Created byFuzzy Cloud

Legislation

Constitution of India

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

STATE OF UTTRAKHAND & ORS.versusDEEP CHANDRA TEWARI & ANR.

2013 INSC 7391 November 2013Appeal(s) allowed

The Uttarakhand Director of School Education advertised for Assistant Teachers (General) requiring a B.Ed. degree simplicitor. The respondents held B.Ed. degrees with Specialisation in Vocational Education, which the authorities deemed not to satisfy the qualification. The High Court set aside the rejection, but the St

UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.versusSTATE OF U.P. AND ORS.

2007 INSC 11161 November 2007Dismissed

The Uttar Pradesh Jal Sansthan, created under the U.P. Water Supply and Sewerage Act, 1975, supplied water and maintained sewerage for railway colonies and stations and demanded service charges from the Railways. The Union of India contended that these charges were a tax on Union property and therefore exempt under Art

UNION OF INDIA AND ANR.versusMAHAJABEEN AKHTAR

2007 INSC 11171 November 2007Dismissed

The Union of India appealed against a decision of the Central Administrative Tribunal and the Delhi High Court that had granted Mahajabeen Akhtar, a former Research Assistant of the Bureau of Promotion of Urdu Language, a replacement pay scale on the basis of equality with research assistants in other language departme

UNION OF INDIA AND ANR.versusCENTRAL ELECTRICAL & MECHANICAL ENGINEERING SERVICE (CE & MES) GROUP A (DIRECT RECRUITS) ASSOCIATION, CPWD AND ORS.

2007 INSC 11201 November 2007Dismissed

The Central Public Works Department issued office orders on 1 August 2002 and 11 March 2003 that reorganised zones by placing civil, electrical and mechanical cadres under a Chief Engineer (either civil or electrical), effectively creating a post that merged distinct services. The respondents challenged the validity of

REGIONAL MANAGER, SBI.versusMAHATMA MISHRA

2006 INSC 7731 November 2006Appeal(s) allowed

Mahatma Mishra was appointed by the State Bank of India as a temporary messenger for a fixed period of 88 days in 1982 and was terminated thereafter. He claimed that the termination violated Section 25‑H of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 and sought reinstatement with full back wages. The Labour Court held the termin

MANISH RATAN AND ORS.versusSTATE OF M.P. AND ORS

2006 INSC 7741 November 2006Appeal(s) allowed

Manish Ratan and others were accused of dowry harassment and ill‑treatment of their wife, who lived in Jabalpur. The complainant lodged a FIR at Datia police, alleging that the offences occurred at Jabalpur, and the case was tried by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Datia. The appellants challenged the jurisdiction, argu

STATE OF U.P. AND ORS.versusHARIHAR BHOLE NATH

2006 INSC 7761 November 2006Appeal(s) allowed

Harihar Bhole Nath, a Deputy Inspector General of Registration, was charged in 1993 with misconduct causing financial loss to the Government and was suspended by order of the Governor. Although the suspension was stayed, he retired on 31 March 1993. A departmental enquiry was later initiated on 4 January 1997, after hi

MATHURA PRASADversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

2006 INSC 7781 November 2006Appeal(s) allowed

Mathura Prasad, a casual labourer, was shortlisted for regularisation and his service card was sent for verification, where it was deemed fake. A departmental inquiry was held, but the inquiry officer’s report did not clearly state whether the card was genuine. The disciplinary authority sent a demi‑official letter ask

KUMAR DHIRENDRA MULLICK AND ORS.versusTIVOLI PARK APARTMENTS (P) LTD.

2004 INSC 6291 November 2004Dismissed

The trustees of a trust estate had leased premises to a lessee for 21 years, who later assigned the lease to TIVOLI PARK APARTMENTS (the respondent). An oral agreement was made to renew the lease for 70 years on increased rent and premium, but the trustees failed to execute the transfer deed. The respondent obtained a

DISTT. REGISTRAR & COLLECTOR, HYDERABAD AND ANR.versusCANARA BANK ETC.

2004 INSC 6311 November 2004Dismissed

The Andhra Pradesh amendment of Section 73 of the Indian Stamp Act gave the Collector power to inspect, seize and impound any registers, books or documents, including those in banks, without any procedural safeguards. The High Court struck down this provision as unconstitutional, and the State appealed. The Supreme Cou

HINDUSTAN TIMES AND ORS.versusSTATE OF UP. AND ANR.

2002 INSC 4591 November 2002Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Uttar Pradesh issued executive directives under Article 162 to deduct 5% from government advertisement bills in newspapers with circulation over 25,000, creating a fund for a pension scheme for working journalists. The scheme had not been enacted as a law because the related bill lapsed in the Vidhan Sabha

MURARI AND ORS.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

1996 INSC 12661 November 1996Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined the acquisition of several thousand acres of land for the planned development of Delhi under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, where notifications under Section 4 were issued between 1959 and 1965 and declarations under Section 6 between 1966 and 1969, but awards were delayed until 1979‑83. The

ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIAversusMOHD. ABDUL GHANI AND ORS.

1995 INSC 6601 November 1995Appeal(s) allowed

Sixteen villages that were originally part of Murshidabad district and fell within the Jangipur Parliamentary Constituency under the Delimitation Order, 1976, were later administratively transferred to the district of Maida due to a change in the course of the River Ganges. The residents filed a writ petition seeking a

B.C. CHATURVEDIversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

1995 INSC 6611 November 1995Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, an Income Tax Officer, was investigated by the CBI and found to hold assets disproportionate to his known income. Although the evidence was insufficient for criminal prosecution under Section 5(1)(e) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947, a departmental inquiry proved the misconduct and dismissed him

SHRI JAGDISH SINGHversusSTATE OF HARYANA AND ORS.

1995 INSC 6721 November 1995Dismissed

The case concerned Jagdish Singh's challenge to the compensation awarded for land acquired under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The acquisition officer initially fixed different rates for two blocks, which were later consolidated by the reference court and the Punjab & Haryana High Court to a uniform rate of Rs 10 per

JAGHNATHversusUNION OF INDIA AND ANR.

1991 INSC 2831 November 1991Dismissed

The petitioners, a group of government compositors, sought to be placed in the "highly skilled" Grade‑I category with backdated benefits, relying on a Himachal Pradesh High Court decision in T.R. Thakur’s case that had held seniority‑based classification unreasonable. The Supreme Court examined whether that High Court

KISHAN RAM & ORS.versusSTATE OF UTTARAKHAND

2013 INSC 6651 October 2013Dismissed

The case concerns the murder of Suresh Chandra, who was tied up and assaulted with lathis and dandas by five accused including Kishan Ram, Pani Ram, Dev Singh, Har Ram and Chandan Singh. The trial court and the High Court convicted the five under Section 302 read with Section 149 of the IPC and sentenced them to life i

ARVIND GUPTAversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

2012 INSC 4411 October 2012Dismissed

Arvind Gupta filed a writ petition under Article 32 challenging the Comptroller and Auditor General of India's (CAG) power to issue performance audit reports under the Regulations on Audit and Accounts, 2007, framed pursuant to the Comptroller & Auditor General's (Duties, Powers and Conditions of Services) Act, 1971. T

DES RAJ (DECEASED) THROUGH LRS. AND ORS.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ANR.

2004 INSC 5701 October 2004Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants' agricultural lands were acquired under a 1965 notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 and an award of Rs 2,000 per bigha was made in 1969. They, together with other claimants, obtained a reference under Section 18 which raised the award to Rs 2,200, and the High Court later enhanc

S.L. CHANDRAKISHORE SINGH ETC. ETC.versusSTATE OF MANIPUR AND ORS. ETC. ETC.

1999 INSC 4521 October 1999

The petitioners, police officers of the Manipur Police Service, were appointed in officiating capacity under Rule 24 and later re‑appointed under Rule 5(1)(b) and Rule 16, but their officiating service was ignored in the seniority list. They challenged the order in the Gauhati High Court; a Single Judge treated their o

S. VINOD KUMAR AND ANR.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

1996 INSC 11331 October 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants challenged a memorandum that allowed relaxation of qualifying marks for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in promotion examinations, arguing it violated the Constitution. The Central Administrative Tribunal had held that such relaxation fell within the reservation power under Article 16(4) and was sa

P. RAVINDRAN AND ORS.versusUNION TERRITORY OF PONDICHERRY AND ORS.

1996 INSC 11371 October 1996Dismissed

The petitioners were appointed as ad‑hoc lecturers in the Union Territory of Pondicherry and later appeared for regular recruitment through the Public Service Commission but were not selected. They filed petitions before the Central Administrative Tribunal seeking regularisation of their services. The Tribunal dismisse

MANAGING DIRECTOR, ECIL, HYDERABAD ETC. ETC.versusB. KARUNAKAR AND ORS. ETC. ETC.

1993 INSC 3161 October 1993Disposed off

The Constitution Bench examined whether a delinquent employee is entitled to a copy of the Inquiry Officer's report before the disciplinary authority decides on guilt or punishment, especially after the 42nd Amendment removed the right to show cause on penalty. It held that when the Inquiry Officer is not the disciplin

TARUN SHARMAversusSTATE OF HARYANA

2025 INSC 11391 September 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned the conviction of Tarun Sharma under Section 302 IPC for the murder of Munish Kumar, based primarily on a dying declaration recorded by a police Sub‑Inspector. The Supreme Court examined whether the dying declaration was reliable, given that the victim had been unconscious for most of the period, the

THE STATE OF TELANGANA & ORS. ETC.versusKALLURI NAGA NARASIMHA ABHIRAM & ORS. ETC.

2025 INSC 10581 September 2025Disposed off

The State of Telangana and its agencies challenged the High Court's expansion of the definition of ‘local candidate’ under the Telangana Medical & Dental Colleges Admission Rules, 2017, arguing that the definition is prescribed by the Presidential Order issued under Article 371D and the 1983 Act and cannot be altered b

SAU. SANGEETA W/O SUNIL SHINDEversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS.

2021 INSC 4341 September 2021Dismissed

The appellant, Sau. Sangeeta, was elected as Gatneta (Group Leader) of the INCPS Party, a Panchayat Samiti party formed by four elected members of the Shrirampur Panchayat Samiti, in a 2017 meeting chaired by the Ahmednagar District INC President. The meeting resolution gave the District President the power to change t

SANJAY RAMDAS PATILversusSANJAY AND OTHERS

2021 INSC 4351 September 2021Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined a dispute over the reservation of the Mayor's office in Dhule Municipal Corporation. The State of Maharashtra had notified that the post would be reserved for the Backward Class (BC) for the term starting June 2021, despite earlier reservations for BC and no reservation for Scheduled Castes (

SHRI VENKATESHWARA UNIVERSITY THROUGH ITS REGISTRAR AND ANOTHERversusUNION OF INDIA AND ANR.

2017 INSC 8401 September 2017Dismissed

Shri Venkateshwara University sought renewal of its Letter of Permission (LOP) to admit MBBS students for 2017‑18 after the Medical Council of India (MCI) inspected the college on 9 December 2016 and recommended debarment for 2017‑18 and 2018‑19. The university argued that the inspection violated clause 8(3)(l)(d) of t

SARASWATI EDUCATIONAL CHARITABLE TRUST AND ANR.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ANR.

2017 INSC 8411 September 2017Case Allowed

The Saraswati Educational Charitable Trust sought to establish a medical college and was granted conditional permission for the 2016-17 session. The Medical Council of India (MCI) conducted an inspection in November 2016, finding only minor deficiencies (faculty 1.5% and residents 6.52%) within permissible limits. A se

CARDAMOM MARKETING CORPORATION AND ANR.versusSTATE OF KERALA & ORS.

2016 INSC 8441 September 2016Dismissed

Cardamom Marketing Corporation and another, registered dealers under the Kerala General Sales Tax Act and Kerala Value Added Tax Act, challenged a 2002 government notification that levied an additional court fee on appeals and revisions before tribunals, directing the proceeds to the Kerala Legal Benefit Fund. They arg

SURENDRA PRASAD SHUKLAversusTHE STATE OF JHARKHAND & ORS.

2011 INSC 6301 September 2011Case Partly allowed

The appellant, a Head Constable with 34 years of service, was dismissed after his son and two others were arrested for stealing a car under Section 392 IPC, the car being recovered from the government quarters occupied by the appellant. The disciplinary authority held the appellant guilty of negligence, indiscipline, a

ANIL KUMAR JAINversusMAYA JAIN

2009 INSC 11011 September 2009Appeal(s) allowed

Anil Kumar Jain and Maya Jain, married in 1985, filed a joint petition for mutual divorce under Section 13‑B of the Hindu Marriage Act in 2004. After the statutory six‑month period, the wife withdrew her consent, stating she did not want the marriage dissolved, leading the trial court and the High Court to dismiss the

NATWAR PARIKH AND CO. LID.versusSTATE OF KARNATAKA AND ORS.

2005 INSC 3931 September 2005Dismissed

Natwar Parikh & Co. Ltd., a transporter of heavy equipment, used tractors (registered as non‑transport vehicles) coupled with trailers (registered as transport vehicles) to move transformers into Karnataka. The Karnataka taxation authority issued demand notices demanding motor‑vehicle tax on the tractor‑trailer combina

NIRMAL JEET KAURversusTHE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND ANR.

2004 INSC 4901 September 2004Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Nirmal Jeet Kaur, alleged dowry harassment and filed a criminal complaint against her husband (Respondent No.2) under Sections 498A, 506 IPC and the Dowry Prohibition Act. Respondent No.2 sought anticipatory bail under Section 438 CrPC, which the High Court disposed of, directing him to apply for regular

JUSTICE P. VENUGOPALversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

2003 INSC 4391 September 2003Dismissed

Justice P. Venugopal, a retired Madras High Court Judge, sought re‑fixation of his pension by claiming that periods he served as a Commission of Inquiry, ad hoc Judge and Commissioner of Payments (1981‑1988) should be counted as judicial service. The Supreme Court examined whether the High Court Judges (Salaries and Co

DELHI JAL BOARDversusMAHINDER SINGH

2000 INSC 4261 September 2000Dismissed

The Supreme Court considered a Special Leave Petition filed by the Delhi Jal Board challenging a Delhi High Court order that had allowed Mahinder Singh, a senior employee, to receive a promotion recommended by a Departmental Promotion Committee (DPC) despite a later disciplinary inquiry. The Court held that the right t

K. KANDASWAMYversusUNION OF INDIA AND ANR.

1995 INSC 5301 September 1995Dismissed

K. Kandaswamy, an IPS officer, was compulsorily retired by the Government of India under Rule 56(j) of the All India Services (Death-cum-Retirement Benefits) Rules, 1958, after a special report raised doubts about his integrity, including a suspicious request to purchase a coffee estate. He challenged the order before

BHUWNESHWAR SINGHversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

1993 INSC 2801 September 1993Dismissed

Bhuwneshwar Singh, a sepoy, was dismissed from service and sentenced to four months' rigorous imprisonment by a District Court Martial (DCM). He challenged the dismissal, conviction, and sentence in the Calcutta High Court, alleging violations of Army Rules and illegal pre‑trial detention beyond three months without Ce

BALRAM GUPTAversusUNION OF INDIA & ANR.

1987 INSC 2351 September 1987Appeal(s) allowed

Balram Gupta, a permanent clerk with over 20 years of service, gave notice of voluntary retirement effective 31 March 1981 under Rule 48‑A of the Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1972. He later withdrew the notice on 31 January 1981, citing personal requests from staff, but the government refused permission to w

SOUTHERN PHARMACEUTICALS & CHEMICALS TRICHUR & ORS. ETC.versusSTATE OF KERALA & ORS. ETC.

1981 INSC 1541 September 1981Dismissed

Southern Pharmaceuticals and other manufacturers of medicinal and toilet preparations containing alcohol challenged the constitutional validity of sections 12A, 12B, 14(e), 14(f) and 68A of the Kerala Abkari Act, 1967 and related rules, arguing that the State lacked competence because the subject fell within the Union’

THE STATE OF PUNJAB & ORS.versusDAVINDER SINGH & ORS.

2024 INSC 5621 August 2024Reference answered

The Supreme Court, by a 6:1 majority, overruled its earlier decision in E.V. Chinnaiah v. State of Andhra Pradesh and held that sub-classification of Scheduled Castes for the purpose of reservation is constitutionally permissible. The Court examined whether the Scheduled Castes constitute a homogenous class under Artic

UNION OF INDIA & ORS. ETC.versusPROHLAD GUHA ETC.

2024 INSC 5631 August 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The respondents were appointed to the Eastern Railway on compassionate grounds, but the railway authority later discovered that the documents supporting their claims were forged and terminated their services. The respondents challenged the termination before the Central Administrative Tribunal, which dismissed their ap

MADHUSUDAN BHANUPRASAD PANDYAversusSTATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.

2019 INSC 8531 August 2019Dismissed

Madhusudan Bhanuprasad Pandya, who operated a cement pipe manufacturing business on leasehold land in Ahmedabad, applied for exemption under Section 20 of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976. The State Government rejected the application, and the High Court dismissed his writ petition, holding that the la

MUNICIPAL COMMITIEE, PATIALAversusMODEL TOWN RESIDENTS ASSON. & ORS.

2007 INSC 7991 August 2007Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined whether the Punjab Municipal Act, 1911 (as amended by the 1994 Punjab Amending Act) could levy house tax at different rates for self‑occupied and tenanted premises and whether the definition of "market value" under Section 3(8aa) was unconstitutional for lacking guidelines. The Court held tha

TORAN SINGHversusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

2002 INSC 3211 August 2002Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant was convicted for murder under Section 302 IPC based on the testimony of the deceased's son, who claimed the appellant killed his father with an axe over a marital dispute. The trial court and the Madhya Pradesh High Court upheld the conviction despite serious inconsistencies, lack of corroboration, and t

STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS.versusSANTOSH SHANKAR ACHARYA

2000 INSC 3691 August 2000Dismissed

The State of Maharashtra detained Santosh Shankar Acharya under Section 3(2) of the Maharashtra Prevention of Dangerous Activities Act, 1981, but failed to inform him that he could make a representation to the detaining authority. The High Court held that such non‑communication violated Article 22(5) of the Constitutio

SHRI DILIP K. BASU ETC.versusSTATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS.

1997 INSC 5881 August 1997Disposed off

The Supreme Court, recalling its earlier D.K. Basu judgment which laid down eleven procedural safeguards to prevent custodial violence, noted that more than seven months had passed without evidence of implementation. On petitions filed by Dr. A.M. Singhvi, the Court directed the Director General of Police and Home Secr

RATIAN KUMAR TANDON AND ORS.versusSTATE OF UTIAR PRADESH

1996 INSC 8161 August 1996Dismissed

The appellants, R.K. Tandon and others, held lease‑hold rights over 22,528 sq. yd of land in Allahabad that was acquired by the State under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The Land Acquisition Officer awarded compensation of Rs 4,57,750.88; the reference court fixed Rs 500 per sq. yd for land, Rs 50,000 for trees and R

SATISH CHANDRAversusUNION OF INDIA

1994 INSC 2951 August 1994Disposed off

Satish Chandra challenged Sections 4, 5, 16, 21 and 27 of the Companies (Amendment) Act, 1988 on the grounds that Parliament lacked competence to create the Company Law Board (CLB) and that the Act failed to protect minority shareholders. The petition argued that the power under Section 397 of the Companies Act, 1956 w

DATTATRYA SHANKARBHAT AMBALGI & ORS.versusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS.

1989 INSC 2181 August 1989Dismissed

The petitioners, owners of land in Sholapur, challenged the acquisition of their land under the Urban Land (Ceiling & Regulation) Act, 1976, arguing that the Act should not apply to land reserved for public purpose under the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966 and that sections 10, 11 and 23 of the Act vio

JAGDISH PARSAD SINHA & ORS.versusBHAGWAT PRASAD & ORS.

1989 INSC 2231 August 1989Dismissed

The Bihar State Government issued a notification on 18 November 1986 bifurcating the single Secondary Education Service cadre into separate cadres, allegedly to provide quicker promotional avenues for lower‑ranked teachers. The notification was challenged before the Patna High Court, which held that the bifurcation vio

HARBANS LAL & ORS.versusSTATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH & ORS.

1989 INSC 2241 August 1989Dismissed

The petitioners, daily‑rated carpenters employed by the Himachal Pradesh State Handicrafts Corporation, filed a writ petition under Article 32 seeking "equal pay for equal work" with regular government carpenters or, alternatively, the minimum wages fixed by the Deputy Commissioner. The respondents argued that the corp

UNION OF INDIA & ORS.versusR. NARASIMHAN

1988 INSC 1951 August 1988Appeal(s) allowed

R. Narasimhan, a Class III railway servant governed by the pension rules, was compulsorily retired in 1982 under para 620 of the Railway Pension Manual, which allows retirement after 30 years of qualifying service. He challenged the order, arguing that the manual provision was void and that only Rule 2046 of the Indian

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

PARVEEN KUMAR @ PARVEEN CHAUHANversusSTATE OF HARYANA & ORS.

2026 INSC 6671 July 2026Appeal(s) allowed

Parveen Kumar was convicted of murder and sentenced to life imprisonment in 2009. In 2022 he applied for remission under the 2002 Haryana remission policy, which required the Governor’s approval under Article 161 of the Constitution, but his application was rejected on the ground that the later 2008 policy, issued unde

AHMEDABAD MUNICIPAL CORPORATION &ANR. ETC.versusRAJUBHAI SOMABHAI BHARWAD AND ANR. ETC.

2015 INSC 4611 July 2015Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned a workman who was dismissed by the Nava Naroda Gram Panchayat and later entered into a compromise with the Sarpanch for reinstatement and back wages. The Labour Court upheld the compromise, but the Gram Panchayat and Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation challenged its validity, arguing that the Sarpanch l

MAJENDRAN LANGESWARANversusSTATE (NCT OF DELHI) & ANR.

2013 INSC 4011 July 2013Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a helmsman on the cargo ship "Lok Prem", was convicted under Section 302 IPC for allegedly murdering a fellow helmsman, L. Shivaraman, based primarily on circumstantial evidence and an alleged extra‑judicial confession to an engine officer. The prosecution relied on the appellant's fingerprints on a bloo

DARSHAN GUPTAversusRADHIKA GUPTA

2013 INSC 4021 July 2013Dismissed

The husband, Darshan Gupta, filed a petition for dissolution of marriage on the grounds of cruelty (s.13(1)(ia)) and his wife’s alleged incurable unsound mind (s.13(1)(iii)) under the Hindu Marriage Act. The wife, Radhika Gupta, sought restitution of conjugal rights. The Family Court and High Court dismissed the husban

P. DHARNI & ORS.versusGOVT. OF TAMIL NADU & ORS.

2013 INSC 4031 July 2013Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned a claim by a Motor Vehicles Inspector (Grade II) for out‑of‑turn/accelerated promotion to Regional Transport Officer under Rule 36(b)(ii) of the Tamil Nadu State and Subordinate Services Rules. The appellant senior officers argued that the Special Rules governing promotion and transfer in the Tamil N

ESSAR TELEHOLDINGS LTD.versusREGISTRAR GENERAL, DELHI HIGH COURT & ORS

2013 INSC 3741 July 2013Dismissed

The petitioners, including Essar Teleholdings Ltd., challenged the Delhi High Court's administrative order and the NCT of Delhi's notification appointing a Special Judge to try the 2G spectrum case, arguing that the Special Judge lacked jurisdiction to try IPC offences (420/120‑B) arising from the same transaction. The

RAJENDRA NAGAR ADARSH GRAH NIRMAN SAHKARI SAMITI LTD.versusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS.

2013 INSC 3841 July 2013Dismissed

The State of Rajasthan acquired 15.5 hectares of land to set up a North‑Western Railway Zone complex and staff quarters. The landowners challenged the acquisition, arguing that because the project was a railway (a Union subject) only the Central Government could be the "appropriate Government" under Sections 4 and 6 of

SHARANJIT KAUR & ANR.versusSTATE OF PUNJAB

2013 INSC 3791 July 2013Dismissed

The appellants were charged under Section 420 IPC for allegedly cheating a complainant of Rs 30 lakhs and sought anticipatory bail, arguing that the offence fell within the jurisdiction of a Gram Panchayat under the Punjab Panchayati Raj Act, 1994. The High Court dismissed their bail applications and a subsequent writ

KAMAL JORAversusSTATE OF UTTARAKHAND & ANR.

2013 INSC 3951 July 2013Dismissed

The State of Uttarakhand dissolved the Municipal Council of Haridwar and appointed an Administrator under the Uttar Pradesh Municipal Corporations Act, 1959, to facilitate its conversion into a Municipal Corporation. The Chairman, Kamal Jora, challenged the dissolution on the ground that no hearing was afforded to the

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

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

CA RAMCHANDRA DALLARAM CHOUDHARYversusADANI INFRASTRUCTURE AND DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED

2026 INSC 6291 June 2026Dismissed

The liquidator of a corporate debtor filed an appeal under Section 62 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) after the 45‑day filing period but within the 60‑day grace period, and the appeal was marked defective. The liquidator failed to cure the defects within the 28‑day period prescribed by the Supreme Court Rul

RAJASTHAN PRADESH V.S. SARDARSHAHAR AND ANR.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

2010 INSC 3341 June 2010Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined whether holders of the "Vaidya Visharad" or "Ayurved Ratna" certificates issued by the Hindi Sahitya Sammelan, Prayag after 1967 could practice medicine under the Indian Medicine Central Council Act, 1970, and whether the cut‑off date of 1967 in Entry 105 of the Act’s Second Schedule was arbi

STATE OF HARYANAversusSURENDER AND ORS. ETC.

2007 INSC 6761 June 2007Appeal(s) allowed

The case involved four accused who, during a robbery on a train in 1994, stabbed one passenger to death and shot another. Eye‑witnesses, who were the victim’s siblings, identified the accused in court, leading to conviction by the trial court. The High Court acquitted them on the ground that no test identification para

R. RANJITH SINGH & ORS.versusTHE STATE OF TAMIL NADU & ORS.

2025 INSC 6121 May 2025Disposed off

The appellants, recruited as Sub‑Inspectors of Police through direct recruitment, challenged a Government Order dated 21‑11‑2017 that granted seniority to 20% in‑service candidates over those recruited from the open market. The order retrospectively amended Rule 25 of the Tamil Nadu Police Subordinate Service Rules, 19

RAM BALAK SINGHversusSTATE OF BIHAR AND ANR.

2024 INSC 3601 May 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Ram Balak Singh, claimed possession of 0.32 decimal of land that had been settled in favour of his adoptive father Makhan Singh by an ex‑landlord and later recorded in his name by the Consolidation Officer under the Bihar Consolidation Act. After the consolidation proceedings closed, the State of Bihar a

DEEPENDRA YADAV AND OTHERSversusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS

2024 INSC 3621 May 2024

The Madhya Pradesh Public Service Commission (MPPSC) conducted a recruitment process for 571 posts, but an amendment to Rule 4 of the Madhya Pradesh State Service Examination Rules, 2015 on 17‑02‑2020 altered the method of segregating reservation‑category candidates and was applied to the ongoing examination. This led

SHARIF AHMED AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND ANOTHER

2024 INSC 3631 May 2024Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined three criminal appeals arising from chargesheets filed in Uttar Pradesh that were alleged to lack sufficient factual detail and evidence under Section 173(2) of the CrPC. It considered whether a chargesheet must contain detailed facts and material evidence to enable a magistrate to take cogni

PRAVEEN SINGH RAMAKANT BHADAURIYAversusNEELAM PRAVEEN SINGH BHADAURIYA

2019 INSC 6151 May 2019Disposed off

The appellant and respondent were married in 1998 and later lived separately, leading the husband to file a suit for dissolution of marriage which was dismissed by the trial, district and high courts. While the appeal was pending before the Supreme Court, the parties reached an amicable settlement through mediation, ag

MAHARASHTRA ARCHERY ASSOCIATIONversusRAHUL MEHRA AND ORS.

2019 INSC 6101 May 2019Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined the conduct of a court‑appointed Administrator who was tasked with amending the Constitution of the Archery Association of India (AAI) and conducting elections. The Administrator unilaterally introduced several amendments beyond the four changes expressly approved by the Court in its order of

SEEMA SARKARversusEXECUTIVE OFFICER AND ORS.

2019 INSC 6121 May 2019Appeal(s) allowed

The Little Andaman Panchayat Samiti, consisting of five elected members and one Member of Parliament (MP) as an ex‑officio member, scheduled a special meeting to consider a no‑confidence motion against the Pramukh. Only three elected members attended, and the Executive Officer dissolved the meeting, holding that a quor

UNION OF INDIA & ORS. ETC. ETC.versusS. MAADASAMY AND ANR. ETC. ETC.

2019 INSC 6041 May 2019Disposed off

The case concerned an amendment to the recruitment rules of the Labour Department of Pondicherry that equated the post of Principal, Grade ‘A’ (Senior Scale) with the post of Joint Chief Inspector of Factories (JCIF). The Central Administrative Tribunal and the Madras High Court had set aside the amendment, holding tha

CHANDRA BHAWAN SINGHversusTHE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

2018 INSC 4351 May 2018Dismissed

The case involved the murder of Satyawati, who was allegedly killed by her in‑laws for refusing to pay dowry. Four family members were tried; Jwala Singh was acquitted while Tribhuwan Singh, Makoi Devi and Chandra Bhawan Singh were convicted by the trial court. The High Court upheld the convictions of Tribhuwan Singh a

SURAZ INDIA TRUSTversusUNION OF INDIA

2017 INSC 4261 May 2017Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined a writ petition filed by Suraz India Trust, which had repeatedly approached the Court with 64 public‑interest litigations and several contempt petitions, none of which resulted in any relief. The Court found that the Trust’s actions amounted to an abuse of the judicial process, wasting valuab

SAVITRI PANDEY AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P.AND OTHERS

2015 INSC 9921 May 2015Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant Savitri Pandey and Raju Pandey were named in an FIR filed in 2014 by their sister‑in‑law alleging fraudulent sale deeds executed in 1994 concerning joint family land. The High Court dismissed their writ petition under Article 226 seeking quashing of the FIR. The Supreme Court examined whether such a writ

RAJASTHAN HOUSING BOARDversusNEW PINK CITY NIRMAN SAHKARI SAMITI LTD. & ANR.

2015 INSC 3751 May 2015Disposed off

The Rajasthan Housing Board and the original Khatedars appealed against a Division Bench order that granted the New Pink City Nirman Sahkari Samiti Ltd. (the Society) a right to compensation and 25% of the developed land after the State acquired the land under the Rajasthan Land Acquisition Act, 1953. The Court held th

MAHENDRA NATH DASversusUNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

2013 INSC 2941 May 2013Appeal(s) allowed

Mahendra Nath Das was convicted of two murders, one of which attracted a death sentence that was confirmed by the High Court and the Supreme Court. He filed a mercy petition under Article 72 of the Constitution seeking commutation to life imprisonment, but the petition was rejected after a twelve‑year delay. The appell

STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ANR.versusMILAP CHAND JAIN & ANR. ETC.

2013 INSC 2981 May 2013Dismissed

The State of Rajasthan filed a fresh batch of Special Leave Petitions (SLPs) challenging a High Court order dated 29‑11‑2011, which had already been the subject of earlier SLPs that were dismissed. The Supreme Court examined whether a coordinate bench could entertain new SLPs against the same impugned order when the ma

INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LTD.versusMEENA KUMARI AND ORS.

2008 INSC 5641 May 2008Disposed off

Meena Kumari, a war widow residing in Jheenjhak village of Kanpur Dehat district, filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus directing Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. to grant her a licence for a retail petrol pump under the 30‑December‑1977 notification. The corporation had awarded the licence to another applicant from Farr

MAN SINGHversusSTATE OF HARYANA & ORS.

2008 INSC 5671 May 2008Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a Sub‑Inspector, was punished for dereliction of duty after a Head Constable under his charge was caught transporting liquor in a government vehicle. While the Head Constable was later exonerated in criminal court and his departmental punishment set aside, the appellant's punishment of stopping two futur

STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS.versusNAGPUR DISTILLERS, NAGPUR AND ANR.

2006 INSC 2721 May 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Maharashtra issued a demand for a fee under Rule 5(2) of the Bombay Rectified Spirit (Transport in Bond) Rules, 1951 against Nagpur Distillers, which purchases rectified spirit and extra neutral alcohol from other distilleries for manufacturing Indian Made Foreign Liquor (IMFL). The distiller filed a writ

ACHAL MISHRAversusRAMA SHANKAR SINGH AND ORS.

2006 INSC 2711 May 2006Disposed off

The Supreme Court had earlier directed the tenants to deposit Rs 3,00,000 as a condition precedent for pursuing their writ petition concerning arrears of rent on a building occupied for 26 years without payment. The tenants applied for clarification, contending that a payment of Rs 1,45,860 made on 5 July 2004 should b

BISHNU PRASAD DASHversusRAJ KUMAR AGARWAL AND ORS.

2006 INSC 2731 May 2006Disposed off

The appellant, representing IDCOL, challenged a decision of the Orissa High Court that set aside a government order awarding a copper cable tender to IDCOL and directed that a later higher offer by OSICL be considered. The High Court had entertained the writ petition without impleading IDCOL, disposed of the case withi

DELHI JUDICIAL SERVICES ASSOCIATION AND ORS.versusDELHI HIGH COURT AND ORS.

2001 INSC 2371 May 2001Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined whether 14 temporary posts of Additional District Judges created under the Delhi Higher Judicial Service Rules, 1970 before their amendment could be filled only by promotion from the Delhi Judicial Service or also by direct recruitment from the Bar as permitted by the amended rules of 1987. T

R. LAKSHMI NARAYANversusSANTHI

2001 INSC 2411 May 2001Dismissed

The husband filed a petition under Section 5(ii) read with Section 12(1)(b) of the Hindu Marriage Act seeking a declaration that his marriage was null and void because his wife allegedly suffered a chronic, incurable mental disorder and refused cohabitation. The trial court dismissed the petition for lack of proof; the

GAJRAJ SINGH AND ORS.versusSTATE OF U.P. AND ORS.

2001 INSC 2381 May 2001Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined the validity of a draft scheme under the Motor Vehicles Acts (1939 and 1988) to nationalise 39 road‑transport routes in Uttar Pradesh, of which 38 routes were distinct from the Saharanpur‑Shahdra‑Delhi route previously dealt with in Ram Krishna Verma. The Court held that the statutory right t

SATPAL AND ANR.versusSTATE OF HARYANA AND ORS.

2000 INSC 2711 May 2000Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined a writ petition filed by the brother and widow of a murder victim challenging the Governor of Haryana’s order granting remission of the life sentence of Siriyans Kumar Jain, a convicted murderer. The High Court and Supreme Court had directed Jain to surrender and serve the remainder of his se

SRI RAMDAS MOTOR TRANSPORT LTD. AND ORS.versusTADI ADHINARAYANA REDDY AND ORS.

1997 INSC 4631 May 1997Appeal(s) allowed

The first appellant, a public limited company, and its senior directors were accused by minority shareholders of oppression and mismanagement. The shareholders filed petitions before the Company Law Board under Sections 397 and 398 of the Companies Act, 1956, seeking injunctions and the appointment of an administrator.

GAINDA RAM AND ORS. ETC.versusM.C.D. AND ORS.

1997 INSC 4641 May 1997Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined the implementation of the Delhi hawkers rehabilitation scheme by the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD) in light of the R.C. Chopra report. It directed the MCD to give all applicants previously held ineligible an opportunity to make representations, to re‑examine eligibility, to prepare zon

BOBBY ART INTERNATIONALversusOM PAL SINGH HOON AND ORS.

1996 INSC 5951 May 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The film "Bandit Queen", based on the life of Phoolan Devi, was certified 'A' by the Appellate Tribunal under the Cinematograph Act after it was found to depict the consequences of social evils such as rape and oppression. The petitioner, Bobby Art International, challenged the High Court's order that quashed the certi

ALLAHABAD BANK OFFICERS ASSOCIATION AND ANR.versusALLAHABAD BANK AND ORS.

1996 INSC 6031 May 1996Dismissed

The Allahabad Bank Officers Association challenged the bank's order of compulsory retirement of a senior officer, alleging that the order was stigmatic and therefore a punitive dismissal under Article 311(2) of the Constitution. The bank had constituted a Special Committee under Regulation 19 of its 1979 Service Regula

GUJARAT UNIVERSITYversusRAJIV GOPINATH BHATT AND ORS.

1996 INSC 5961 May 1996Appeal(s) allowed

Gujarat University prescribed a rule for admission to its limited super‑speciality (M.Ch./D.M.) courses giving first preference to its own graduates, second preference to other Gujarat‑state university graduates, and leaving any remaining vacancies unfilled. Rajiv G. Bhatt, not a Gujarat University graduate, was denied

THE PROPERTY OWNERS' ASSOCIATION AND ORS.versusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS.

1996 INSC 5981 May 1996Matter referred to larger bench

The petition challenged the constitutional validity of Chapter VIII‑A of the Maharashtra Housing and Area Development Act, 1976, which allows acquisition of properties on payment of one hundred times the monthly rent, and argued that Article 31C of the Constitution shields the Act from attack under Articles 14 and 19.

CITIZENS FOR DEMOCRACYversusTHE STATE OF ASSAM AND ORS.

1995 INSC 3201 May 1995Appeal(s) allowed

A journalist, writing as President of Citizens for Democracy, petitioned the Supreme Court under Article 32 alleging that seven TADA detainees lodged in Guwahati Medical College Hospital were handcuffed and tied with ropes, violating their constitutional rights. The State of Assam countered, claiming a high risk of esc

BALDEV RAJ SHARMAversusBAR COUNCIL OF INDIA & ORS.

1989 INSC 1631 May 1989Dismissed

Baldev Raj Sharma obtained a two‑year LL.B (Academic) degree as a private candidate from Kurukshetra University and later completed the third year of the professional LL.B as a regular student at Kanpur University, receiving the LL.B (Professional) degree in 1982. He applied to the Punjab and Haryana State Bar Council

E. S. REDDIversusCHIEF SECRETARY, GOVT. OF A.P. & ANR.

1987 INSC 1451 May 1987Dismissed

The case concerned the suspension of IAS officer E.S. Reddi under the Andhra Pradesh Civil Services Rules, which he challenged on the ground of arbitrariness under Article 14 of the Constitution, alleging that similarly situated officers were merely transferred. The Division Bench of the Andhra Pradesh High Court rever

DR. DINESH KUMAR & ORS.versusMOTILAL NEHRU MEDICAL COLLEGE ALLAHABAD & ORS.

1985 INSC 1151 May 1985Case Partly allowed

The petitioners, who had completed their MBBS and house‑job before the Supreme Court’s June 22, 1984 judgment in Dr. Pradeep Jain’s case, were denied admission to two‑year postgraduate medical courses for 1985‑86 because the college applied the new 50% institutional‑preference rule instead of the earlier 75% rule. They

STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ANR.versusSHAMSHER SINGH

1985 INSC 1181 May 1985Appeal(s) allowed

Shamshar Singh, a practising advocate, was detained under Section 3(2) of the National Security Act, 1980. He challenged the detention on four grounds: (1) a one‑day delay in placing his representation before the Advisory Board violated Section 10; (2) the Board failed to consider documentary evidence he produced, cont

A. L. KALRAversusTHE PROJECT & EQUIPMENT CORPORATION OF INDIA LIMITED

1984 INSC 971 May 1984Appeal(s) allowed

A.L. Kalra, a former Deputy Finance Manager of the Project & Equipment Corporation of India Ltd., was disciplined for allegedly misusing two advances granted under the corporation's House Building and Conveyance Advance Rules. The corporation withheld his salary and, after a disciplinary inquiry that lacked reasons and

I.K. MERCHANTS PVT. LTD. & ORS.versusTHE STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS.

2025 INSC 4181 April 2025Disposed off

The appellants, I.K. Merchants Pvt. Ltd. and others, sold their shares in a state-owned company in 1973 for Rs.11.50 per share and later sought a higher valuation, which was finally fixed at Rs.640 per share by a court-appointed valuer. The State of Rajasthan, as respondent, delayed payment for over five decades, leadi

JOMON K.K.versusSHAJIMON P. & ORS. ETC.

2025 INSC 4251 April 2025Dismissed

The Kerala Public Service Commission advertised 12 Boat Lascar vacancies requiring a current Lascar's licence, but the appellant, holding a higher Syrang's licence, applied and was placed first in the ranked list and advised for appointment. While the appointment was pending, two applications were filed before the Kera

STATE OF KERALAversusUNION OF INDIA

2024 INSC 2531 April 2024Matter referred to larger bench

The State of Kerala filed an original suit under Article 131 of the Constitution challenging the Union of India's imposition of a Net Borrowing Ceiling that limited the State's ability to raise funds, including borrowings by State‑Owned Enterprises and public‑account liabilities. Kerala sought a mandatory interim injun

TUSHAR ARUN GANDHIversusSTATE OF GUJARAT AND ORS

2022 INSC 3831 April 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The petitioner filed a public interest litigation before the Gujarat High Court under Article 226 challenging a Gujarat Government resolution that created a Governing Council and an Executive Council for the redevelopment of the Gandhi Ashram Memorial (Sabarmati Ashram) and sought that the existing trusts spearhead the

ALEMBIC PHARMACEUTICALS LTD.versusROHIT PRAJAPATI & ORS.

2020 INSC 3261 April 2020Appeal(s) allowed

Three pharmaceutical units in Ankleshwar began operations without obtaining the prior environmental clearance (EC) mandated by the 1994 Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) notification. The Ministry of Environment and Forests issued a 2002 circular allowing defaulting units to obtain an ex‑post‑facto EC, which the Na

RAJA @ AYYAPPANversusSTATE OF TAMIL NADU

2020 INSC 3251 April 2020Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant was arrested in 2007 in connection with a bomb‑defusing case and, while in police custody, gave a confessional statement that was recorded by a Superintendent of Police under Section 15 of the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1987. The appellant contended that the confession was not v

MANMOHAN SHARMAversusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ORS.

2014 INSC 2401 April 2014Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined whether the doctrine of prospective overruling applied in Kailash Chand Sharma's case— which struck down bonus marks based on domicile for primary school teacher appointments— could be extended to a large group of appointees who were not parties before the High Court. The appellants, whose se

BHARATKUMAR SHANTILAL THAKKARversusSTATE OF GUJARAT & ANOTHER

2014 INSC 2391 April 2014Case Allowed

Bharatkumar Shantilal Thakkar, a subordinate judicial officer in Gujarat, filed a writ petition under Article 32 seeking the implementation of the 1st National Judicial Pay Commission's recommendation of three advance increments for judges with higher law qualifications. The Gujarat Government, by a resolution dated 14

KALPESH HEMANTBHAI SHAHversusMANHAR AUTO STORES THROUGH ITS PARTNER & ORS.

2014 INSC 2381 April 2014Appeal(s) allowed

The landlord filed an eviction suit which was dismissed by the trial court; the appellate court reversed that decision, finding that the landlord had a bona‑fide need for the premises under Section 7(5) of the Maharashtra Rent Control Act and ordered the tenants to vacate. The tenants obtained a writ of certiorari from

BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITYversusM/S VIJAYA LEASING LTD. & ORS.

2013 INSC 1971 April 2013Appeal(s) allowed

The Bangalore Development Authority (BDA) acquired land under the Bangalore Improvement Act, 1945, with possession handed over to the government on 9 December 1983. A de‑notification under Section 48(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 was issued on 5 October 1999, and later recalled on 27 June 2000. The Karnataka Hig

LALU PRASAD YADAVversusSTATE OF BIHAR & ANR.

2010 INSC 1881 April 2010Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined whether the State of Bihar could file an appeal under Section 378(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 against an acquittal rendered by a Special CBI Judge when the offence was investigated by the Delhi Special Police Establishment (CBI). The Court held that the opening words "save as o

ALL INDIA ANNA DRAVIDA MUNNETRA KAZHAGAMversusL.K. TRIPATHI AND OTHERS

2009 INSC 4511 April 2009Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined contempt petitions filed by the All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (AIADMK) alleging that senior Tamil Nadu officials (respondents 1‑5) willfully disobeyed a Court order restraining political parties from calling a bandh on 1 October 2007, and that Union Minister T.R. Baalu (respondent 

STATE OF KARNATAKA AND ANR.versusSRI R. VIVEKANANDA SWAMY

2008 INSC 4361 April 2008Disposed off

The Supreme Court heard two appeals concerning claims for reimbursement of medical expenses incurred by government employees in non‑government hospitals. In Karnataka, an officer who underwent coronary bypass surgery claimed Rs 1,50,600 but was reimbursed only Rs 39,207; the High Court had allowed his writ petition. In

STATE OF ARUNACHAL PRADESHversusNEZONE LAW HOUSE, ASSAM

2008 INSC 4391 April 2008Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent, a law‑books seller, filed a writ petition alleging that the Government of Arunachal Pradesh, through an oral assurance by the then Law Minister, had promised to purchase 500 sets of North Eastern Region Local Acts and Rules. The High Court allowed the petition, holding that the doctrine of promissory es

JAIPAL SINGHversusSMT. SUMITRA MAHAJAN AND ANR.

2004 INSC 2211 April 2004Dismissed

Jaipal Singh, an IAS officer, applied for voluntary retirement on 13 March 2002 and requested a waiver of the three‑month notice period required under the All India Services (Death‑cum‑Retirement Benefits) Rules, 1958. He filed nomination papers for the Rajya Sabha election from Haryana, but the Returning Officer rejec

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRAversusDR. PRAFUL B. DESAI AND ANR.

2003 INSC 2021 April 2003Disposed off

The State of Maharashtra filed a criminal complaint under IPC sections 338, 109 and 114 alleging medical negligence by Dr. Praful B. Desai and Dr. A.K. Mukherjee, leading to the death of the complainant's wife. The trial court permitted the testimony of a US doctor, Dr. Greenberg, via video‑conferencing; the High Court

SH. AKLU RAM MAHTOversusSH. RAJENDRA MAHTO

1999 INSC 1521 April 1999Dismissed

In the 1995 Bihar Legislative Assembly election for the Bokaro constituency, the Returning Officer rejected the nomination papers of two workers, a Khalasi and a Meter Reader employed by Bokaro Steel Plant, on the ground that they were "managing agents" of the plant and thus disqualified under Section 10 of the Represe

PRATAP PHARMA PVT. LTD. AND ANR. ETC. ETC.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

1997 INSC 3471 April 1997Disposed off

The petitioners, manufacturers of Ayurvedic, Siddha and Unani drugs, challenged the amendment to Section 3(h) of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940, arguing that it arbitrarily prohibited the manufacture of drugs administered by the parenteral route and violated Articles 14 and 19(1)(g) of the Constitution. The Court ex

PRATAP PHARMA PVT. LTD. AND ANR. ETC. ETC.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

1997 INSC 3481 April 1997Disposed off

Pratap Pharma Pvt. Ltd. and others filed writ petitions under Article 32 challenging the amendment of Section 3(h) of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 (as amended by Act 68 of 1982), alleging it was arbitrary and violative of Articles 14 and 19(1)(g) of the Constitution. The petitioners contended that the amendment ex

STATE OF KERALA & ORS. ETC.versusT. N. PETER & ANR. ETC.

1980 INSC 631 April 1980Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Kerala appealed against a Kerala High Court judgment that struck down Sections 34(1) and 34(2A) of the Cochin Town Planning Act as violative of Article 14. The Supreme Court examined whether the Act's differential treatment of compensation, particularly the exclusion of solatium, constituted unreasonable c

KAPIL AGARWAL AND OTHERSversusSANJAY SHARMA AND OTHERS

2021 INSC 1321 March 2021Appeal(s) allowed

The dispute arose from a terminated distributorship agreement between Varun Beverages Ltd. and the complainant, who alleged non‑payment of commissions and issued a cheque that later bounced. The complainant filed a criminal complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and later a Section 156(3) Cr.P.C.

KHODAY DISTILLERIES LTD. (NOW KNOWN AS KHODAY INDIA LIMITED) AND OTHERSversusSRI MAHADESHWARA SAHAKARA SAKKARE KARKHANE LTD., KOLLEGAL (UNDER LIQUIDATION) REPRESENTED BY THE LIQUIDATOR

2019 INSC 2981 March 2019Disposed off

The case involved two civil appeals (Nos. 2432 and 2433) arising from special leave petitions (SLPs) filed by Khoday Distilleries Ltd. after a High Court decree in a money suit. Both SLPs were dismissed by the Supreme Court in limine without reasons. The appellants then sought review of the High Court's judgment, raisi

STATE OF GUJARAT AND OTHERS ETC.versusJAYESHBHAI KANJIBHAI KALATHIYA ETC.

2019 INSC 2971 March 2019Dismissed

The Supreme Court considered two writ petitions challenging a Gujarat Government resolution and subsequent amendment of the Gujarat Minor Mineral Rules that prohibited the movement of sand excavated in Gujarat to other states or countries. The petitioners argued that the State’s rule‑making power under Sections 15 and

THE MANAGEMENT OF STATE BANK OF LNDIAversusSMITA SHARAD DESHMUKH AND ANOTHER

2017 INSC 1951 March 2017Appeal(s) allowed

Smita Sharad Deshmukh, an employee of State Bank of India, submitted a forged CAIIB Part‑II certificate to obtain additional salary. A domestic enquiry found the certificate forged and dismissed her; the dismissal was upheld by the Appellate Authority and the Industrial Tribunal. The High Court, exercising its writ jur

DNYANDEO SABAJI NAIK AND ANR.versusMRS. PRADNYA PRAKASH KHADEKAR AND ORS.

2017 INSC 1931 March 2017Dismissed

The petitioners were tenants of a commercial premises under a conducting agreement and were ordered by the High Court to vacate within a year, later receiving a four‑month extension. They filed an unconditional undertaking to vacate, but subsequently sought a review and a further five‑year extension, claiming the High

LAXMAN LAL (DEAD) THROUGH LRS. AND ANR.versusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ORS.

2013 INSC 1331 March 2013Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants challenged the acquisition of their land for a bus stand, arguing that the preliminary notification issued on 01‑05‑1980 had lapsed because the declaration under Section 6 was made on 19‑03‑1987, well beyond the two‑year limit imposed by Section 5(2) of the 1981 Amendment Act, and that the State’s invoca

K.S. PANDURANGAversusSTATE OF KARNATAKA

2013 INSC 1311 March 2013Disposed off

The appellant, a superintendent at KAVIKA, was convicted under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 for demanding and accepting a Rs 5,000 bribe in exchange for allocating transport loads. The Supreme Court examined whether the statutory presumption under s.20 of the Act could be rebutted; it held that the appellant’

GVK INDS. LTD. & ANR.versusTHE INCOME TAX OFFICER & ANR.

2011 INSC 1671 March 2011Reference answered

GVK Industries Ltd. challenged a tax order that invoked sections 9(1)(i) and 9(1)(vii)(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, arguing that the provisions were unconstitutional for lacking a nexus with India. The High Court upheld the tax provision, relying on the ECIL judgment, prompting a Supreme Court reference to a Constit

VISHWANATH CHATURVEDIversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

2007 INSC 2361 March 2007Disposed off

The petitioner filed a public interest litigation under Article 32 alleging that the Chief Minister of Uttar Pradesh, Mulayam Singh Yadav, and his family acquired assets disproportionate to their known sources of income, violating the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The petition sought a writ of mandamus directing

BIJOY KUMAR DUGARversusBIDYADHAR DUTT AND ORS.

2006 INSC 1311 March 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The case involved a head‑on collision between a car and a bus in which the car driver, Raj Kumar Dugar, died. His parents claimed compensation from the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (MACT), which awarded a sum based on his present earnings, applied a multiplier, and held both drivers equally liable, directing the ins

V.C. MOHANversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

2002 INSC 1121 March 2002Appeal(s) allowed

V.C. Mohan was charged under Sections 132 and 135 of the Customs Act for misdeclaration of a Bill of Entry, arrested, and later released on bail. After the investigation, the Customs Department issued a show‑cause notice under Section 124 and the petitioner filed an application before the Settlement Commission, which o

KERALA MAGISTRATES (JUDICIAL) ASSOCIATION AND ORS.versusSTATE OF KERALA AND ORS.

2001 INSC 1291 March 2001Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined the validity of the Kerala Judicial Service Rules, 1991 which integrated the Civil Judicial Service and Criminal Judicial Service into a single Kerala Judicial Service. Sub‑rule (4) of Rule 3 fixed a 3:1 ratio for Subordinate Judges versus Chief Judicial Magistrates and a 5:2 ratio for Munsif

MAFATLAL INDUSTRIES LTD.versusNADIAD NAGAR PALIKA AND ANR.

2000 INSC 1141 March 2000Appeal(s) allowed

Mafatlal Industries Ltd, a textile manufacturer, brought cloth rolls of 100 metres into the municipal limits of Nadiad and cut them into smaller pieces before sending them out of the town. The issue was whether octroi duty under Section 99 of the Gujarat Municipal Act, 1963 was payable on those cloth pieces. The Gujara

AJIT SINGH JANUJA AND OTHERSversusSTATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS

1996 INSC 3421 March 1996Disposed off

The petitioners, employees of the Punjab Civil Secretariat, challenged the State's reservation policy, arguing that members of Scheduled Castes (SC) and Backward Classes (BC) who had been promoted under the roster system were being given undue advantage in subsequent promotions against general‑category posts due to the

M/S. REAL FOOD PRODUCTS LTD. AND ORS. ETC. ETC.versusA.P. STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD AND ORS.

1995 INSC 1491 March 1995Dismissed

The appellants, high‑tension electricity consumers including Real Food Products Ltd., challenged the Andhra Pradesh State Electricity Board’s tariff revisions, arguing that the board’s imposition of a fuel‑adjustment cost only on high‑tension users and the flat‑rate concession for agricultural pump sets violated Articl

STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESHversusP.V. PAVITHRAN

1990 INSC 691 March 1990Dismissed

The State of Andhra Pradesh filed a criminal appeal against the quashing of an FIR registered against IPS officer P.V. Pavithran under the Prevention of Corruption Act. The FIR was lodged on 8 March 1984, but the investigation report was filed only on 17 September 1987, leading the respondent to seek quashing of the FI

C.D. AILAWADIversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

1990 INSC 671 March 1990Dismissed

C.D. Ailawadi, an Audit Officer in the Defence Services, challenged his compulsory retirement order issued under rule 56(j)(i) of the Civil Services Fundamental Rules, claiming he had an unblemished record and that no review had been conducted six months before he turned 50 or completed thirty years of service, entitli

BIHAR STATE HARIJAN KALYAN PARISHADversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

1985 INSC 451 March 1985Case Allowed

The Bihar State Harijan Kalyan Parishad filed a writ petition challenging two letters—one from the Ministry of Steel and Mines and another from the Steel Authority of India Ltd.—which denied reservation for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in promotions by selection to Group ‘A’ posts with a salary ceiling of Rs.

STATE OF ORISSA & OTHERSversusTHE TITAGHUR PAPER MILLS COMPANY LTD. & ANR.

1985 INSC 431 March 1985Disposed off

The State of Orissa issued notifications under the Orissa Sales Tax Act, 1947, imposing a 10% purchase tax on bamboos and standing trees agreed to be severed. Petitioners challenged the validity of these notifications, arguing that the transactions were not sales of goods, that the tax amounted to double taxation, and

COL. D.D. JOSHI AND OTHERSversusUNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

1983 INSC 171 March 1983Dismissed

The petitioners, commissioned officers of the Army Medical Corps, challenged Army Instruction No. 78/78 which limited the enlarged period of ante‑dating of commission to officers commissioned on or after 1 April 1978, alleging discrimination violating Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution. The Court examined the langu

SUSHIL KUMAR PANDEY & ORS.versusHIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND & ANR.

2024 INSC 971 February 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined the selection process for District Judge posts in Jharkhand where the High Court, via a Full Court resolution, introduced a 50% aggregate marks requirement after candidates' performances were already assessed. Petitioners challenged this alteration, arguing it violated the 2001 Rules, the 201

ASHARFI DEVI (D) THR. LRS.versusSTATE OF U.P. & ORS.

2019 INSC 1241 February 2019Dismissed

The original appellant, owner of land subject to the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976, claimed that ceiling proceedings became void after the Act was repealed in 1999 and filed a writ petition in 2002. The Allahabad High Court dismissed the writ on 14 March 2008, finding the appellant could not prove posse

BITHIKA MAZUMDAR AND ANR.versusSAGAR PAL AND ORS.

2017 INSC 951 February 2017Disposed off

Gautam Mazumdar died in a road accident in 2007, and his widow and minor daughter filed a compensation claim before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (MACT). MACT dismissed the claim for lack of territorial jurisdiction and the review petition was also dismissed. The appellants then filed a petition under Article 227

IMTIYAZ AHMADversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ORS.

2012 INSC 671 February 2012Hearing Adjourned

The Supreme Court examined a batch of interlocutory orders by the Allahabad High Court that stayed criminal investigations and trials, resulting in cases remaining pending for years, some up to three decades. The Court held that while High Courts have the power under Article 226 and Section 482 of the CrPC to stay proc

STATE OF PUNJABversusDALBIR SINGH

2012 INSC 661 February 2012Dismissed

The State of Punjab appealed the acquittal of CRPF constable Dalbir Singh, who had been charged under Sections 302, 307 IPC and Section 27 of the Arms Act for firing a self‑loading rifle that resulted in the death of a senior officer. The High Court acquitted him on the basis of irreconcilable inconsistencies in the pr

UNION OF INDIAversusR.K. CHOPRA

2010 INSC 731 February 2010Appeal(s) allowed

R.K. Chopra, a Desk Officer, was suspended from service in 1989 and remained under suspension when the Central Civil Services (Revision Pay) Rules, 1997 came into force on 1 January 1996. He claimed entitlement to a revised subsistence allowance based on the new pay scale, filing representations which were rejected, an

RAMESH KUMARversusHIGH COURT OF DELHI & ANR.

2010 INSC 711 February 2010Appeal(s) allowed

The Delhi High Court advertised 20 District Judge vacancies, reserving three for Scheduled Castes. Two SC candidates, Ramesh Kumar and Desh Raj Chalia, cleared the written test but were deemed unsuitable because they failed to obtain the prescribed minimum marks in the interview. They filed writ petitions under Article

ASHFAQ KHAN AND ANR.versusSTATE OF U.P. AND ORS.

2008 INSC 1291 February 2008Case Allowed

The appellants filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution seeking quashment of an FIR alleging offences under Sections 420 and 424 of the IPC and Sections 2 and 3 of the Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti‑Social Activities (Prevention) Act. The Allahabad High Court dismissed the petition, relying on a ba

J.K. SYNTHETICS LTD.versusK.P. AGRAWAL AND ANR.

2007 INSC 911 February 2007Appeal(s) allowed

J.K. Synthetics Ltd. dismissed employee K.P. Agrawal for misconduct after an inquiry that found all charges proved. The Labour Court later held the inquiry unfair, found only one charge proved, and substituted dismissal with a lesser punishment of withholding two annual increments, also adding a paragraph granting back

DEEPAK KUMARversusRAVI VIRMANI AND ANR.

2002 INSC 601 February 2002Case Partly allowed

The Supreme Court examined the murder of four family members allegedly committed by Ravi Virmani, who was convicted and sentenced to death by the Sessions Court and later to life imprisonment by the High Court. The prosecution's case relied mainly on the testimony of the two surviving brothers, without any independent

BOSE ABRAHAM ETC.versusSTATE OF KERALA AND ANR.

2001 INSC 641 February 2001Dismissed

The Kerala Tax on Entry of Motor Vehicles into Local Areas Act imposes a tax on any motor vehicle that enters a local area for use or sale and is liable for registration under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. Petitioners Bose Abraham and others challenged the tax's applicability to excavators and road rollers, arguing tha

THE GENERAL MANAGER, TELEPHONES, ABMEDABAD AND ORS.versusV.G. DESAI AND ANR.

1996 INSC 1601 February 1996Appeal(s) allowed

V.G. Desai, a former telephone operator, sought retirement on medical grounds and the release of his General Provident Fund (GPF). The Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) ordered payment of GPF, leave salary and interest from 20 April 1972 but denied pension, later directing that he be treated as retired on 1 June 19

STATE OF M.P.versusMAHALAXMI FABRIC MILLS LTD. AND ORS.

1995 INSC 891 February 1995Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined petitions by the State of Madhya Pradesh and the Union of India challenging a 1991 notification that raised royalty rates on coal under Section 9(3) of the Mines and Minerals (Regulation and Development) Act, 1957. The petitioners argued that Section 9(3) was an unconstitutional delegation of

P. S. R. SADHANANTHAMversusARUNACHALAM & AIIR.

1980 INSC 161 February 1980Dismissed

The accused, S. R. Sadhanantham, was acquitted by the Madras High Court of murder (s.302 IPC) and assault (s.148 IPC). The victim's brother, Arunachalam, filed a special leave petition under Article 136 of the Constitution, obtained leave, and the Supreme Court set aside the acquittal, restoring conviction and life sen

P. N. ESWARA IYERversusTHE REGISTRAR, SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

1980 INSC 171 February 1980Dismissed

The petitioners challenged the amendment to Order XL, Rule 3 of the Supreme Court Rules, which allows review petitions to be disposed of by circulation without oral arguments, alleging violations of Articles 14, 19, 21 and the right to a public hearing under Article 32. The Court examined whether the rule was ultra vir

KIM WANSOOversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ORS.

2025 INSC 81 January 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a foreign national serving as Project Manager for Hyundai Engineering & Construction India LLP, was named in FIR No.64/2020 alleging conspiracy and cheating in a Rs 9‑crore payment default involving multiple subcontractors. The appellant sought quashing of the FIR on the ground that the allegations were

B.N. JOHNversusSTATE OF U.P. & ANR.

2025 INSC 41 January 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, B.N. John, owned a hostel for underprivileged children and alleged that officials raided it illegally on 3 June 2015, falsely accusing him of assaulting them. An FIR was lodged under IPC s.353, and a charge‑sheet later added s.186, leading the Chief Judicial Magistrate (CJM) to take cognizance and issue

BERNARD FRANCIS JOSEPH VAZ AND OTHERSversusGOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA AND OTHERS

2025 INSC 31 January 2025Disposed off

The appellants purchased residential plots in Bengaluru between 1995 and 1997, which were later acquired by the Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Board (KIADB) under a preliminary notification dated 29 January 2003. Although possession was taken in 2005, no compensation award was made until a Special Land Acquisit

KRISHNA KUMAR SINGH & ANRversusSTATE OF BIHAR & ORS.

2017 INSC 11 January 2017Reference answered

The Supreme Court examined a series of seven ordinances issued by the Governor of Bihar between 1989 and 1992 to take over non‑government Sanskrit schools. None of the ordinances were laid before the state legislature as required by Article 213(2) and they were repeatedly re‑promulgated, violating the precedent set in

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