Created byFuzzy Cloud

Supreme Court of India

Y V CHANDRACHUD

169 judgments delivered by benches including this judge.

STATE OF TAMIL NADU, ETC. ETC.versusL. ABU KAVUR BAI AND ORS. ETC.

1983 INSC 16831 October 1983Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined the constitutionality of the Tamil Nadu Stage Carriages and Contract Carriages (Acquisition) Act, 1973, which sought to nationalise stage and contract carriage services and their assets. Operators challenged the Act as violative of Articles 14, 19 and 31, alleging it was confiscatory and lack

MINERVA MILLS LTD. & ORSversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

1980 INSC 14231 July 1980Disposed off

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

DARSHAN SINGH @ BHASURI & ORS.versusSTATE OF PUNJAB

1983 INSC 2931 March 1983Case Partly allowed

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

MOHD. SHAKEEL WAHID AHMEDversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS.

1983 INSC 2731 March 1983Case Allowed

Mohd. Shakeel Wahid Ahmed was detained under the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 on 7 November 1981. An earlier detainee, Shamsi, had been released after the Advisory Board reported no sufficient cause for his detention. The High Court upheld Ahmed's detention on the ba

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

1984 INSC 2331 January 1984Dismissed

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

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

1980 INSC 13930 July 1980Disposed off

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

NARENDER KUMAR AND ORS.versusSTATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS.

1984 INSC 22229 November 1984Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, twenty‑two apprentices who completed a one‑year training with the Punjab State Electricity Board, claimed that their letters of appointment required the Board to absorb them in the event of vacancies, in line with a Government of India instruction that at least 50% of direct recruitment vacancies be fil

S. KUMARversusTHE INSTITUTE OF CONSTITUTIONAL AND PARLIAMENTARY STUDIES AND OTHERS

1983 INSC 13329 September 1983Dismissed

The appellant, a research officer, was charged with submitting a false bill and later with disobeying an order, leading to his dismissal from service. He filed a suit for declaration and injunction to restrain his dismissal, which was dismissed by the Subordinate Judge on the ground that his remedy lay in damages. Subs

MOTOR OWNERS INSURANCE CO. LTD.versusJADAVJI KESHAVJI MODI & ORS.

1981 INSC 17429 September 1981Dismissed

In 1966 a collision between a car and a goods truck caused the death of the car driver and injuries to a passenger. The heirs of the deceased and the injured passenger claimed compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939. The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal dismissed the claims, but the Gujarat High Court awarded Rs

DR. V. K. SAXENAversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND VICE VERSA

1983 INSC 10629 August 1983Dismissed

Dr. V.K. Saxena and a nurse, Bhagwati Singh, were convicted for the murder of Sudha, Saxena's wife. The Sessions Judge sentenced Saxena to death and the nurse to life imprisonment. The Allahabad High Court reduced Saxena's death sentence to life imprisonment and acquitted the nurse, citing a split opinion among its jud

MADAN LALversusMST. GOPI & ANR.

1980 INSC 16829 August 1980Dismissed

The dispute concerned a deed of adoption executed by Mansaram in 1944, which the appellant Madan Lal sought to enforce. The trial and district courts dismissed the suit, but the Rajasthan High Court set aside those judgments, holding that Mansaram was not of sound mind when he executed the deed. The Supreme Court exami

JASWANT SINGH & ORS. ETC.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS. ETC.

1979 INSC 16229 August 1979Dismissed

The petitioners, who were engineers and other staff employed for the Beas Project, challenged orders of retrenchment, claiming they were employees of the Central Government, governed by the Central Civil Services (Temporary Service) Rules, 1965, and entitled to quasi‑permanent status and transfer to the Bhakra Beas Man

BANK OF BARODAversusMOTI BHAI AND ORS.

1985 INSC 1529 January 1985Appeal(s) allowed

The Bank of Baroda granted a demand loan of Rs.36,000 to Moti Bhai, secured by a promissory note, a hypothecation of standing crops and a mortgage deed, with two guarantors. When the loan defaulted, the Bank sued the borrowers in a civil court for recovery of the principal, interest and, in case of non‑payment, sale of

A. K. ROY, ETC.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ANR.

1981 INSC 21028 December 1981Disposed off

The petitioners, including A.K. Roy, challenged the National Security Ordinance, 1980 and the subsequent National Security Act, 1980 on grounds that the President's ordinance‑making power under Article 123 is an executive power and not "law" within the meaning of Article 21, that the provisions of the Act are vague, un

STATE OF MAHARASHTRA ETC. ETC.versusMRS. KAMAL SUKUMAR DURGULE AND ORS. ETC.

1984 INSC 21928 November 1984Dismissed

The petitioners, owners of plots in Bandra, Bombay, were ordered by the Municipal Corporation and the State to demolish buildings constructed without permission and the lands were later declared "vacant" under the Maharashtra Vacant Lands (Prohibition of Unauthorised Occupation and Summary Eviction) Act, 1975. They cha

S. L. SACHDEV & ANR.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

1980 INSC 20228 October 1980Case Partly allowed

The petitioners, Upper Division Clerks (UDCs) transferred from the Posts & Telegraphs Audit Offices to the Savings Bank Control‑Internal Check Organisation (SBCO‑ICO), challenged the Director‑General’s circulars that limited promotion of UDCs from the Audit Offices to 10 % of Selection‑Grade posts and 20 % of Head‑Cler

AHMED HUSSAIN KHANversusSTATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

1984 INSC 18528 September 1984Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, Ahmed Hussain Khan and S. Gopalan, were senior civil servants who had joined the Hyderabad State service before its merger with India and later transferred to Andhra Pradesh. Their pension was governed by Rule 299(b) of the Hyderabad Civil Services Rules, which originally stipulated a maximum pension of

SALABUDDIN MOHAMED YUNUSversusSTATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

1984 INSC 18628 September 1984Appeal(s) allowed

S.M. Yunus, a former civil servant of the erstwhile State of Hyderabad who retired in 1956, claimed a pension of Rs 1,000 per month in Indian currency, arguing that his right had vested at retirement. The Andhra Pradesh Government had, by a 1971 notification, retrospectively reduced the maximum pension to Rs 857.15 per

PATEL ISHWERBHAI PRAHLADBHAI ETC. ETC.versusTALUKA DEVELOPMENT OFFICER & OTHERS

1983 INSC 728 January 1983Appeal(s) allowed

The Minimum Wages Inspector filed applications before the Minimum Wages Authority seeking overtime wages for four tube‑well operators employed by Taluka and District Panchayats in Gujarat, alleging that they worked beyond the hours prescribed under the Minimum Wages Act, 1948. The Authority dismissed the applications,

M/S VARIETY EMPORIUMversusV. R. M. MOHD. IBRAHIM NAINA

1984 INSC 21727 November 1984Appeal(s) allowed

The landlord filed seven eviction suits under the Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1960, claiming a bona‑fide personal requirement for the premises. The trial court decreed eviction against all tenants; the appellate authority upheld the decrees for the four ground‑floor shop tenants and one first‑flo

BANWAR LALversusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN

1984 INSC 18127 September 1984Dismissed

Four persons, including the appellant Banwar Lal, were tried for the murder of Gyanchand under Sections 302 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The Sessions Judge acquitted three accused and convicted only Kanahiya Lal, but the Rajasthan High Court set aside the acquittal of Banwar Lal, relying on the testimony of an inde

LALLU RAM AND ORS.versusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANR.

1984 INSC 18227 September 1984Dismissed

The appellants, convicted of life imprisonment for the 1971 murder of Kunwar Bahadur, sought acquittal on the ground that a man of the same name was found dead in 1983, suggesting the original victim was alive for twelve years. The Supreme Court, invoking its power under Article 136, ordered the District Magistrate of

KANPUR UNIVERSITY AND OTHERSversusSAMIR GUPTA AND OTHERS

1983 INSC 12927 September 1983Dismissed

The Kanpur University conducted the 1982 Combined Pre‑Medical Test using a multiple‑choice objective format and published the key‑answers along with the results. Several candidates claimed that the key‑answers for three questions (in Chemistry, Zoology and Botany) were incorrect, causing them to be denied admission to

INDIAN ALUMINIUM CABLES LTD.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

1985 INSC 14027 May 1985Dismissed

Indian Aluminium Cables Ltd. manufactured aluminium rods by the Properzi process and argued that these "Properzi Rods" were not "wire rods" and therefore should be taxed under the residuary Entry 68 of the Central Excise and Salt Act, 1944. The Central Excise authorities classified them under Entry 27(a)(ii) as "wire b

SMT. SOWMITHRI VISHNUversusUNION OF INDIA & ANR.

1985 INSC 14127 May 1985Dismissed

The petitioner, a wife, filed a divorce on the ground of desertion and later challenged a criminal complaint filed by her husband under IPC s.497 accusing Dharma Ebenezer of adultery with her. She argued that s.497 violated Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution by discriminating against women and denying the alleged v

T. VENKATA REDDY ETC. ETC,versusSTATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

1985 INSC 7127 March 1985Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined the constitutional validity of the Andhra Pradesh Abolition of Posts of Part‑time Village Officers Ordinance, 1984, which abolished a large number of part‑time village officer posts and created new full‑time Village Assistant posts. The petitioners challenged the ordinance on grounds of lack

STATE OF GUJARAT & ANOTHERversusRAMAN LAL KESHAV LAL SONI & OTHERS

1983 INSC 627 January 1983Disposed off

The Gujarat Panchayat Act, 1961 created a distinct Panchayat Service for officers and servants of gram, taluka and district panchayats. After the High Court held that members of this service, including the local cadre, were government servants entitled to pay revisions and other benefits, the State of Gujarat appealed.

WESTERN COALFIELDS LTD.versusSPECIAL AREA DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, KORBA AND ANR.

1981 INSC 19426 November 1981Dismissed

The Special Area Development Authority (SADA) of Korba, created under the Madhya Pradesh Nagar Tatha Gram Nivesh Adhiniyam, 1973, levied property tax on Western Coalfields Ltd., Bharat Aluminium Co. Ltd. and other government‑owned companies, despite an agreement that SADA would not tax them and claims that the companie

GWALIOR DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE CENTRAL BANK LTD. GWALIORversusRAMESH CHANDRA MANGAL AND ORS.

1984 INSC 17926 September 1984Dismissed

The Gwalior District Co‑operative Central Bank Ltd., whose board had been superseded by the Registrar of Cooperative Societies and placed under the control of the Madhya Pradesh State Cooperative Bank (the Apex Bank), dismissed employee Ramesh Chandra Mangal for allegedly overstaying leave. The dismissal was ordered by

VINODKUMAR SHANTILAL GOSALIAversusGANGADHAR NARSINGDAS AGARWAL & ORS.

1981 INSC 15026 August 1981Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant obtained a prospecting licence and later a mining lease for an area in Goa after the territory was annexed by India. Respondent 1 had purchased four Portuguese "Titles of Manifest" before annexation and had applied for mining concessions, which were later deemed to have lapsed by the Indian authorities. H

PRINCIPAL, KING GEORGE'S MEDICAL COLLEGE LUCKNOWversusDR. VISHAN KUMAR AGARWAL &. ANOTHER

1983 INSC 16025 October 1983Dismissed

Dr. V.K. Agarwal, having completed his MBBS, one year of compulsory housemanship and three years as a Medical Officer, applied in October 1974 for admission to the M.D. (Physiology) course at King George's Medical College, Lucknow. The Principal rejected his application, contending that Agarwal had not satisfied the cl

STATE OF KARNATAKA & ANR.versusM/S. HANSA CORPORATION

1980 INSC 19125 September 1980Appeal(s) allowed

The Karnataka Legislature enacted the Tax on Entry of Goods into Local Areas Act, 1979 to replace octroi by levying a tax of up to 2% ad valorem on specified goods (textiles, tobacco, sugar) entering 27 selected local areas. The State notified the areas and rates, and several petitions challenged the Act on the grounds

LT. COL. PRITHI PAL SINGH BEDI ETC.versusUNION OF INDIA & OTHERS

1982 INSC 6525 August 1982Dismissed

The Supreme Court heard three writ petitions under Article 32 challenging the constitutionality and legality of orders convening General Court‑Martials for Lt Col Prithipal Singh Bedi, Capt Dharam Pal Kukrety and Capt Chander Kumar Chopra. The petitioners argued that the composition of the courts‑martial violated Rule 

STATE OF WEST BENGALversusSHEW MANGAL SINGH & ORS.

1981 INSC 14825 August 1981Dismissed

The State of West Bengal charged four police officers with murder under IPC sections 302 and 34 for the deaths of Ranjit and Samir Chakraborty during a police operation in 1970. The trial court convicted them, but the Calcutta High Court acquitted, holding that the order to open fire given by the Deputy Commissioner wa

ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIAversusSTATE OF HARYANA

1984 INSC 9125 April 1984Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court heard a special leave appeal (Civil Appeal No. 2182 of 1984) filed by the Election Commission of India against an ex‑parte order of the Punjab & Haryana High Court that stayed the election programme for a by‑election in the Taoru Assembly constituency. The High Court had intervened despite the imminen

RAMESH CHANDRA ETCversusSTATE OF U.P. ETC.

1980 INSC 5125 March 1980Case Partly allowed

The Supreme Court examined the Uttar Pradesh Krishi Utpadan Mandi Act and its 1965 Rules concerning the declaration of market areas, the constitution of market committees, and the levy of market fees on agricultural produce. Traders challenged the validity of declaring large geographic areas as market areas, the legali

M/S LOHIA MACHINES LIMITED AND ANR.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

1985 INSC 1425 January 1985Dismissed

The petitioners, industrial undertakings, challenged the validity of Rule 19A of the Income‑Tax Rules, 1962, which excluded borrowed capital and fixed the computation of "capital employed" on the first day of the previous year for the purpose of the tax exemption under Section 80J of the Income‑Tax Act. They also conte

HINDUSTANI ANDOLAN & ORS.versusSTATE OF PUNJAB & ORS.

1983 INSC 18424 November 1983Dismissed

The petitioners, two public‑spirited organisations, sought a writ of mandamus directing the police to enter any place of worship where criminals were suspected to be sheltering. The petition was filed under Article 32 of the Constitution. The Court held that it is not within judicial competence to issue a general manda

COL. A. S. IYER & ORS. ETC.versusV. BALASUBRAMANYAM & ORS.

1979 INSC 22124 October 1979Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned the validity of the Survey of India (Recruitment from Corps of Engineer Officers) Rules, 1950, which gave seniority and promotional advantages to army engineers over civilian recruits. Civilian officers challenged the rules as violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution, and the Andhra Prades

BHAGIRATH KANORIA & ORS. ETCversusSTATE OF M.P. & ORS. ETC.

1984 INSC 15824 August 1984Dismissed

The Provident Fund Inspector filed complaints against the directors and factory manager of Burhanpur Tapti Mills Ltd for failing to pay the employer's contribution to the Employees' Provident Fund and Family Pension Fund Act, 1952, for the period February 1970 to June 1971. The accused contended that the complaint was

SHER SINGH & OTHERSversusTHE STATE OF PUNJAB

1983 INSC 2524 March 1983Heard

Sher Singh and others were convicted of murder under IPC s.302/34 and sentenced to death in 1977. After the High Court upheld the sentence and the Supreme Court dismissed their Special Leave Petition, the petitioners filed writ petitions under Art.32 claiming that a delay of more than two years in executing the death s

DEENA@DEEN DAYAL ETC. ETC.versusUNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

1983 INSC 12623 September 1983Dismissed

The petitioners, sentenced to death for murder, challenged the constitutionality of Section 354(5) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, which mandates execution by hanging, alleging it is cruel, barbarous and violative of Article 21 of the Constitution. The Court examined whether hanging constitutes a cruel or degrading

V. SASIDHARANversusPETER & KARUNAKAR & ORS.

1984 INSC 15523 August 1984Dismissed

V. Sasidharan, a clerk in a firm of lawyers, was dismissed and appealed under the Kerala Shops and Commercial Establishments Act, 1960. The firm contended that it was not a "commercial establishment" within the meaning of the Act, leading the Appellate Authority to dismiss the appeal on a preliminary objection. The Hig

SATYENDRA NARAIN SINGH & OTHERS.versusRAM NATH SINGH & OTHERS.

1984 INSC 15623 August 1984Dismissed

The appellants, members of a society for the prevention of cruelty to animals, filed a revision application in the Patna High Court which was to be heard by Justice S.K. Jha. They later engaged Shri Sailendra Kumar Jha, the son of Justice Jha, to appear for them, prompting concerns about a son appearing before his fath

V. DHANAPAL CHETTIARversusYESODAI AMMAL

1979 INSC 15623 August 1979Dismissed

The landlady sought eviction of her tenant under the Tamil Nadu Building (Lease and Rent Control) Act on the ground of personal necessity. The Rent Controller dismissed the application; the appellate court held that personal necessity existed but required a notice to quit under Section 106 of the Transfer of Property A

MOHD. AHMED KHANversusSHAH BANO BEGUM AND ORS.

1985 INSC 9723 April 1985Dismissed

The appellant, a Muslim advocate, divorced his wife Shah Bano Begum by irrevocable talaq and argued that under Muslim Personal Law he owed no further maintenance beyond the iddat period, having paid dower (mahr). The wife filed a petition under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) seeking maintenance, w

KAMAL KANTI DUTTA AND ORS.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

1980 INSC 9323 April 1980Dismissed

The Supreme Court considered review petitions filed under Article 32 seeking to overturn its earlier decisions in S.G. Jaisinghani and the two Gupta cases concerning the seniority and quota rules for Income‑Tax Officers (Class I, Grade II). The petitioners argued that the Court had wrongly treated Rule 4 of the 1945 Re

ARJUN CHAUBEYversusUNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

1984 INSC 6623 March 1984Appeal(s) allowed

Arjun Chaubey, a senior clerk in the Northern Railway, was served with twelve charges of gross indiscipline, many of which related to the Deputy Chief Commercial Superintendent (Respondent 3). After submitting explanations, Respondent 3 himself evaluated the explanations and dismissed Chaubey under Rule 14(ii) of the R

ANIL YADAV & ORS.versusSTATE OF BIHAR & ANR.

1982 INSC 4023 March 1982Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined petitions filed by the Superintendent of Bhagalpur Central Jail, who claimed his suspension by the Bihar Government was a mala fide attempt to prevent him from complying with the Court’s order to file an affidavit regarding the blinding of under‑trial prisoners. The Court noted that the suspe

RATTAN SINGH ETC. ETC.versusSTATE OF PUNJAB & ORS. ETC. ETC.

1981 INSC 18322 October 1981Case Allowed

Rattan Singh was detained under section 3(1) of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974. While in custody he, through his counsel, sent representations to both the Punjab State Government and the Central Government via the jail superintendent, seeking revocation of his dete

STATE OF M.P. AND ANR.versusKUMARI NIVEDITA JAIN AND ORS.

1981 INSC 17022 September 1981Appeal(s) allowed

The Madhya Pradesh Government issued an executive order on 9 September 1980 that completely removed the minimum qualifying‑marks requirement for candidates belonging to Scheduled Castes (SC) and Scheduled Tribes (ST) when selecting them for seats reserved in state medical colleges. Nivedita Jain, a general‑category can

PREM PRAKASHversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

1984 INSC 15022 August 1984Case Allowed

The petitioners, members of the Scheduled Caste, challenged their exclusion from appointment as Sub‑Judges in the Delhi Judicial Service despite being on the merit list of the 1980 competitive examination. The High Court had fixed the number of reserved vacancies based on the number of candidates qualifying for general

JAIN INK MANUFACTURING COMPANYversusLIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA & ANR.

1980 INSC 16022 August 1980Dismissed

The Life Insurance Corporation of India (LIC) bought a building at auction and the appellant, Jain Ink Manufacturing Co., was a tenant under the previous owner. LIC served notice under Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act to terminate the tenancy, but the appellant remained in possession. LIC then invoked the Pu

R.K. GARG, ADVOCATEversusSTATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

1981 INSC 9822 April 1981Case Partly allowed

Advocate R.K. Garg, appearing for a petitioner in a Rent Act matter, threw his shoe at the presiding judge after the petition was dismissed for non‑payment of process fee under Order 9 Rule 2 CPC. The judge sought to arrest him under Section 228 IPC and referred the matter to the Himachal Pradesh High Court under Secti

STATE OF UTTAR PRADESHversusRAM SAGAR YADAV AND ORS

1985 INSC 1122 January 1985Appeal(s) allowed

The Uttar Pradesh State prosecuted four police officers for the death of Brijlal, who was arrested on a spurious charge and died in police custody after being beaten. The prosecution relied heavily on Brijlal's dying declaration to the magistrate, which identified the Station House Officer and constables as his assaila

D. C. GOUSE AND CO. ETC.versusSTATE OF KERALA & ANR. ETC.

1979 INSC 19321 September 1979Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined the Kerala Building Tax Act, 1975, which imposed a non‑recurring tax on buildings based on a "capital value" calculated as sixteen times the building's annual value. The petitioners challenged the Act on four grounds: (1) it was beyond the State's legislative competence because it taxed the c

STATE BANK OF TRAVANCOREversusMOHAMMED MOHAMMED KHAN

1981 INSC 14621 August 1981Dismissed

The respondent, an agriculturist, owed an overdraft of over Rs. 3,000 to Kottayam Orient Bank Ltd., which was amalgamated into the State Bank of Travancore (a subsidiary bank) in 1961. After a decree for recovery was obtained by the bank, the respondent sought relief under the Kerala Agriculturists' Debt Relief Act, 19

MANGAT RAI & ANR.versusKIDAR NATH & ORS.

1980 INSC 15721 August 1980Appeal(s) allowed

Mangat Rai and another, tenants, deposited all arrears of rent, future rent, interest and costs in the court of a Senior Sub‑Judge under Section 31 of the Punjab Relief of Indebtedness Act, 1934. The landlord sued for eviction under Section 13 of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949, claiming the deposit wa

LAND ACQUISITION COLLECTOR & ANR.versusDURGA PADA MUKHERJEE & OTHERS

1980 INSC 15821 August 1980Appeal(s) allowed

The State Government of West Bengal issued three notifications under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, to acquire land belonging to the respondents for what it claimed was a public purpose—first for the expansion of a private company's factory and later for industrial development. The respondents objected, alleging that

KULJEET SINGH @ RANGAversusUNION OF INDIA & ANR.

1981 INSC 9621 April 1981Dismissed

Kuljeet Singh alias Ranga was convicted along with a co‑accused for the murder of two children and sentenced to death under sections 302 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, with additional convictions under sections 363, 365, 366 and 376. The conviction and sentence were affirmed by the High Court and the Supreme Court di

STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS.versusJAGE RAM AND ORS.

1980 INSC 9021 April 1980Case Partly allowed

The respondents won the auction for a retail liquor vend in March 1967, paid a security deposit and began operations, but failed to pay the first two instalments of the licence fee, leading to cancellation of their licence and a re‑auction of the vend at a much lower price. The respondents filed writ petitions challeng

CHIEF OF THE ARMY STAFF AND OTHERSversusMAJOR DHARAM PAL KUKRETY

1985 INSC 6521 March 1985Appeal(s) allowed

Major D.P. Kukrety, a commissioned officer of the Indian Army, was tried by a general court‑martial for alleged misconduct in November 1975. The court‑martial found him not guilty, but the finding was sent back for revision and remained unconfirmed. The Chief of the Army Staff then issued a show‑cause notice under Rule

AJOY KUMAR BANERJEE & ORS. ETC.versusUNION OF INDLA & ORS. ETC.

1984 INSC 6421 March 1984Appeal(s) allowed

The petitioners, employees of the nationalised general insurance companies, challenged the 30 September 1980 notification introducing the General Insurance (Rationalisation and Revision of Pay Scales and Other Conditions of Service) Second Amendment Scheme, alleging it violated Articles 14, 19(1)(g) and 31 of the Const

R.K. GARG ETC. ETC.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS. ETC.

1981 INSC 18120 October 1981Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined the constitutionality of the Special Bearer Bonds (Immunities and Exemptions) Ordinance, 1981 and the subsequent Act, which granted anonymity and tax exemptions to holders of special bearer bonds intended to canalise black money. The petitioners argued that the President lacked authority unde

GANGA SUGAR CO. LTD., ETC.versusSTATE OF U.P. & OTHERS ETC.

1979 INSC 19120 September 1979Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined the validity of the Uttar Pradesh Sugarcane Purchase Tax Act, 1961, which imposed a tax of Rs.1.25 paise per quintal on sugarcane purchased by factories and 50 paise per quintal on khandsari units. The petitioners argued that the Act was ultra‑vires because sugarcane is a raw material for a "

PUNJAB ENGINEERING COLLEGE ETC. ETC.versusSANJAY GULATI AND ORS.

1983 INSC 4320 April 1983Disposed off

The Punjab Engineering College admitted sixteen students for the 1982‑83 academic year in violation of its admission rules. The Punjab & Haryana High Court struck down those admissions, but the students had already completed one or two semesters. The Supreme Court held that cancelling their admission at this stage woul

KULJIT SINGH ALIAS RANGAversusLT. GOVERNOR OF DELHI & ORS.

1982 INSC 620 January 1982Dismissed

The petitioners, Kuljit Singh (Ranga) and his associate Billa, challenged the President's refusal to commute their death sentences, invoking Article 72 of the Constitution. The Supreme Court examined the scope of the President's clemency power, emphasizing that it is limited to reducing sentences and cannot be used to

HARSHARAN VERMAversusCHARAN SINGH AND ORS.

1984 INSC 21519 November 1984Dismissed

Harsharan Verma filed a writ petition in the Allahabad High Court challenging the continuance of Charan Singh as Prime Minister and S.N. Kacker as minister, alleging that Charan Singh failed to obtain a Lok Sabha mandate within three weeks as directed by the President, resigned on 20 August 1979, and thereafter continu

SUMAN GUPTA AND OTHERS ETC.versusSTATE OF J & K AND OTHERS

1983 INSC 12219 September 1983Case Partly allowed

The Supreme Court examined a scheme whereby several states reserved a percentage of seats in medical colleges for candidates from other states to promote national integration. The Jammu & Kashmir and Andhra Pradesh governments nominated candidates to these seats without any objective criteria, prompting the petitioners

RUPINDER SINGH SODHL AND ANOTHERversusUNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

1982 INSC 8418 November 1982Disposed off

The petitioners, including Hardev Singh, challenged orders by the states of Haryana and Uttar Pradesh that placed barricades on highways to impede the movement of Akali Sikhs during a threatened Morcha coinciding with the Asian Games. They argued that highways are public thoroughfares and any obstruction is per se unla

MUNIAPPANversusSTATE OF TAMIL NADU

1981 INSC 7218 March 1981Appeal(s) allowed

Muniappan was convicted of murdering his maternal uncle and the uncle's son, a double homicide, and was sentenced to death by the Sessions Judge, who described the crime as a "terrific double murder." The Madras High Court affirmed both the conviction and the death sentence. On appeal, the Supreme Court examined whethe

VENGDASALAM PILLAIversusUNION TERRITORY OF PONDICHERRY

1985 INSC 2818 February 1985Dismissed

Vengdasalam Pillai, a landholder in Pondicherry, partitioned his property in 1970, allocating land to his two minor sons and retaining a small parcel for himself, while his wife owned land purchased with her Sridhanam money. The land reforms authority deemed his total holding, including his wife’s and sons’ lands, to e

K. NAGARAJ & ORS. ETC. ETC.,versusSTATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH & ANR. ETC.

1985 INSC 618 January 1985Dismissed

The Andhra Pradesh government, after coming to power in 1983, reduced the superannuation age for most government employees from 58 to 55 years by issuing an order and two notifications, claiming it would create employment opportunities for youth. Over 28,000 employees were forced to retire, prompting writ petitions cha

D.S. NAKARA & OTHERSversusUNION OF INDIA

1982 INSC 10317 December 1982Case Allowed

The petitioners, two retired government servants and a society of pensioners, challenged two 1979 Government memoranda that liberalised pension computation but limited the benefit to employees who were in service on 31 March 1979 (civil servants) or 1 April 1979 (armed forces) and retired on or after those dates. They

SHANKARLAL GYARASILAL DIXITversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

1980 INSC 23717 December 1980Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Shankarlal Gyarasilal Dixit, was convicted of rape and murder of a five‑year‑old girl based solely on circumstantial evidence, including the discovery of the child's body in his house, alleged presence of the appellant at the scene, and forensic traces such as a semen stain on his under‑pant. The Supreme

PREM THAKURversusSTATE OF PUNJAB

1982 INSC 8217 November 1982Appeal(s) allowed

Prem Thakur was charged with the murder of five co‑labourers and was convicted by the trial court and the Punjab and Haryana High Court, receiving a death sentence under IPC sections 302 and 201. The prosecution's case rested solely on circumstantial evidence – a motive of theft, the appellant being the last person see

SPECIAL REFERENCE CASE NO. 1 OF 1983versusSPECIAL REFERENCE CASE NO. 1 OF 1983

1983 INSC 9517 August 1983Disposed off

The President referred a question under Article 317(1) of the Constitution concerning whether a member of the Punjab Public Service Commission, Gopal Krishan Saini, should be removed for alleged gross misbehaviour after allegedly slapping the Chairperson, Santosh Chowdhary. The Court held that the President is not requ

KRISHNA KUMARversusDIVISIONAL ASSISTANT ELECTRICAL ENGINEER CENTRAL RAILWAY AND ORS.

1979 INSC 11917 July 1979Appeal(s) allowed

Krishna Kumar was appointed as a Train Lighting Inspector by the Chief Electrical Engineer on 11 July 1974. He was removed from service on 31 August 1976 by the Divisional Assistant Electrical Engineer, who was subordinate to the Chief Electrical Engineer. Kumar challenged the removal in a writ petition, which the Bomb

MC DOWELL & COMPANY LIMITEDversusTHE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER

1985 INSC 9217 April 1985Dismissed

McDowell & Company Ltd., a licensed liquor manufacturer in Hyderabad, paid sales tax on its turnover excluding the excise duty that buyers paid directly to the excise authorities. The Commercial Tax Officer issued a notice to include that excise duty in the company's turnover for sales tax purposes, relying on amendmen

SURESHversusSTATE OF U.P.

1981 INSC 7017 March 1981Case Partly allowed

Suresh, a domestic servant, was convicted of murdering his employer Geeta and her three‑year‑old son Anil and of attempting to murder the five‑year‑old Sunil. The conviction rested on the testimony of Sunil, a five‑year‑old child who was not sworn, and on corroborative evidence linking Suresh to the crime. The trial co

GAYASIversusSTATE OF U.P.

1981 INSC 7117 March 1981

The deceased Bhagwan Singh, an Amin, was performing his official duty of auctioning the appellant's land when the appellant Gayasi, along with Moo! Chand and Daya Ram, lay in wait. Daya Ram shot Bhagwan Singh, causing him to fall, and Gayasi then decapitated him with a sword. Gayasi was convicted under IPC sections 302

STATE OF PUNJABversusJAGDEV SINGH TALWANDI

1983 INSC 19916 December 1983Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined the detention of J.S. Talwandi under Section 3 of the National Security Act, 1980. The respondent argued that the detaining authority failed to provide sufficient particulars of the first ground of detention, violating Article 22(5) of the Constitution, and that the District Magistrate’s fail

STATE OF RAJASTHANversusSUKHPAL SINGH & OTHERS

1982 INSC 10216 December 1982Appeal(s) allowed

In March 1971, a group of armed dacoits looted the State Bank of Bikaner and Jaipur branch at Bayana, escaped in a stolen Ambassador car, and were later intercepted after the car crashed. The police recovered a black box containing Rs. 6,800 of the stolen cash, along with other incriminating items, and arrested the sev

DIVISIONAL PERSONNEL OFFICER, WESTERN RAILWAY, KOTAversusSUNDAR DASS

1981 INSC 18016 October 1981Appeal(s) allowed

Sundar Dass, a former railway clerk, was suspended on 17 February 1949 after it was discovered that he had concealed a prior discharge from railway service in 1944. He was dismissed on 14 May 1949, but the Rajasthan High Court later set aside that dismissal on grounds of natural justice, directing fresh disciplinary pr

BHAGIRATH & ORSversusDELHI ADMINISTRATION

1985 INSC 8816 April 1985Case Allowed

The appellants, Bhagirath and others, sentenced to life imprisonment for murder, sought to have the 14 years they had already spent in jail as under‑trial prisoners set off against their life sentences, invoking Section 428 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The Delhi High Court had rejected the claim, relying on

GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESHversusTHUMMALA KRISHNA RAO & ANR.

1982 INSC 3716 March 1982Dismissed

The Government of Andhra Pradesh sought to evict Thummala Krishna Rao and others from three plots of land using the summary eviction provision of Section 6 of the Andhra Pradesh Land Encroachment Act, 1905. The respondents claimed a bona‑fide title, arguing that the land might have been acquired by the Nizam’s governme

PADMA SRINLVASANversusPREMIER INSURANCE CO. LTD.

1982 INSC 2016 February 1982Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant's husband was killed in a road accident on 5 April 1970 while the truck involved was covered by a statutory insurance policy issued on 30 June 1969. The Motor Vehicles (Amendment) Act 56 of 1969, effective 2 March 1970, raised the insurer's liability limit from Rs.20,000 to Rs.50,000. The Motor Accident C

H.M.M LIMITEDversusDIRECTOR OF ENTRY TAX, WEST BENGAL & OTHERS

1983 INSC 4015 April 1983Dismissed

H.M.M. Ltd., a manufacturer of Horlicks powder, imported 8,736 kg of the product into the Calcutta Metropolitan Area in 1974 and declared its value under Rule 12(1) of the 1970 Rules. The Entry Tax Officer rejected the declared value, citing non‑availability of supporting documents and resorted to a "best judgment" ass

JAI SINGHversusSARWAN SINGH & OTHERS

1983 INSC 17514 November 1983Disposed off

The respondents, members of the Harijan community, were convicted of murder and related offences for the killing of Dhian Singh, a Rajput, amid a land dispute between the two factions. While hearing the criminal appeal, the Punjab and Haryana High Court attempted to settle the underlying civil land dispute by convening

BOMBAY OIL INDUSTRIESversusUNION OF INDIA

1983 INSC 17414 November 1983Dismissed

Bombay Oil Industries challenged a Government order issued under Sections 21, 22 and 23 of the Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices Act, 1969, alleging that it was not supplied with material necessary to contest the order. The Court examined whether the Government, as an administrative tribunal, must give adequat

O.P. SINGLA & ANR. ETCversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

1984 INSC 14014 August 1984Case Partly allowed

The case concerned the inter‑se seniority of promotee judges (appointed by promotion under Rule 16) and direct recruits (appointed from the Bar under Rule 5(2)) to the Delhi Higher Judicial Service. The petitioners, promotees, argued that seniority should be based on their dates of continuous officiation and that the s

GURDAYAL SLNGH FIJIversusTHE STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS.

1981 INSC 9114 April 1981Dismissed

Gurdayal Singh Fiji, a member of the Punjab Provincial Civil Service, filed a writ petition under Article 32 claiming that, despite a good service record, he was denied a certificate of integrity and inclusion in the IAS Select List due to two adverse remarks. The Supreme Court noted that the IAS Selection Committee is

CHARAN LAL SAHU & OTHERSversusGIANI ZAIL SINGH & ANOTHER

1983 INSC 19613 December 1983Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined three election petitions challenging the election of Giani Zail Singh as President of India. The petitioners, who had not been duly nominated as candidates under the Presidential and Vice‑Presidential Elections Act, 1952, claimed the returned candidate exercised undue influence and was unsuit

WAMAN RAO & ORS. ETC. ETC.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

1980 INSC 21613 November 1980Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined the constitutional validity of the Maharashtra Agricultural Lands (Ceiling on Holdings) Act, 1961 and its subsequent amendments, which were placed in the Ninth Schedule, and whether the First and Fourth Amendments introducing Articles 31A and 31B violated the basic structure of the Constituti

AJAY HASIA ETC.versusKHALID MUJIB SEHRAVARDI & ORS. ETC.

1980 INSC 21813 November 1980Dismissed

The petitioners challenged the admission process of the Regional Engineering College, Srinagar, run by a society registered under the Jammu & Kashmir Societies Registration Act, alleging that the viva voce interview was arbitrary, that 33⅓% of total marks were allocated to it, and that the procedure violated Article 14

MAHARAO SAHIB SRI BHIM SINGHJI ETC. ETCversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS. ETC. ETC.

1980 INSC 21913 November 1980Dismissed

The petitioners, owners of vacant urban land, challenged the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 on grounds that several provisions violated Articles 14, 19(1)(f) and 31(2) of the Constitution and the basic structure doctrine. The Court examined the artificial definition of "family" in s.2(f), the compensatio

HASINUDDIN KHAN AND ANR.versusDEPUTY DIRECTOR OF CONSOLIDATION AND ORS.

1979 INSC 17913 September 1979

The Supreme Court examined the constitutional validity of the Uttar Pradesh High Court (Abolition of Letters Patent Appeals) Act, 1962 and its 1972 amendment, holding that neither statute is unconstitutional. Relying on precedents such as State of Bombay v. Narothamdas, Union of India v. Mahindra Supply Co., and Ram Ad

DR. MUNEEB UL REHMAN HAROON AND ORS.versusGOVERNMENT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR STATE AND ORS.

1984 INSC 13813 August 1984Dismissed

The petitioners, a group of medical graduates, applied for admission to the post‑graduate medical course at the Srinagar Medical College for the July 1980 semester and appeared for the entrance test, but the result was never declared and no admissions were made for three consecutive semesters (July 1980, November 1980,

JAGAN NATHversusRAM KISHAN DASS AND ANR.

1984 INSC 23612 December 1984Appeal(s) allowed

The landlord filed three ejectment applications against the tenant for possession of a room in Kamla Nagar, Delhi. In the first proceeding (1967) the Rent Controller ordered the tenant to pay arrears under s.14(2) read with s.15 of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958; the tenant complied and the landlord withdrew the peti

GRINDLAYS BANK LTD.versusCENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL AND ORS.

1980 INSC 23312 December 1980Dismissed

The Central Government referred an industrial dispute between Grindlays Bank Ltd. and its workmen to the Central Government Industrial Tribunal under s.10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. After several adjournments, the Tribunal refused a further adjournment on 9 December 1976 and passed an ex‑parte award, relying

STATE OF HARYANAversusJAGE RAM

1983 INSC 11712 September 1983Disposed off

The State of Haryana resold liquor licences that had been defaulted on by the original bidders, either through re‑auctions or private negotiations, and demanded the shortfall between the original bids and the resale proceeds. The respondents challenged the State's demand, arguing that the re‑auctions were not conducted

SHANKER DASSversusUNION OF INDIA & ANR.

1985 INSC 4812 March 1985Case Allowed

Shankar Dass, a cash clerk, was convicted of breach of trust and released under section 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958. Despite the probation, the Government dismissed him from service. He challenged the dismissal, arguing that section 12 of the Probation Act barred any "disqualification" such as dismissal,

HARBANS SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P. & OTHERS

1982 INSC 1912 February 1982Case Allowed

Harbans Singh, along with Kashmira Singh and Jeeta Singh, was convicted and sentenced to death for the murder of four persons. While Jeeta Singh was executed and Kashmira Singh's death sentence was later commuted to life imprisonment by the Supreme Court, Harbans Singh's special leave and review petitions were dismisse

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

SHIDAGOUDA NINGAPPA GHANDAVARversusSTAIB OF KARNATAKA

1980 INSC 21411 November 1980Dismissed

Shildagouda Ningappa Ghandavar was convicted of murdering a young boy during a land dispute. Both the Sessions Court and the High Court sentenced him to death, providing special reasons. The appellant appealed to the Supreme Court, arguing that the death penalty was excessive. The Court examined the nature of the crime

R.K. KHANDELWALversusSTATE OF U.P. & OTHERS

1981 INSC 13911 August 1981Dismissed

Dr. R.K. Khandelwal, who had passed his MBBS in 1976, applied for admission to the MD (Paediatrics) course for 1979-80 but was denied admission on the basis of merit and the 1:1 teacher‑student ratio, being placed sixth when only four seats were available. He contended that a long‑standing practice of preferring candid

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

KHANDELWAL METAL & ENGINEERING WORKS AND ANOTHER ETC.versusUNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

1985 INSC 14211 June 1985Dismissed

Khandelwal Metal & Engineering Works imported brass scrap and argued that the "additional duty" under Section 3(1) of the Customs Tariff Act was a counter‑vailing duty that could not be levied because brass scrap is not manufactured in India and that it should be treated as a "master alloy" exempted under Notification

SMT. SURINDAR KAUR SANDHUversusHARBAX SINGH SANDHU & ANR.

1984 INSC 7911 April 1984Appeal(s) allowed

Surinder Kaur Sandhu and Harbax Singh Sandhu, both Indian citizens, married in 1975 and moved to England where their son Pritpal Singh was born in 1976, making him a British citizen. After the husband was convicted for attempting to murder his wife and later removed the child to India in 1983, the wife obtained a ward

DUDH NATH PANDEYversusTHE STATE OF U.P.

1981 INSC 2711 February 1981Case Partly allowed

Dudh Nath Pandey was convicted of murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code for shooting his brother-in-law, Pappoo Kishore, after a dispute over his desire to marry Pappoo's sister. The trial and appellate courts upheld the conviction and imposed the death penalty. On appeal, the Supreme Court examined the rel

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

K. CHANDRU ETC.ETC.versusSTAIE OF TAMIL NADU & ORS.

1985 INSC 15210 July 1985Dismissed

The petitioners sought a writ of mandamus to restrain the State of Tamil Nadu from evicting slum and pavement dwellers in Madras without providing alternative accommodation and basic amenities. The State argued that it had a benevolent policy of providing alternate housing before demolition, citing the Tamil Nadu Slum

OLGA TELLIS & ORS.versusBOMBAY MUNICIPAL CORPORATION & ORS. ETC.

1985 INSC 15110 July 1985Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined writ petitions filed by pavement and slum dwellers challenging the Bombay Municipal Corporation's demolition of their hutments, arguing that eviction violated their fundamental rights under Articles 21 and 19 of the Constitution. The petitioners claimed that the right to life includes the rig

ASHOK KUMAR YADAV AND ORS. ETC. ETC.versusSTATE OF HARYANA AND ORS. ETC. ETC.

1985 INSC 13710 May 1985Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined appeals against a Punjab and Haryana High Court judgment that had set aside the selections made by the Haryana Public Service Commission (HPSC) for the Haryana Civil Service (Executive) and allied services. The petitioners alleged that the HPSC members were appointed on political and caste pa

AELTEMESH REINversusCHANDULAL CHANDRAKAR & OTHERS

1981 INSC 6010 March 1981Dismissed

Aeltemesh Rein, a Lok Sabha candidate, filed an election petition under Section 81 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, claiming to have deposited the required security of Rs.2,000 as mandated by Section 117, although no deposit was actually made. The Madhya Pradesh High Court dismissed the petition for non‑c

RAM MANORATHversusSTATE OF U.P.

1981 INSC 6210 March 1981Case Partly allowed

The case arose from a December 5, 1973 incident in Bhawanipur where four persons were killed during a clash involving an alleged unlawful assembly of about twelve men. Twelve accused were charged under IPC sections 302 and 149; the trial court convicted eight, sentencing two (Chhotey and Ram Manorath) to death and the

R. R. ENGINEERING CO.versusZILA PARISHAD, BAREILLY & ANR.

1980 INSC 4310 March 1980Dismissed

R.R. Engineering Co., a partnership engaged in manufacturing, challenged the "Circumstances and Property Tax" levied by the Zila Parishad of Bareilly and by a Town Area Committee in Kuraoli, arguing that the tax was in substance a tax on income or professions and therefore exceeded the constitutional ceiling of Rs.250

NIRMAL SINGHversusSTATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS.

1984 INSC 1359 August 1984Appeal(s) allowed

Nirmal Singh, a Branch Manager of a cooperative bank, was dismissed after an inquiry into a fraudulent draft encashment. He challenged his dismissal, and the Government of Punjab referred his grievance to the Conciliation Officer, who recommended that the dispute be referred to a Labour Court. The Punjab Labour Commiss

GRAM PANCHAYAT OF VILLAGE, JAMALPURversusMALWINDER SINGH & ORS.

1985 INSC 1509 July 1985Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned a dispute between Gram Panchayats and the Central Government over the vesting of Shamlat‑deh (village common) lands after the 1947 partition. The Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulation) Act, 1953 vested such lands in the village panchayats, while the Administration of Evacuee Property Act, 1950 vest

TUMATI VENKAISH ETC. ETC.versusSTATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

1980 INSC 1169 May 1980Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined challenges to the Andhra Pradesh Land Reforms (Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings) Act, 1973 (as amended in 1977) on the ground that, after the Parliament enacted the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 under Article 252, the State law became void for being outside the legislature's c

AMBIKA PRASAD MISHRA ETC.versusSTATE OF U.P. AND ORS. ETC.

1980 INSC 1179 May 1980Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined the constitutional validity of the Uttar Pradesh Imposition of Ceiling on Land Holdings Act, 1960, which imposes land‑holding ceilings and provides for surplus land surrender, consolidation, and related restrictions. Petitioners challenged various provisions on grounds of violation of Article

SETH NAND LAL & ANR.versusSTATE OF HARYANA & ORS.

1980 INSC 1189 May 1980Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined challenges to the Haryana Ceiling on Land Holdings Act, 1972 and its subsequent amendments, focusing on the artificial definition of "family" and the double standard for fixing land‑holding ceilings under sections 4(1), 4(3), 7, 8, 9 and 11, alleged to breach Article 14. It held that the Act,

SASANKA SEKHAR MAITY & ORS. ETC.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

1980 INSC 1199 May 1980Dismissed

The petitioners, raiyats in West Bengal, challenged the constitutionality of Chapter IIB of the West Bengal Land Reforms Act, 1955 as amended in 1971 and 1972, alleging that the ceiling on agricultural holdings, the definition of "family", and related provisions violated Articles 14, 19(1)(f) and 31(2) of the Constitut

STATE OF MADHYA PRADESHversusRAM RATAN

1980 INSC 1219 May 1980Appeal(s) allowed

Ram Ratan, a Forest Guard in Madhya Pradesh, was charged with misconduct and, after a departmental inquiry, was served a second show‑cause notice under Article 311(2) of the Constitution (pre‑1976) and Rule 15(4)(i)(b) of the Madhya Pradesh Civil Services Rules, 1966, proposing a major penalty of removal from service.

BACHAN SINGH ETC. ETC.versusSTATE OF PUNJAB ETC. ETC.

1980 INSC 1209 May 1980Disposed off

The case involved a constitutional challenge to the death penalty for murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and the sentencing procedure under Section 354(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The Supreme Court, by a 4-1 majority, upheld the constitutionality of both provisions. The Court held that th

GURBAKSH SINGH SIBBIA ETC .versusSTATE OF PUNJAB

1980 INSC 689 April 1980Case Partly allowed

Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia, a former minister, faced allegations of political corruption and applied for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the CrPC, fearing arrest for non‑bailable offences. The Punjab and Haryana High Court dismissed the applications, imposing a series of restrictive conditions and rejecting blanket b

S.P. MITTAL ETC. ETC.versusUNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

1982 INSC 818 November 1982Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined the constitutional validity of the Auroville (Emergency Provisions) Act, 1980, which authorised the Government of India to take over the management of the Auroville township for a limited period due to alleged mismanagement and fund diversion by the Sri Aurobindo Society. The petitioners chal

B. VENKATA REDDY AND OTHERS ETCversusSTATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH AND OTHERS

1983 INSC 898 August 1983Case Partly allowed

The Supreme Court examined the interpretation of Rule 13(1) of the 1973 Adhoc Rules and Rule 6 of the 1974 Adhoc Rules governing seniority and promotion of Junior Lecturers in Andhra Pradesh junior colleges. Petitioners, who were first or second class post‑graduate degree holders, claimed that the 1976 seniority list,

K.C. VASANTH KUMAR & ANOTHER.versusSTATE OF KARNATAKA

1985 INSC 1278 May 1985Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined the constitutionality of Karnataka's reservation orders (1977, 1979) that set aside 68% of seats in professional colleges and 66% of posts in government services for Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and other backward classes under Articles 15(4) and 16(4). The Court held that reservation m

DR. P. NALLA THAMPY TERAHversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

1985 INSC 1288 May 1985Dismissed

The petition challenged the constitutional validity of Explanation 1 to Section 77(1) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, which exempts expenditures incurred by political parties or other persons (other than the candidate or his agent) from being counted towards the candidate's election‑expense ceiling. The

S.S. MOGHE & ORS.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

1981 INSC 1168 May 1981Dismissed

The petitioners, who were directly recruited on a temporary basis to the Aviation Research Centre (ARC) between 1965‑71, challenged the legality of promotions granted to deputation officers (respondents 8‑67) from 1968‑75, the constitutionality of the Aviation Research Centre (Technical) Service Rules, 1976 (Rules 6‑8,

P. KASILINGAMversusP.S.G. COLLEGE OF TECHNOLOGY

1981 INSC 58 January 1981Appeal(s) allowed

P. Kasilingam, a probationary lecturer at P.S.G. College of Technology, was facing a departmental enquiry for alleged dereliction of duty. On the morning the enquiry was to begin, he submitted a letter of apology and an unconditional resignation at the college correspondent's residence, apparently as part of a deal to

PRABHA DUTTversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

1981 INSC 1917 November 1981Disposed off

Prabha Dutt, chief reporter of Hindustan Times, filed a writ petition under Article 32 seeking a direction to allow her to interview two death‑row convicts, Billa and Ranga, in Tihar Jail. The Court examined whether Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution confers a press right to unrestricted access to information and hel

THE NEW THEATERS (CARNATIC TALKIES) LTD., COIMBATOREversusN. VAJRAPANI NAIDU

1983 INSC 1477 October 1983Dismissed

The appellant, New Theatres (Carnatic Talkies) Ltd., held a lease for land on which it built a theatre and later claimed a right to purchase the site under Section 9 of the Madras City Tenants' Protection Act, 1921. The respondent, N.V. Naidu, sought the appellant's eviction and the matter proceeded through multiple su

H. S. VERMA & ORS.versusSECRETARY, MINISTRY OF SHIPPING & TRANSPORT AND ORS. ETC., ETC.

1979 INSC 1437 August 1979Disposed off

The case concerned 51 engineers appointed by interview (UPSC) to the Ministry of Shipping & Transport (Roads Wing) who claimed they were regular cadre officers, while officers appointed by competitive examination argued that the interview appointees were ex‑cadre and should not enjoy seniority or promotion rights. The

TARA PRASAD SINGH ETC. ETC.versusUNION OF INDIA & OTHERS

1980 INSC 1067 May 1980Case Partly allowed

The Supreme Court examined a group of writ petitions challenging the Coal Mines (Nationalisation) Amendment Act, 1976, which terminated existing coal mining leases and barred private persons from carrying out coal mining operations. The petitioners, lessees of coal and composite (coal‑fireclay) mines, argued that the a

MITHU, ETC., ETC.versusSTATE OF PUNJAB ETC. ETC.

1983 INSC 347 April 1983Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined the constitutionality of Section 303 of the Indian Penal Code, which mandates death for a murder committed by a person already serving a life sentence. The petitioners argued that the provision was arbitrary, discriminatory and denied the accused a fair procedure under Articles 14 and 21 of t

R. VISWAN & OTHERSversusUNION OF INDIA & OTHERS

1983 INSC 606 May 1983Dismissed

The petitioners, members of the General Reserve Engineering Force (GREF), were convicted by Court‑Martial under section 63 of the Army Act, 1950 for participating in a protest and were dismissed from service. They challenged the constitutional validity of applying section 21 of the Army Act and rules 19‑21 of the Army

MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHIversusNEW KWALITY SWEET HOUSE & ORS.

1984 INSC 2305 December 1984Dismissed

In 1975 a food inspector collected a 200‑gram sample of suji from the accused, although the Prevention of Food Adulteration Rules required 250 g, and sent it to the public analyst, who reported excessive moisture and ash. The Metropolitan Magistrate acquitted the accused on the ground that the sample was insufficient i

B. S. YADAV AND OTHERS ETC.versusSTATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS ETC,

1980 INSC 2075 November 1980Case Partly allowed

The Supreme Court examined disputes between promotee and direct‑recruit judicial officers in Punjab and Haryana over seniority, confirmation and probation. The petitioners argued that the High Court improperly applied a rotation system at confirmation, violating the quota rule and their constitutional rights. The Court

N. C. ZELIANGversusAJU NEWMAI & 2 ORS

1980 INSC 1735 September 1980Appeal(s) allowed

In the 1977 Nagaland Assembly election, N.C. Zeliang was declared elected but the defeated candidate Aju Newmai filed an election petition alleging that Zeliang committed corrupt practices by filing a false expense return and exceeding the permissible election expenditure limit, as well as by holding feasts to induce v

NATIONAL TEXTILE WORKERS' UNIONversusP. R. RAMAKRISHNAN & OTHERS

1983 INSC 575 May 1983Case Allowed

The National Textile Workers' Union filed a contempt petition against journalist P.M. Kumaraswamy (alias Kailaimannan) for publishing articles alleging corruption by four Madras High Court judges. The Supreme Court directed him to tender a written apology to the Court and the judges and to publish it on the front pages

V.T. KHANZODE & ORS.versusRESERVE BANK OF INDIA & ANR.

1982 INSC 315 March 1982Dismissed

The case concerned a challenge by 25 Group I officers of the Reserve Bank of India to an Administrative Circular (No. 8, 7 January 1978) and an Office Order (No. 679, 27 April 1978) that introduced a combined seniority list and inter‑group mobility for officers across Groups I, II and III, with retrospective effect fro

SAT PAL GUPTA & ANR.versusSTATE OF HARYANA & ANR.

1982 INSC 155 February 1982Dismissed

The petitioners, dealers in rice and owners of a rice mill, challenged Clause 3 of the Haryana Rice Bran (Distribution and Price) Control Order, 1967, which required a permit for the sale of rice bran. They argued that rice bran is not an "essential commodity" under the Essential Commodities Act, 1955, and therefore th

SARASWATI DEVI & ORS.versusSTATE OF U.P. & ORS.

1980 INSC 2054 November 1980Dismissed

The petitioners, a group of private road‑transport operators, challenged the Uttar Pradesh Government’s approval of a scheme that nationalised certain bus routes in favour of the State Transport Undertaking (STU) under sections 68C and 68D of the Motor Vehicles Act. They argued that the scheme was not necessary in the

K. L. TRIPATHIversusSTATE BANK OF INDIA AND OTHERS

1983 INSC 1384 October 1983Dismissed

K.L. Tripathi, a Branch Manager of State Bank of India, was charged with irregularities in issuing letters of credit and alleged misconduct. An internal investigation under the SBI (Officers and Assistants) Service Rules led to a charge‑sheet, after which he was given a personal hearing but not the opportunity to cross

V. B. RAJUversusUNLON OF INDIA & OTHERS

1980 INSC 1704 September 1980Dismissed

V.B. Raju, an Indian Civil Service officer who later became a High Court Judge, filed a petition seeking two separate pensions—one for his service as an I.C.S. officer and another for his tenure as a judge—under the High Court Judges (Conditions of Service) Act, 1954. The issues centered on the constitutional validity

V.B. RAJUversusSTATE OF GUJARAT & ANR

1980 INSC 1714 September 1980Dismissed

V.B. Raju, an additional judge of the Bombay High Court, was allotted to the newly created Gujarat High Court under section 29(1) of the Bombay Reorganisation Act, 1960. He filed a petition under article 226 seeking the compensatory allowance provided by article 222(2) of the Constitution, contending that the president

PREM NATH RAINA AND OTHERSversusSTATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR AND OTHERS

1983 INSC 884 August 1983Dismissed

The petitioners challenged the Jammu & Kashmir Agrarian Reforms Act, 1976 on the ground that its provisions violated Articles 14, 19 and 31 of the Constitution. The State contended that the Act is a measure of agrarian reform and therefore falls within the protection of Article 31A, which bars any challenge to its vali

DAMAN SINGH & ORS.versusSTATE OF PUNJAB & ORS.

1985 INSC 764 April 1985Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined the constitutional validity of sections 13(8) to 13(11) of the Punjab Cooperative Societies Act, 1961, which empower the Registrar to compulsorily amalgamate cooperative societies. Petitioners argued that the provisions violated the right to form associations under Article 19(1)(c) and were n

ALL SAINTS HIGH SCHOOL, HYDERABAD ETC. ETC.versusGOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH & ORS. ETC.

1980 INSC 184 February 1980Remitted to Lower Court

The Supreme Court examined whether several provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Recognised Private Educational Institutions Control Act, 1975 infringed the constitutional guarantee of minority institutions under Article 30(1). The appellants, Christian minority schools, challenged sections 3(1), 3(2), 4 and 5 as they requi

BOMBAY HAWKERS' UNION AND ORS.versusBOMBAY MUNICIPAL CORPORATION AND ORS.

1985 INSC 1463 July 1985Disposed off

The Bombay Hawkers' Union and several hawkers filed writ petitions under Article 32 challenging sections 313, 313‑A, 314(3) and 497 of the Bombay Municipal Corporation Act, 1888, alleging that the provisions gave the municipal authorities unfettered power to refuse licences and remove goods without a hearing, thereby v

RAM SARUPversusSTATE OF HARYANA & ORS.

1984 INSC 1003 May 1984Dismissed

Ram Sarup was appointed as a clerk by the Loharu Panchayat Samiti in 1963 and later promoted to Head Clerk on an ad‑hoc basis in 1974 and regularised in 1975. The Haryana Amendment Act of 1973 deleted Section 33 of the Punjab Panchayat Samitis and Zilla Parishads Act, which had empowered the Samiti to make appointments

STATE OF MAHARASHTRAversusVYASENDRA

1983 INSC 553 May 1983Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Maharashtra appealed against a Bombay High Court order that had directed the Surplus Lands Determination Tribunal to examine whether land held in the name of the respondent's wife was her separate or stridhan property. The respondent, Vyasendra, claimed that such land should be excluded from the family uni

ATMA SINGH & ORS.versusSTATE OF PUNJAB & ORS.

1981 INSC 802 April 1981Dismissed

The State of Punjab, under the Punjab Municipal Act, 1911, notified the inclusion of eight local areas into Sunam Municipality. A stay order was later placed on this notification, preventing the areas from being officially added. Despite the stay, the State, compelled by a statutory deadline, held municipal elections o

STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ORS.versusSWAPAN KUMAR GUHA & ORS.

1982 INSC 132 February 1982Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined whether the FIR lodged against Sanchaita Investments and its partners disclosed a cognizable offence under the Prize Chits and Money Circulation Schemes (Banning) Act, 1978. The firm accepted public deposits at a nominal 12% interest but paid excess interest of up to 48% in cash, prompting th

STATE OF U.P.versusJAIRAM ETC.

1981 INSC 1951 December 1981Appeal(s) allowed

The respondents, detained under the Maintenance of Supplies of Essential Commodities Act, 1980, filed habeas corpus petitions in the Allahabad High Court. While the petitions were listed before a Division Bench, a single judge, after hearing counsel, granted them bail on the ground that the State Government had erred i

RUDUL SAHversusSTATE OF BIHAR AND ANOTHER

1983 INSC 851 August 1983Case Allowed

Rudul Sah was kept in prison for more than 14 years after being acquitted by a trial court. He filed a habeas corpus petition under Article 32 of the Constitution seeking his release and compensation for the illegal detention. The State of Bihar informed the Court that he had already been released, but the petition con

DISTRIBUTORS (BARODA) PVT. LTD.versusUNION OF INDIA AND TWO ORS.

1985 INSC 1431 July 1985Dismissed

Distributors (Baroda) Ltd., an investment company, claimed a deduction under Section 80M of the Income Tax Act for inter‑corporate dividends based on the full amount of dividends received, contrary to the Revenue’s view that the deduction should be calculated on dividend income as computed under the Act. The Supreme Co

HADIBANDHU RAUTARAO AND ORS ETC. ETC.versusSTATE OF ORISSA AND ORS. ETC. ETC.

1985 INSC 1441 July 1985Disposed off

The petitioners, medical graduates from Orissa, challenged a change in the admission scheme for postgraduate medical courses that required a separate entrance examination after completing a Resident House Staff appointment. They claimed the new scheme violated their fundamental right to admission under Article 32 and t

D.K. MITRA AND ORS.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

1985 INSC 1451 July 1985Appeal(s) allowed

Eight petitioners, originally Assistant Medical Officers, were promoted on an officiating basis to Divisional Medical Officer posts between 1971 and 1974 under the 1965 and 1973 Railway Medical Service Rules, which treated such posts as selection posts. A seniority list prepared in 1979 under the 1978 Rules (which intr

SMT. GIAN DEVI ANANDversusJEEVAN KUMAR AND OTHERS

1985 INSC 1141 May 1985Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant's husband was a tenant of a shop under the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958. After the landlord served a notice of termination, the tenant died while still in possession as a statutory tenant. The widow and heirs claimed the right to remain in possession and the protection against eviction provided by the Act

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