The Supreme Court has set aside the verdict of Bombay High Court and explained that the lower court’s interpretation of the law regarding fixing minimum standards for re-inspection of medical colleges is incorrect and misinformed. In its judgment on June 1, 2018, the top court remarked: “the interpretation of Regulation
Supreme Court chastised Centre and State governments for the delay in payment of workers’ wages under Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA), 2005 declaring that such cavalier attitude and callousness is “simply not acceptable”. The Apex Court held “one entity cannot pass on the burden to another or
Supreme Court in its June 5, 2018 verdict allowed the Centre to continue with reservations in promotions at government jobs for SC/ST candidates. The Court further remarked that until the Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court finally disposed of the matter about reservations the government is allowed to follow the
Kerala High Court in its judgment gave validity to live-in relationships when it decided that couples who have attained majority cannot be separated from each other through the use of writs just because they are in a live-in relationship. The changing Indian society is always reflected in the landmark verdicts
Supreme Court on Monday, 21 May 2018 showed its disappointment over the delaying tactics of the social media giants such as Google, Facebook and Microsoft being unable to take any concrete measures in preventing the usage of the social media platforms to upload videos of child porn, gang rapes and
Kerala High Court on Wednesday, May 16, 2018, ruled in favour of the petitioner stating that talking on mobile phone while driving is not illegal under Kerala Police Act, Section 118(e). If such a behaviour needs to be condemned then such statutory provisions should be enacted by the Kerala Legislative
After presidential assent on May 3, 2018 the amended Commercial Courts, Commercial Division and Commercial Appellate Division of High Courts Act, 2015 came into force with a view to increase efficiency in the resolution of commercial disputes and subsequently improving India’s ranking on the Ease of Doing Business index in
Supreme Court on Tuesday 15 May 2018 held Punjab Tourism Minister Navjot Singh Sidhu guilty in a 1988 road rage case. The cricketer-turned-politician was convicted under Section 323 IPC (punishment for voluntarily causing hurt) which entails a maximum prison sentence for up to one year or with a fine which
Supreme Court on Monday, 7th April has ruled that ex-Chief Ministers are not allowed to stay in government bungalows and the amended Uttar Pradesh (UP) state law [UP Ministers (salaries, allowances & miscellaneous provisions) Act, 2016] was declared, “a legislative exercise based on irrelevant and legally unacceptable considerations, unsupported by
A number of cases under Negotiable Instruments (NI) Act, 1881 came up for review with Calcutta High Court to determine whether compliance with Section 202 CrPC is mandatory in cases of dishonour of cheques. It was decided that it is not necessary to comply with Section 202 CrPC in such
Subscribe to our newsletter and receive a curated selection of legal updates directly to your inbox.
