Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: citizenship constitution of india Court: supreme court of india Year: 1981 Page 1 of about 14 results (0.091 seconds)

Dec 30 1981 (SC)

S.P. Gupta Vs. President of India and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Dec-30-1981

Reported in : AIR1982SC149; 1981Supp(1)SCC87; [1982]2SCR365

..... to be integral parts of a union which is far and away the more real political entity and the basis of our nationhood. secondly, the constitution of india recognises only one citizenship, a common citizenship or the entire indian people, with equal rights and opportunities throughout the union.348. speaking in the same strain the src further observed thus:849. ..... federation of states like the united states of america. the word 'federation' is not used in the constitution of india. there is no dual citizenship in india as we find it in the united states of america. the constitution of india contemplates only one citizenship, only one loyalty and only one sovereignty. the geographical area covered by the states and the union territories ..... mentioned in the first schedule to the constitution and such other areas that may be acquired constitute the territory of india which is an indivisible and indestructible whole though ..... seeks to achieve should always be kept in view. current usage and a priori reasoning should also be used as the tools of interpretation of the constitutional provisions. the constitution of india in order to ensure sound administration has entrusted separate powers to different organs of the state, charging all of them with the joint responsibility of securing .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 21 1981 (FN)

Fedorenko Vs. United States

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Jan-21-1981

..... necessary to protect the rights of our naturalized citizens. in chaunt, the issue presented was whether failure to reveal certain prior arrests in response to a question on a citizenship application form constituted misrepresentation or concealment page 449 u. s. 519 of a material fact for purposes of the denaturalization statute. [ footnote 2/1 ] id. at 364 u. s. 351 ..... need to safeguard admission to united states citizenship, in accord with the will of congress, against a citizen's right to feel secure in the exercise of his constitutional freedoms. by concluding that an impaired investigation may justify the loss of these freedoms, the court of appeals ..... were closely tied to his expression of political beliefs or activities implicating the first amendment. [ footnote 2/15 ] citizenship determinations continue to involve judgments about a person's "good moral character" or his attachment "to the principles of the constitution," see 8 u.s.c. 1427(a), and the judiciary's task remains the difficult one of balancing a ..... conditions precedent to naturalization is simply an acknowledgment of the fact that congress alone has the constitutional authority to prescribe rules for naturalization, [ footnote 25 ] and the courts' task is to assure compliance with the particular prerequisites to the acquisition of united states citizenship page 449 u. s. 507 by naturalization legislated to safeguard the integrity of this "priceless .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 15 1981 (FN)

Jones Vs. Helms

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Jun-15-1981

..... to migrate from state to state, which, i agree with mr. justice douglas, is shown by our precedents to be one of national citizenship, is not, however, an unlimited one. in addition to being subject to all constitutional limitations imposed by the federal government, such citizen is subject to some control by state governments. he may not, if a fugitive from ..... the nature and essential character of the national government or are specifically granted or secured to all citizens or persons by the constitution of the united states." "and he went on to state that one of those rights of national citizenship was 'the right to pass freely from state to state.' id. at 211 u. s. 97 ." id. at 314 u. ..... concludes, ante at 452 u. s. 422 , that where departure "aggravates the consequences of conduct that is otherwise punishable," it may merit enhanced punishment. i doubt that a state constitutionally may impose greater penalties for all crimes simply because the accused leaves the jurisdiction. to hold otherwise ignores the availability of summary interstate transfer procedures under the extradition clause, and ..... has examined state statutes imposing durational residence requirements that deprived new residents of rights or benefits available to old residents, to determine whether such requirements penalized citizens for exercising their constitutional page 452 u. s. 421 right to travel. [ footnote 17 ] in all of those cases, the statute at issue imposed a burden on the exercise of the right to .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 15 1981 (FN)

Federated Department Stores, Inc. Vs. Moitie

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Jun-15-1981

..... .c. 1441(b): "any civil action of which the district courts have original jurisdiction founded on a claim or right arising under the constitution, treaties or laws of the united states shall be removable without regard to the citizenship or residence of the parties." removability depends solely upon the nature of the plaintiff's complaint: an action may be removed to federal ..... , the only remaining issues concern the claims of respondent brown. [ footnote 2/2 ] as the district court acknowledged, brown ii could not be removed on the basis of diversity of citizenship, because the amount in controversy did not exceed $10,000. app.190. the court correctly noted, however, that the action could have been removed without regard to the amount in ..... of the actions originally filed in the district court were assigned to a single federal judge, and the moitie i case was removed there on the basis of diversity of citizenship and federal question jurisdiction. the district court dismissed all of the actions "in their entirety" on the ground that plaintiffs had not alleged an "injury" to their "business or property ..... court only if a "right or immunity created by the constitution or laws of the united states [constitutes] an element, and an essential one, of the plaintiff's .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 18 1981 (FN)

Parratt Vs. Taylor

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : May-18-1981

..... . . . displaces state lawmaking authority by diverting decisionmaking to the federal courts." whitman, supra, at 25. the present case, involving a $23 loss, illustrates the extent to which constitutional law has been trivialized, and federal courts often have been converted into small claims tribunals. there is little justification for making such a claim a federal case, requiring a decision ..... the societal costs of using this statute for a purpose never contemplated are high indeed: "first, the existence of the statutory cause of action means that every expansion of constitutional rights [through 1983] will increase the caseload of already overburdened federal courts. this increase dilutes the ability of federal courts to defend our most significant rights. second, every ..... already exist, the risk of error that may result in violation of a schoolchild's substantive rights can only be regarded as minimal. imposing additional administrative safeguards as a constitutional requirement might reduce that risk marginally, but would also entail a significant intrusion into an area of primary educational responsibility." id. at 430 u. s. 682 . (emphasis ..... since erie r. co. v. tompkins, 304 u. s. 64 (1938), there has been no general common law applicable in federal courts merely by reason of diversity of citizenship jurisdiction. therefore, in order properly to decide this case, we must deal not simply with a single, general principle, however just that principle may be in the abstract, but .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 25 1981 (FN)

Middlesex County Sewerage Auth. Vs. Sea Clammers

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Jun-25-1981

..... suit on his own behalf to enjoin any person, including the united states and any other governmental instrumentality or agency (to the extent permitted by the eleventh amendment to the constitution), who is alleged to be in violation of any prohibition, limitation, criterion, or permit established or issued by or under this subchapter. the district courts shall have jurisdiction, without ..... regard to the amount in controversy or the citizenship of the parties, to enforce such prohibition, limitation, criterion, or permit, as the case may be." "(2) no action may be commenced -- " "(a) prior to sixty days after ..... perform any act or duty under this chapter which is not discretionary with the administrator." "the district courts shall have jurisdiction, without regard to the amount in controversy or the citizenship of the parties, to enforce such an effluent standard or limitation, or such an order, or to order the administrator to perform such act or duty, as the case ..... own behalf -- " "(1) against any person (including (i) the united states, and (ii) any other governmental instrumentality or agency to the extent permitted by the eleventh amendment to the constitution) who is alleged to be in violation of (a) an effluent standard or limitation under this chapter or (b) an order issued by the administrator or a state with respect .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 02 1981 (FN)

Dames and Moore Vs. Regan

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Jul-02-1981

..... international agreements settling claims by nationals of one state against the government of another "are established international practice reflecting traditional international theory." l. henkin, foreign affairs and the constitution 262 (1972). consistent with that principle, the united states has repeatedly exercised its sovereign authority to settle the claims of its nationals against foreign countries. though those settlements have ..... that the act was passed in response to a situation unlike the recent iranian crisis. congress in 1868 was concerned with the activity of certain countries refusing to recognize the citizenship of naturalized americans traveling abroad and repatriating such citizens against their will. see, e.g., cong.globe, 40th cong., 2d sess., 4331 (1868) (sen. fessenden); id. at ..... of the president forthwith to demand of that government the reasons of such imprisonment; and if it appears to be wrongful and in violation of the rights of american citizenship, the president shall forthwith demand the release of such citizen, and if the release so demanded is unreasonably delayed or refused, the president shall use such means, not ..... in returning the citizens in exchange for any sort of ransom. this also explains the reference in the act to imprisonment "in violation of the rights of american citizenship." although the iranian hostage-taking violated international law and common decency, page 453 u. s. 677 the hostages were not seized out of any refusal to recognize .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 20 1981 (FN)

City of Memphis Vs. Greene

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Apr-20-1981

..... involve any impairment to the kind of property interests that we have identified as being within the reach of 1982. we therefore must consider whether the street closing violated respondents' constitutional rights. iv in relevant part, the thirteenth amendment provides: "neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist ..... been duly convicted, shall exist within the united states, or any place subject to their jurisdiction." [ footnote 2/4 ] the fear that the former slaves were doomed to second-class citizenship was supported by the report submitted by major general carl schurz to president andrew johnson. s.exec.doc. no. 2, 39th cong., 1st sess. (1865). president johnson had assigned schurz ..... u. s. 129 prohibited by the amendment itself. we merely hold that the impact of the closing of west drive on nonresidents of hein park is a routine burden of citizenship; it does not reflect a violation of the thirteenth amendment. the judgment of the court of appeals is reversed. [ footnote 1 ] section 1982 provides: "all citizens of the united ..... of that charter of freedom. proper respect for the dignity of the residents of any neighborhood requires that they accept the same burdens as well as the same benefits of citizenship regardless of their racial or ethnic origin. this case does not disclose a violation of any of the enabling legislation enacted by congress pursuant to 2 of the thirteenth amendment .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 22 1981 (FN)

Michigan Vs. Summers

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Jun-22-1981

..... apprehending suspects, an interest important enough to overcome the presumptive constitutional restraints on police conduct. at issue in terry was "more than the governmental interest in investigating crime; in addition, there is the more immediate interest of the police officer ..... 452 u. s. 707 different from those two special exceptions to the warrant and probable cause requirement, and poses a significantly greater threat to the protections guaranteed by the constitution. i the common denominator of the terry cases and the border checkpoint cases is the presence of some governmental interest independent of the ordinary interest in investigating crime and ..... ohio, 392 u. s. 1 , 392 u. s. 23 -24. the second is a brief stop of vehicles near our international borders to question occupants of the vehicles about their citizenship. e.g., united states v. brignoni-ponce, 422 u. s. 873 , 422 u. s. 881 . from these two special exceptions to the general prohibition on seizures not based on ..... confronted by roving border patrol agents, though not sufficient to justify random stops of vehicles page 452 u. s. 699 near the mexican border to question their occupants about their citizenship, id. at 422 u. s. 882 -884, [ footnote 9 ] were adequate to support vehicle stops based on the agents' awareness of specific articulable facts indicating that the vehicle .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 26 1981 (FN)

Clayton Vs. Automobile Workers

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : May-26-1981

..... these cases, for example, clayton alleges that the union "acted arbitrarily . . . and discriminatorily" in refusing to seek arbitration of his grievance. app. 6 (emphasis added). the uaw constitution, however, states that the public review board can only consider allegations that the employee's grievance "was improperly handled [by the union] because of fraud, discrimination, or collusion with management ..... affecting commerce . . . may be brought in any district court of the united states having jurisdiction of the parties, without respect to the amount in controversy or without regard to the citizenship of the parties." [ footnote 10 ] section 203(d) of the labor management relations act, 61 stat. 153, 29 u.s.c. 173(d), provides that "[f]inal ..... from the procedures at issue here. in these cases, the court is asked to require exhaustion of internal union procedures. these procedures are wholly a creation of the uaw constitution. they were not bargained for by the employer and union, and are nowhere mentioned in the collective bargaining agreement that clayton seeks to have judicially enforced. [ footnote 12 ..... representation in processing his grievance, and that his employer breached the collective bargaining agreement, must also attempt to exhaust the internal union appeals procedures established by his union's constitution before he may maintain his suit under 301. i after eight years in the employ of itt gilfillan, clifford e. clayton, a member of the united automobile, aerospace .....

Tag this Judgment!


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //