Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News
The Court stated that the writ of habeas corpus was the most powerful safeguard against arbitrary acts of the executive, or even of private individuals, transgressing personal liberty.
“The writ Court is not required to find fault of the authorities with a magnifying glass rather the Court should examine the decision-making process and also leave room for interpretation of the contract by the authorities.”
The Court awarded an interim compensation amounting 5 lakhs rupees to the petitioner on account of death of the petitioner son due to contributory negligence by the petitioner and the respondent-department.
Calcutta High Court held that the appellant lacked locus standi of collective bodies to bring proceedings as the appellants don’t have legal personality or individual rights.
Calcutta High Court opined that the “allegations of encroachment are essentially a title dispute which is beyond the jurisdiction of a Writ Court.”
The Petitioner is an Arjuna Awardee and is a Commonwealth and Asian Games medalist swimmer and was also appointed swimming team coach for the 2016 Rio Paralympic Games who was suspended from participating and being sponsored in any sports event organized by Paralympic Committee of India for three years.
Supreme Court: The bench of Hemant Gupta and V. Ramasubramanian*, JJ has lucidly explained the law on the jurisdiction in case of
Madras High Court: Sanjib Banerjee, J., addressed whether this Court is the appropriate forum to decide the quantum that can be forfeited
“It is said that none can see time, but many a time, time makes us see many things hitherto before unseen. So true.”
─ Bombay High Court
Karnataka High Court: Krishna S. Dixit, J. dismissed the petition being devoid of merits. Background The facts of the case are such
Court of Appeal of the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka: A Division Bench of Mahinda Samayawardhena and Arjuna Obeyesekere, JJ., while
Orissa High Court: Biswanath Rath, J. dismissed the writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India seeking the
Jammu & Kashmir High Court: A Division Bench of Ali Mohammad Magrey and Dhiraj Singh Thakur, JJ. disposed of the appeal after
Jammu and Kashmir High Court: Dismissing a writ petition filed by the kin of former Chief Minister Farooq Abdullah, a bench comprising
Patna High Court: Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J. disposed of the writ petition saying that the petitioner should approach the appropriate forum, in accordance
Kerala High Court: The Division Bench of V. Chitambaresh and A.M. Babu, JJ. dismissed an appeal challenging the learned Single Judge’s order
Karnataka High Court: The Single Judge Bench of S. Sujatha, J. dismissed a petition challenging the decision of Returning Officer of Kadaragundi
Kerala High Court: A Division Bench comprising of P.R. Ramachandra Menon and N. Anil Kumar, JJ. dismissed a petition seeing mandamus for
Jammu and Kashmir High Court: The Division Bench of Dhiraj Singh Thakur and Sindhu Sharma, JJ. dismissed an order passed by the
Jammu & Kashmir High Court: A Division Bench comprising of Dhiraj Singh Thakur and Sindhu Sharma, JJ. ruled that a joint reading