Petitioner has challenged the validity of IT (Reasonable security practices and procedures and sensitive personal data or information) Rules, 2011.
PIL before SC seeks J Lodha Panel’s recommendations to be declared unconstitutional + reference to 7 judge bench
Petition claims recommendations as violative or articles 12, 14 and19 of the Constitution.
On its last working day of the year 2016, Supreme Court of India would hear two interesting fresh matters.
ML Sharma’s PIL sought to declare separatists’ funding as “unconstitutional and illegal”.
Lack of OTT regulations make the legal position grey.
HC which originally seated at Agra was shifted to Allahabad in 1869.
PIL seeks direction to states and UTs for a centralised process.
In Lalita Kumari, SC had held that registration of FIR was mandatory if cognizable offence shown.
Last Updated on December 11, 2015 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION…
Court will hear the matter on October 30.
Petitioner claims that making Aadhaar mandatory for DigiLocker is violative of the Court’s order not to make Aadhaar mandatory.
CJI Dattu made the observation while dismissing a PIL seeking framing of guidelines to ensure uninterrupted functioning of Parliament.
PIL seeks setting up of special courts to do a day-to-day hearing to complete the task.
Petition claims that Ministers can issue directions or policy orders only under Articles 74, 77 and 78 of the Constitution of India.