๐•ƒ๐”ผ๐”พ๐”ธ๐•ƒ โ„‚๐•Œโ„โ„๐”ผโ„•๐•‹ ๐”ธ๐”ฝ๐”ฝ๐”ธ๐•€โ„๐•Š ๐”น๐•ช- โ„•๐•’๐•ฅ๐•ฆ๐•ฃ๐•’๐• ๐•๐•ฆ๐•ค๐•ฅ๐•š๐•”๐•– โ„ข
18.9K subscribers
851 photos
11 videos
1.72K files
3.09K links
๐Ÿ“ฒ Contact โ†’ @CurrentLegalGKBOT

โ˜บ๏ธ 360ยฐ Cases on topics.

Keywords: Civil Judge, MPCJ, UP PSCJ, Haryana ADA, DJS, CBI APP, RJS, JLO, CLAT PG, Supreme Court law clerk, AIBE, IBPS, UGC NET.
_____________
๐Ÿง  Daily Quiz โ†’ @LegalQuizzes

โณ๐Ÿš€ Enjoy Learning!
Download Telegram
Principles required for a Judge


I had once asked Justice Iyer what his guiding principles in his role as Judge were. In his inimitable style, he said it were four and described them thus:===> The first lesson he said, fundamental to life and law, is humility without hubris and humanist hearing without โ€œhigh benchโ€ attitude; ===>the second - which he said touched his judicial heart - was the compassionate treasury of the preamble to the Constitution, particularly the words in its exordium โ€œwe, the people of Indiaโ€; the ===> third, was to hear either side fairly since courage and independence obliged him to give even โ€œthe devil its dueโ€; and ==>finally, Justice Iyer told me that his life has taught him that perfect justice is a mirage and that in pursuit of this illusion, we ought not to jeopardise that justice which is within our grasp.

By Justice Krishna Iyer (as he then was)

#BeingJudge@CurrentLegalGK
๐Ÿ‘4๐Ÿ‘Œ2๐Ÿ’ฏ2
๐•ƒ๐”ผ๐”พ๐”ธ๐•ƒ โ„‚๐•Œโ„โ„๐”ผโ„•๐•‹ ๐”ธ๐”ฝ๐”ฝ๐”ธ๐•€โ„๐•Š ๐”น๐•ช- โ„•๐•’๐•ฅ๐•ฆ๐•ฃ๐•’๐• ๐•๐•ฆ๐•ค๐•ฅ๐•š๐•”๐•– โ„ข
Reserved Category Candidates Availing Age Relaxation Barred From Migrating To General Category Seats If Rules Forbid : Supreme Court https://www.livelaw.in/supreme-court/reserved-category-candidates-availing-age-relaxation-barred-from-migrating-to-generalโ€ฆ
Ratio: โ€œWhether a reserved candidate who has availed relaxation in fees/upper age limit to participate in open competition with general candidates may be recruited against unreserved seats would depend on the facts of each case. That is to say, in the event there is no embargo in the recruitment rules/employment notification, such reserved candidates who have scored higher than the last selected unreserved candidate shall be entitled to migrate and be recruited against unreserved seats. However, if an embargo is imposed under relevant recruitment rules, such reserved candidates shall not be permitted to migrate to general category seats

Relied: The Court also referred to Saurav Yadav v. State of UP (2020), clarifying that candidates can only be migrated to unreserved seats when no special concession has been availed and no bar exists in the recruitment framework.

Facts: Since a bar to migration existed in the present case, the Court overturned the High Court's decision and denied the migration to the Respondents to the general seats.

UNION OF INDIA v. SAJIB ROY

#COI@CurrentLegalGK
*เคธเฅเคชเฅเคฐเฅ€เคฎ เค•เฅ‹เคฐเฅเคŸ เคฌเฅ‹เคฒเคพ- เคชเฅ‚เคฐเฅ‡ เคฆเฅ‡เคถ เค•เฅ‹ เคธเคพเคซ เคนเคตเคพ เค•เคพ เคนเค•:* เคฆเคฟเคฒเฅเคฒเฅ€-NCR เคนเฅ€ เค•เฅเคฏเฅ‹เค‚, เคฆเฅ‡เคถเคญเคฐ เคฎเฅ‡เค‚ เคชเคŸเคพเค–เฅ‡ เคฌเฅˆเคจ เคนเฅ‹เคจเฅ‡ เคšเคพเคนเคฟเค; เคฆเคฟเคฒเฅเคฒเฅ€ เค•เฅ‡ เคฒเคฟเค เคชเฅ‰เคฒเคฟเคธเฅ€ เคจเคนเฅ€เค‚ เคฌเคจเคพ เคธเค•เคคเฅ‡
https://dainik.bhaskar.com/pMFjXyDbBWb
๐Ÿ‘1
2575220202025-09-12-620196.pdf
626 KB
๐Ÿก Right to shelter discussed.

๐Ÿ“Landmarkโ€”
SHANTISTAR BUILDERS
v.
NK TOTAME,
1990

This recognition casts a corresponding duty on the State to ensure access to adequate housing, particularly for weaker sections.

๐Ÿ—“๏ธRecentโ€”
MANSI BRAR FERNANDES
v.
SHUBHA SHARMA

2025
Reiterated, for housing.

Question โ“
Is it possible to impose positive duty on State under the ambit of the language of Article 21? State has to make shelter for persons.

#COI@CurrentLegalGK
๐Ÿ‘Œ3โค1
1050220192025-09-10-619848.pdf
319.2 KB
HCs should discourage writ or 482 where alternative remedies are available. Nonetheless In
Sakiri Vasu v. State of U.P. 2008

it is equally true that alternative remedy is not an absolute bar for invoking the extraordinary jurisdiction or the inherent jurisdiction of the High Court.

The present case belongs to non registration of FIR on the basis of preliminary inquiry report but the HC has directed it to register on the prima facie finding that cognizable offence has been committed and so the preliminary inquiry is not conclusive because ordinarily it is not required.

Lalita kumari has held that if no cognizable offence is made out then to ascertain cognizable offence is made out preliminary inquiry is held

Constitutional Court has exercised its discretion in entertaining the petitions and directing for the registration of the FIR against the two officers on being satisfied that the commission of a cognizable offence is prima facie made out against them we see no good reason to interfere

@CurrentLegalGK