Court : Kerala
Reported in : AIR1993Ker1
..... disastrous levels of noise, would amount to a clear infringement of their constitutional guarantee of right to life under article 21. right to life, comprehends right to a safe environment, including safe air quality, safe from noise. 25. but, that is not the end of the matter. there are amenities available outside fundamental rights. the spirit often protects what the language does not. one may enjoy ..... orderchettur sankaran nair, j. 1. claiming a fundamental right to use a loud speaker at public meetings to voice his views, petitioner seeks to restrain respondents from interfering with the use of a loud speaker by him. 2. petitioner belongs to a denomination of christianity, known as 'knanaya' christians. thomas of cana came to india from mesopottomia in 344 a.d. and organised ..... 622). 9. in indian express newspapers (bombay) pvt. ltd. v. union of india, air 1986 sc 515, the supreme court of india highlighted the free speech content of article 19 and its parameters. the right is not absolute. for that matter, under the first amendment, restrictions are not alien to the constitutional . scheme. in roth v. u.s. (354 us 746), the supreme court ..... themselves. not all matters peripheral to the exercise of a fundamental right, are part of that right. in smt. maneka gandhi's case air 1978 sc 597, the court held that going abroad is not part of the right under article 19. in the words of rajagopala lyengar (j) in all india bank employees' case, air 1962 sc 171, recognition of a series of .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Allahabad
Reported in : 1998(1)AWC48
..... take life and kill animals. a butcher may have his profession but he cannot claim it as a fundamental right by the constitution. otherwise, it will be a negation of the tenants of our constitution. the constitution of india has a chapter on fundamental duties. this is chapter iv-a- article 51a(g) ordains 'compassion for living creatures'.6. thus, the court is unable to persuade itself ..... that butchery as a profession can be claimed as a fundamental right of a citizen. that a butcher may slaughter and make a ..... vocation and profession is their fundamental right, that is to say, to slaughter buffaloes and make a business from the meat which they sell.4. the court has considered this matter very carefully and heard the submissions of learned counsel for the petitioners on the writ petition.5. the court is of the view that the constitution of india does not permit any citizen .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Karnataka
Reported in : 2003(4)KarLJ1
..... has been filed by the competent authority and the supervisory body - rbi, it has to be accepted. otherwise also, this court cannot investigate in the writ jurisdiction particularly in pil, though in appropriate case, if there is any violation of fundamental right, direction can be issued. but, as stated learned counsel has ..... perused the material on record.11. no doubt in an appropriate case, this court can issue directions if there is any gross violation of fundamental right or if the issue touches the conscience of the court, but at the same time no direction can be issued for personal gain, publicity, ..... not been able to show violation of any fundamental rights. in view of the counter and in the facts of the given case, no direction ..... by the bank to deal with the grievance raised by the 4th respondent. thereafter, he filed w.p. no. 19064 of 2000 questioning the constitution of grievance committee and for quashing the transfer order dated 8-10-1997. however, he was retained. it is also stated that he remained ..... is also stated that the cbi has closed the case after verifying the allegations. it is submitted that the petitioner has therefore no legal right nor there is any violation which can be invoked by the petitioner in this public interest litigation petition. therefore, the public interest litigation petition .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1997SC3828; JT1997(7)SC180; 1997(5)SCALE209; (1997)6SCC623; Supp3SCR63; 1997(2)LC610(SC); (1997)3UPLBEC2217
..... rules which may have prospective or retrospective operation, the said rules may be open to challenge on the ground of violation of the provisions of the constitution, including the fundamental rights contained in part iii of the constitution.19. in triloki nath khosa : (1974)illj121sc (supra), rules had been framed altering the criterion of eligibility for promotion from the post of assistant engineer to ..... of andhra pradesh : 1scr930 , the appellant was employed in the service of the former indian state of hyderabad prior to coming into force of the constitution of india. on coming into force of the constitution the appellant continued in the service of that state till he retired from service on january 21,1956. the appellant claimed that he was entitled to be ..... that the said amendments in the rule insofar as the same were given retrospective effect were unjust, unreasonable and were violative of article 14 of the constitution. a review application filed by the union of india against the said judgment of the ernakulam bench of the tribunal was dismissed by order dated july 25, 1990. special leave petition no. 10373 of ..... had been working as railway guards. some of them had retired from service while some had filed the writ petition in a representative capacity through the general secretary of all india guards council. in the said writ petition the petitioners challenged the validity of the order of the railway board as contained in the letter dated march 22, 1976 whereby the .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1952SC339; 1SCR744
..... initio and for all purposes an earlier law which was inconsistent with fundamental rights, it was laid down by this court in that case 'that such laws existed for all past transactions and for enforcing all rights and liabilities accrued before the date of the constitution.' (per das. j, at page 234) 19. mr. ..... contravenes the provisions of article 31, sub-clause (2) and article 19(1)(f) of the constitution. (2) the order is discriminatory and offends article 14 of the constitution. (3) under the defence of india rules under which the accommodation control order was made, the allotment can only be of houses available for ..... individual' was invalid because the regulation of letting and and sub-letting under clause (bb) could not only be for the defence of british india or for the efficient prosecution of the war, or for maintaining supplies and services essential to the life of the community, and that the taking ..... it is not available for being let. 27. there was no requisition of property in this case under section 75 (a) of the defence of india rules. the control order was promulgated under rule 81 (2) (bb) which provides for the regulation of letting and sub- letting houses. it is ..... discrimination was not pressed. 25. then we come to ground no. 3, clause (bb) of sub-clause (2) of rule 81 of the defence of india rules is in these terms :- (bb) for regulating the letting and sub-letting of any accommodation or class of accommodation, whether residential or non-residential, whether .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Mumbai
Reported in : AIR1992Bom214
..... to ensure supremacy of the constitutional law in every walk of life. pre-constitutional laws are void to the extent of their inconsistency with the provisions ..... any kind, not even the custom or usage having the force of law, from the basic requirement of constitutional law that every law and law in force must necessarily conform to the fundamental rights enshrined in part iii of the constitution of india. i requested the learned advocate for the petitioner to issue a letter of request on behalf of the court ..... notand is bound to enforce it as it is, even if it appears to he repugnant to one or other of the fundamental rights guaranteed under part iii of the constitution of india?(c) whether the provisions of sunni muslim 'personal law' sought to be enforced in the courts of law to the effect that a son is entitled to ..... immune from challenge under article 13 of the constitution of india and need not conform to fundamental rights4. it is well-settled that every action of the state-legislative, executive or judicial must necessarily conform to the constitution of india including chapter on fundamental rights enshrined in part iii of the constitution of india. article 12 of the constitution defines 'state' in widest sense so as .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Karnataka
Reported in : ILR1999KAR1715; 1999(5)KarLJ193
..... state legislatures to make laws is limited in two ways, viz., the division of legislative powers between the states and the federal government and the fundamental rights (bill of rights) incorporated in the constitution. in india, the position is similar to the united states of america. the power of the parliament or for that matter, the state legislatures is restricted in ..... and iti are 'other authorities' under article 12, it is only for the purpose of chapters iii and iv of the constitution of india for enforcement of fundamental rights, and not with reference to the other chapters of the constitution much less with reference to use of the expression 'other authorities' occurring in a statute like karnataka municipal corporations act, 1976. ..... has to be considered independently.35. there is no dispute that the definition of 'state' within article 12 of the constitution of india is intended to apply in chapters iii and iv of the constitution dealing with the fundamental rights and directive principles. but there is no bar to incorporate the words 'other authorities' as understood in article 12 in ..... government and the legislature of each of the states and all local or other authorities within the territory of india or under the control of the government of india'.the definition is made applicable only to fundamental rights and directive principles.14. the constitution empowers state to establish any 'instrumentality' or 'agency', statutory or otherwise, for the purpose of fulfilment .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : 2000(1)ALD(Cri)117; 1999(6)ALT249; 2000CriLJ1297
..... to prevent commission of crime, the history sheet of the petitioner should be continued etc., is not sufficient. in matters involving breach of fundamental rights under articles 14, 19 and 21 of the constitution of india especially the right to life and liberty under article 21 the reasons should be rational and satisfy the court that the continuation of the history sheet is ..... in that, the surveillance is excessively obtrusive and invasive, it may seriously encroach on the privacy of a citizen as to infringe the fundamental right to privacy and personal liberty under article 19(1)(d) of the constitution of india and the same is impermissible.(2.8) even where there is statutory sanction for surveillance against history sheeter/rowdy sheeter, principle in 2 ..... that arise for consideration, it should be held that maintenance of history sheet/rowdy sheet for a long time violates not only right to privacy under article 21 and also other fundamental rights under articles 14 and 19 of the constitution of india. the points no. i and iii are decided in favour of the petitioner.51. in re point no. ii: 'human ..... opening of history sheet for limited period and maintaining history sheet in perpetuity would grossly violate the fundamental rights of the petitioner to move freely and also his right to privacy which is now recognized as a right flowing from article 21 of the constitution of india. the learned counsel would further submit that maintaining history sheet for a long time would result in .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Allahabad
Reported in : 2005(4)AWC3745; 2005(4)ESC2489
..... legislature as well as other instrumentalities of the state (reference article 12 of the constitution of india). any law made in violation of fundamental rights would be null and void (reference article 13 of the constitution of india).27. there is a broad distinction between fundamental rights guaranteed by the constitution and those rights which are guaranteed by a statute. if the statute deals with the ..... university having been incorporated as a legal juristic person under a legislative act of 1920, as such cannot claim fundamental right guaranteed for citizens under the constitution of india nor the members of the minority community can claim such a fundamental right in respect of a body incorporated.50. it is no doubt true that in the case of azeez basha ..... muslim university act itself and declared to be a body corporate (section 3 of the act), started asserting a fundamental right guaranteed by article 30 of the constitution of india. as already held by the hon'ble supreme court, such rights are available to citizens only and therefore the statutory body like the academic council and executive council could not have ..... (supra), the hon'ble supreme court has held that a person not possessed of a fundamental right cannot challenge the validity of a law on the ground that it is unconstitutional. fundamental right (article 30 of the constitution of india) are available to a citizen of india only. admittedly the aligarh muslim university cannot be held to be a citizen, as it is .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1993SC2178; JT1993(1)SC474; 1992(2)SCALE703; (1993)1SCC645; 1SCR594
..... learned brother has set out the facts, i will confine myself to answering the three questions, namely:1. whether the constitution of india guarantees a fundamental right to education to its citizents?2. whether there is a fundamental right to establish an educational institution under article 19(1)(g)?3. does recognition or affiliation make the educational institution an instrumentality? ..... maharashtra institute of technology, pune questioning the correctness of mohini jain and praying for issuance of a declaration that the petitioner has a fundamental right under article 19(1)(g) of the constitution of india to establish and run a self-financing engineering college subject to compliance with the regulatory requirements of the statute. the petitioner has ..... says the petitioner.part - iiquestion no.]: 'whether the constitution of india guarantees a fundamental right wo education to its citizens ?155. right to education is not stated expressly as a fundamental right in part iii. this court has, however, not followed the rule that unless a right is expressly stated as a fundamental right, it cannot be treated as one. freedom of press ..... and the following three questions, which were framed by us at the hearing. the three questions are:(1) whether the constitution of india guarantees a fundamental right to education to its citizens?(2) whether a citizen of india has the fundamental right to establish and run an education institution under article 19(1)(g) or any other provision in the .....Tag this Judgment!