Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News
Calcutta High Court acknowledged the concerns raised by the petitioner regarding the potential harm caused by the notification to the affected dog breeds.
Calcutta High Court held “in the absence of any claim being made by the respondents during the six months’ performance guarantee period, the petitioners are entitled to refund of the entire amount of security deposit.”
Calcutta High Court emphasised on the importance of conducting the elections to avoid a “headless state of affairs” in the Council and to uphold the democratic process.
Calcutta High Court clarified that Court’s findings are confined to the allegations related to the applications under Section 340 CrPC and would not prejudice the outcome of any independent criminal cases or investigations against the petitioner.
Calcutta High Court stated that show-cause notices are analogous to a First Information Report (FIR) and are not required to detail the probative value of the Forensic Audit Report at this stage.
Calcutta High Court affirmed tender issuing authority’s expertise in interpreting the tender document and underscored the limited scope of judicial review in such matters.
Calcutta High Court upheld the maintainability of the writ petition under Article 226, given the challenge is on the grounds of arbitrariness and illegality in the repudiation process.
The Calcutta High Court recognised the issue involved in the present matter transcendence beyond a mere legal dispute, as it involved the petitioner’s fundamental rights.
Calcutta High Court allowed the writ petition, emphasising the importance of following legal provisions in appointments to public offices and maintaining the integrity of the Waqf Board.
The Calcutta High Court held that the impugned order is not a violation of specific legal rights or an arbitrary decision.
Calcutta High Court held that petitioner’s delay in initiating the root search impacts the availability of certain documents, and no penal action can be taken against the adoption agency for the absence of the surrender deed.
Respondent authorities are instructed to proceed with the tender process based on the original tender document.
The Calcutta High Court affirmed the petitioner’s locus standi, i.e., right to challenge the election process based on the infringement of rights as a registered medical practitioner.
In a case related to modification of a security order related to the arrest of a vessel and claim for damages due to business losses, the Calcutta High Court ruled in favour of respondent, but acknowledged the appellant’s prima facie case for damages.
The Competent Authority’s power to act on complaints is not limited to complaints made by the Association or a majority of its members, it also extends to cases where the Association or its top management might be involved in the alleged wrongdoings
Calcutta High Court emphasized the importance of considering the conduct of prisoners while in jail to ascertain their potential for committing further crimes after a long period of detention.
Calcutta High Court observed that the Contractors have a duty to ensure their labor force complies with safety norms, and WBSEDCL is responsible for overall supervision.
Calcutta High Court emphasized on the need to strike a balance between Article 30 of the Constitution of India and public interest.
Calcutta High Court held that the writ petition was not a PIL but had personal elements involving the respondents, who were directly affected by the alleged financial scam.
In the instant matter, the Calcutta High Court dismissed an application for addition of the applicant as a party in a writ petition challenging the assessment of stamp duty.