Court : US Supreme Court
Marshall v. Barlow's, Inc. - 436 U.S. 307 (1978) U.S. Supreme Court Marshall v. Barlow's, Inc., 436 U.S. 307 (1978) Marshall v. Barlow's, Inc. No. 76-1143 Argued January 9, 1978 Decided May 23, 1978 436 U.S. 307 APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF IDAHO Syllabus Appellee brought this action to obtain injunctive relief against a warrantless inspection of its business premises pursuant to 8(a) of the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 (OSHA), which empowers agents of the Secretary of Labor to search the work area of any employment facility within OSHA's jurisdiction for safety hazards and violations of OSHA regulations. A three-judge District Court ruled in appellee's favor, concluding, in reliance on Camara v. Municipal Court, 387 U. S. 523 , 387 U. S. 528 -529, and See v. Seattle, 387 U. S. 541 , 387 U. S. 543 , that the Fourth Amendment required a warrant for the type of search involved and that the statutory authorization fo...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reportable IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION Writ Petition (Civil) No.502 of 2021 Madras Bar Association .... Petitioner(s) Versus Union of India & Another . Respondent (s) JUDGMENT L. NAGESWARA RAO, J.1. The Madras Bar Association has filed this Writ Petition seeking a declaration that Sections 12 and 13 of the Tribunal Reforms (Rationalisation and Conditions of Service) Ordinance, 2021 and Sections 184 and 186 (2) of the Finance Act, 2017 as amended by the Tribunal Reforms (Rationalisation and Conditions of Service) Ordinance, 2021 as ultra vires Articles 14, 21 and 50 of the Constitution of India inasmuch as these are violative of the principles of separation of powers and independence of judiciary, apart from being contrary to the principles laid down by this Court in Union of India v. R. Gandhi, President, Madras 1 | Pa ge Bar Association1, Madras Bar Association v. Union of India & Anr.2, Rojer Mathew v. South Indian Bank Limited & Ors.3 and Madras Bar Ass...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reportable IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION SU O MOT U WRI T PETITIO N (CIVIL ) No.6 O F2020IN RE: PROBLEMS AND MISERIES OF MIGRANT LABOURERS With Writ Petition (C) No.916 of 2020 Bandhua Mukti Morcha Petitioner Versus Union of India & Ors. Respondents JUDGMENT Ashok Bhushan, J.1. The Worldwide Pandemic COVID-19 engulfed this country in March, 2020 and continues till date changing its face from time to time. Different mutations in the virus have made it dangerous and fatal at times. The pandemic had affected each and every person in the world including all citizens of this country. The pandemic has adversely affected all businesses 1 including the small scale businesses, industries, markets and smallest of the person.2. One of the groups, which were severally affected by the pandemic, was the migrant labouers. When Nationwide Lockdown was declared on 24.03.2020, after few days, there was huge exodus of the migrant labourers from their place of work to their na...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE/ORIGINAL JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.3123 of 2020 DR. JAISHRI LAXMANRAO PATIL ...APPELLANT(S) VERSUS THE CHIEF MINISTER & ORS. ...RESPONDENT(S) WITH CIVIL APPEAL NO.3124 of 2020 SANJEET SHUKLA ...APPELLANT(S) VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA ...RESPONDENT(S) WITH CIVIL APPEAL NO.3133 of 2020 KRISHNAJI DATTATRAYA MORE ...APPELLANT(S) VERSUS DR. JAISHRI LAXMANRAO & ORS. ...RESPONDENT(S) WITH CIVIL APPEAL NO.3134 of 2020 MADHUSHRI NANDKISHOR JETHLIYA & ORS. ...APPELLANT(S) VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS. ...RESPONDENT(S) 2 WITH CIVIL APPEAL NO.3131 of 2020 DEVENDRA ROOPCHAND JAIN & ORS. ...APPELLANT(S) VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ANR. ...RESPONDENT(S) WITH CIVIL APPEAL NO.3129 of 2020 KAMALAKAR SUKHDEO DARODE @ DARWADE ...APPELLANT(S) VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS. ...RESPONDENT(S) WITH WRIT PETITION (C) NO.915 of 2020 DESHMUKH ESHA GIRISH ...APPELLANT(S) VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS. ...RESPONDENT(S)...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) No.494 OF2012JUSTICE K.S. PUTTASWAMY (RETD.) AND ANOTHER .....PETITIONER(S) VERSUS UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS .....RESPONDENT(S) WITH TRANSFERRED CASE (CIVIL) No.151 OF2013TRANSFERRED CASE (CIVIL) No.152 OF2013WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) No.833 OF2013WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) No.829 OF2013TRANSFERRED PETITION (CIVIL) No.1797 OF2013WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) No.932 OF2013TRANSFERRED PETITION (CIVIL) No.1796 OF2013CONTEMPT PETITION (CIVIL) No.144 OF2014WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) No.494 OF2012IN TRANSFERRED PETITION (CIVIL) No.313 OF2014TRANSFERRED PETITION (CIVIL) No.312 OF2014SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRIMINAL) No.2524 OF2014WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) No.37 OF2015Writ Petition (Civil) No.494 of 2012 & c onnected matters Page 1 of 567 WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) No.220 OF2015CONTEMPT PETITION (CIVIL) No.674 OF2015WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) No.829 OF2013TRANSFERRED PETITION (CIVIL) No.921 OF2015CONTEMPT PETITION (CIVIL) No.470 OF2015WRIT...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) No.215 OF2005Common Cause (A Regd. Society) Versus Union of India and Another ...Petitioner(s) Respondent(s) JUDGMENT Dipak Misra, CJI [for himself and A.M. Khanwilkar, J.]. I N D E X Heading S. No.A. Prologue B. Contentions in the Writ Petition Page No.3 10 C. Stand in the counter affidavit and the 14 applications for intervention D. Background of the Writ Petition D.1 P. Rathinams case The question of unconstitutionality of Section 309 of the Indian Penal Code D.2 Gian Kaurs case The question of unconstitutionality of Section 306 of 18 19 22 2 the Indian Penal Code D.3 The approach in Aruna Shanbaug qua Passive Euthanasia vis--vis India D.4 The Reference E. Our analysis of Gian Kaur F. Our analysis of Aruna Shanbaug qua legislation 30 42 45 51 G. The Distinction between Active and Passive 52 Euthanasia H. Euthanasia : International Position H.1 U.K. Decisions: H.1.1 Airedale Case H.1.2 Late...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.20982 OF2017INDORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY ...APPELLANT (S) SHAILENDRA (DEAD) THROUGH LRS.& ORS. VERSUS WITH ...RESPONDENT (S) SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) No.10742 OF2008YOGESH KUMAR & ORS. ...PETITIONER (S) VERSUS STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH & ORS. ...RESPONDENT (S) WITH SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) No.20920 OF2011SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C)Nos.26574-26575 OF2011SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C)No.28993 OF2011SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C)No.30198 OF2015SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C)No.30192 OF2015SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C)No.30142 OF20151 SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C)No.30128 OF2015SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C)No.30203 OF2015CIVIL APPEAL No.4835 OF2015SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C)No.25289 OF2015SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C)CC No.9842 OF2016SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) No.22356 OF2015SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) No.31678 OF2015CIVIL APPEAL NO.4836 OF2015SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) No.22527 OF2015SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) No.4705 OF2016SPECI...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.3453/2002 JINDAL STAINLESS LTD.& ANR. Appellants VS. STATE OF HARYANA & ORS. Respondents WITH C.A. No.6383-6421/1997, C.A. No.6422-6435/1997, C.A. No.6436/1997, C.A. No.6437-6440/1997 , C.A. No.3381-3400/1998, C.A. No.4651/1998, C.A. No.918/1999, C.A. No.2769/2000, C.A. No.4471/2000, C.A. No.3314/2001, C.A. No.3454/2002, C.A. No.3455/2002, C.A. No.3456-3459/2002, C.A. No.3460/2002, C.A. No.3461/2002, C.A. No.3462-3463/2002, C.A. No.3464/2002, C.A. No.3465/2002, C.A. No.3466/2002, C.A. No.3467/2002, C.A. No.3468/2002, C.A. No.3469/2002, C.A. No.3470/2002, C.A. No.3471/2002, C.A. No.4008/2002, C.A. No.5385/2002, C.A. No.5740/2002, C.A. No.5858/2002, W.P.(C) No.512/2003, W.P.(C) No.574/2003, C.A. No.2608/2003, C.A. No.2633/2003, C.A. No.2637/2003, C.A. No.2638/2003, C.A. No.3720-3722/2003, C.A. No.6331/2003, C.A. No.8241/2003, C.A. No.8242/2003, C.A. No.8243/2003, C.A. No.8244/2003, C.A. No.8245/2003, C.A. No.8246/...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reportable IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISIDCTION CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 6203-6204__OF2016(Arising out of SLP(C) Nos. 1259-1260 of 2016) Nabam Rebia, and Bamang Felix Appellants versus Deputy Speaker and others Respondents JUDGMENT Jagdish Singh Khehar, J.1. Leave granted.2. The 5th session of the Arunachal Pradesh Legislative Assembly (hereinafter referred to as, the Assembly/House) was concluded on 21.10.2015. On 3.11.2015, the Governor issued an order summoning the 6th session of the Assembly, to meet on 14.1.2016 in the Legislative Assembly Chamber at Naharlagun. The instant order was passed by the Governor, on the aid and advice of the Chief Minister, and in consultation with the Speaker of the House. The 6th session of the House was preponed by the Governor from 14.1.2016 to 16.12.2015, by an order dated 9.12.2015 indicating inter alia the manner in which the proceedings of the House should be conducted. In its support, the Governor issued a message on 9.12.2015....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) No.13 OF2015Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record - Association and another Petitioner(s) versus Union of India Respondent(s) With |WRIT PETITION (C) No.14 OF2015| |WRIT PETITION (C) No.18 OF2015| |WRIT PETITION (C) No.23 OF2015| |WRIT PETITION (C) No.24 OF2015| |WRIT PETITION (C) No.70 OF2015| |WRIT PETITION (C) No.83 OF2015| |WRIT PETITION (C) No.108 OF2015| |WRIT PETITION (C) No.124 OF2015| |WRIT PETITION (C) No.209 OF2015| |WRIT PETITION (C) No.309 OF2015| |WRIT PETITION (C) No.310 OF2015| |WRIT PETITION (C) No.323 OF2015| |WRIT PETITION (C) No.341 OF2015| |TRANSFER PETITION(C) No.391 OF2015 |TRANSFER PETITION (C) No.971 OF2015 | | JUDGMENT Jagdish Singh Khehar, J.Index |Sl.No.|Contents |Paragraphs|Pages | |1. |The Recusal Order | 1 - 18| 1 - | | | | |15 | | | | | | |2. |The Reference Order | 1 - 101| 16 - 169| |I |The Challenge | 1 - | 16 - | | | |9 |19 | |II. |The Background to the Challenge ...
Tag this Judgment!