Use LEFT and RIGHT arrow keys to navigate between flashcards;
Use UP and DOWN arrow keys to flip the card;
H to show hint;
A reads text to speech;
68 Cards in this Set
- Front
- Back
|
Electricity Board, Rajasthan v Mohan Lal AIR 1967 SC 1857 (6)
|
foreman, provisional placement, unframed grades, reversion, promotion, trade or business, rule-making power
|
|
|
Sukhdev v Bhagatram AIR 1975 SC 1331 (5)
|
ONGC/IFC/LIC, statutory corporation, agency/instrument, pervasive control, rule-making power |
|
|
R.D. Shetty v Airport Authority AIR 1979 SC 1628 (3)
|
Bombay airpt. restaurant tenders, unequal opportunity, govt. held- agency/instrument |
|
|
Som Prakash v Union of India AIR 1981 SC 212
|
(1) Burmah Shell acquired through Act, converted to Bharat Petroleum (2) Petition by employee for seniority (3) Held BP Corp = other authority |
|
|
Ajay Hasia v Khalid Mujib - parameters (1 + 5)
|
(1) arbitrary Srinagar engg. college entrance (2) registered society - managed college = other authority parameters (1) capital/financial assistance (2) conferred monopoly (3) control (4) public good (5) deptt.. converted to corp. |
|
|
Pradeep Kumar Biswas v Indian Institute of Chemical Biology (2002) 5 SCC 111
|
(1) not all govt.-associated registered societies are 'State' (2) reviewed sabhajit tewary (CSIR not state) (3) held, applying hasia tests, CSIR not an authority |
|
|
Zee Telefims v UOI (2005) 4 SCC 649
|
BCCI terminated TV rights K apply Ajay Hasia - no delegation/ctrl./money BUT discharges public function held not agency/instrument - mere regulatory control |
|
|
Rupa Ashok Hurra v Ashok Hurra (2002) 3 SCC 388
|
(1) mutual consent divorce review (2) after SC dismisses review petn., curative petition can only be admitted when natural justice is violated/judges' bias proven (3) courts != state u/art. 12 (4) no art. 32 w. p. due from courts violating FRs |
|
|
Keshavan Madhava Menon v State of Bombay AIR 1951 SC 128 (4)
|
(1) pamphlet = news sheet published w/o authority (2) const. enacted during pendency (3) general clauses s. 6 - proceedings preserved despite repeal (4) no RETROSPECTIVE effect => no wipeout |
|
|
State of Bombay v F.N. Balsara AIR 1951 SC 318 (4)
|
prohibition act, scope of powers, pith and substance, severable when (1) legislative intent (2) no change to nature/structure (3) no single scheme broken (4) valid part enforceable |
|
|
Bhikaji Narain Dhakras v State of M.P. AIR 1955 SC 781 (4)
|
govt. transport monopoly law + notification, first amendment validation, eclipse only for pre-const. law |
|
|
State of Gujarat v Ambica Mills (1974) 4 SCC 656 [3]
|
(1) laws violating FRs still apply to non-citizens w/ (2) law violating individual/group rts valid against others/outsiders (3) rule of eclipse applies to post constnl. laws - art 31B/9th Schedule |
|
|
Basheshar Nath v CIT AIR 1959 SC 149 (3)
|
(1) tax fraud investigated under s. 5(1) IT (investigation comm. Act), settled under s. 8-A (2) former section voided (3) no WAIVER of rights - no obligation under settlement after section made invalid |
|
|
Shankari Prasad v UOI AIR 1951 SC 458 (3)
|
zamindari abolition acts, 31A/B inserted, legislative v. constituent power, amendments != laws |
|
|
Sajjan Singh v State of Rajasthan AIR 1965 SC 845 (3)
|
17th am., 9th Schedule shield, Hidayatullah/Mudholkar dissents against Shankari Prasad |
|
|
Golak Nath v State of Punjab AIR 1967 SC 1643 (4)
|
30 acre land ceiling in Punjab, 500-acre estate, 9th Schedule shield, permanency/immutability of FRs, amendments = laws |
|
|
Kesavananda Bharati v State of Kerala (1973) 4 SCC 225
|
govt.-court tussle, math land acquired, 9th Schedule shield (29th am.), amendments != laws, basic features immutable |
|
|
State of West Bengal v Anwar Ali Sarkar (AIR 1952 SC 75)
|
(1) govt. empowered to direct specific 'cases' to be speedily tried by special court
(2) no guidelines (3) differentia and object cannot be same |
|
|
Kathi Raning Rawat v Saurashtra (AIR 1952 SC 123)
|
s.11 state ordinance, special court, class of offenses, special circumstances (riots) - valid classification |
|
|
Northern India Caterers v Punjab (AIR 1967 SC 1581) [5]
|
(1) punjab speedy eviction act (2) valid distinction - public v. private property occupiers (3) supplemental, not substituting act (4) invalid distinction - govt. option to sue some u/CPC, others under eviction act (5) void section |
|
|
Maganlal Chhaganlal Ltd. V Municipal Corporation of Greater Bombay (1974) 2 SCC 402 [5]
|
(1) speedy eviction from mun. corporation/govt. premises - validity (2) delegated classification - void w/o guidance (3) implicit guidance - preamble/affidavits etc. (4) two procedures - speedier one will always preferred => no discrimination (5) NI Caterers overruled |
|
|
Maneka Gandhi v. U. o. I. |
impounded passport, reasons withheld, public interest, inquiry commission, arbitrariness |
|
|
Kedar Nath Bajoria v State of West Bengal (AIR 1953 SC 404)
|
(1) special courts for enumerated offences, as referred by the govt. (2) post Ind-Pak war - businessmen + public servants cheated the govt. (3) sufficient guidance for executive classification |
|
|
Pradeep Jain v UOI (1984) 3 SCC 654
|
(1) residence/domicile reqmt. - medical colleges, (2) invalid - national unity (3) exceptional cases (70%), (4) postgrad - same instn./local |
|
|
State of Kerala v N.M. Thomas (1976) 2 SCC 310 (4)
|
(1) scheduled clerks given 2 more years to pass promotion tests (2) 16(4) not an exception to 'equal opportunity' (3) efficiency not compromised
(4) meets art. 14 reqmt. |
|
|
Indra Sawhney v UOI AIR 1993 SC 477 (5)
|
(1) clause 4 not exception - exhausts reservn. for backwards (2) reservation for non-backwards under clause 1 (3) no reserved promotion (4) caste only indicates class (5) creamy layer excluded |
|
|
M. Nagaraj v UOI (2006) 8 SCC 212 - (4)
|
(1) 4a + b + 335 proviso = reserved promotion, carry forward, lower marks (2) basic structure unchanged (a) for scheduled people (b) creamy layer/50% limit (3) show reasons (backward/unrepresentative) + avoid excess (4) two year carry-forward limit |
|
|
Ashoka Kumar Thakur v UOI (2008) 6 SCC 1 - (4)
|
(1) art. 15(5) [education] doesn't alter B. S. or contradict cl. 4 (2) exclude creamy layer from OBCs not SCs/STs (3) no decision on pvt. unaided (4) fix cut-offs for OBCs |
|
|
E.V. Chinnaiah Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh and Ors AIR 2005 SC 162 - (3)
|
(1) AP SC Act - sub-classified SCs - proportionate reservation allotted (2) held - states can't modify president's list - only parliament competent (3) listed groups are homogenously backward |
|
|
U.P Power Corporation Ltd. v. Rajesh Kumar (2012) 7 SCC 1 (3)
|
(1) up rule - scheduled person promoted early is senior to later promotees (2) nagraj applied - consequential seniority valid under 4a/b (3) compelling reasons/data required to prove intra vires |
|
|
Anuj Garg vs. Hotel Association of India, AIR 2008 SC 663
|
(1) s. 30, PEA: women & u-25s couldn't work in liquor serving estb. (2) changed circumstances + duty to ensure women's safety (3) pro-women measures must resonate w/ other rights |
|
|
Bennett Coleman v UOI (AIR 1973 SC 106)
|
newsprint import policy (1) no new paper (2) 10 page max - no circulation adjustment (3) no interchange w/ same unit papers (4) paper <10 pgs can increase by 20%. holding (1) direct effect - content curtailed - void (2) mathew dissent - speech v freedom |
|
|
Secy., Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, Government of India v Cricket Association of Bengal (1995) 2 SCC 161
|
(1) telecasting via foreign satellite (2) uplinking perm. denied - limited resrc. (3) right to telecast - receiver's rt. to entertainment (4) judicious airwave allocation (5) pre-censorship/inherent limitation (6) no state/pvt. monopoly - establish ind. auth. |
|
|
Virendra v State of Punjab AIR 1957 SC 896.
|
(1) successful punjab partn. agitation - communal tension (2) spl. powers act - "save hindi agitation" matter prohibited, no entry into Punjab (3) "interest of public order" restriction - reasonable and valid (4) officer's satisfaction |
|
|
Sakal Papers (P) Ltd. V Union of India (AIR 1962 SC 305)
|
price and page act, regulating (1) no. of pages by price (2) size/area of ads (3) supplements held void (1) intent to regulate biz. irrelevant (2) direct effect - upsetting publisher's plan - forced price adj. OR content curtailed |
|
|
Romesh Thappar v UOI AIR 1950 SC 124.
|
(1) cross-roads mag banned in Madras (2) pre-amendment 19 (2) - no 'public order' exception (3) law authorizing unreasonable restrn. NOT severable |
|
|
S. Rangarajan vs. Jagjivan Ram (1989) 2 SCC 574 (5)
|
(1) anti caste-reservation film (2) u certificate revoked by HC after revising committee OK (3) greater impact of films - time-bound pre-censorship required (4) proper certification/commitee/guidelines followed (5) no immediate danger to pub. order |
|
|
Ramji Lal Modi v. State of UP, AIR 1957 SC 620
|
(1) gaurakshak article - 295a charge - 2nd appeal (2) 295a is valid (3) "deliberate/malicious intent" safeguard (4) interests of public order |
|
|
Kedarnath Singh vs State of Bihar, AIR 1962 SC 955
|
(1) armed revolution speeches (2) 124a is valid (3) interpretation conflict resolved - intention/tendency to disturb public order is essential (4) presumption of constitutionality |
|
|
Mithu v State of Punjab (1983) 2 SCC 277
|
(1) s. 303 - death sentence for murder by life convict - (2) substantive due process - arbitrary/unreasonable law (3) unanimously struck down |
|
|
Vishakha v. State of Rajasthan 1997 (7) SC 384
|
acquittal in rape case of state employee (anti-child marriage worker) right to safe workplace - directions for SHW issued - in force until law enacted |
|
|
Suresh Kaushal v Naz Foundation (2014) 1 SCC 1
|
(1) s. 377 - validity (2) valid w. r. t. art. 14/19/21 [haha, no point] |
|
|
Society for Unaided Private Schools of Rajasthan v Union of India (2012) 6 SCC 1
|
(1) RTE act - vires (2) upheld application to all schools excluding unaided minority schools |
|
|
Pramati Educational & Cultural trust vs Union of India (2014) 8 SCC 1 (2)
|
.(1) RTE act reasonably restricts 19(1)(g) wrt pvt. unaided schools (2) minority rt. to establish continues despite 21A |
|
|
Kharak Singh v State of U.P. AIR 1963 SC 1295 (4)
|
(1) chap. XX, up police rules (2) "history sheeter" surveillance - picketing, night visits, inquiries (3) domiciliary visits provision voided (4) subbarao dissent - privacy rt. |
|
|
Sunil Batra v Delhi Administration (1978) 4 SCC 494
|
(1) solitary confinement/bar fetters under prisons act - validity (2) solitary upheld in final death penalty case - appellant released (3) directions for fetters: shortest period, for recorded reasons (4) iyer adopts substantive due process |
|
|
Olga Tellis v Bombay Municipal Corporation AIR 1986 SC 180).
|
(1) pavement dwellers evicted w/o notice
(2) right to livelihood, subject to legality/morality/public interest (3) enabling provision not ultra vires (4) notice served through proceedings - eviction delayed |
|
|
Francis Coralie Mullin v Union Territory of Delhi (AIR 1981 SC 746)
|
(1) detenu under COFEPOSA (2) right to consult legal advisor for purpose unconnected with cr. proceeding (3) interviews with friends/family - included under procedural due process |
|
|
Bandhua Mukti Morcha v UOI (AIR 1984 SC 802)
|
(1) stone quarry bonded laborers - ID/release/rehab (2) no improvement despite directions/inquiries (3) adversarial procedure inapplicable to PILs - power imbalance b/w parties (4) continuing mandamus - monitor govt. activity |
|
|
Paschim Banga Khet Majdoor Samity v State of West Bengal (1996) 4 SCC 37.
|
(1) samity member injured in train accident (2) no emergency treatment at 7 state hospitals - inadequate resources (3) implied right to 'preservation' of life -> healthcare (4) compensation awarded for pvt. hospital expenses |
|
|
Seshammal v State of Tamil Nadu (1972) 2 SCC 11
|
(1) amendment to TN endowment act upheld (2) no hereditary archakas - state can prescribe qualifications (3) appointment is secular act (4) trustee bound to follow usage OR trust terms |
|
|
N. Adithayan v Travancore Devasvom Board (2002) 8 SCC 106
|
(1) respondent statutory body created scheme to train students in mantras/tantras w/o considering caste (2) non-malayala OR non-brahmin persons appointed santhikaran (3) pre-constitutional custom against FRs invalid - art. 26 claim dismissed |
|
|
Commr. Of Police v Acharya Jagadishwarananda Avadhuta (2004) 12 SCC 770
|
(1) tandava dance essential for ananda margis (2) public procession infrequent, no real danger (3) commissioner can specify routes and times (4) procession protected u/25&26 but regulated |
|
|
Bijoe Emmanuel v State of Kerala (1986) 3 SCC 615
|
(1) jehovah's witness children expelled for not singing national anthem (2) tenet - pol. authority is evil (3) no offence u/insult to nat'l honour act (4) expulsion by deptt. notice invalid (5) right to silence - 19 (1) (a) |
|
|
Rev. Stanislaus v State of M.P. AIR 1977 SC 908
|
(1) anti-forced conversion act upheld (2) no right to convert - only to exposit (3) freedom of conscience (4) no regulation of religion |
|
|
S.R. Bommai v UOI AIR 1994 SC 1918
|
(1) dismissal of 3 BJP govts. post-babri upheld (2) BJP manifesto, ideology, support for demolition (3) art. 356 - violating secularism sufficient ground to declare emergency |
|
|
Ismail Faruqui v UOI AIR 1995 SC 605
|
(1) acquisition of ayodhya land upheld (2) worshipping at a mosque NOT essential to islam - namaz can be offered anywhere (3) mosque can come under adverse possession (4) abatement of suits invalid |
|
|
Vishwa Lochan Madan vs Union of India (2014) 7 SCC 707
|
(1) dar-ul qazas - training qazis/muftis (2) rape fatwas - (marriage dissolved/witness required) - legal status (3) no fatwa without consent (4) no binding effect even on consenting person - enforcement illegal |
|
|
T.M.A. Pai Foundation v State of Karnataka AIR 2003 SC 355
|
(1) minorities determined statewise (2) unaided: max autonomy, BUT transparent/merit-based admissions and NO capitation fee (3) aided: CAN regulate teacher's quals, service condns. + require admission of all (4) aiding authority can prescribe by-rules/regulations |
|
|
Islamic Academy of Education v State of Karnataka AIR 2003 SC 3724 |
(1) autonomously set fee structures to be vetted by appointed committee
(2) minority rt. absolute - will continue even if edn. is nationalised
(3) reservation
(a) unaided general: mgmt. can reserve some seats, others filled up by state agency
(b) unaided: NEVER 100% - adj. for local needs |
|
|
P.A. Inamdar v State of Maharastra AIR 2005 SC 3236 |
PRE 15 (5) (1) NO reservation (lower marks etc.) in pvt. prof. non-minority - OPTION for the institution
(2) if pvt. entrance test/procedure is unfair/not transparent, CAN introduce central entrance test |
|
|
Art. 20 |
(1) no retrospective criminal legislation (2) double jeopardy (3) compulsion to be a witness against self |
|
|
Art. 22 (1 - 3) |
(1) grounds communicated (2) lawyer (3) present before Mag. in 24h (4) no custody beyond 24h w/o magisrate's authority |
|
|
Art 22 (4-7) |
preventive detention (1) not > 3 months, unless Advisory Boards says OR under Parliament's law (2) grounds communicated ASAP + representation (3) parliament's powers - which cases, how long, AB's procedure |
|
|
A. K. Roy v. UOI |
. |
|
|
D. K. Basu v State of West Bengal |
. |
|
|
PUCL v UOI (POTA) |
. |
|
|
Selvi v. State of Karnataka |
. |
