Esheria India Case Law
Sign in
India Source-linked decisions Coverage checked

India Case Law

Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.

Courts on this page
0 court collections
Last checked

Search and filter India case law

Results update automatically as you type.

India decisions

Decisions matching the current search

Clear filters
Constitutional law

JARNAIL SINGH & OTHERS versus LACHHMI NARAIN GUPTA & OTHERS

The requirement in M. Nagaraj case that States must collect quantifiable data showing backwardness of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes for reservation in promotion is invalid as it is contrary to the ruling in Indra Sawhney (1). The creamy layer principle applies to SCs and STs and does not alter the Presidential List. Adequacy of representation for reservation in promotion is a matter for States, not rigid proportionality to population. There is no need to refer M. Nagaraj to a larger bench.

Source excerpt

  • Reservation in promotion
  • Creamy layer
  • Scheduled castes and scheduled tribes
  • Interpretation of constitution
  • Basic structure doctrine
Read case analysis
Constitutional law

BIR SINGH versus DELHI JAL BOARD & ORS.

Reservation for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in employment can only be given to those expressly specified in the Presidential Orders for that State or Union Territory; pan India reservation in services under States or Union Territories is constitutionally impermissible, except for centrally recruited posts.

Source excerpt

  • Reservation policy
  • Scheduled castes and scheduled tribes
  • Interplay of articles 16(4), 341, and 342
  • Pan india reservation
  • Presidential order
Read case analysis
Election law

MOHAMMAD SADIQUE versus DARBARA SINGH GURU

The appellant, though born to Muslim parents, belonged by birth to the 'Doom' community recognized as Scheduled Caste in Punjab. He converted to Sikhism, publicly declared his new faith, obtained and retained a caste certificate after conversion, and was accepted by the Sikh community. There was no legal requirement to change one's name upon conversion. The certificate was not cancelled. Accordingly, his Scheduled Caste status was duly proved, entitling him to contest from the reserved constituency under the applicable legal standards.

Source excerpt

  • Scheduled castes and scheduled tribes
  • Caste certificates
  • Religious conversion
  • Reservation in legislatures
  • Social status and rights
Read case analysis
Constitutional law

SURESH CHAND GAUTAM versus STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ORS.

A writ of mandamus cannot be issued to direct the State or its functionaries to collect data as a condition precedent to exercise discretion under enabling provisions for reservation in promotion; there is no constitutional duty to make such reservation, and the relief sought would enter the legislative domain.

Source excerpt

  • Reservation in promotion
  • Scheduled castes and scheduled tribes
  • Mandamus
  • Quantifiable data
  • Article 16(4-a)
  • Article 16(4-b)
Read case analysis
Constitutional law

ROHTAS BHANKHAR & ORS. versus UNION OF INDIA & ANR.

The constitutional amendments to Articles 16(4A) and 335 permit relaxation of qualifying standards for SC/STs in promotions; the 1997 Office Memorandum withdrawing such relaxation was illegal as it was based on a judgment that failed to consider these amendments. The Tribunal's reliance on S. Vinod Kumar is incorrect as it is not good law post-amendment.

Source excerpt

  • Reservation for promotion
  • Relaxation of standards
  • Scheduled castes and scheduled tribes
  • Interpretation of articles 16(4), 16(4a), 335
Read case analysis
Property law

RAM KARAN (DEAD) THROUGH LRS. & ORS. versus STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ORS.

Suit for restoration and ejectment instituted after lapse of 31 years by the Tehsildar under Section 175 and for cancellation of mutation under Section 42 of Rajasthan Tenancy Act, 1955 was barred by limitation as per Schedule 3 read with Section 214 of the Act; transfer forbidden by law but since action not taken within statutory/ reasonable period, claim cannot be sustained.

Source excerpt

  • Transfer of land
  • Bar of limitation
  • Mutation
  • Scheduled castes and scheduled tribes
  • Illegal transfer
  • Restoration of land
Read case analysis
Property law

G. KRISHNAREDDY versus SAJJAPPA (D) BY LRS. AND ANR.

The plea of adverse possession was not available to the appellant, as his claim was by way of purchase and not through hostile possession. Furthermore, the grant was only for cultivation for a limited period, and did not convey absolute title, making the applicable limitation period 30 years, not 12 years. The appellant failed to acquire title by adverse possession and the transfer was null and void as per the Act.

Source excerpt

  • Government grants
  • Adverse possession
  • Scheduled castes and scheduled tribes
Read case analysis
Service law

ANIL CHANDRA & ORS. versus RADHA KRISHNA GAUR & ORS.

The High Court was justified in passing an interim order protecting existing seniority because the State of U.P. had not complied with its constitutional obligation to identify posts, collect quantifiable data for backwardness, inadequacy, and efficiency, nor specified any retrospective effect for Rule 8-A. The rules on reservation and promotion are prospective and cannot disturb existing seniority lists unless expressly stated. Thus, the appeals were dismissed, and the interim order maintained.

Source excerpt

  • Reservation in promotion
  • Seniority of government servants
  • Scheduled castes and scheduled tribes
  • Retrospective application of rules
Read case analysis
Constitutional law

SUBHASH CHANDRA & ANR. versus DELHI SUBORDINATE SERVICES SELECTION BOARD & ORS.

Reservation benefits for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes are restricted to those castes and tribes notified for the State or Union Territory of recruitment by Presidential Order. Migrants from other States or Union Territories, whose caste or tribe is not notified for the receiving State/UT, are not entitled to reservation under the Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe quota; such recruitment would violate the constitutional scheme of Articles 341/342 and Article 16. Policies or circulars cannot override or amend Presidential Orders except via Parliamentary legislation.

Source excerpt

  • Reservation
  • Scheduled castes and scheduled tribes
  • Protective discrimination
  • Migration and reservation policy
  • Judicial discipline
Read case analysis
Property law

BHADRAPPA (D) BY LRS. versus TOLACHA NAIK

The transfer was effected in violation of the statutory prohibition contained in the Act. The burden of proof was on the person in possession to demonstrate valid possession but was not discharged. Therefore, the transfer was null and void and the High Court was justified in dismissing the writ petition and appeal.

Source excerpt

  • Alienation of granted land
  • Scheduled castes and scheduled tribes
  • Prohibition of transfer
  • Burden of proof
Read case analysis

About this LexChat collection

India decisions are organised by court, judge, legal area and indexed issue so a practitioner can move from a proposition to a citable authority with the surrounding context intact.

Source links and collection timestamps are retained alongside the indexed records.