Court : Supreme Court of India
Reportable IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.2357 OF2017Government of NCT of Delhi Appellant Versus Union of India & Another Respondents WITH CONTEMPT PETITION (CIVIL) No.175 OF2016WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) No.539 OF1986IN CIVIL APPEAL No.2358 OF2017CIVIL APPEAL No.2359 OF2017CIVIL APPEAL No.2360 OF2017CIVIL APPEAL No.2361 OF2017CIVIL APPEAL No.2362 OF2017CIVIL APPEAL No.2363 OF2017CIVIL APPEAL No.2364 OF2017AND CRIMINAL APPEAL No.277 OF2017JUDGMENT Dipak Misra, CJI (for himself, A.K. Sikri and A.M. Khanwilkar, JJ.) 2 CONTENTS A. Prologue 322 B. Rivalised Submissions 2223 B.1 Submissions on behalf of the appellant 2334 B.2 Submissions on behalf of the respondents. 3445 C. Ideals/principles of governance 4550 representative D. Constitutional morality 5054 E. Constitutional objectivity 5457 F. Constitutional governance and the conception of legitimate constitutional trust. 5768 G. Collective responsibility. 6873 H. Federal functionalism and democ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
S. RAVINDRA BHAT 1. The Constitution makers fervently hoped to usher a society committed to equality, where barriers of race, gender, domicile, descent and the unforgiving marginalization of a large section of the society as a result of the ills of the caste system and the practise of untouchability, would eventually be eliminated. The commitment has remained largely an unrealized promise. The strategy of the State to bridge the social gulf through affirmative action has thrown up constant challenges which Courts are called upon to resolve. This is one such challenge, where the Court has to grapple with the interpretation of Articles 341 and 342 read with Article 16, in the context of differing standards of what is the permissible reservation standard applicable on the one hand to residents of states who take up residence in one state, as opposed to residents of states who take up residence in Union territories. This judgment seeks to answer a reference made to the Full Bench, constit...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Reported in : 154(2008)DLT755
S. Ravindra Bhat, J.1. Courts in India have often traversed questions relating to the principle of equality and affirmative action. This constant engagement with affirmative action policies has not only raised questions relating to their validity and reach, but also crucial questions about the beneficiaries of such policies. This petition raises one such short, yet significant question.2. The petitioner avers that she is an originally listed Delhi Scheduled Caste (hereafter 'SC') candidate and appeared for the LLB entrance examination conducted by the first respondent ('the University') on 20.06.2004 She was at No. 118 in the SC category ranking and it is stated that she could not obtain admission in the course due to inclusion of ineligible SC candidates belonging to States/ Union territories (UTs) other than Delhi. It is alleged that by virtue of Articles 341 and 342 of the Constitution of India and notifications issued under those provisions, only Delhi listed scheduled caste candid...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reportable 2023 INSC1058IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA ORIGINAL WRIT / APPELLATE JURISDICTION Writ Petition (Civil) No.1099 of 2019 IN RE: ARTICLE370OF THE CONSTITUTION With Writ Petition (C) No.871 of 2015 With Writ Petition (C) No.722 of 2014 With SLP (C) No.19618 of 2017 With Writ Petition (C) No.1013 of 2019 With Writ Petition (C) No.1082 of 2019 With Writ Petition (C) No.1068 of 2019 1 With Writ Petition (C) No.1037 of 2019 With Writ Petition (C) No.1062 of 2019 With Writ Petition (C) No.1070 of 2019 With Writ Petition (C) No.1104 of 2019 With Writ Petition (C) No.1165 of 2019 With Writ Petition (C) No.1210 of 2019 With Writ Petition (C) No.1222 of 2019 With Writ Petition (C) No.396 of 2017 With Writ Petition (C) No.756 of 2017 With Writ Petition (C) No.398 pf 2018 With 2 Writ Petition (C) No.924 of 2018 With Writ Petition (C) No.1092 of 2018 With Writ Petition (C) No.1162 of 2018 With Writ Petition (C) No.1048 of 2019 With Writ Petition (C) No.1268 of 2019 And With Writ Petition (...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.1085 OF2013BIR SINGH .APPELLANT(S) VERSUS DELHI JAL BOARD & ORS. .RESPONDENT(S) CIVIL APPEAL NO(S) 99359937 OF2014WITH CIVIL APPEAL NO(S).10081 OF2014CIVIL APPEAL NO(S). 8141 OF2014CIVIL APPEAL NO(S). 8802 OF2012CIVIL APPEAL NO(S).1086 OF2013CIVIL APPEAL NO.9048 OF2018[ARISING OUT OF S.L.P(C) NO.36324 OF2017 JUDGMENT RANJAN GOGOI, J Leave granted in Special Leave Petition (Civil) No.36324 of 1. 2017 2. In State of Uttaranchal vs. Sandeep Kumar Singh and others1 [Civil Appeal No.4494 of 2006) the following question arose for consideration of this Court: Whether a person belonging to a Scheduled Caste in relation to a particular State would be entitled or not, to the benefits or concessions allowed to 1 (2010) 12 SCC7942 Scheduled Caste candidate in the matter of employment, in any other State?. 3. In the course of the deliberations that took place this Court noticed the Constitution Bench judgments o...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.1085 OF2013BIR SINGH .APPELLANT(S) VERSUS DELHI JAL BOARD & ORS. .RESPONDENT(S) CIVIL APPEAL NO(S) 99359937 OF2014WITH CIVIL APPEAL NO(S).10081 OF2014CIVIL APPEAL NO(S). 8141 OF2014CIVIL APPEAL NO(S). 8802 OF2012CIVIL APPEAL NO(S).1086 OF2013CIVIL APPEAL NO.9048 OF2018[ARISING OUT OF S.L.P(C) NO.36324 OF2017 JUDGMENT RANJAN GOGOI, J Leave granted in Special Leave Petition (Civil) No.36324 of 1. 2017 2. In State of Uttaranchal vs. Sandeep Kumar Singh and others1 [Civil Appeal No.4494 of 2006) the following question arose for consideration of this Court: Whether a person belonging to a Scheduled Caste in relation to a particular State would be entitled or not, to the benefits or concessions allowed to 1 (2010) 12 SCC7942 Scheduled Caste candidate in the matter of employment, in any other State?. 3. In the course of the deliberations that took place this Court noticed the Constitution Bench judgments o...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.1085 OF2013BIR SINGH .APPELLANT(S) VERSUS DELHI JAL BOARD & ORS. .RESPONDENT(S) CIVIL APPEAL NO(S) 99359937 OF2014WITH CIVIL APPEAL NO(S).10081 OF2014CIVIL APPEAL NO(S). 8141 OF2014CIVIL APPEAL NO(S). 8802 OF2012CIVIL APPEAL NO(S).1086 OF2013CIVIL APPEAL NO.9048 OF2018[ARISING OUT OF S.L.P(C) NO.36324 OF2017 JUDGMENT RANJAN GOGOI, J Leave granted in Special Leave Petition (Civil) No.36324 of 1. 2017 2. In State of Uttaranchal vs. Sandeep Kumar Singh and others1 [Civil Appeal No.4494 of 2006) the following question arose for consideration of this Court: Whether a person belonging to a Scheduled Caste in relation to a particular State would be entitled or not, to the benefits or concessions allowed to 1 (2010) 12 SCC7942 Scheduled Caste candidate in the matter of employment, in any other State?. 3. In the course of the deliberations that took place this Court noticed the Constitution Bench judgments o...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.1085 OF2013REPORTABLE BIR SINGH .APPELLANT(S) VERSUS DELHI JAL BOARD & ORS. .RESPONDENT(S) CIVIL APPEAL NO(S) 99359937 OF2014WITH CIVIL APPEAL NO(S).10081 OF2014CIVIL APPEAL NO(S). 8141 OF2014CIVIL APPEAL NO(S). 8802 OF2012CIVIL APPEAL NO(S).1086 OF2013CIVIL APPEAL NO.9048 OF2018[ARISING OUT OF S.L.P(C) NO.36324 OF2017 JUDGMENT RANJAN GOGOI, J1 Leave granted in Special Leave Petition (Civil) No.36324 of 2017 2. In State of Uttaranchal vs. Sandeep Kumar Singh and others1 [Civil Appeal No.4494 of 2006) the following question arose 1 (2010) 12 SCC7941 for consideration of this Court: Whether a person belonging to a Scheduled Caste in relation to a particular State would be entitled or not, to the benefits or concessions allowed to Scheduled Caste candidate in the matter of employment, in any other State?. 3. In the course of the deliberations that took place this Court noticed the Constitution Bench judgments of th...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.1085 OF2013REPORTABLE BIR SINGH .APPELLANT(S) VERSUS DELHI JAL BOARD & ORS. .RESPONDENT(S) CIVIL APPEAL NO(S) 99359937 OF2014WITH CIVIL APPEAL NO(S).10081 OF2014CIVIL APPEAL NO(S). 8141 OF2014CIVIL APPEAL NO(S). 8802 OF2012CIVIL APPEAL NO(S).1086 OF2013CIVIL APPEAL NO.9048 OF2018[ARISING OUT OF S.L.P(C) NO.36324 OF2017 JUDGMENT RANJAN GOGOI, J1 Leave granted in Special Leave Petition (Civil) No.36324 of 2017 2. In State of Uttaranchal vs. Sandeep Kumar Singh and others1 [Civil Appeal No.4494 of 2006) the following question arose 1 (2010) 12 SCC7941 for consideration of this Court: Whether a person belonging to a Scheduled Caste in relation to a particular State would be entitled or not, to the benefits or concessions allowed to Scheduled Caste candidate in the matter of employment, in any other State?. 3. In the course of the deliberations that took place this Court noticed the Constitution Bench judgments of th...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.1085 OF2013BIR SINGH .APPELLANT(S) VERSUS DELHI JAL BOARD & ORS. .RESPONDENT(S) CIVIL APPEAL NO(S) 99359937 OF2014WITH CIVIL APPEAL NO(S).10081 OF2014CIVIL APPEAL NO(S). 8141 OF2014CIVIL APPEAL NO(S). 8802 OF2012CIVIL APPEAL NO(S).1086 OF2013CIVIL APPEAL NO.9048 OF2018[ARISING OUT OF S.L.P(C) NO.36324 OF2017 JUDGMENT RANJAN GOGOI, J Leave granted in Special Leave Petition (Civil) No.36324 of 1. 2017 2. In State of Uttaranchal vs. Sandeep Kumar Singh and others1 [Civil Appeal No.4494 of 2006) the following question arose for consideration of this Court: Whether a person belonging to a Scheduled Caste in relation to a particular State would be entitled or not, to the benefits or concessions allowed to 1 (2010) 12 SCC7942 Scheduled Caste candidate in the matter of employment, in any other State?. 3. In the course of the deliberations that took place this Court noticed the Constitution Bench judgments o...
Tag this Judgment!