Constitution of India

If action impugned before writ court has no nexus with public element, even though the private body in question may be discharging public function, held, writ jurisdiction cannot be invoked in such a case. Held, It must be consequently held that while a body may be discharging a public function or performing a public duty […]

Scope of judicial review of State action in a matter arising from non-statutory contract on ground of arbitrariness, explained. Held, We would, therefore, sum up as to when an act is to be treated as arbitrary. The court must carefully attend to the facts and the circumstances of the case. It should find out whether

Para 11-  In view of the implementation of the GST and as per Article 279A of the Constitution of India, the GST Council is empowered to make recommendations to the States on any matter relating to GST. The GST Council can also issue advisories to the respective States for implementation of the DIN system, which shall be

Para 17– Though the decision of this Court in the case of Bijnor Urban Cooperative Bank Limited (supra) was specifically pressed in service on behalf of the Bank and was pointed out to the High Court, the High Court instead following the binding decision of this Court in the case of Bijnor Urban Cooperative Bank

There are two facets of right to equality: Formal equality and substantive equality. Formal equality means that every person, irrespective of attributes must be treated equally and must not be discriminated, while substantive equality is aimed at producing equality of outcomes through different modes of affirmative action. Reasonable accommodation, held, one of the means for

In case of Supreme Court’s order to High Court to place before Supreme Court suggestions and road map formulated by High Court for early disposal of commercial disputes. Suggestions and road map formulated by High Court, held, should have been necessarily placed before Supreme Court well in advance so as to enable Supreme Court to

Held, Before parting, we may observe that there could indeed be a necessity to impose certain restrictions so as to prevent mushrooming growth of pharmacy colleges. Such restrictions may be in the larger general public interest. However, if that has to be done, it has to be done strictly in accordance with law. If and

Held, we find that the writ petition challenging the clauses was maintainable. It is not disputed that GAIL is a Public Sector Undertaking and thus qualifies under the definition of ‘State’ as per Article 12 of the Constitution. At the time of entering into contract, GAIL was enjoying a monopolistic position with respect to the supply of natural

The petition dealt with the misuse of the right of freedom of speech and expression, as provided under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution, by public functionaries who made distasteful remarks against certain individuals who were the victims of a crime. The grounds lined up in Art. 19(2) for restricting the right to free speech are

Supreme Court judgment directing all trial courts and Magistrates to act independently of interim/interlocutory orders, even of High Court, in circumstances specified in the said Supreme Court judgment. In such a case, held, all Magistrates and trial courts in India must act in terms of the Supreme Court, in letter and spirit, without any further