dulari Exports Ltd. and others were allotted an industrial plot by H.S.I.D.C. Ltd. They paid four installments but failed to pay the fifth within the stipulated time. The corporation issued a notice stating that the plot was liable for resumption and offered the petitioners a chance to retain it at Rs.2200 per square m

HARYANA STATE INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATIONversusVEENA SHARMA & ORS.

2009 INSC 91716 July 2009Case Allowed

The Haryana State Industrial Development Corporation (HSIDC) filed review petitions seeking clarification of its earlier orders dated 19 February 2008 and 20 February 2008 concerning the re‑allotment of industrial plots to Veena Sharma and others. The petitions centered on the interpretation of a direction that allowed

STATE OF PUNJAB & ORS.versusDR. SANJAY KUMAR BANSAL

2009 INSC 91816 July 2009Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court considered an appeal by the State of Punjab against a High Court order that directed the health department to grant Dr. Sanjay Kumar Bansal a five‑year special leave for self‑employment on the ground that he had been discriminated against. The Court examined whether special leave is a statutory right

HARIDAS DASversusSMT. USHA RANI BANIK & ORS.

2007 INSC 75716 July 2007Disposed off

Haridas Das filed an interim application in Civil Appeal No. 7948/2004 making serious allegations of corruption and immorality against the Chief Justice of India and several other judges. The Supreme Court issued a show‑cause notice, and the applicant’s reply contained even more contemptuous statements, prompting the C

A.V. MOHAN RAO AND ANR.versusM. KISHAN RAO AND ANR.

2002 INSC 30216 July 2002Dismissed

The appellant‑accused filed a petition under Section 482 of the CrPC seeking to quash a criminal complaint that alleged violations of Sections 60, 63, 68 and 68‑A of the Companies Act, 1956, involving the alleged siphoning of funds from Non‑Resident Indians into offshore entities. The High Court refused to quash the co

MEDICAL COUNCIL OF INDIAversusSTATE OF KARNATAKA AND ORS. ETC.

1998 INSC 25716 July 1998Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined whether the State of Karnataka and its universities could increase the admission capacity of medical colleges despite the provisions of Sections I0A, I0B and I0C of the Indian Medical Council Act, 1956 (as amended in 1993). The Court held that the Medical Council of India, under the Central A

KAKA JOGINDER SINGH ALIAS DHARTI PAKADversusK.R. NARAYANAN VICE PRESIDENT OF INDIA

1993 INSC 23816 July 1993Dismissed

Kaka Joginder Singh alias Dharti Pakad challenged the election of K.R. Narayanan as Vice‑President of India, alleging (i) that the Returning Officer wrongly accepted Narayanan's nomination despite substantial defects, and (ii) that a whip issued by the Congress party amounted to undue influence under the Presidential a

RANJIT PRASAD SINHAversusSTATE OF BIHAR & ANOTHER

1987 INSC 17016 July 1987Dismissed

The appellant, an Additional Subordinate Judge of the Bihar Judicial Service, was disciplined with censure, withholding of increments, and denial of promotion benefits. He challenged the order by filing a writ petition and also sought to appeal the punishment to the Governor under the Civil Services (Classification, Co

MADRAS MARINE & CO.versusSTATE OF MADRAS

1986 INSC 14216 July 1986Dismissed

Madras Marine & Co., a ship‑chandler, imported goods, stored them in a customs‑bonded warehouse in Tamil Nadu and supplied them on board foreign‑going vessels. The State of Madras assessed sales tax under the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959, contending the sales occurred within the state. The company argued the

MS. P XXXversusSTATE OF UTTARAKHAND & ANR

2022 INSC 64816 June 2022Dismissed

Ms. P (appellant) alleged that her fiancé, respondent No.2, raped her in Delhi in February‑March 2016 (IPC s.376) and later, in November 2016, threatened and abused her over telephone in Chamoli (IPC s.504, s.506). The Sessions Judge, Chamoli, discharged the accused of the rape charge for lack of territorial jurisdicti

MAYURAM SUBRAMANIAN SRINIVASANversusCBI

2006 INSC 37416 June 2006

The appellants filed criminal appeals under Section 10 of the Special Courts (Trial of Offences Relating to Transaction in Securities) Act, 1992, but had not surrendered to their sentences. The Court examined whether Order XXI Rule 13A of the Supreme Court Rules, 1966, which requires surrender before an appeal can be p

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