Writs, appeals and the Supreme Court's powers
Articles 32, 136, 141, 142 and 226 in action.
15 of the 73 judgments in our library on this topic: the ones other judgments here cite most, oldest first.
0 of 15 read
Start: Romesh Thappar v. State of MadrasYour progress is kept in this browser. Sign in to keep it on every device and count it in your reading streak.
26 May 1950 · 6 judges · cited by 5 judgments in this library
Romesh Thappar v. State of MadrasThe Court held Section 9(1-A) of the Madras Maintenance of Public Order Act, 1949 wholly void under Article 19(2) and quashed the Madras Government's ban on the entry and circulation of the weekly Cross Roads.
On this path for: Article 32, Constitution
6 November 1962 · 5 judges · cited by 3 judgments in this library
Prem Chand Garg v. Excise Commissioner, U.P.Rule 12 of Order XXXV of the Supreme Court Rules, so far as it allowed the Court to demand security for the respondent's costs in Article 32 petitions, was invalid as it impaired the right to move the Court.
On this path for: Article 32, Constitution; Article 142(1), Constitution
18 December 1962 · 6 judges · cited by 6 judgments in this library
Kharak Singh v. State of Uttar PradeshThe Court struck down the provision for night-time domiciliary visits in the U.P. Police Regulations as violating personal liberty under Article 21, but held that the other forms of police surveillance infringed no fundamental right.
On this path for: Article 32, Constitution
10 February 1970 · 11 judges · cited by 4 judgments in this library
Rustom Cavasjee Cooper v. Union of IndiaThe majority struck down the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1969, which nationalised 14 banks, for hostile discrimination, unreasonable restriction on business and failure to provide compensation under Article 31(2) on relevant principles.
On this path for: Article 32, Constitution
23 November 1973 · 5 judges · cited by 4 judgments in this library
E.P. Royappa v. State of Tamil NaduThe Court dismissed an IAS officer's challenge to his transfer from the post of Chief Secretary, Tamil Nadu; the three-judge opinion held that Articles 14 and 16 strike at arbitrariness, but arbitrariness and mala fides were not proved.
On this path for: Article 32, Constitution
2 December 1977 · 5 judges · cited by 2 judgments in this library
Mohinder Singh Gill v. Chief Election CommissionerThe Court held that a writ petition under Article 226 challenging the Election Commission's cancellation of a poll and order for a fresh poll was barred by Article 329(b), leaving every relief to be sought in an election petition.
On this path for: Article 226, Constitution
31 July 1980 · 5 judges · cited by 2 judgments in this library
Minerva Mills Ltd. v. Union of IndiaThe Court struck down Sections 4 and 55 of the Constitution (42nd Amendment) Act, 1976, holding that a limited amending power, judicial review and the balance between Fundamental Rights and Directive Principles are parts of the basic structure.
On this path for: Article 32, Constitution
3 October 1991 · 5 judges · cited by 2 judgments in this library
Union Carbide Corporation v. Union of IndiaOn review, the Court upheld the US $470 million Bhopal settlement and its Article 142 power to record it, but revived the quashed criminal proceedings and declared the Union of India liable to meet any shortfall in the fund.
On this path for: Article 142(1), Constitution; Article 136, Constitution
18 February 1992 · 5 judges · cited by 4 judgments in this library
Kihoto Hollohan v. ZachillhuThe majority upheld the Tenth Schedule (anti-defection law) except Paragraph 7, which was invalid for want of ratification and severable; Speakers' disqualification decisions are subject to limited judicial review.
On this path for: Article 136, Constitution; Articles 226 and 227, Constitution
24 March 1993 · 3 judges · cited by 3 judgments in this library
Nilabati Behera v. State of OrissaCompensation under Articles 32 and 226 for violation of fundamental rights is a public law remedy based on strict liability, to which sovereign immunity does not apply; Orissa was ordered to pay Rs. 1,50,000 for a custodial death.
On this path for: Article 32, Constitution; Article 226, Constitution; Article 142, Constitution
13 August 1997 · 3 judges · cited by 3 judgments in this library
Vishaka v. State of RajasthanIn the absence of legislation, the Court laid down binding guidelines and norms to prevent sexual harassment of women at all work places, reading international conventions such as CEDAW into Articles 14, 15, 19(1)(g) and 21.
On this path for: Article 32, Constitution; Article 141, Constitution
17 April 1998 · 5 judges · cited by 3 judgments in this library
Supreme Court Bar Association v. Union of IndiaWhile punishing an advocate for contempt under Articles 129 and 142, the Supreme Court cannot also suspend his licence to practise, a power vested in the Bar Councils; In Re: Vinay Chandra Mishra was overruled to that extent.
On this path for: Article 142, Constitution
14 August 2003 · 5 judges · cited by 2 judgments in this library
Islamic Academy of Education v. State of KarnatakaClarifying T.M.A. Pai, the majority held that unaided professional colleges may fix their own fees subject to no profiteering or capitation fee, and directed State committees under Article 142 to approve fees and supervise admission tests.
On this path for: Article 142, Constitution
12 August 2005 · 7 judges · cited by 1 judgment in this library
P.A. Inamdar v. State of MaharashtraThe State cannot appropriate seats or enforce its reservation policy in unaided minority or non-minority institutions; such institutions may set their own fair, transparent, merit-based admissions and non-profiteering fees, subject to regulation including the Islamic Academy committees.
On this path for: Article 142, Constitution
1 May 2023 · 5 judges · cited by 2 judgments in this library
Shilpa Sailesh v. Varun SreenivasanThe Supreme Court can, under Article 142(1), waive the six-month period under Section 13-B(2) of the Hindu Marriage Act on a settlement, and can dissolve a marriage that has irretrievably broken down even if one spouse opposes.
On this path for: Article 142, Constitution; Article 32, Constitution
Test yourself: 170 practice questions on landmark judgments, with explanations.