The Supreme Court has said private employers can include a clause in appointment letters specifying that any employment-related disputes must be resolved in a particular court or jurisdiction. A bench comprising Justices Dipankar Datta and Manmohan said a contract was a legally binding agreement, regardless of the parties involved or their strengths. "The right to legal adjudication cannot be taken away from any party through contract but can be relegated to a set of courts for the ease of the parties," it said. In the dispute at hand, the court observed, the clause did not take away the right of the employee to pursue a legal claim but only restricted them to pursue the claims before the courts in Mumbai alone. The apex court was hearing appeals filed by two employees of HDFC Bank appointed in Patna and Lord Krishna Bank in Delhi, respectively. The banks in both cases had mentioned in their appointment letters that any dispute between the parties leading to legal action must be .
Specifies how long governors can hold on to Bills passed by state Cabinet
The Supreme Court on Tuesday directed the MCD to start 'massive' awareness drives through advertisements in print, electronic and social media to educate bulk waste generators in the national capital. A bench of Justices Abhay S Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan said bulk waste generators produced large quantity of solid waste daily. "We direct MCD to start massive awareness campaigns about the duties of various stakeholders under Rule 4 of 2016 rules by making advertisements in media both traditional, electronic and social media platforms," the bench said. The top court said the MCD needed to lay emphasis on the implementation of Rule 4 of the Solid Waste Management (SWM) Rules, 2016 The rule says waste generators, including domestic and institutional generators, have the duty to segregate waste into biodegradable, non-biodegradable, and domestic hazardous waste streams, and to hand over the segregated waste to authorised collectors. The order added, "On MCD 311 app it is possible to register
In the last hearing, the court had directed the Centre and the GST department to file their response to the pleas by online gaming companies
The Centre on Tuesday filed a caveat in the Supreme Court and sought a hearing before any order was passed on the pleas challenging the constitutional validity of the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025. Caveat is filed by a party in the high courts and the apex court to ensure that no orders are passed without hearing it. Over 10 petitions, including those by politicians and the All India Muslim Personal Law Board and Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind, were filed in the top court challenging the validity of the newly-enacted law. Lawyers privy to the development said the petitions were likely to be listed for hearing before a bench on April 15 though it is not reflected on the apex court website as of now. On April 7, a bench headed by Chief Justice Sanjiv Khanna assured senior advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind, to consider listing the petitions. President Droupadi Murmu on April 5 gave her assent to the Waqf (Amendment) Bill, 2025, which was passed by Parliament after heated deba
The bench said it has seen real-life cases of women being sexually assaulted when they go out in open to defecate themselves
The Supreme Court on Tuesday decided to examine pleas challenging the Rs 50 lakh cap on Centre's assistance for treating patients suffering from rare diseases like spinal muscular atrophy (SMA). A bench comprising Chief Justice Sanjiv Khanna and Justice Sanjay Kumar said the petitions on the cap of Rs 50 lakh central assistance to treat diseases would be heard by a bench headed by Justice P S Narasimha in the week commencing May 13. The bench said pharma firm M/s F Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd, which manufactures the SMA drug Risdiplam priced at Rs 6.2 lakh a bottle, had agreed to supply the medicine for free for a year to 24-year-old Seba PA, who hails from Kerala, and suffers from the disorder. She had previously moved the Kerala High Court, which directed the Centre to provide an additional Rs 18 lakh worth of medicines to Seba beyond its Rs 50 lakh cap. The top court on February 24 stayed the high court order after taking note of the Centre's appeal that it couldn't be compelled to ..
Congress leader Rahul Gandhi drew attention of President Droupadi Murmu to the plight of the teachers who were selected through 'fair means'
Observing that courts are not supposed to do moral policing, the Supreme Court on Tuesday set aside an order of the Punjab and Haryana High Court imposing a fine of Rs 10 lakh on political analyst Tehseen Poonawalla for mocking Jain monk Tarun Sagar. A bench of Justices Abhay S Okay and Ujjal Bhuyan quashed the 2019 order of the high court which had directed Poonawala and music composer and singer Vishal Dadlani to pay costs. The top court said the high court was swayed by the fact that the appellant criticised a priest belonging to a particular religion. "What kind of order is this? There was no question of imposing cost. The court acquitted the appellants but imposed cost. Courts are not supposed to do moral policing," the bench said. Poonawala had moved the top court against the high court judgement. The high court had asked Dadlani and Poonawalla to pay Rs 10 lakh each to get the FIR against them quashed. The high court had also said that the fine was imposed to give a messag
The Supreme Court's stay gives interim relief to the West Bengal government, which was under scrutiny over alleged irregularities in the appointment of staff through the SSC recruitment process
The Supreme Court said that Tamil Nadu Governor's move to reserve 10 bills for President's assent 'illegal and arbitrary;' says bills are deemed cleared from date they were re-presented to Governor
SC condemns UP Police for converting civil money matters into criminal cases, warning of a complete breakdown of the rule of law if such misuse continues
The Supreme Court, in a strongly worded verdict last week, upheld an earlier verdict of the Calcutta High Court invalidating over 25,000 appointments of teaching and non-teaching staff
The All India Muslim Personal Law Board has moved the Supreme Court against the constitutional validity of the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025. Earlier in the day, a bench comprising Chief Justice Sanjiv Khanna and Justices Sanjay Kumar and K V Viswanathan agreed to consider, listing for an urgent hearing, the plea of Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind, AIMIM leader Asaduddin Owaisi and others, including Congress MP Mohammad Jawed and AAP MLA Amanatullah Khan on the issue. President Droupadi Murmu on April 5 gave her assent to the Waqf (Amendment) Bill, 2025, which was passed by Parliament after heated debates in both houses. The All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) filed the plea in the top court late April 6. In a press statement, SQR Ilyas, the AIMPLB spokesperson, said the petition strongly objected to the amendments passed by Parliament for being "arbitrary, discriminatory and based on exclusion". The amendments, it said, not only violated the fundamental rights guaranteed under Articles
Judiciaries thrive through collaboration and mutual respect and the signing of a MoU with the Supreme Court of Nepal will build institutional comity for the future, Chief Justice of India Sanjiv Khanna said on Monday. The signing of the memorandum of understanding (MoU) is not a mere formal exchange but the reaffirmation of a centuries-old bond, renewed with a spirit of collaboration, mutual respect and shared purpose, he said at the event. "India and Nepal are more than just neighbouring countries. Our connection is etched in history and civilisational values. From the sacred Himalayas to the spiritual heritage of Gautam Buddha, our ties transcend borders and have withstood the test of time. These ties are not only visible in our traditions but also in the institutions that underpin our democracies," Chief Justice of India (CJI) Khanna said. "Among these institutions, the judiciary holds a sacred place. It guards the Constitution, upholds the rule of law, and ensures justice for al
The protests come days after the Supreme Court upheld a Calcutta HC verdict that invalidated the appointments of over 25,000 teachers and non-teaching staff across state-run and state-aided schools
The Supreme Court on Monday agreed to consider listing for urgent hearing the petitions challenging the constitutional validity of the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025. A bench comprising Chief Justice Sanjiv Khanna and justices Sanjay Kumar and KV Viswanathan took note of the submissions of senior advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind, that there were several petitions on the issue and they needed to be listed for urgent hearing. Besides Sibal, senior advocate Abhishek Singhvi and lawyer Nizam Pasha mentioned other petitions for urgent listing. The CJI, who has done away with the practice of oral mentioning of cases for urgent listing, asked the lawyers to file letters or send mails for getting the matters listed before a bench. When Sibal said the same has already been done, the CJI said, "I will see the mentioning letter in the afternoon and take a call. We will list it." Pasha mentioned the petition filed by Lok Sabha MP Asaduddin Owaisi. President Droupadi Murmu
Last week's Delhi High Court ruling came after Indian news agency ANI sued the US platform last year
The Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind has filed a petition in the Supreme Court challenging the constitutional validity of the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025, claiming it was a "dangerous conspiracy" to strip Muslims of their religious freedom. President Droupadi Murmu on Saturday gave her assent to the Waqf (Amendment) Bill, 2025, which was earlier passed by Parliament after heated debates in both Houses. Several petitions, including one by Samastha Kerala Jamiathul Ulema, have been filed in the apex court challenging the validity of the Act. In its petition, the Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind has said that this law was a "direct attack on the country's Constitution, which not only provides equal rights to its citizens but also grants them complete religious freedom". "This bill is a dangerous conspiracy to strip Muslims of their religious freedom. Therefore, we have challenged the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025, in the Supreme Court, and the state units of Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind will also challenge the constitution
The All India Ulema Board has called the Waqf Bill more dangerous than the erstwhile black laws or jungle laws, claiming that it endangers Islamic properties like mosques and madrasas. Allama Bani Nayeem Hasani, national president of the organisation, told reporters at the Mumbai Press Club here that the main problem with the new bill is that if a government employee makes a claim on a Waqf property, another government staffer will decide on the matter. Claiming that the decision taken by the government employee cannot even be challenged in the high courts or the Supreme Court, Hasani said the bill endangers the existence of Waqf properties like mosques, madrasas, and shelter homes. This way, he claimed, all Islamic properties would be wiped out, and even the assets of Sikh, Christian, and other communities would meet a similar fate in the future. This is not a Hindu-Muslim issue, but a matter of justice, he said. Hasani also claimed that all black laws are passed under the cover