Search Results

Saksham Sharma, 4th-year law students at Gujarat National Law University, Gandhinagar Supreme Court of India Union of India . Right to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009, implemented  Article 21A  of the Constitution of India Union of India  (2012). Union of India  (2014).

Union of India[5] to be essentially procedural, and any infringement of them, as a procedural irregularity Union of India[8], the Supreme Court addressed this issue, holding that the word has a broader meaning References [1] INDIA CONST., arts. 101, 102, 190, 191 [2] G.C. Union of India, AIR 1994 SC 1558 [6] Kihoto Hollohon v. Union of India, AIR 1994 SC 1558 [9] G. Vishwanathan v.

The President of India, under Articles 341(1) and 342(1), specifies the list of the castes, race, tribes Nagraj v. Union of India[2]laid down three constitutional requirements in order to test the validity of any policy It is advocated that the relied upon judgment of Indra Sawhney v. Union of India[4] dealt with only the constitutionality of exclusion of creamy layer in OBCs only and

within the framework of the Indian Constitution. This distinction holds good even in the Indian context between fundamental rights and DPSP. Meanwhile, the Courts of India, Supreme Court, and High Courts have been interpreting Fundamental Rights Union of India. The Supreme Court in Hussainara Khatoon v.

Tribal women in India grapple with a historical injustice as tribal customary laws frequently strip them This exclusion has been officially communicated under Article 342 of the Constitution of India. ST women lack equal entitlement, evident in the All-India Report on Agricultural Census 2010-2011 , with In Kartick Oraon v. universal rights, and cultural sensitivities is crucial for improving the status of tribal women in India

Directive Principles Of State Policy Abstract In a politically charged and ever-changing society, the Indian Directive Principle of State Policy (DPSP) in Part IV and the Fundamental Rights (FR) in Part III of the Indian The Indian Constitution's framers prioritized fundamental rights over directive principles. between Fundamental Rights and Directive Principles of State Policy cases under the Constitution of India

Authored by Neha Kumari, pursuing LLM at Chanakya National Law University, Patna Introduction India's India emphasises three primary areas that will improve this structure: the allocation of authorities India's quasi-federal structure, comprising 29 states and 7 union territories, establishes three features India has always operated as a federation, with power distributed among various state governments and union governments.

The Society for Constitutional Law Discussion is organizing a workshop on “Indian Constitution in 2022 occasion of Republic Day i.e., 26th January, 2022 About the Workshop/ Concept Note The Supreme Court of India shall discuss the wider interpretation of the Constitution by the Apex Court and the relevance of the Indian Topic “Indian Constitution in 2022: Judicial Perspectives” General Details Date: January 26, 2022 Time

There was no question about their loyalty towards India. of India. In Central Bank of India v. same view was later propounded by the different High Courts , and the Apex Court in Izhar Ahmad Khan v Union of India ,  wherein it held that Rule 3 was not ultra vires of fundamental rights and that obtaining

The Preamble envisages India as a Sovereign, Socialist, Democratic, and Republic nation. Union of India[13] where the Supreme Court held that the words voluntary give up membership and resignation Vishwanathan v. Rajendra Singh Rana v. Zachilhu and Others, AIR 1993 SC 412. [13] Ravi S Naik v. Union of India, AIR 1994 SC 1558 [14] G.

right to personal liberty given to an arrested person, flowing out of Article 21 of the Constitution of India right to personal liberty given to an arrested person, flowing out of Article 21 of the Constitution of India Union of India, have ruled that the ability to be released on bond is a basic right. "In the matter of Athar Pervez v. For instance, the Supreme Court of India granted temporary release to Arvind Kejriwal during the Lok

However, this has ignited the debate over dual citizenship within the territory of India because the Thereby, in Pradeep Jain ,   the   single domicile of the citizens i.e., the domicile of India was upheld In Prashant Vidyarthi v. specifically refers to “office under the Government of, or any local or other authority within, a State or Union Suggestions and Conclusions The judgment of Punjab and Haryana High Court in IMT Industrial Association v.