Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 24 (0.22 seconds)THE CONSTITUTION (SEVENTY-SEVENTH AMENDMENT) ACT, 1995
Suresh Chand Gautam vs State Of Uttar Pradesh . on 11 March, 2016
State of Rajasthan and others (2011) 1 SCC 467; (5) Uttar Pradesh Power
Corporation Limited v. Rajesh Kumar and others (2012) 7 SCC 1; (6) S. Panneer
Selvam and others v. State of Tamil Nadu and others (2015) 10 SCC 292; (7)
Chairman and Managing Director, Central Bank of India and others v. Central
Bank of India SC/ST Employees Welfare Association and others (2015) 12 SCC
308; and (8) Suresh Chand Gautam v. State of Uttar Pradesh and others (2016)
11 SCC 113 to contend that the request for a revisit cannot be entertained ad
nauseam. However, apart from the clamour for revisit, further questions were
also raised about application of the principle of creamy layer in situations of
competing claims within the same races, communities, groups or parts thereof of
SC/ST notified by the President under Articles 341 and 342 of the Constitution
of India."
The State Of Tripura vs Jayanta Chakraborty on 14 November, 2017
9. The Hon'ble Apex Court in its order dated 14.11.2017 in The
State of Tripura & Ors. Vs. Jayanta Chakraborty & Ors.
observed as under :-
Article 32 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
M.Nagaraj & Others vs Union Of India & Others on 19 October, 2006
The petitioners
have argued for a re-look of Nagaraj (supra) specifically on the ground that test of
backwardness ought not to be applied to SC/ST in view of Indra Sawhney
(supra) and Chinnaiah (supra).
Indra Sawhney Etc. Etc vs Union Of India And Others, Etc. Etc. on 16 November, 1992
"The questions posed in these cases involve the interpretation of Articles
16(4), 16(4A) and 16(4B) of the Constitution of India in the backdrop of mainly
three Constitution Bench decisions - (1) Indra Sawhney and others v. Union of
India and others 1992 Supp.
E.V.Chinnaiah vs State Of Andhra Pradesh And Ors on 5 November, 2004
The petitioners
have argued for a re-look of Nagaraj (supra) specifically on the ground that test of
backwardness ought not to be applied to SC/ST in view of Indra Sawhney
(supra) and Chinnaiah (supra).
U.P.Power Corp.Ltd vs Rajesh Kumar & Ors on 27 April, 2012
State of Rajasthan and others (2011) 1 SCC 467; (5) Uttar Pradesh Power
Corporation Limited v. Rajesh Kumar and others (2012) 7 SCC 1; (6) S. Panneer
Selvam and others v. State of Tamil Nadu and others (2015) 10 SCC 292; (7)
Chairman and Managing Director, Central Bank of India and others v. Central
Bank of India SC/ST Employees Welfare Association and others (2015) 12 SCC
308; and (8) Suresh Chand Gautam v. State of Uttar Pradesh and others (2016)
11 SCC 113 to contend that the request for a revisit cannot be entertained ad
nauseam. However, apart from the clamour for revisit, further questions were
also raised about application of the principle of creamy layer in situations of
competing claims within the same races, communities, groups or parts thereof of
SC/ST notified by the President under Articles 341 and 342 of the Constitution
of India."
S.Panneer Selvam vs The Government Of Tamil Nadu on 16 December, 2015
State of Rajasthan and others (2011) 1 SCC 467; (5) Uttar Pradesh Power
Corporation Limited v. Rajesh Kumar and others (2012) 7 SCC 1; (6) S. Panneer
Selvam and others v. State of Tamil Nadu and others (2015) 10 SCC 292; (7)
Chairman and Managing Director, Central Bank of India and others v. Central
Bank of India SC/ST Employees Welfare Association and others (2015) 12 SCC
308; and (8) Suresh Chand Gautam v. State of Uttar Pradesh and others (2016)
11 SCC 113 to contend that the request for a revisit cannot be entertained ad
nauseam. However, apart from the clamour for revisit, further questions were
also raised about application of the principle of creamy layer in situations of
competing claims within the same races, communities, groups or parts thereof of
SC/ST notified by the President under Articles 341 and 342 of the Constitution
of India."