Article 14 - The Legal Chamber

Supreme Court Upholds Level Playing Field, Strikes Down Arbitrary Tender Clause

27Nov

By The Legal ChamberNo Comments

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Upholds Level Playing Field, Strikes Down Arbitrary Tender Clause

The Supreme Court struck down a tender condition requiring prior supply experience within Chhattisgarh as violative of Articles 14 and 19(1)(g) of the Constitution. The condition was held arbitrary for creating an artificial barrier, restricting competition, and offending the doctrine of a level playing field without a rational nexus to the tender's object. Facts Of The Case: The appellant, Vinishma Technologies Pvt. Ltd., a company with experience supplying Sports Kits to several other states, challenged specific eligibility conditions in three tender notices issued by the State of Chhattisgarh for the supply of Sports Kits to government schools. The company was aggrieved by condition no. 4, which required bidders to have supplied sports goods worth at least Rs. 6.00 crores to state gov...

No Complete Freeze on Waqf Law, Says Supreme Court: Caps Non-Muslim Members on Boards

4Nov

By The Legal ChamberNo Comments

Supreme Court

No Complete Freeze on Waqf Law, Says Supreme Court: Caps Non-Muslim Members on Boards

In an interim order, the Supreme Court declined to stay the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025, upholding the legislative presumption of constitutionality. However, it partially stayed specific provisions, including the "five-year practice of Islam" requirement and certain clauses related to government property inquiries, deeming them prima facie arbitrary pending a final constitutional validity hearing. Facts Of The Case: A batch of writ petitions challenged the constitutional validity of the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025, before the Supreme Court. The petitioners, arguing on behalf of Muslim community interests, contended that the amendments violated fundamental rights under Articles 14, 15, 19, 21, 25, 26, and 300A of the Constitution. Key challenges were mounted against provisions that de-recog...

Supreme Court Slams Special Treatment, Orders Joint Trial for All Accused in Nuh Violence Case

4Nov

By The Legal ChamberNo Comments

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Slams Special Treatment, Orders Joint Trial for All Accused in Nuh Violence Case

The Supreme Court held that segregating the trial of an accused solely based on their status as an MLA is legally unsustainable. Such an order violates the statutory scheme for joint trials under Sections 218-223 CrPC when offences arise from the same transaction and common evidence. It also infringes upon the fundamental rights to equality under Article 14 and a fair trial under Article 21 of the Constitution. The direction for a separate charge sheet was also quashed as it exceeds the court's jurisdiction. Facts Of The Case: The case originated from two FIRs (Nos. 149 and 150 of 2023) registered at Police Station Nagina, District Nuh, concerning large-scale communal violence that occurred on July 31, 2023. The appellant, Mamman Khan, a sitting Member of the Legislative Assembly (MLA) f...

Coal India’s 20% Price Hike for Select Industries Upheld by Supreme Court

1Nov

By The Legal ChamberNo Comments

Supreme Court

Coal India’s 20% Price Hike for Select Industries Upheld by Supreme Court

The Supreme Court upheld the constitutional validity of Coal India's Interim Pricing Policy, ruling that the 20% price increase for the non-core sector was a valid economic policy decision. The Court affirmed that such price fixation, based on reasonable classification and to subserve the common good, does not violate Article 14, and set aside the refund directed by the High Court. Facts Of The Case: Following the Supreme Court's 2006 decision in Ashoka Smokeless that struck down the e-auction system for coal sales, Coal India Limited (CIL) introduced an Interim Coal Policy on December 15, 2006. This policy increased the price of coal by 20% over the pre-e-auction notified price specifically for linked consumers in the non-core sector, such as manufacturers of smokeless fuel. An associat...

Accessibility is a Right, Not a Charity: Supreme Court’s Powerful Ruling on Disability

1Nov

By The Legal ChamberNo Comments

Supreme Court

Accessibility is a Right, Not a Charity: Supreme Court’s Powerful Ruling on Disability

This Supreme Court judgment establishes a comprehensive monitoring framework, "Project Ability Empowerment," to audit state-run disability care institutions nationwide. It directs compliance with the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016, emphasizing substantive equality, accessibility, and community living. The Court also mandates a review of reservation policies to include "upward movement" for meritorious disabled candidates. Facts Of The Case: The litigation originates from two consolidated petitions. The first, a 1998 Writ Petition by the Justice Sunanda Bhandare Foundation, sought the enforcement of the Persons with Disabilities Act, 1995, specifically demanding the implementation of reservation for persons with visual disabilities in teaching posts. The second case began a...

Supreme Court Rules: Reserved Candidates Who Use Age Relaxation Can’t Switch to General Category

27Oct

By The Legal ChamberNo Comments

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Rules: Reserved Candidates Who Use Age Relaxation Can’t Switch to General Category

The Supreme Court held that reserved category candidates who avail age relaxation are barred from migrating to unreserved vacancies if the governing recruitment rules expressly prohibit it. The Court distinguished earlier precedents, ruling that such an embargo does not violate equality, as the right to be considered for general category posts depends on the specific rules of the recruitment process in question. Facts Of The Case: The case originated from a recruitment drive for Constable (GD) in various Central Armed Police Forces. The employment notification prescribed an age limit of 18-23 years, with a 3-year relaxation for OBC candidates. The respondents, OBC candidates, availed this age relaxation to participate in the selection process. However, they were not selected in the OBC c...

Training is a Must: Supreme Court Judgment on Railway Recruitment and Service Confirmation

16Oct

By The Legal ChamberNo Comments

Supreme Court

Training is a Must: Supreme Court Judgment on Railway Recruitment and Service Confirmation

The Supreme Court held that successful completion of prescribed training, including passing the requisite written test, is a mandatory condition precedent for confirmation in service for direct recruits to Group 'C' non-gazetted railway posts. Failure to clear this training examination validly entitles the employer to terminate services, as it is a fundamental term of recruitment governed by the Master Circular. Facts Of The Case: The case involved Alok Kumar, who was provisionally appointed as a Senior Section Engineer (Trainee) in the Railways after clearing a recruitment examination. His appointment was conditional on the successful completion of a 52-week training program. After 46 weeks of field training, he was sent, along with other trainees, to a three-week General and Subsidiary...

Domicile vs. Study: Supreme Court Explains Who Qualifies as a “Local” for Medical Seats

6Oct

By The Legal ChamberNo Comments

Supreme Court

Domicile vs. Study: Supreme Court Explains Who Qualifies as a “Local” for Medical Seats

The Supreme Court upheld the constitutional validity of Telangana's rules defining 'local candidates' for medical admissions. It ruled that the classification, based on consecutive years of study/residence within the state, is not arbitrary and falls within the legislative competence under Article 371D, Entry 25 of List III, and the relevant Presidential Order. Facts Of The Case: The case originated from challenges to the Telangana Medical & Dental Colleges Admission Rules, 2017, and their 2024 amendment, which defined 'local candidates' eligible for 85% state quota seats. The definition required candidates to have studied in educational institutions within the state for four consecutive years ending with the qualifying examination, or to have resided there for the same period if not...

Supreme Court Rules: Govt Can’t Cancel Ongoing Job Recruitments Midway

1Oct

By The Legal ChamberNo Comments

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Rules: Govt Can’t Cancel Ongoing Job Recruitments Midway

This Supreme Court judgment reiterates that executive instructions, such as a New Recruitment Policy, cannot override or supplant statutory rules or rules framed under Article 309 of the Constitution. A recruitment process, once commenced under specific statutory rules, cannot be altered midway by executive fiat, as doing so amounts to changing the rules of the game after it has begun and violates principles of fairness and legitimate expectation. Facts Of The Case: The State of Tripura initiated a recruitment process for the post of Enrolled Followers in the Tripura State Rifles, conducted strictly under the Tripura State Rifles Act, 1983 and its corresponding Rules. The process, involving advertisements, physical tests, written exams, and interviews, had advanced significantly, with pr...

A New Lease on Life: Supreme Court Allows Death Penalty Review Based on New Mitigation Guidelines

29Sep

By The Legal ChamberNo Comments

Supreme Court

A New Lease on Life: Supreme Court Allows Death Penalty Review Based on New Mitigation Guidelines

This Supreme Court judgment holds that its extraordinary power under Article 32 of the Constitution can be invoked to reopen the sentencing stage in death penalty cases that have attained finality. This is permissible to remedy a clear breach of the procedural safeguards for individualized sentencing mandated in Manoj v. State of M.P., which are integral to the fundamental rights under Articles 14 and 21. The Court clarified that such judicial declarations operate retrospectively. Facts Of The Case: The case concerns the petitioner, Vasanta Sampat Dupare, who was convicted and sentenced to death for the 2008 kidnapping, sexual assault, and murder of a four-year-old girl in Nagpur. His conviction and death sentence were confirmed by the High Court in 2012 and ultimately upheld by the Supr...