CONSTITUTION AND LAW

Supreme Court Writ Law Digest

  • Apex Court is in favour of disclosing marks of Main Exam before conducting viva-voce in Judicial Services-13/12/2019 - Pranav Verma & Others Vs. The Registrar General of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh & anr-As regards the petitioners' plea that marks of the Main Exam should be disclosed before conducting viva-voce, we are of the considered opinion that such a practice may not insulate the desired transparency, rather will invite criticism of likelihood of bias or favourtism.As the written examination assesses knowledge and intellectual abilities of a candidate, the interview is aimed at assessing their overall intellectual and personal qualities which are imperative to hold a judicial post.
  • BENEDICT DENIS KINNY  VS TULIP BRIAN MIRANDA & ORS-19/03/2020 - ARTICLE 226 OF CONSTITUTION-When a citizen has right to judicial review against any decision of statutory authority, the High Court in exercise of judicial review had every jurisdiction to maintain the status quo so as to by lapse of time, the petition may not be infructuous.
  • DR. SHAH FAESAL AND ORS.  VS UNION OF INDIA AND ANR- 02/03/2020 - Supreme Court is of the opinion that there is no conflict between the judgments in the Prem Nath Kaul case (supra) and the Sampat Prakash case (supra). The plea of the counsel to refer the present matter to a larger Bench on this ground is therefore rejected
  • Keshavan Madhava Menon Vs The State of Bombay-22/01/1951 - What Art. 13(1) provides is that all existing laws which clash with the exercise of the fundamental rights (which are for the first time created by the Constitution) shall to that extent be void. As the fundamental rights became operative only on and from the date of the Constitution the question of the inconsistency of the existing laws which those rights must necessarily arise on and from the date those rights came into being.
  • MUKESH VS STATE OF NCT OF DELHI-19/03/2020 - NIRBHYA DEATH ROW ACCUSED-In this writ petition, the petitioner has raised the points on merits of the matter:- (i) That there was no proper consideration of evidence; (ii) regarding the disability of Ram Singh (accused no.1) who subsequently allegedly committed suicide in the prison; and (iii) raising doubts about the arrest of the petitioner at Karoli, Rajasthan.
  • SHRIPAL BHATI & ANR. VS STATE OF U.P. & ORS- 29/1/2020 - Locus standi to maintain writ petition-Unless injury is suffered personally a person can not be said to be aggrieved and has no locus standi.