Created byFuzzy Cloud

Legislation

Constitution of India

5,773 Supreme Court judgments cite this Act — showing 3,601–3,800.

JINDAL STAINLESS LTD. & ANRversusSTATE OF HARYANA & ORS

2016 INSC 101911 November 2016Directions issued

The Supreme Court, by a 9-judge bench, answered a reference on the interpretation of Articles 301-304 of the Constitution concerning the validity of entry taxes levied by states. The majority held that taxes simpliciter are not within the contemplation of Part XIII of the Constitution, and the word 'free' in Article 30

ARJUN GOPALAND ORSversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2018 INSC 98111 November 2016Directions issued

The petitioners filed a writ petition under Article 32 seeking emergency relief from the severe air‑pollution in the National Capital Region caused by the widespread use of fireworks during Diwali and the marriage season. They alleged that the pollution breached fundamental rights, especially the right to life and heal

COLLECTOR SINGHversusL.M.L. LTD., KANPUR

2014 INSC 76911 November 2014Appeal(s) allowed

Collector Singh, a semi‑skilled workman, was dismissed by L.M.L. Ltd. after a departmental inquiry found him guilty of throwing jute/cotton waste balls at a foreman and allegedly using abusive language. The Labour Court upheld the dismissal, relying on the appellant's apology letter, and the High Court affirmed that aw

S.D. JOSHI & ORS.versusHIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY & ORS.

2010 INSC 76911 November 2010Dismissed

The petitioners, who are Judges of Family Courts in Maharashtra, sought elevation to the Bombay High Court, arguing that they hold a "judicial office" under Article 217(2)(a) of the Constitution. The Supreme Court examined whether Family Courts qualify as courts in the constitutional sense, whether their judges are par

STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH AND ANR.versusA.P. PENSIONERS ASSOCIATION AND ORS.

2005 INSC 56411 November 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Andhra Pradesh issued a Pay Revision Committee recommendation and Government Order No. 114 (1999) that revised pay scales would be notionally effective from 1 July 1998 with monetary benefits payable from 1 April 1999. Employees who retired between 1 July 1998 and 31 March 1999 claimed pension, gratuity an

VIRENDRA KASHINATH RAVAT AND ANR.versusVINAYAK N. JOSHI AND ORS.

1998 INSC 42411 November 1998Appeal(s) allowed

The landlords (appellants) let a building to Ms. Shanta Sabnis, who died leaving her daughter (second respondent) as the alleged heir. The landlords sued for eviction on the ground that the premises had been unlawfully sub‑let to the first respondent and his sister, invoking Section 13(1)(e) of the Bombay Rents, Hotel

UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.versusL.V. VISHWANATHAN ETC.

1997 INSC 72411 November 1997Appeal(s) allowed

The respondents, Audit Officers on deputation, retired after 1 January 1986 but before the Office Memorandum of 14 April 1987 came into force. The Memorandum, issued to implement the Fourth Pay Commission recommendations, retrospectively redefined "emoluments" for pension calculation as basic pay excluding special pay

MRS. ELIZABETH DINSHAWversusARVAND M. DINSHAW AND ANR.

1986 INSC 23011 November 1986Disposed off

The petitioner, a U.S. citizen, obtained a Michigan Circuit Court decree granting her sole custody of her son and limited visitation to the father, who was an Indian citizen. The father, exploiting his weekend visitation rights, abducted the child to India without court permission, violating the decree and prompting ar

GOPI NATH GHOSHversusSTATE OF WEST BENGAL

1983 INSC 17311 November 1983Appeal(s) allowed

Gopinath Ghosh was convicted by a Sessions Court and sentenced to life imprisonment for murder under IPC sections 302 and 34. He later contended before the Supreme Court that he was a "child" under the West Bengal Children Act, 1959, being only 16‑17 years old at the time of the offence. The Court ordered a medical age

MARU RAM ETC. ETC.versusUNION OF INDIA & ANR.

1980 INSC 21211 November 1980

The Supreme Court examined the constitutionality of Section 433A of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, which imposes a mandatory minimum of fourteen years’ imprisonment on two categories of life‑sentence convicts – those convicted of offences where death is a possible punishment and those whose death sentence was co

SMT. IMLIKOKLA LONGCHAR & ORSversusTHE STATE OF NAGALAND & ORS.

2022 INSC 106411 October 2022Dismissed

The dispute concerned the seniority of four appellants (SMT. Imlikokla Longchar & Ors.) and respondent K in the cadre of Senior Lecturer under the Nagaland State Council on Educational Training Service Rules, 2003. K claimed that the appellants, who were promoted on an officiating basis before her regularisation, shoul

SURINDER SINGH BRAR AND OTHERS ETC.ETC.versusUNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

2012 INSC 46311 October 2012Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned the acquisition of about 105 acres of land in Manimajra, Chandigarh for the expansion of the Rajiv Gandhi Technology Park (Phase III). The acquisition was approved by the Adviser to the Administrator of the Union Territory based on reports of the Land Acquisition Officer (LAO), which the petitioners

MALTHESH GUDDA POOJAversusSTATE OF KARNATAKA & ORS.

2011 INSC 75111 October 2011Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant challenged a notification and the handling of a review petition concerning a writ appeal that had been dismissed by a Division Bench of the Karnataka High Court. The review petition was heard by a different Division Bench under a 29‑December‑2008 notification and was allowed on 17 December 2009, thereby r

D. ETHIRAJversusSECRETARY TO GOVT. & ORS.

2011 INSC 74011 October 2011Appeal(s) allowed

D. Ethiraj was convicted under IPC sections 366, 109 and 119 and sentenced to three years rigorous imprisonment. He sought remission under Tamil Nadu Government Order No. 279 dated 23‑02‑1992, which provides six months remission for male prisoners. The Madras High Court rejected his application on the ground that he wa

DAYARAMversusSUDHIR BATHAM & ORS.

2011 INSC 73711 October 2011Disposed off

The case concerned the validity of the fifteen directions issued by the Supreme Court in Kumari Madhuri Patil for verification of caste certificates and the procedural rights of parties challenging the orders of the State Level Screening Committee. Dayaram, the President of the Scheduled Caste Employees Association, ch

BCPP MAZDOOR SANGH AND ANR.versusN.T.P.C. AND ORS.

2007 INSC 103711 October 2007Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned the transfer of 236 non‑executive employees recruited by NTPC for the BALCO Captive Power Plant (BCPP) to BALCO after BALCO was disinvested and became a private concern. The employees argued that they were appointed by NTPC, not BALCO, and that the 1990 NTPC‑BALCO agreement and the clause 14 in their

STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS.versusBHATINDA DISTRICT COOP. MILK P. UNION LTD.

2007 INSC 104211 October 2007

The State of Punjab issued a show‑cause notice on 4 September 2006 under section 21(1) of the Punjab Cooperative Societies Act, 1948 to revise an assessment order dated 20 March 2001, more than five years after the assessment was completed. The respondent, Bhatinda District Cooperative Milk Producers Union Ltd., did no

MOHANNAKUMARAN NAIRversusVIJAYAKUMARAN NAIR

2007 INSC 104311 October 2007Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant borrowed Rs 6,02,000 from the respondent in Saudi Arabia and executed a promissory note there. The respondent filed a suit for recovery in the Subordinate Court at Attingal, Kerala. The appellant contended that the court lacked territorial jurisdiction under Section 20 of the CPC because the cause of acti

G.M. TANDA THERMAL POWER PROJECTversusJAI PRAKASH SRIVASTAVA AND ANR.

2007 INSC 104511 October 2007Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Uttar Pradesh acquired land for G.M. Tanda Thermal Power Project and the Special Land Acquisition Officer (SLAO) engaged daily‑wage workers, including Jai Prakash Srivastava, to handle the acquisition cases. Although the appellant (the power project company) funded the wages, the appointment and supervisio

JASBIR SINGHversusST ATE OF PUNJAB

2006 INSC 69211 October 2006Disposed off

Jasbir Singh, an under‑trial accused, applied for bail before the Sessions Judge. During a routine inspection of the district jail, the Administrative (Inspecting) Judge of the Punjab & Haryana High Court received the bail application and directed the Sessions Judge to grant bail, which was done. A complaint alleging m

COMMISSIONER, BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITYversusK.S. NARAYAN

2006 INSC 69311 October 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The respondents K.S. Narayan purchased land in 1985 after the Bangalore Development Authority (BDA) had issued a notification for acquisition under the Bangalore Development Authority Act, 1976. They filed civil suits seeking injunctions against the BDA, claiming that no notice under Section 17(5) of the Act had been s

EPURU SUDHAKAR AND ANR.versusGOVT. OF A.P. AND ORS.

2006 INSC 69511 October 2006Case Partly allowed

The petitioners, sons of murder victims, challenged the Governor of Andhra Pradesh’s order granting remission of the unserved portion of a ten‑year rigorous imprisonment sentence imposed on respondent No.2 for murder. They argued that the remission was granted on irrelevant and extraneous material, without proper appli

COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, DELHI AND ANR.versusREGISTRAR, DELHI HIGH COURT, NEW DELHI

1996 INSC 118011 October 1996Appeal(s) allowed

Former Prime Minister P.V. Narasimha Rao, whose security is covered by the Special Protection Group (SPG) Act, was summoned as an accused before the Tis Hazari Court. The Commissioner of Police, Delhi and the Director of the SPG sought a change of venue, arguing that the court complex could not provide the "proximate s

A. KUMARversusUNION OF INDIA

1996 INSC 119111 October 1996Disposed off

A. Kumar filed several writ petitions challenging a customs show‑cause notice under Section 124 of the Customs Act, a seizure order under Section 132‑A of the Income Tax Act, and the demurrage rates of the Madras Port Trust. The customs authorities had found that the imported stainless‑steel circles, declared as "defec

GURU BIPIN SINGHversusSH. CHONGTHAM MANIHAR SINGH AND ANR.

1996 INSC 119411 October 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant had earlier faced a criminal complaint in 1966 under Section 500 IPC, which was settled by an apology and compromise. In 1990 a fresh complaint was lodged alleging that the appellant, by claiming his book was based on a manuscript of King Bhagyachandra, had forged a false document, thereby cheating the pu

ROSILINE GEORGEversusUOI & ORS.

1993 INSC 32311 October 1993Dismissed

George Kutty Kuncheria, an Indian citizen, was arrested in Kerala following a U.S. request for his extradition on charges of embezzlement and related offences. The United States supplied authenticated documents, and the Indian Government ordered a magisterial inquiry under the Extradition Act, 1962. The appellant chall

BAKSHISH SINGHversusM/S DARSHAN ENGINEERING WORKS & ORS.

1993 INSC 32511 October 1993Appeal(s) allowed

Bakshish Singh, a fitter, resigned after more than ten years of service and claimed gratuity under Section 4(1)(b) of the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972. The Controlling Authority awarded him gratuity, but the employer challenged the award, and the High Court struck down Section 4(1)(b) as an unreasonable restriction on

MADHU KISHWAR AND ORS.versusSTATE OF BIHAR

1991 INSC 26111 October 1991Amount Awarded

The petitioners, women belonging to the Ho and Oraon Scheduled Tribes of Chhota Nagpur, challenged Sections 7 and 8 of the Chhota Nagpur Tenancy Act, 1908, on the ground that restricting succession to the male line violated the equality guarantees of the Constitution. The State of Bihar set up a committee which reporte

COMPTROLLER AND AUDITOR GENERAL OF INDIA AND ORS.versusMOHAN LAL MEHROTRA AND ORS.

1991 INSC 26211 October 1991Appeal(s) allowed

The petitioners, Section Officers in the Indian Audit & Accounts Department, challenged a circular dated 25 January 1973 issued by the Comptroller and Auditor General of India that introduced reservation for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in promotions by seniority. They argued that the 1963 Recruitment Rules, m

TARSEM LAL GAUTAM & ANOTHERversusSTATE BANK OF PATIALA, AND OTHERS

1988 INSC 31811 October 1988Dismissed

The petitioners, two Grade‑A officers of the State Bank of Patiala, challenged Regulation 7 of the State Bank of Patiala (Officers) Service Regulations, 1979, which placed existing Grade‑A officers into two new grades—Senior Management Grade Scale IV and Middle Management Grade Scale III—based solely on whether they ha

STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ANR.versusDR. ASHOK KUMAR GUPTA & ORS.

1988 INSC 31911 October 1988Dismissed

The respondents, who had appeared for a common postgraduate medical entrance exam in Rajasthan, were denied admission despite higher marks because the University of Rajasthan Ordinance No. 278‑E(d)(ii) added a uniform 5% weightage to candidates who had obtained their MBBS degree from the same college for which they sou

CBIversusR.R. KISHORE

2023 INSC 81711 September 2023Matter referred to larger bench

The CBI registered a case against Dr. R.R. Kishore for alleged bribery under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, but conducted the investigation without the prior approval of the Central Government required by Section 6A(1) of the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act, 1946. The Delhi High Court allowed the trial

SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORP. LTD. & ORS.versusSECURITIES & EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA & ANR.

2012 INSC 38811 September 2012Disposed off

The Supreme Court was approached after a television channel disclosed confidential settlement proposals between Sahara India Real Estate Corp. Ltd. and SEBI during pending litigation, raising concerns about media reporting of sub‑judice matters. The Court examined whether it could issue guidelines or orders restricting

SHAMSHAD AHMAD & ORS.versusTILAK RAJ BAJAJ (DECEASED) THROUGH LRS. & ORS.

2008 INSC 103211 September 2008Appeal(s) allowed

The landlords, owners of a shop in Dehradun, sought eviction of the tenant under Section 21(1)(a) of the Uttar Pradesh Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972, claiming a bona‑fide requirement to run a readymade garment business by the retired husband Matloob Ahmad and his daughter Kum Fara

U.P. POWER CORPORATION LTD.versusAYODHYA PRASAD MISHRA AND ANR.

2008 INSC 103311 September 2008Dismissed

The writ petitioners, Ayodhya Prasad Mishra and another, were Executive Engineers who, after scoring the highest marks, were placed in Category I under the Uttar Pradesh State Electricity Board Service of Engineers Regulations, 1970, and sought promotion to Superintending Engineer. The Corporation refused to promote th

SUNIL KUMAR PARIMAL AND ANR.versusTHE STATE OF BIHAR AND ORS.

2007 INSC 90711 September 2007Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, Sunil Kumar Parimal and Shiv Shankar Roy, enrolled in C.P.Ed and D.P.Ed courses at Tirhut Physical Education College for the 1994-95 and 1995-96 sessions, a college that was duly recognised at the time. The Bihar School Examination Board, tasked with conducting the examinations, failed to hold the exams

JAYARAJBHAI JAYANTIBHAI PATELversusANILBHAI JAYANTIBHAI PATEL AND ORS.

2006 INSC 59511 September 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined a municipal election in Anand where two independent councillors were arrested minutes before the election of the President, preventing them from voting. The presiding officer, aware of the arrests, proceeded with the election, resulting in a tie and a draw of lots that declared the appellant

M/S. SIEL LTD. AND ORS. ETC.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

1998 INSC 35911 September 1998Dismissed

The petitioners (SIEL Ltd. and others) challenged the constitutional validity of the Uttar Pradesh Sheera Niyantran Adhiniyam, 1964 and subsequent state notifications controlling the supply, distribution and price of molasses, arguing that the State lacked legislative competence because the sugar industry fell under Un

DEPUTY COLLECTOR, MINICOY AND ORS.versusNAVADIGOTHI MOHAMMED AND ORS.

1996 INSC 103811 September 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned the South Pandaram lands of Lakshadweep, where villagers, through their Mooppans (trustees), historically enjoyed a collective right to collect coconuts but held no ownership over the land or trees. The administration, invoking the Laccadive, Minicoy and Amindivi Islands Revenue and Tenancy Regulatio

STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AND OTHERSversusGANESH WOOD PRODUCTS AND ORS. ETC.

1995 INSC 55411 September 1995Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined the validity of the Himachal Pradesh government's refusal to approve several katha‑manufacturing units after the Industrial Projects Approval and Review Authority (IPARA) had given provisional approvals. The Court held that IPARA’s approvals were merely administrative recommendations and did

TEJINDER SINGH AND ANOTHER ETC.versusM/S. BHARAT PETROLEUM CORPORATION LIMITED AND ANOTHER

1986 INSC 18711 September 1986Dismissed

The petitioners, officers of the management staff of Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd., challenged the company's policy of setting the retirement age at 58 years for management staff while the clerical staff retire at 60 years, alleging discrimination under Articles 12, 14 and 32 of the Constitution. The Court held tha

PRITAM NATH HOONversusUNION OF INDIA & OTHERS

1980 INSC 17811 September 1980Case Allowed

Pritam Nath Hoon was detained under Section 5(a) of the Conversion of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 after customs seized silver bars from him. While in custody he repeatedly requested copies of the statements and documents on which his detention was based so that he could make an eff

ARSHNOOR KAUR & ANR.versusTHE UNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2025 INSC 95411 August 2025Disposed off

The petitioners, two female candidates who ranked higher than a male candidate in the JAG Short Service Commission selection, challenged a notification that allotted only three vacancies for women against six for men, alleging violation of Articles 14, 15, 16 and 19 of the Constitution. The Court examined whether, afte

IN RE: N. PEDDI RAJU AND OTHERS versus

2025 INSC 98911 August 2025

A transfer petition seeking to move a criminal case from the Telangana High Court to the Bombay High Court (Nagpur Bench) contained scandalous remarks against the Telangana High Court judge hearing the matter. The Supreme Court dismissed the petition and, suo moto, issued contempt notices to the petitioner’s lawyer, th

NET RAM YADAVversusTHE STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS.

2022 INSC 82211 August 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a physically disabled senior teacher appointed in 1993, was posted 550 km from his residence. After a 2000 circular directing that disabled employees be posted near their chosen place, he was transferred to his home district, but his state‑level seniority was later downgraded, affecting his promotion pro

VINEETA SHARMAversusRAKESH SHARMA & ORS.

2020 INSC 48711 August 2020Directions issued

The Supreme Court examined the interpretation of Section 6 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 as amended by the Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005. It held that the amendment confers coparcenary status on daughters—whether born before or after the amendment—on and from 9 September 2005, giving them the same rights a

SMT. B. NARASAMMAversusDEPUTY COMMISSIONER COMMERCIAL TAXES KARNATAKA & ANR.

2016 INSC 59111 August 2016Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined whether iron and steel reinforcement used in building works contracts retains its identity as "declared goods" under the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956, and consequently whether it is taxable at the restricted 4% rate prescribed in Section 15. The Court held that the 46th Constitution Amendment

JUSTICE K.S. PUTTASWAMY (RETD.) &ANOTHERversusUNION OF INDIA & OTHERS

2015 INSC 55911 August 2015Matter referred to larger bench

The petitioners challenged the Aadhaar Card Scheme on the ground that the compulsory collection of biometric and demographic data violated the fundamental right to privacy under Article 21 of the Constitution. The Union of India and the UIDAI argued that the scheme is essential for the delivery of welfare benefits and

ORISSA POWER TRANSMISSION CORPORATION LTD.versusKHAGESWAR SUNDARAY AND ORS.

2011 INSC 57311 August 2011Appeal(s) allowed

The Orissa State Electricity Board (OSEB) granted two advance increments to Lower Division Clerks (LDCs) who became graduates while in service, but later limited this benefit to those who graduated or passed the Accounts Examination on or before 30‑06‑1971. Five LDCs who obtained their degrees after that date filed wri

KALPNATH SINGHversusUDAI NATH & ORS.

2010 INSC 49711 August 2010Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant applied for a sand mining lease under the Uttar Pradesh Minor Minerals (Concession) Rules, 1963, and was recommended for grant by the District Magistrate and State Government. The respondent, a member of a socially and educationally backward class (SEBC), claimed preference under clause (e) of Rule 9(2) a

N.T.P.C. & ORSversusBADRI SINGH THAKUR & ORS.

2008 INSC 92411 August 2008Appeal(s) allowed

The petitioners, electricians employed through a contractor for the National Thermal Power Corporation (NTPC), sought to be absorbed as workmen of the corporation, arguing that the Madhya Pradesh Industrial Relations Act, 1960 applied to them and that contract labour should be abolished. NTPC contended that it was a re

PUNJAB STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD LTD.versusZORA SINGH AND ORS.

2005 INSC 35411 August 2005Dismissed

The Punjab State Electricity Board (the Board) was appealed against for refusing to supply electricity to a group of agriculturists (Zora Singh and others) despite receipt of security deposits and compliance with formalities. The District Consumer Forums, State Commission and National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commis

P.R. DESHPANDEversusMARUTI BALARAM HAIBATTI

1998 INSC 29811 August 1998Dismissed

The tenant, P.R. Deshpande, filed a revision petition under Section 50 of the Karnataka Rent Control Act, 1961, but failed to deposit the arrears of rent required by Section 29(1) at the time of filing. The Karnataka High Court dismissed the revision petition for this deficiency, gave the tenant six weeks to vacate the

H.R. ADYANTHAYAversusSANDOZ (INDIA) LTD.

1994 INSC 31311 August 1994

The Supreme Court examined whether medical representatives employed by Sandoz (India) Ltd. qualified as "workmen" under Section 2(s) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 and the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions & Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971. The Court held that the work of a medical represent

R.M. GURJAR AND ANR.versusHIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AND ORS.

1992 INSC 20011 August 1992Dismissed

Two junior clerks in the Gujarat civil courts, R.M. Gurjar and D.N. Jadhav, were found to have falsely identified three persons before a magistrate and admitted the charge. The District Judge, as disciplinary authority under Gujarat Civil Services (Discipline & Appeal) Rules, 1971, imposed a permanent stoppage of futur

STATE OF MAHARASHTRAversusVIKAS SAHEBRAO ROUNDALE AND ORS.

1992 INSC 19911 August 1992

The respondents were admitted to a D.Ed. course in an unrecognised institution and sought a writ directing the State of Maharashtra to allow them to sit for the public examination. The Bombay High Court ordered the State to permit the students to appear and, after passing, to allocate them seats in a recognised institu

MD. RAHIM ALI @ ABDUR RAHIMversusTHE STATE OF ASSAM & ORS.

2024 INSC 51111 July 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Md. Rahim Ali, was declared a foreigner by the Foreigners Tribunal, Nalbari, on the basis that he failed to prove his Indian citizenship under Section 9 of the Foreigners Act, 1946. He challenged the Tribunal's order, arguing that the authorities had no material basis for the allegation of illegal migrat

MOHAMED ALIversusV. JAYA & ORS.

2022 INSC 69611 July 2022Appeal(s) allowed

Mohamed Ali sued for specific performance of a sale agreement. The trial court passed an ex‑parte judgment and decree in 2012. The defendants filed applications to set aside the decree after delays of 1,522 days (defendant 1) and 2,345 days (defendants 2‑4); the trial court refused to condone these delays. The defendan

ALL MANIPUR PENSIONERS ASSOCIATION BY ITS SECRETARYversusTHE STATE OF MANIPUR AND OTHERS

2019 INSC 74811 July 2019Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Manipur issued an office memorandum in 1999 revising pension benefits, granting a higher percentage to employees who retired on or after 1 January 1996 and a lower percentage to those who retired earlier. All Manipur Pensioners Association challenged this classification as violative of Articles 14 and 16 o

PUNJAB NATIONAL BANKversusSAHUJAIN CHARITABLE SOCIETY AND ORS.

2007 INSC 74511 July 2007Appeal(s) allowed

Punjab National Bank (PNB) held 66.94% of the shares in a co‑owned property and sought its partition. A preliminary decree in 1977 allotted the bank 83 of 124 shares and ordered a public auction of the property, but the auction was never carried out. After several fresh valuations and a confirmed sale to PNB on 24 June

M/S. JAIN STUDIOS LTD. THROUGH. ITS PRESIDENTversusSHIN SATELLITE PUBLIC CO. LTD.

2006 INSC 41911 July 2006Rejected

Mis. Jain Studios Ltd filed a review petition under Article 137 of the Constitution against an order dated 31 January 2006 in which the Chief Justice of India, acting under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, appointed a sole arbitrator, Justice M.L. Pendse. The petitioner sought to have the or

SAMATHAversusSTATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH AND ORS.

[1997] SUPP. 2 S.C.R. 30511 July 1997Disposed off

The case concerned the validity of mining leases granted by the State of Andhra Pradesh to non-tribal persons in scheduled areas, including reserved forests. The appellant, a society, challenged these leases as violating the Andhra Pradesh Scheduled Area Land Transfer Regulation, 1959, the Forest (Conservation) Act, 19

S.S. BOLA AND ORS. ETC.versusB.D. SARDANA AND ORS. ETC.

[1997] SUPP. 2 S.C.R. 50711 July 1997Disposed off

The case involves a challenge to the Haryana Service of Engineers Act, 1995, which was enacted with retrospective effect to alter the seniority rules between direct recruits and promotees in the Haryana Public Works Department. The Supreme Court had earlier interpreted the rules in Sehgal and Chopra, but the Act change

S. GOPAL REDDYversusSTATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

1996 INSC 72711 July 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, S. Gopal Reddy, was convicted under Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 for demanding dowry in connection with a proposed marriage. He appealed, arguing that a demand made during pre‑marriage negotiations does not fall within the statutory definition of "dowry" and that the prosecution’s evidenc

U.P. BHUMI SUDHAR NIGAM LTD.versusSHIV NARAIN GUPTA

1994 INSC 23311 July 1994

The Uttar Pradesh Bhumi Sudhar Nigam Ltd. advertised for a Financial Controller and prepared a three‑member merit panel, with Shiv Narain Gupta placed second. After the first candidate failed to join, the corporation abolished the post because a World Bank‑funded project was delayed. Gupta filed a writ petition under A

STATE OF TAMIL NADUversusG.N. VENKATASWAMY & ORS. ETC. ETC.

1994 INSC 23411 July 1994Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined the constitutional validity of Section 52‑A inserted by the Tamil Nadu Revenue Recovery (Amendment) Act, 1972, which allowed recovery of loans advanced by state‑owned corporations as arrears of land revenue. The petitioners challenged the provision on two grounds: lack of legislative competen

RAM SEWAK PRASADversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ORS

1991 INSC 14711 July 1991Appeal(s) allowed

Ram Sewak Prasad, appointed Excise Sub‑Inspector in 1964, was promoted on an ad‑hoc basis to Excise Inspector in February 1972 and thereafter performed the duties and received the salary of an Inspector. He was omitted from the seniority list and denied promotion, while direct recruits to the Inspector cadre were promo

S.K. CHAKRABORTHY AND ORS.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

1988 INSC 17211 July 1988Dismissed

The petitioners, 75 employees of the Production Control Organisation (PCO) at Kharagpur Railway Workshop, challenged a 1979 memorandum that declared their posts ex‑cadre, alleging that it infringed vested rights and amounted to hostile discrimination compared with the PCO at the Integral Coach Factory (ICF) where posts

UNION OF INDIA AND ANOTHERversusTULSIRAM PATEL AND OTHERS

1985 INSC 15511 July 1985Disposed off

This Constitution Bench judgment interprets the second proviso to Article 311(2) of the Constitution of India, which allows dismissal, removal, or reduction in rank of a civil servant without an inquiry in three exceptional circumstances: conviction on a criminal charge, when it is not reasonably practicable to hold an

THE COMMISSIONER, BRUHAT BANGALORE MAHANAGARA PALIKEversusK.K. UMESH KUMAR & ORS.

2026 INSC 63711 June 2026Disposed off

The appellant, the Commissioner of Bruhat Bangalore Mahanagara Palike, was sued for injuries suffered by a passenger when a branch from a roadside tree fell on a stationary auto‑rickshaw during heavy rain. The passenger filed a claim under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, seeking compensation, which was initially dismisse

MAKARDHWAJ RAMversusJAGDISH RAI (DEAD) TH. LRS. & ANR.

2026 INSC 63611 June 2026Appeal(s) allowed

The dispute concerned a 95.80‑acre family property originally transferred in 1960 to the appellant, Makardhwaj Ram, and his mother. Subsequent sales by a cousin acting under a General Power of Attorney were later cancelled, leading to multiple suits challenging those sales, all of which were dismissed. The appellant la

SUREKHA DOMAJI BELEversusEXECUTIVE ENGINEER, TESTING DIVISION, MSEDCL

2026 INSC 63911 June 2026Case Partly allowed

Surekha Domaji Bele, an Upper Division Clerk with over two decades of service at MSEDCL, was suspended in 2006 for alleged indiscipline and related misconduct. A domestic enquiry was held but later declared unfair, leading to a de novo adjudication before the Labour Court where misconduct was proved. The employer dismi

MADHUMITA DAS AND ORS.versusSTATE OF ORISSA AND ORS.

2008 INSC 74711 June 2008Hearing Adjourned

The Supreme Court examined nine ad‑hoc Additional District Judges appointed to Fast Track Courts who challenged an Orissa High Court advertisement for 16 direct recruitment posts, arguing that the advertisement’s eligibility criteria (maximum age of 45 years and requirement of being a member of the Bar) disqualified th

STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS.versusBRIGADIER SUKHJIT SINGH

1993 INSC 21511 June 1993Dismissed

The dispute concerned a double‑storeyed building within the Jallowkhana complex at Kapurthala, occupied by the Punjab Public Works Department. Brigadier Sukhjit Singh, a heir‑apparent of the erstwhile Maharaja, claimed ownership based on a 1925 farman that vested the entire complex in each succeeding heir, while the St

SUBHASH DESAIversusPRINCIPAL SECRETARY, GOVERNOR OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS.

2023 INSC 51611 May 2023Disposed off

After the 2019 Maharashtra elections a coalition government (MVA) led by Uddhav Thackeray collapsed in mid‑2022 when the Shiv Sena split into two factions headed by Thackeray and Eknath Shinde. The Governor, relying on letters from opposition leaders and a resolution of 34 Shiv Sena MLAs, directed Thackeray to prove hi

GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHIversusUNION OF INDIA

2023 INSC 51711 May 2023Reference answered

The Supreme Court examined a 2015 Union Ministry notification that gave the Lieutenant Governor of Delhi control over "services" in addition to public order, police and land. The Court held that, under Article 239AA(3)(a), the Legislative Assembly of the National Capital Territory of Delhi (NCTD) has legislative and co

MAHESH CHANDRA VERMAversusTHE STATE OF JHARKHAND THROUGH: ITS CHIEF SECRETARY & ORS.

2018 INSC 50711 May 2018Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Jharkhand created Fast Track Courts (FTCs) to address case backlogs, appointing judges who were on the merit list for the regular judicial cadre but could not be placed due to limited cadre strength. The appellants served as FTC judges for about nine years and were later regularised into the regular judici

ASHOK KUMAR & ORS.versusTHE STATE OF JHARKHAND & ORS.

2018 INSC 49511 May 2018Appeal(s) allowed

Ashok Kumar and others were appointed as Civil Judges under the Jharkhand Judicial Service (Recruitment) Rules, 2004. Although they passed the examination conducted by the Judicial Academy, the State of Jharkhand denied their confirmation and increments on the ground that they had not cleared the higher‑grade Hindi dep

SWARAJ ABHIYAN - (I)versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2016 INSC 41111 May 2016Directions issued

The Supreme Court entertained a public‑interest writ petition filed by Swaraaj Abhiyan seeking a declaration of drought in parts of Bihar, Gujarat and Haryana and relief for affected persons. The petition highlighted that the three states had either not declared drought or had delayed declaration despite evidence of ra

SAMAJ PARIVARTAN SAMUDAYA & ORS.versusSTATE OF KARNATAKA &ORS.

2012 INSC 23011 May 2012Hearing Adjourned

The Supreme Court examined a writ petition filed by Samaj Parivartan Samuday alleging continued illegal mining of iron ore in Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh, despite earlier orders and a CBI charge‑sheet. The Court considered reports of a Central Empowered Committee (CEC) that identified irregularities, including land de

REGISTRAR GENERAL, PATNA HIGH COURTversusPANDEY GAJENDRA PRASAD & ORS.

2012 INSC 23611 May 2012Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerns a Railway Judicial Magistrate, Pandey Gajendra Prasad, who was dismissed from service after a departmental enquiry found him guilty of misconduct for granting bail in cases involving the NDPS Act. The Standing Committee of the Patna High Court recommended dismissal, which was approved by the Full Cour

STATE OF M.P.versusRAKESH KOHLI & ANR.

2012 INSC 23411 May 2012Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Madhya Pradesh challenged the constitutional validity of clause (d) of Article 45 in Schedule 1‑A of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899, as amended by the Madhya Pradesh Stamp Amendment Act, 2002, which imposes a 2% stamp duty on power‑of‑attorney instruments given without consideration to persons who are not bloo

NARMADA BACHAO ANDOLANversusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH & ANR.

2011 INSC 37911 May 2011Disposed off

The Supreme Court heard appeals by the State of Madhya Pradesh and the Narmada Hydro Development Corporation challenging the High Court's interim orders in a public‑interest litigation filed by Narmada Bachao Andolan (NBA) concerning the Omkareshwar Dam. NBA sought land‑for‑land rehabilitation, inclusion of major sons

GOVERNMENT OF INDIA & ORS.versusB. ANIL KUMAR & ORS.

2010 INSC 30911 May 2010Dismissed

The respondents, originally investigators in the NSSO, were promoted to Assistant Superintendents after 1 January 1986. They argued that, despite a Board of Arbitration award granting a special pay of Rs.75 per month to Assistant Superintendents, the government had not incorporated this special pay into their revised p

PROJECT OFFICER, IRDP AND ORS.versusP. D. CHACKO

2010 INSC 31111 May 2010Appeal(s) allowed

P.D. Chacko worked as a full‑time menial in an aided school from 1968 to 1976, resigned and joined the Kerala government as a peon in 1976. He claimed that, under Kerala Service Rules (KSR) 1959 Rule 60(b), officers who were in "last grade service" on 7‑April‑1970 could retire at 60 years, and therefore he should be al

UNION OF INDIAversusR. GANDHI, PRESIDENT, MADRAS BAR ASSOCIATION

2010 INSC 30511 May 2010Case Partly allowed

The Supreme Court examined the constitutional validity of Chapters 1B and 1C of the Companies Act, 1956 (as amended by the Companies (Second Amendment) Act, 2002) which created the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) and the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) and transferred the jurisdiction of High Court

MADRAS BAR ASSOCIATIONversusUNION OF INDIA

2010 INSC 30611 May 2010Directions issued

The Madras Bar Association challenged the constitutional validity of the National Tax Tribunal Act, 2005 and the provisions of Article 323B (and Article 3238) of the Constitution, arguing that the Act undermines the basic structure by creating a parallel tribunal system under executive control. The petition also contes

RAVI DEVELOPMENTversusSHREE KRISHNA PRATHISTHAN & ORS.

2009 INSC 78811 May 2009Appeal(s) allowed

Ravi Development and the Maharashtra Housing and Area Development Authority (MHADA) challenged a Bombay High Court order that had struck down the award of a development contract under the Swiss Challenge Method, alleging arbitrariness, lack of innovativeness and favouritism by the Chief Minister. The Supreme Court exam

GLOBAL ENERGY LTD. & ANR.versusCENTRAL ELECTRICITY REGULATORY COMMISSION

2009 INSC 78511 May 2009Appeal(s) allowed

The Central Electricity Regulatory Commission (CERC) granted an interim inter‑state trading licence to Global Energy Ltd., but later invoked Regulation 6A of the 2006 amendment to disqualify the applicant on grounds of pending legal proceedings and a vague "fit and proper" test, revoking the licence. The appellants cha

PROMOTERS & BUILDERS ASSOCIATION OF PUNEversusPUNE MUNICIPAL CORPORATION AND ORS.

2007 INSC 56411 May 2007Dismissed

The Promoters & Builders Association of Pune challenged a modification to Pune's Development Control Rules (DCR) wherein the State Government, while sanctioning the Municipal Corporation's proposal under Section 37(2) of the Maharashtra Regional Town Planning Act, 1966, inserted the words "from the very said plot" into

SATYA NARAIN SHUKLAversusUNION OF LNDIA & ORS.

2006 INSC 31411 May 2006Disposed off

Satya Narain Shukla, an IAS officer of the Uttar Pradesh cadre, challenged his non‑empanelment as Additional Secretary to the Government of India, contending that the Central Staffing Scheme (CSS) was unconstitutional, that its provisions were ultra vires Articles 309 and 312 of the Constitution, that the post constitu

K.P. SUDHAKARAN AND ANR.versusSTATE OF KERALA AND ORS.

2006 INSC 31511 May 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned Lower Division Clerks (LDCs) recruited in different districts of Kerala, some of whom were transferred on their own request to another district and placed below the junior‑most local LDCs. The dispute arose over whether the seniority of these transferred LDCs for promotion to Upper Division Clerk (UD

ASHOK LANKA AND ANR.versusRISHI DIXIT AND ORS.

2005 INSC 27711 May 2005Disposed off

The State of Chhattisgarh invited applications for retail liquor licences and, after receiving over 2.6 lakh applications, selected candidates by computer‑drawn lottery. Several applicants challenged the process, contending that Rule 9(d) of the 2002 Rules required a notarised affidavit at the pre‑selection stage and t

STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH & ORS.versusASHOK DESHMUKH & ANR.

1988 INSC 16411 May 1988Appeal(s) allowed

Ashok Deshmukh, a permanent officer of the Social Welfare Department, was deputed as an officiating Block Development Officer in the Panchayat and Rural Development Department in March 1983. He was repatriated to his parent department in June 1984 by an order of the Secretary, which he challenged through a civil suit a

D.K. AGARWALversusHIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

1988 INSC 16611 May 1988Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a retired District and Sessions Judge of the Uttar Pradesh Higher Judicial Service, sought the grant of super‑time scale recommended by the Selection Committee. The Full Court of the Allahabad High Court repeatedly rejected the recommendation, relying on adverse allegations made by the Administrative Jud

REGISTRAR, HIGH COURT OF MADRAS ETC.versusR. RAJIAH AND K. RAJESWARAN

1988 INSC 16211 May 1988Dismissed

Two District Munsifs of the Tamil Nadu State Judicial Service were compulsorily retired by the Madras High Court under Rule 56(d) of the Fundamental Rules. They challenged the orders under Article 226, contending that only the Governor, as the appointing authority, could retire them and that the High Court lacked such

COFFEE BOARD, KARNATAKA, BANGALOREversusCOMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES

1988 INSC 16311 May 1988Disposed off

The Coffee Board challenged the levy of purchase tax on coffee it received from growers under the compulsory delivery provision of the Coffee Act, 1942, arguing that the transaction was a compulsory acquisition and not a sale. The Karnataka High Court held that an element of consensuality existed, making it a sale liab

MEHMOOD ALAM TARIQ AND ORS. ETC.versusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. ETC.

1988 INSC 16811 May 1988Appeal(s) allowed

The Rajasthan Public Service Commission, in its 1985 recruitment for the Administrative, Police and Forest Services, required candidates to obtain at least 33% marks in the viva‑voce (interview) as a condition for selection. Several candidates who failed to meet this cut‑off challenged the provision as unconstitutional

STATE OF RAJASTHANversusRAMANAND

2017 INSC 33411 April 2017Disposed off

The respondent Ramanand was charged with the deaths of his wife Anita and daughter Ekta, alleged to be caused by strangulation with the bodies later set on fire. Post‑mortem reports established that death resulted from asphyxia due to strangulation and that the burns were post‑mortem, contradicting the initial claim of

TEJINDER SINGH @ KAKAversusSTATE OF PUNJAB

2013 INSC 24511 April 2013Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined a gang‑rape and murder case where an FIR dated 25‑05‑2000 led to the conviction of six accused under sections 302, 376(2)(g), 201, 404 and 506 IPC. The trial court and the Punjab‑Haryana High Court relied heavily on the testimonies of witnesses PW‑8, PW‑9 and PW‑7, the latter providing an ext

COMMON CAUSE (A REGD. SOCIETY)versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2008 INSC 48511 April 2008Dismissed

Common Cause, a registered society, filed a public‑interest writ petition seeking comprehensive directions to the Union and State governments for licensing, driver training, road infrastructure, ambulance services, expert committees and a new Road Traffic Safety Act to curb road accidents. The Court examined whether su

ABAN LOYD CHILES OFFSHORE LTD. & ANR.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2008 INSC 49211 April 2008Dismissed

The appellants, offshore drilling companies, operated oil rigs in India's designated offshore areas (continental shelf and exclusive economic zone) and sought to import stores for the rigs without customs duty, relying on the exemption for foreign‑going vessels under the Customs Act. The Revenue authorities, citing not

MUKESH TIKAJI BORAversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

2007 INSC 40811 April 2007Dismissed

The appellant challenged the preventive detention of his brother Bherchand Tikaji Bora under Section 3(1) of COFEPOSA, arguing that the detenu had been fully exonerated in adjudication proceedings under FERA and that this should nullify the detention order. The High Court dismissed the writ, holding that exoneration do

DIRECTORATE OF FILM FESTIVALS AND ORS.versusGAURAV ASHWIN JAIN AND ORS.

2007 INSC 41011 April 2007Case Partly allowed

Documentary filmmakers sought to enter non‑feature films for the National Film Awards, challenging regulations that required certification by the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) and release on film format. They argued that entry did not constitute public exhibition, making certification an unreasonable restr

DR. RAJINDER SINGHversusTHE STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS.

2001 INSC 20311 April 2001Case Allowed

Dr. Rajinder Singh filed a writ petition challenging the promotion of respondent No.3 to Deputy Director (Health Services) on the ground that the respondent had not completed the ten years of service required under Rule 9A(c) of the Punjab Civil Medical (State Service Class I) Rules, 1972. The Punjab High Court dismiss

INDIAN OVERSEAS BANKversusI.O.B. STAFF CANTEEN WORKERS UNION AND ANR.

2000 INSC 21311 April 2000Dismissed

The Indian Overseas Bank (IOB) provided a staff canteen from 1973, initially through a contractor and later via a co‑operative society run by bank employees. The bank supplied premises, equipment, subsidies and other support, while the canteen workers were paid from these funds. When the canteen was closed in 1990, the

JAYA GOKUL EDUCATIONAL TRUSTversusTHE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT HIGHER EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, KERALA STATE AND ANR.

2000 INSC 21411 April 2000Directions issued

The Jaya Gokul Educational Trust applied to the All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE) and Mahatma Gandhi University for permission to establish a self‑financing engineering college. AICTE granted conditional approval after inspections and consultations, and the university listed the college for affiliation.

DAL-ICHI KARKARIA LTD.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

2000 INSC 21511 April 2000Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Dai-ichi Karkaria Ltd., imported raw materials for manufacturing goods supplied to ONGC under a customs duty exemption granted by Notification No. 210/82 (amended 1983) which was to remain in force until 10 September 1987. The Union of India later issued Notification No. 513/86, reducing the exemption to

LAXMIKANTversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

1997 INSC 41111 April 1997Dismissed

The appellant, a manufacturer of Ayurvedic toothpaste containing 4% tobacco, challenged a 1992 government notification that prohibited the manufacture and sale of any Ayurvedic drugs licensed as tooth‑pastes or tooth‑powders containing tobacco. The notification was issued under Section 33(E) of the Drugs and Cosmetics

STATE OF BIHAR AND ORS.versusRAMJEE PRASAD AND ORS.

1990 INSC 13611 April 1990Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Bihar advertised vacancies for junior teaching posts in its medical colleges and fixed 31 January 1988 as the last date for receipt of applications, requiring three years of experience as a Resident or Registrar. Several junior teachers, including Ramjee Prasad, challenged the cut‑off date, alleging it was

SABYASCHI SENGUPTA AND ORS.versusNANI GOPAL DATTA AND ORS.

1990 INSC 13711 April 1990Disposed off

A batch of West Bengal Civil Service (Executive) officers filed a writ petition under Article 226 seeking seniority rules. The Calcutta High Court ordered the State to frame such rules and later stayed its own judgment for eight weeks, allowing the State to fill vacancies. The State appealed, and the Supreme Court inte

STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESHversusA PARENT OF A STUDENT OF MEDICAL COLLEGE, SIMLA & ORS

1985 INSC 8511 April 1985Appeal(s) allowed

The guardian of a medical college student wrote to the Chief Justice of Himachal Pradesh alleging widespread ragging and attached a letter from his son. The High Court treated the letters as a writ petition, ordered that the petitioner's identity be kept confidential, and directed the State Government to file an affida

RAM AVTAR SHARMA & ORS. ETC.versusSTATE OF HARYANA AND ANR. ETC.

1985 INSC 8611 April 1985Case Allowed

The petitioners, workmen dismissed after domestic enquiries, raised industrial disputes and sought reinstatement. Conciliation failed and the State of Haryana (for four workmen) and the Central Government (for one workman) refused to refer the disputes to an Industrial Tribunal under Section 10(1) of the Industrial Dis

RAJENDRA NARAIN SINGH AND OTHERSversusSTATE OF BIHAR AND OTHERS

1980 INSC 7611 April 1980Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, originally appointed as Inspectors of Police in 1953, were promoted in 1965 to officiate as Deputy Superintendents of Police in temporary posts. In 1974 a gradation list placed them below direct recruits, leading to a writ petition in the Patna High Court, which ordered a fresh list. Subsequently, the B

R. R. VERMA AND ORS.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

1980 INSC 7811 April 1980Dismissed

The Supreme Court considered an appeal by R. R. Verma and other direct recruits against the Union of India challenging the Delhi High Court’s dismissal of their writ petition as infructuous and the grant of a certificate of fitness under Article 133. The petitioners argued that Rule 3 of the All India Services (Conditi

UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERSversusROHITH NATHAN AND ANOTHER, ETC.

2026 INSC 23011 March 2026Dismissed

The case concerned candidates who had secured ranks in the Civil Services Examination and claimed OBC (Non‑Creamy Layer) reservation, but were denied on the ground that their parents' salary income exceeded the creamy‑layer ceiling as per the Department of Personnel and Training's (DoPT) application of the 1993 Office

DEVU G NAIRversusTHE STATE OF KERALA & ORS.

2024 INSC 22811 March 2024Disposed off

The appellant, a woman, filed a habeas corpus petition alleging that her intimate partner, also a woman (referred to as X), was being held against her will by X's parents. The Kerala High Court ordered the District Legal Services Authority to interview X and subsequently directed that X undergo counselling with a psych

THE STATE OF HARYANAversusASHOK KHEMKA & ANR.

2024 INSC 19011 March 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Haryana appealed against a High Court order that set aside a CAT decision which had upheld the Chief Minister’s downgrade of an IAS officer’s performance appraisal score. The officer’s self‑appraisal was initially graded 8.22 by the Reporting Authority, raised to 9.92 by the Reviewing Authority, and then r

M/S ICOMM TELE LTD.versusPUNJAB STATE WATER SUPPLY & SEWERAGE BOARD & ANR.

2019 INSC 34111 March 2019Appeal(s) allowed

M/S ICOMM TELE Ltd. was awarded a water supply contract by the Punjab State Water Supply & Sewerage Board, which contained an arbitration clause requiring a 10% "deposit-at-call" before invoking arbitration. The company challenged this clause as arbitrary, discriminatory, and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution

SURESH CHAND GAUTAMversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ORS.

2016 INSC 117411 March 2016Dismissed

The petitioners sought a writ of mandamus directing the Uttar Pradesh government to collect quantitative data on Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in its services, arguing that such data is a condition precedent for exercising the reservation in promotion power under Articles 16(4‑A), 16(4‑B) and 335 of the Constit

KALYANI MATHIVANANversusK. V. JEYARAJ AND ORS.

2015 INSC 20711 March 2015Appeal(s) allowed

Dr. Kalyani Mathivanan was appointed Vice‑Chancellor of Madurai Kamaraj University by a Tamil Nadu government order, but two writ petitions challenged her appointment on the ground that she did not satisfy the eligibility criteria prescribed in the UGC Regulations, 2010. The High Court set aside the appointment, holdin

UNION OF INDIA & ORS.versusMAJOR GENERAL SHRI KANT SHARMA & ANR.

2015 INSC 20611 March 2015Disposed off

The case concerned several writ petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution challenging orders of the Armed Forces Tribunal (AFT). The Union of India argued that Sections 30 and 31 of the Armed Forces Tribunal Act, 2007, together with Articles 136(2) and 227(4) of the Constitution, bar High Court jurisdiction

DINESHAN K.K.versusR.K. SINGH & ANR.

2014 INSC 18111 March 2014

The petitioner obtained a writ from the Gauhati High Court directing the Union of India to re‑designate him as a Warrant Officer and extend his pay. The Union appealed to the Supreme Court (Civil Appeal No. 25 of 2008), which dismissed the appeal, thereby upholding the High Court’s directions. The petitioner later file

DIVINE RETREAT CENTREversusSTATE OF KERALA & ORS.

2008 INSC 34111 March 2008Case Allowed

A female remand prisoner alleged sexual exploitation by the head of Divine Retreat Centre and complained of police bias. The High Court, acting suo motu on a petition addressed to a single judge and an anonymous letter, ordered the withdrawal of the police investigation of the rape case and constituted a Special Invest

RAMESH SINGHversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2008 INSC 33711 March 2008Dismissed

The petitioner, an employee of the Border Roads Organisation, filed a writ petition under Article 32 seeking parity in service benefits with army personnel and officers of the General Reserve Engineering Force. He argued that a prior Supreme Court decision (R. Viswan) mandated such parity. The Union of India contended

RAJ KUMAR YADAVversusSAMIR KUMAR MAHASETH AND ORS

2005 INSC 13011 March 2005Appeal(s) allowed

An election petition was presented to the designated election judge of the Patna High Court at 4:25 pm on the last day of the 45‑day limitation period, after the judge had retired from open court but was still in chambers. The judge refused to accept the petition, citing High Court Rules that required presentation only

COMMISSIONER OF POLICE AND ORS.versusACHARYA JAGADISHWARANANDA AVADHUTA AND ANR.

2004 INSC 15811 March 2004Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined whether the Ananda Marga sect's performance of the Tandava dance in public processions is an essential or integral part of its religion protected by Articles 25 and 26 of the Constitution. The sect, founded in 1955, introduced the dance in 1966 and later prescribed it in the 1986 edition of i

DR. B. SINGHversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

2004 INSC 16011 March 2004Dismissed

Dr. B. Singh filed a petition under Article 32 of the Constitution challenging the appointment of a High Court judge on the basis of newspaper clippings and an affidavit that did not disclose the source of the allegations. The petitioner offered no personal knowledge, did not investigate the truth of the claims, and fa

EXPRESS PUBLICATIONS (MADURAI) LTD. AND ANR.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ANR.

2004 INSC 16211 March 2004Dismissed

The petitioners, Express Publications (Madurai) Ltd. and another, challenged the constitutionality of Paragraph 80(2) of the Employees' Provident Fund Scheme, 1952, which exempts newspaper employees from the income‑ceiling test for PF benefits. They argued that the provision arbitrarily singled out the newspaper indust

UCO BANK AND ORS.versusSANWAR MAL

2004 INSC 16411 March 2004Appeal(s) allowed

Sanwar Mal, a former Class‑IV employee of UCO Bank who resigned in 1988, sought to join the bank's Employees' Pension Scheme introduced in 1995 under a 1993 settlement. The bank refused, invoking Regulation 22 which disqualifies any employee who has resigned, been dismissed or removed from pension benefits. The employe

SHYAMA CHARAN DASH AND ORS.versusSTATE OF ORISSA AND ANR.

2003 INSC 16111 March 2003Dismissed

The State of Orissa, exercising powers under Rule 7(1) of the Orissa Industries Service Rules, 1985, merged various categories of posts into Industries Promotion Officers (IPOs) and later amended the rule to delete the pay‑scale restriction, thereby making all IPOs eligible for promotion to Class‑II posts. The Industri

CHANDIGARH ADMINISTRATION AND ORS.versusNAURANG SINGH AND ORS.

1997 INSC 25911 March 1997Appeal(s) allowed

The Chandigarh Administration, bound by a 1966 Home Ministry notification to follow Punjab's pay pattern, initially gave storekeepers the clerk pay scale but later, at the college principal's request, raised the scale for five incumbent storekeepers. After accepting the Second Pay Commission's recommendations, which re

M/S. AVTAR SINGH & CO. PVT. LTD.versusM/S. S.S. ENTERPRISES AND ORS.

1996 INSC 35411 March 1996Disposed off

The parties were involved in two distribution agreements for the film 'Aag Ka Dariya', one dated 28 February 1985 with R. Venkatraman and a later one dated 7 October 1993 with M/s. Avtar Singh & Co. Pvt. Ltd. Three suits arose: a Bombay suit by Venkatraman seeking cancellation of the 1985 agreement, a Madras High Court

DURGA PRASADversusNAVEEN CHANDRA AND ORS.

1996 INSC 35611 March 1996Dismissed

The respondent filed a suit for specific performance which culminated in a decree on 14 January 1994. Respondent No.2 and others filed applications under Order 9 Rule 13 CPC to set aside the decree, while the appellant moved a preliminary objection challenging the maintainability of those applications. The trial court

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR.versusSHRI PRABHAKAR BHIKAJI INGLE

1996 INSC 35711 March 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent, a police officer, was removed from service by the Commissioner of Police under Article 311(2)(b) of the Constitution and challenged the removal before the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal (MAT), which confirmed the removal on March 6, 1995. He filed a Special Leave Petition (SLP) under Article 136, w

KARTAR SINGHversusSTATE OF PUNJAB

1994 INSC 11211 March 1994Disposed off

The Supreme Court considered a batch of writ petitions and appeals challenging the constitutional validity of the Terrorist Affected Areas (Special Courts) Act, 1984, the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1985, and the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1987 (TADA), along with a c

S.R. BOMMAIversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

1994 INSC 11111 March 1994

This landmark judgment concerns the scope of Article 356 of the Constitution of India, which empowers the President to impose President's Rule in states upon failure of constitutional machinery. The case consolidated challenges to proclamations dissolving legislative assemblies in Karnataka, Meghalaya, Nagaland, Madhya

UNION OF INDIA & ORS.versusE. BASHYAN

1988 INSC 7211 March 1988Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined whether a disciplinary authority must furnish the delinquent with a copy of the Enquiry Officer's report before recording a finding of guilt, as required by Article 311(2) of the Constitution and the principles of natural justice. The Court observed that the Enquiry Officer acts as a delegate

BRIJ MOHAN SINGH CHOPRAversusSTATE OF PUNJAB

1987 INSC 7511 March 1987Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a senior government officer, was prematurely retired under Rule 3 of the Punjab Civil Services (Premature Retirement) Rules, 1975. He challenged the order, arguing that the State had relied on remote adverse entries in his confidential reports and had ignored his representations against those entries, vi

SANTOSH KUMAR & ORS.versusCENTRAL WAREHOUSING CORPORATION & ANR.

1986 INSC 3311 March 1986Appeal(s) allowed

The Collector, acting under Section 11 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, awarded compensation for land acquired for the Central Warehousing Corporation. The landowners sought a reference under Section 18 to increase the award, while the Corporation sought a reference to reduce it. The Collector refused the Corporation

DR. AMARAGOUDA L PATILversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2025 INSC 20111 February 2025Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined the appointment of Dr. Anil Khurana, Director General of the Central Council for Research in Homeopathy, as Chairperson of the National Commission for Homeopathy. The appellant, Dr. Amaragouda L. Patil, challenged the appointment on the ground that the respondent did not satisfy the statutory

RUPA AND CO. LIMITED AND ANOTHERversusFIRHAD HAKIM AND OTHERS

2025 INSC 24511 February 2025Directions issued

The appellants Rupa & Co. Ltd paid Rs.4,00,92,000 for a plot of land in New Town, Kolkata, based on HIDCO's promise to convey it on a free‑hold basis. HIDCO later altered the terms to a 99‑year lease and subsequently demanded additional payment at market rates, prompting the appellants to file a writ petition which the

OM PRAKASH GUPTA ALIAS LALLOOWA (NOW DECEASED) & ORS.versusSATISH CHANDRA (NOW DECEASED)

2025 INSC 18311 February 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The case arose from two second appeals concerning specific performance suits where the respondents died during pendency. The heirs of the deceased respondents filed substitution applications, but the High Court dismissed applications for condonation of delay and held the appeals abated. The Supreme Court examined the p

CANARA BANKversusAJITHKUMAR G.K.

2025 INSC 18411 February 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The father of Ajithkumar G.K. died in service of Canara Bank in December 2001, and the son applied for a compassionate appointment under the bank's 1993 scheme. The bank rejected the claim on grounds of sufficient family pension, terminal benefits and the son's age exceeding the limit, prompting a writ petition that wa

M/S TECHNO PRINTSversusCHHATTISGARH TEXTBOOK CORPORATION & ANR.

2025 INSC 23611 February 2025Disposed off

The appellant, a printing firm, was issued a show‑cause notice by the Chhattisgarh Textbook Corporation seeking an explanation why it should not be blacklisted for three years and its EMD forfeited, alleging breach of tender clauses relating to time‑bound delivery and other obligations. The appellant challenged the not

JAY KISHAN AND ORS.versusTHE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND ORS.

2025 INSC 19811 February 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants challenged the registration of FIR No.0092/2023 under the Uttar Pradesh Gangsters & Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, alleging that the three predicate cases cited in the FIR were essentially civil property and monetary disputes. The High Court had dismissed the writ petition and allowed the

UMESH KUMAR PAHWAversusTHE BOARD OF DIRECTORS UTTARAKHAND GRAMIN BANK & ORS.

2022 INSC 17811 February 2022Case Partly allowed

Umesh Kumar Pahwa, a branch officer of Uttarakhand Gramin Bank, was accused of demanding a bribe from a borrower and reducing the loan amount from Rs.1,50,000 to Rs.75,000. A departmental inquiry found him guilty of ten charges and ordered his removal from service, which was upheld by the High Court. Pahwa challenged t

VIKASH KUMARversusUNION PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION & ORS.

2021 INSC 7811 February 2021Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a medical graduate suffering from writer's cramp (dysgraphia), applied for a scribe in the 2018 Civil Services Examination (CSE) but was denied because the UPSC said only candidates with benchmark disabilities (≥40% impairment) were eligible. The appellant challenged the denial before the Tribunal, High

SIRISIA STHAL, IMLI CHATI, MUZAFFARPUR & ORS.versusSTATE OF BIHAR & ORS.

2008 INSC 16711 February 2008Case Allowed

The appellants challenged the constitutionality of certain provisions of the Bihar Land Reforms (Fixation of Ceiling Area and Acquisition of Surplus Land) Act, 1961, specifically an amendment to Section 29 that removed an exemption for extra units used for religious rites. They contended that the amendment was not prot

GRAM PANCHAYAT, VILLAGE KUM KALANversusSTATE OF PUNJAB & ORS.

2008 INSC 16911 February 2008Case Allowed

The Gram Panchayat of Village Kum Kalan challenged a 1995 amendment (Amendment Act No. 8) to the Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulation) Act, 1961, which retrospectively validated land transfers that had been invalidated by a Supreme Court judgment in Gram Panchayat of Village Jamalpur v. Malwinder Singh. The amendmen

S. PUSHPA AND ORS.versusSIVACHANMUGAVELU AND ORS.

2005 INSC 7111 February 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned the selection of migrant Scheduled Caste (SC) candidates for posts reserved for SCs in the Union Territory of Pondicherry. The Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) had declared the selection illegal, holding that only SCs listed in the 1964 Presidential Order for Pondicherry were eligible. The Union

J.H. JADHAVversusM/S. FORBES GOKAK LTD.

2005 INSC 7511 February 2005Appeal(s) allowed

J.H. Jadhav, an employee of Forbes Gokak Ltd., was denied a promotion and raised an industrial dispute, claiming that the Gokak Mills Staff Union had espoused his cause. The Industrial Tribunal, after examining oral and documentary evidence, held that the dispute was industrial because the Union, though not a majority

CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR, UNITED COMMERCIAL BANK AND ORS.versusP.C. KAKKAR

2003 INSC 7611 February 2003Disposed off

The United Commercial Bank dismissed Assistant Manager P.C. Kakkar after disciplinary proceedings under its 1976 Conduct, Discipline and Appeal Regulation, finding several charges of misconduct established. The employee appealed the dismissal and later challenged the quantum of punishment before the Allahabad High Cour

GURBAX SINGHversusKARTAR SINGH AND ORS.

2002 INSC 7411 February 2002Dismissed

Jamail Singh executed two sale deeds on the same day, one (Ex P-2) at 10:00 a.m. and the other (Ex D-1) with no time recorded. Lower courts found that Ex P-2 was executed earlier and therefore should have priority over Ex D-1. The Punjab and Haryana High Court affirmed this finding and dismissed the appeal against it.

MOHD. RIAZUL USMAN GANI AND ORS.versusDISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, NAGPUR AND ORS.

2000 INSC 6411 February 2000Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined an appeal against a High Court order that upheld a short‑listing criterion which excluded candidates possessing educational qualifications higher than Standard VII from being considered for peon posts in the District and Sessions Court, Nagpur. The recruitment rules prescribed a minimum quali

STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESHversusSHRI P.D. ATTRI AND OTHERS

1999 INSC 5911 February 1999Appeal(s) allowed

Senior Translators and Junior Translators of the Himachal Pradesh High Court sought redesignation and parity of pay with their counterparts in the Punjab & Haryana High Court, relying on a policy of adopting Punjab & Haryana pay scales. The Himachal High Court, following the Chief Justice's recommendation, ordered the

S. RAJENDRAversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

1998 INSC 8011 February 1998Dismissed

The appellant, S. Rajendra, a regular Assistant Superintendent of Jails, was promoted on an ad‑hoc basis to Deputy Superintendent when a single vacancy reserved for a Scheduled Caste (SC) candidate could not be filled because the only SC candidate, respondent No.3, had not yet completed the required three years of serv

THE STATE OF WEST BENGALversusSHIV ANANDPATHAK

1998 INSC 8311 February 1998Appeal(s) allowed

Six Assistant Computors of the West Bengal Subordinate Labour Service filed a writ petition seeking promotion to higher posts, which a single judge ordered to be effected from 13‑03‑1980. A division bench later modified that order, directing that all promotion cases be considered afresh under the law. The petitioners s

DR. RAMESH CHANDRA TYAGIversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

1994 INSC 6711 February 1994Appeal(s) allowed

Dr. R.C. Tyagi, a distinguished scientist, was transferred from Delhi to the Institute of Armament Technology, Pune in 1977 by an order issued by the Director General, although the Secretary of the department was the only authority empowered to transfer him. Tyagi challenged the transfer as malicious and unauthorized;

SACHIDANANDA PANDEYversusSTATE OF WEST BENGAL & ORS.

1987 INSC 4211 February 1987Dismissed

The petitioners filed a public‑interest writ seeking to restrain the West Bengal Government from leasing four acres of Begumbari land, part of the Alipore Zoological Garden, to the Taj Group for a five‑star hotel, alleging ecological harm to migratory birds and violation of natural‑justice principles. The Government ar

NARENDER CHADHA & ORS.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

1986 INSC 1411 February 1986Disposed off

The case concerned the Indian Economic Service and Indian Statistical Service, where a large number of officers had been promoted to Grade IV posts on an ad‑hoc basis for 15‑20 years, contrary to the quota provisions of Rule 8 that required 75 % of vacancies to be filled by direct recruitment and at most 25 % by depart

STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH & ANR.versusUMED RAM SHARMA & ORS.

1986 INSC 1311 February 1986Disposed off

The Himachal Pradesh government sanctioned a 5‑km road in 1977 but construction stalled at about 3 km due to obstruction and lack of funds, leaving hill‑area residents without essential road access. The residents wrote to the High Court seeking relief; the High Court, treating the letter as a writ petition, directed th

DR. C. GIRIJAMBALversusGOVT. OF ANDHRA PRADESH

1981 INSC 2811 February 1981Dismissed

Dr. C. Girijambal, a holder of a Diploma in Ayurvedic Medicine (D.A.M.), was initially appointed as a Medical Officer in a Zilla Parishad dispensary on a lower pay scale despite the advertisement indicating a higher scale for candidates with G.C.I.M. or L.I.M. qualifications. The High Court had earlier held that she wa

AKHILESH PRASADversusUNION TERRITORY OF MIZORAM

1981 INSC 2911 February 1981Appeal(s) allowed

Akhlsh Prasad, a member of the Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF), was charged under IPC sections 307, 326 and 324 for allegedly firing on two persons on 30 May 1978. He sought to quash the proceedings, arguing that the offences were committed while he was acting in the discharge of his official duty as a member of th

STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AND OTHERSversusYOGENDERA MOHAN SENGUPTA AND ANOTHER

2024 INSC 3011 January 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Himachal Pradesh prepared a draft development plan for the Shimla Planning Area under the Himachal Pradesh Town & Country Planning Act, 1977, which was stayed by the National Green Tribunal (NGT) in 2014 and again in 2022. The State challenged the NGT orders before the Himachal Pradesh High Court, while th

HIGH COURT OF KERALAversusRESHMA A. & OTHERS ETC.

2021 INSC 1511 January 2021Appeal(s) allowed

The appeal concerned the interpretation of Rule 7 of the Kerala Judicial Service Rules, 1991 (as amended 2019) regarding the number of "probable vacancies" for appointing Munsiff‑Magistrates. The High Court had held that vacancies arising within a year of the Governor’s approval of the merit list could be filled from t

SUPREME COURT WOMEN LAWYERS ASSOCIATIONversusUNION OF INDIA & ANR.

2016 INSC 116311 January 2016Disposed off

The Supreme Court Women Lawyers Association filed a writ petition under Article 32 seeking that the legislature impose chemical castration as an additional punishment for perpetrators of rape against girl children. The petition highlighted alarming incidents of child sexual abuse and argued that the Indian Penal Code d

N.C. DASversusGAUHATI HIGH COURT THR. REGISTRAR & ORS.

2012 INSC 1411 January 2012Dismissed

N.C. Das, a Grade‑II civil judge of the Tripura Judicial Service, filed a writ petition under Article 32 challenging (i) the denial of his promotion to Grade‑I despite his seniority and (ii) the refusal to extend his service up to the age of 60 years as provided in the amended Rule 20 of the Tripura Judicial Service Ru

I. R. COELHO (DEAD) BY LRS.versusSTATE OF TAMIL NADU

2007 INSC 2811 January 2007Reference answered

The case arose from a reference concerning whether statutes placed in the Ninth Schedule after the Kesavananda Bharati judgment (24 April 1973) can enjoy absolute immunity from judicial review under Article 31B. The petitioners argued that such immunity would violate the basic structure doctrine by abrogating fundament

LAL MOHAMMAD AND ORS.versusINDIAN RAILWAY CONSTRUCTION CO. LTD. & ORS.

2007 INSC 3011 January 2007Dismissed

The petitioners were workmen appointed on an ad‑hoc basis for the Anpara‑Rihand Nagar railway construction project of Indian Railway Construction Co. Ltd. (IRCON). After the project was completed in early 1998, they were served with retrenchment notices and offered compensation under Section 25‑F of the Industrial Disp

SECRETARY, U.P. HIGH SCHOOL & INTERMEDIATE EDUCATION, ALLAHABAD & ANR.versusH.K.LAL

2007 INSC 3211 January 2007Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent, H.K. Lal, sought to have his date of birth altered in a matriculation certificate issued by the Uttar Pradesh High School and Intermediate Education Board. After a series of writ petitions and a civil suit that resulted in a decree ordering the alteration, the Board appealed the decree. While the appeal

PU MYLLAI HLYCHHO AND ORS.versusSTATE OF MIZORAM AND ORS.

2005 INSC 2211 January 2005Dismissed

The case concerned the nomination and subsequent termination of four members to the Mara Autonomous District Council (MADC) in Mizoram. The Governor had nominated the members on 8 August 2000 under the Sixth Schedule, terminated them on 5 December 2001, and re‑nominated four members on 6 December 2001. A writ petition

STATE OF BIHAR AND ORS.versusSHREE BAIDYANATH AYURVED BHAWAN (P) LTD. AND ORS.

2005 INSC 2411 January 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Bihar enacted notifications licensing the use, possession and sale of Ayurvedic medicinal preparations containing alcohol, after amending the Bihar Excise Act, 1915 to include such preparations within the definition of "intoxicant". Manufacturers challenged the constitutional validity of the amendment and

STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND ANR.versusKAUSHAL KISHORE SHUKLA

1991 INSC 411 January 1991Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent, K.K. Shukla, was appointed as an ad‑hoc Assistant Auditor in Uttar Pradesh on a temporary contract that allowed termination at any time without cause. An adverse entry was entered against him for 1977‑78 and, later, a preliminary inquiry found him guilty of unauthorised audit of a college’s Boys Fund an

WORKMEN OF ENGLISH ELECTRIC COMPANY OF INDIA LTD., MADRASversusPRESIDING OFFICER & ANR.

1990 INSC 311 January 1990Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined appeals by workmen challenging a Division Bench decision that dismissed their claim for confirmation and back wages under the Industrial Disputes Act. The workmen argued that 131 of the 186 casual employees had completed the requisite 240 days of service and were entitled to confirmation, whi

BHASKAR TEXTILE MILLS LTD.versusJHARSUGUDA MUNICIPALITY & OTHER

1984 INSC 1011 January 1984Dismissed

Bhaskar Textile Mills Ltd., a company situated in the village of Ektali, challenged the Jharsuguda Municipality’s inclusion of the village within its limits and the subsequent levy of octroi duty on cotton. The municipality had extended its jurisdiction through notifications dated 31 July 1973 and 12 August 1975 under

PRADEEP S/O RAJKUMAR JAINversusMANGANESE ORE (INDIA) LIMITED & ORS.

2021 INSC 86410 December 2021Case Partly allowed

The appellant, a qualified Chartered Accountant, was appointed Manager (Finance) and later Deputy Chief (Finance) at Manganese Ore (India) Ltd. He was suspended and subsequently dismissed following a series of show-cause notices after reporting late to work due to his father's death. The High Court reinstated him but d

BIPINCHANDRA GAMANLAL CHOKSHI AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF GUJARAT AND OTHERS

2015 INSC 91310 December 2015Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Bipinchandra Gamanlal Chokshi, was detained on 11 June 1976 under Section 3 of the COFEPOSA Act, with a simultaneous declaration under Section 12A during a national emergency. The declaration was revoked on 21 March 1977 when the emergency ended, and the appellant was released the same day. He later chal

RAJBALA & OTHERSversusSTATE OF HARYANA & OTHERS

2015 INSC 91210 December 2015Dismissed

The petitioners challenged four new disqualification clauses (t, u, v, w) inserted in Section 175(1) of the Haryana Panchayati Raj Act, 1994, arguing that they violated Article 14 by creating unreasonable classifications and that the right to vote and the right to contest elections are fundamental constitutional rights

GM. (OPERATIONS) S.B.I. &ANR.versusR. PERIYASAMY

2014 INSC 85510 December 2014Appeal(s) allowed

R. Periyasamy, a permanent cash officer of State Bank of India, was dismissed after a departmental enquiry found, on a preponderance of probabilities, that he was responsible for a cash shortage of Rs.1,25,000 and had violated service rules. The dismissal was upheld by the disciplinary authority and departmental appeal

RAMRAJ @ NANHOO @ BIHNUversusSTATE OF CHHATIISGARH

2009 INSC 129710 December 2009Dismissed

Ramraj, convicted under IPC sections 302 and 201 for murdering his wife, was sentenced to life imprisonment. The High Court upheld the conviction, and the petitioner sought release after serving 14 years, arguing that remission had effectively reduced his term to about 17 years. The Supreme Court examined the statutory

STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ORS.versusKABERI KHASTAGIR & ORS.

2008 INSC 141110 December 2008Appeal(s) allowed

The respondents, appointed as supervisors and Child Development Project Officers (CDPO) under the Integrated Child Development Scheme (ICDS) in West Bengal, claimed that they were State Government employees and sought mandatory promotion of 75% of CDPO and Assistant CDPO posts from female supervisors. The High Court he

STATE OF RAJASTHANversusGANESHI LAL

2007 INSC 125310 December 2007Case Partly allowed

Ganeshilal, a temporary peon in the Law Department of the Rajasthan State Government, was terminated and claimed the dismissal violated Section 25‑G of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The State contended that the Law Department was not an "industry" within the meaning of Section 2(s) of the Act, and therefore the em

MR. "X"versusHOSPITAL "Z"

2002 INSC 52610 December 2002Disposed off

The appellant, a medical practitioner, was found HIV‑positive when his blood was tested at Hospital Z during a donation for a relative. The hospital disclosed his HIV status to the relatives of his fiancée, leading to the cancellation of his marriage and social ostracism. The appellant sought compensation for breach of

BALCO EMPLOYEES UNION (REGD.)versusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

2001 INSC 60110 December 2001Dismissed

The Union of India sold a 51% stake in Bharat Aluminium Company Ltd (BALCO), a public sector undertaking, to Sterlite Industries, prompting challenges by the BALCO Employees Union, the State of Madhya Pradesh, and a public‑interest litigant. The petitioners argued that the disinvestment violated constitutional provisio

MEWA SINGH AND OTHERSversusSHIROMANI GURDWARA PRABANDHAK COMMITTEE

1998 INSC 47410 December 1998Appeal(s) allowed

Four employees of the Shiromani Gurdwara Prabandhak Committee (SGPC), a body created under the Sikh Gurdwara Act, 1925, were dismissed from service. They filed a writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution challenging the dismissal. The Punjab & Haryana High Court refused relief, directing them to seek

BALARAM PRASAD AGRAWALversusSTATE OF BIHAR & ORS.

1996 INSC 145610 December 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, father of Kiran Devi, alleged that his daughter was subjected to continuous cruelty by her husband, mother‑in‑law and brother‑in‑law, culminating in her suicide by jumping into a well. The trial court acquitted the accused of murder (Sec. 302) and the High Court upheld that acquittal. On appeal, the Supr

ALL INDIA RESERVE BANK RETIRED OFFICERS ASSOCIATION AND ORS.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ANR.

1991 INSC 33310 December 1991Dismissed

The Reserve Bank of India introduced a new pension scheme in 1990, replacing the Contributory Provident Fund (CPF) scheme. Regulations 3(3) and 31 fixed a cut‑off date of 1 January 1986, allowing only employees who retired on or after that date (and before 1 November 1990) to opt into the pension scheme by refunding CP

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