Keeping Pace with Legal Change
Rajasthan High Court has recently issued a major verdict in case of unfair refusal of promotion of an employee named…
In Kaduru Chinnappanna v. State of Andhra Pradesh, the High Court ruled that only the Supreme Court‑constituted SIT may investigate, holding any extra‑SIT nominations void and reinforcing strict compliance with apex court orders to ensure a fair, independent inquiry.
Kerala University Registrar K.S. Anil Kumar pulled back seeking relief in the High Court to challenge the suspension after he was reinstated by the Syndicate. This was after a controversy in one of the portraits titled Bharat Mata. The High Court allowed the withdrawal, but recognizing the internal resolution, did not exclude wider institutional authority issues as the subject of future legal action.
The Supreme Court on June 30, 2025, directed Lalit Modi to civil courts for his ₹10.65 crore claim against BCCI. Upholding the Bombay High Court, the ruling clarified BCCI is not a “State” for all writ purposes, emphasizing that financial disputes are for civil remedies.
This paper discusses a ruling of the Bombay High Court in Chetan Chandrakant Ahire against. Union of India, rejected a writ petition, which objected to the Maharashtra Assembly elections. The Court stressed upon the legislative prohibition against intervention by the Court on the subject of an election, the lack of locus standi of the petitioner and a dearth of any demand for justice, recreating the orderly nature of the legal system of election disputes.
This paper will analyse a ruling of the Supreme Court that was given against a ruling of the High Court in a case that concerned cancellation of a government tender. It notes how the Court has attached importance to issues of public interest, administrative discretion and little judicial review in contractual circumstances, particularly in the event of the unavailability of mala fides.
In the case of New Mangalore Port Trust v. Clifford D’Souza, which was decided by the Supreme Court in 2025, the primary question that was being considered was whether or not demands for past dues under a new licensing price could be filed after a delay. This article provides this explanation.
