Author: Anvita Dwivedi

The Allahabad High Court has drawn an important distinction between a private educational institution being amenable to writ jurisdiction in an appropriate case and every dispute arising from its functioning becoming a matter of public law. In Nootan Rai v. Union of India & Others, Justice Manju Rani Chauhan held that a teacher’s challenge to termination by a wholly private and unaided trust was not maintainable under Article 226 of the Constitution where the grievance essentially concerned the legality of a contractual termination and no statutory right or public-law obligation was shown to have been violated. The ruling is significant…

The Supreme Court has declined a proposed interaction between its sitting judges and the Joint Parliamentary Committee examining the constitutional framework for simultaneous elections, bringing into sharp focus an important institutional question that goes beyond the political debate surrounding “One Nation, One Election”: how should the legislature and judiciary interact when Parliament is examining a constitutional amendment that may ultimately come before the Court for judicial review? The proposed interaction was scheduled for October 6 and had been described in the committee’s circulated programme as an “informal discussion” with the Chief Justice of India and other Supreme Court judges on…

The Supreme Court has reaffirmed that the extraordinary power conferred upon secured creditors under the SARFAESI Act to sell secured assets without prior intervention of a civil court is inseparably tied to strict compliance with the statutory safeguards governing such sales. In Sterling Holiday Resorts Limited v. M/s P.M. Associates & Ors., decided on September 30, 2026, a Bench of Justices Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha and Alok Aradhe set aside the auction sale of the “The Fernhill” resort at Ooty after finding multiple and cumulative violations of the SARFAESI Act and the Security Interest (Enforcement) Rules, 2002. The Court’s ruling is…

The controversy over transparency in the NEET-PG examination has returned to the Supreme Court, this time with a more precise question: is disclosure of numerical Question IDs, answer-option IDs, candidate responses and marks enough to allow an unsuccessful or aggrieved candidate to actually verify how the examination was evaluated? A fresh writ petition filed by the Democratic Medical Association and NEET-PG 2026 aspirants challenges the National Board of Examinations in Medical Sciences’ (NBEMS) method of disclosure following the declaration of the examination results. The petition does not merely seek publication of an answer key in the conventional sense. It seeks…

The constitutional debate over the rendition of Vande Mataram has acquired a fresh legal dimension with a petition before the Supreme Court challenging the Union Government’s decision to prescribe the complete six-stanza version of the National Song for specified official and ceremonial occasions. The petition, filed by Nagpur-based Buddhist activist and Ambedkarite scholar B.D. Borkar under Article 32, does not merely question the manner in which the song is to be performed. It raises a broader constitutional issue: can the executive prescribe, and potentially enforce through penal law, a particular textual version of a national symbol when that version contains…

The Supreme Court has drawn an important distinction between fraudulently invoking insolvency jurisdiction and the subsequent fate of the insolvency resolution process itself, holding that a Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) initiated through a fraudulent or collusive Section 9 application may be recalled, but such recall does not necessarily require the entire CIRP to be terminated. The judgment in Orris Infrastructure Private Limited v. Rakesh Kumar Gupta & Ors., delivered on September 30, 2026 by a Bench of Justices Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha and Alok Aradhe, places the interests of the wider creditor body and other stakeholders at the centre of…

The Supreme Court has indicated that it may move beyond the immediate dispute concerning the selection of District Judges in Gujarat and consider a broader reform of the judicial recruitment examination system itself. While hearing a challenge to the Gujarat High Court’s 2024–25 recruitment process for District Judges, a Bench of Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V. Mohana observed that the Court was interested in formulating an initiative for reform of the entire judicial examination process rather than confining the proceedings to the grievances of two unsuccessful candidates. The observation assumes significance because the controversy before the Court arises from a…

The Supreme Court has stayed the execution of death-row convict Ahmed Bawa alias Abbu Abubakar Barelvi, one of the 38 persons sentenced to death in the 2008 Ahmedabad serial blasts case, while issuing notice to the State of Gujarat on his challenge to the Gujarat High Court judgment upholding his conviction and capital sentence. A Bench comprising Justices Vikram Nath, Sandeep Mehta and Augustine George Masih passed the interim order on October 1, 2026, after counsel for Barelvi submitted that his conviction was founded entirely upon the allegation of conspiracy. The Court has also called for the trial court record.…

Ernst & Young U.S. LLP has approached the Supreme Court challenging a significant Delhi High Court ruling which held that amounts received by the US entity from its Indian affiliates towards the cost of employees seconded to India were taxable as Fees for Technical Services under the India–US Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement. The appeal places before the Supreme Court a recurring question in international taxation: when a multinational group temporarily places its overseas employees with an Indian group entity and the Indian entity reimburses the foreign entity for salary and related costs, does the payment remain a mere reimbursement of…

The Delhi High Court has declined to grant regular bail to Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam in the larger-conspiracy case arising from the February 2020 North-East Delhi riots, holding that the Court could not dilute or modify the specific liberty conditions imposed by the Supreme Court while rejecting their bail pleas in January 2026. A Division Bench of Justice Prathiba M. Singh and Justice Dinesh Bhatt dismissed their appeals against the July 4, 2026 order of the Special NIA Court, bringing the question of prolonged incarceration under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 once again into sharp judicial focus. The…