Law and Case Commentaries

  Scope of Article 136: The article occurs in Chapter IV of Part V of the Constitution "The Union Judiciary." The language employed in this article is very wide and is of a comprehensive character. Power given are of an overriding nature.[1] It is fully recognized that the scope of Art. 136 of the Constitution is very wide, but the significance of the language used in the section can be appreciated only by comparing it with the articles which precede it. Art. 132 deals with the Appellate Jurisdiction of the Supreme Court in cases involving a substantial question of law as to the interpretation in the Constitution, and the words used in that article are : "appeal........ from any judgment, decree or final order." Art. 133 deals with appeal in civil matters and the same words are used here also. Art. 134 deals with appeals in criminal matters, and the words used in it are; "appeal........ from any judgment, final order or sentence." In Art. 136, the wor

The nature of the duties and functions of the Industrial Tribunal: In Case of Bharat Bank Ltd. Case, H J Kania, CJ opined that, “the functions and duties of the Industrial Tribunal are very much like those of a body discharging judicial functions, although it is not a Court. The rules framed by the Tribunal required evidence to be taken and witnesses to be examined, cross-examined and re-examined. The Act constituting the Tribunal imposes penalties for incorrect statements made before the Tribunal. While the powers of the Industrial Tribunal in some respects are different from those of an ordinary Civil Court and it has jurisdiction and powers to give reliefs which a Civil Court administering the law of the land (for instance, ordering the re-instatement of a workman) does not possess in the discharge of its duties it is essentially working as a judicial body. The fact that it determination has to be followed by an order of the Government which makes the award binding, or that in cas

  Supreme Court of India District Council Of The Jowai vs Dwet Singh Rymbai Etc on 14 August, 1986 Equivalent citations: 1986 AIR 1930, 1986 SCR (3) 569 Author: E Venkataramiah Bench: Venkataramiah, E.S. (J) PETITIONER: DISTRICT COUNCIL OF THE JOWAI Vs. RESPONDENT: DWET SINGH RYMBAI ETC. DATE OF JUDGMENT14/08/1986 BENCH: VENKATARAMIAH, E.S. (J) OZA, G.L. (J) CITATION:   1986 AIR 1930; 1986 SCR (3) 569; 1986 SCC (4) 38 JT 1986 146; 1986 SCALE (2)240 ACT: United Khasi and Jaintia                 Hills Autonomous   District (Management and Control of Forests) Act, 1958-ss. 3, 4, 8, 11 &   13 and Jowai Autonomous District (Administration) Act, 1967-Royalty on timber brought from private forests-Whether in the nature of a tax-Whether constitutionally valid. Constitution of India, Art.   244(2)/Sixth Schedule, Paragraphs 3   and 8-Nature   and scope   of powers of District Councils-Competency to levy fees. HEADNOTE: Jowai was previously a subdivision of Unit

Wlcome to new blog. This blog is based on the legal facts discussed in Mrs. K.S. Yaomila vs The State Of Manipur decided on 6 January, 2020 by Manipur High Court. In Somi Kamkar Vs. State of Manipur & ors, WP(C) No.894 of 2017 it was held that Compensation can be broadly divided into two- one, a compensation that can be claimed in private law and two, a compensation that can be claimed in public law for violation of fundamental rights. In Somi Kamkar Vs. State of Manipur & ors, WP(C) No.894 of 2017 it was held that The law relating to payment of compensation on account of the violation of fundamental rights, is no longer res integra. Public law proceedings serve a different purpose than the private law proceedings. Award of compensation for established infringement of the indefeasible rights guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution is a remedy available in public law since the purpose of public law is not only to civilise public power but also to assure the citizen

  Prakash Singh Supreme Court of India Prakash Singh & Ors vs Union Of India And Ors on 22 September, 2006 Author: S . Y.K. Bench: Y.K. Sabharwal, C.K. Thakker, P.K. Balasubramanyan CASE NO.: Writ Petition (civil)   310 of 1996 The Indian Police Act, 1861 came into force during British era. But there was absence of any comprehensive review at the national level of the police system after independence. Hence on 15th November, 1977 the Government of India appointed a National Police Commission (NPC). The National Police Commission was appointed for fresh examination of the role and performance of the police both as a law enforcing agency and as an institution to protect the rights of the citizens enshrined in the Constitution. The Chairman of the National police commission was a renowned and highly reputed former Governor. A retired High Court Judge, two former Inspector Generals of Police and a Professor of TATA Institute of Special Sciences were members with the Directo

  [2] Sajjan Singh vs State Of Rajasthan [1965 AIR 845, 1965 SCR (1) 933] 1) If an Act is included in the 9th Schedule of Constitution of India then it gets the shield of Article 31-B of the Constitution. 2) Article 31B provided that none of the Acts specified in the Ninth Schedule to the Constitution shall be deemed to be void or ever to have become void. 3) The constituent power conferred by Art. 368 on the Parliament can also be exercised both prospectively and retrospectively. 4) The effect of the last clause in Art. 31B is to leave it open to the respective legislatures to repeal or amend the Acts which have been included in the Ninth Schedule. 5) Acts have been included in the Ninth Schedule with a view to make them valid, does not mean that the legislatures in question which passed the said Acts have lost their competence to repeal them or to amend them. Please support me by donating a small amount of Rs. 11 (Eleven) only by scanning this QR code