Suitability of Candidate

Commissioner of Police, New Delhi v. Mehar Singh, (2013) 7 SCC 685 while considering a case of antecedents verification, for appointment into Delhi Police Service, observed, a candidate wishing to join the Police Force must be a person having impeccable character and integrity. In a case where candidates have been acquitted in a criminal case, […]

Read more "Suitability of Candidate"

Arbitrability of Fraud

“It is clear that ‘serious allegations of fraud’ arise only if either of the two tests laid down are satisfied, and not otherwise. The first test is satisfied only when it can be said that the Arbitration Clause or agreement itself cannot be said to exist in a clear case in which the Court finds […]

Read more "Arbitrability of Fraud"

No Reservations, Lebanon

A. “West German Consul said, he had received information that, similar charges had been made against Hans Muller in Lebanon and in Egypt.” – Hans Muller of Nurenburg v. Superintendent, Presidency Jail, Calcutta, AIR 1955 SC 367. B. “On 15-9-1963, he left Delhi for Beirut under the name Donze Jean Claude, a French national. It […]

Read more "No Reservations, Lebanon"

The Revival of Ray XLI

“We are reminded of the weighty observation of Justice V.R. Krishna Iyer in Pasupuleti Venkateswarlu v. The Motor & General Traders, (1975) 1 SCC 770. “We affirm the proposition that for making the right or remedy claimed by the party just and meaningful as also legally and factually in accord with the current realities, the […]

Read more "The Revival of Ray XLI"

Reservation in Appointment/Promotion

“It is settled law that the State Government cannot be directed to provide reservations for appointment in public posts [C.A. Rajendran, (1968) 1 SCR 721]. Similarly, the State is not bound to make reservation for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in matters of promotions. However, if they wish to exercise their discretion and make such […]

Read more "Reservation in Appointment/Promotion"

Writ Jurisdiction of Supreme Court / The Revival of Ray XXXII

Writ Jurisdiction of Supreme Court may be resorted to when available remedies are exhausted [U.P. State Spinning Co. Ltd., (2005) 8 SCC 264]. This is essentially a ‘rule of policy, convenience and discretion’; it’s not a ‘compulsion’ [Mohammad Nooh, AIR 1958 SC 86; Harbanslal Sahnia, (2003) 2 SCC 107]. Supreme Court in Shrimath Balasaheb Patil […]

Read more "Writ Jurisdiction of Supreme Court / The Revival of Ray XXXII"

Hard Cases Make Bad Law

Hon’ble Justice L. Nageswara Rao in State of Tamil Nadu v. G. Hemalathaa, Civil Appeal No. 6669 of 2019 quoted Chief Justice John Roberts in Caperton v. A.T. Massey, 556 U.S. 868 (2009). “Extreme cases often test the bounds of established legal principles. There is a cost to yielding to the desire to correct the […]

Read more "Hard Cases Make Bad Law"

Writ Jurisdiction of High Courts

“While the powers the High Court may exercise under its Writ Jurisdiction are not subject to strict legal principles, two clear principles emerge with respect to when a High Court’s Writ Jurisdiction may be engaged. First, the decision of the High Court to entertain or not entertain a particular action under its Writ Jurisdiction is […]

Read more "Writ Jurisdiction of High Courts"

The Writ of Quo Warranto

“A Writ of Quo Warranto cannot be issued on the basis of assumptions, inferences or suspicion regarding the factum of fulfillment of eligibility criteria. Being an extraordinary power, ordinarily such a Writ ought to be issued only on the basis of indisputable facts leading to a singular conclusion that the incumbent was in fact or […]

Read more "The Writ of Quo Warranto"

Battle of the Articles II: 32/226

“The Court must necessarily abide the parameters which govern a nuanced exercise of judicial power. Hence, where an effort is made to bring issues of governance before the Court, the basic touchstone on which the invocation of jurisdiction must rest is whether the issue can be addressed within the framework of law or the Constitution. […]

Read more "Battle of the Articles II: 32/226"

The Writ of Mandamus II

“A Writ of Mandamus is an extraordinary remedy and is intended to supply deficiencies in law and is thus discretionary in nature. The issuance of a Writ of Mandamus pre-supposes a clear right of the applicant and unjustifiable failure of a duty imposed on an authority otherwise obliged in law to imperatively discharge the same. […]

Read more "The Writ of Mandamus II"

The Writ of Mandamus I

 My Lord, What is Mandamus? “Mandamus literally means a command. The essence of Mandamus in England was that it was a royal command issued by the King’s Bench (now Queen’s Bench) directing performance of a public legal duty. A Writ of Mandamus is issued in favour of a person who establishes a legal right in […]

Read more "The Writ of Mandamus I"

Writ Court Appointed Committees

“A Writ Court should ordinarily not entertain a Writ Petition, if there is a breach of contract involving disputed questions of fact. When an issue arises whether in a particular State there are toilets for school children and there is an assertion by the State that there are good toilets, definitely the Court can appoint […]

Read more "Writ Court Appointed Committees"

Battle of the Articles I: 32/226

“No question other than relating to Fundamental Rights will be determined in a proceeding under Article 32. The difference between Article 32 and 226 is that while an application under Article 32 lies only for the enforcement of Fundamental Rights, the High Court under Article 226 has a wider power to exercise its jurisdiction not only for the […]

Read more "Battle of the Articles I: 32/226"