0ada kr. Biswns V.

Clai d Biole
L Stetk
Tht.i2) (2oo.
atte
Fomatien boy
Managemnt Fonetiau
(4 finuneal Aiel.
bez. god. dao ovcrridiny Contol Ger

4. Bai Rdoy V. TRTS AT (2oo3). At 12

o Tc
îe RISAT knated led wit Petiotion
226. But He TeRIs 47 temated
vganstonnot aa state. Mater
Se obsered- TRIsAT is

Net- Sutþ by govt.

Nov Coholleo ar aceouwtdle to gout.
Cbut Contibuten is miniml.
dan a ole cbegond Dban territoy.
Pl volowty Sowiea, Can't cte
be s

Zec Teima Ltd. UoI (2oos) h./2

BCCT Js not?
foms Pblie Funehen - So, Stat.
Not a sfat.
 Couti,
So Hhe
valid cbe Can Feviolae wieh an
(G). amndmet
(? Addel Govt.
<kisted Metor
of Jot (9ss M.P, V.
St. Jhaky Narain Bhika (8)
provisld. dewil
oSo, Cout befoe dou wan ofkne kld -Cout
and 19(a) vielaky Jt
.bz. Un
beCome, At h thet Peiton
I3() 10), gpuatia- In
mantanable watt wit So
Ua
stete aNot al- SC
12
Bee+.
|2/ 2oisBihan, hsoietiom
go Cieked BCCr
V.
4)
Hedd-
Not Funtion tublie
od So,
Not swiu, asant
its ment oay Jaks VstvsNL
elgu. Tenintd vSNL. tke Tat
deymi'natl Sasthan iaan qana Ul -
ho Uneónhled Uigoidd beCan't
hk sbez At( lotes vio At that (owt ’
treatd Cann
case his that At.4.
d whieh t.eount speial eackd gout. w&.
1952 Sakan ti uwan V. B.
W. SES.
. (2)
wabe. JbCamt
e FR )
Ta« Ltowe
it.gint i'ssee Je Henehmekon.
Can
ail ucie and
U4c,ichis Unde Cout
niaty tmidy teacken, Tamt -
At.12
vaio is Aet hi hine lls. tbika
lo.
telle fo cletion
dn HC's -
Molls Aubika iyt ts
violats ut
(2) 3 toAee: callanged
itto Aulls Anbika
At.
Amika V.
s()
19
 kol;
(3) Kati Raiwi Rauvat V. S. Sarakta

Was Count
Cotndol 's til hd
heuld e oy
nat violtes Ad.4

followed acc. as stete Gort.

(I9) Lrola Sat Sauhy 1993

1974- Mall Ceumissen Jucommnded 2 2 Renwaton er

VP Govt Sewices to OBC.

Rao, issved lo cxha uwati
Latr pv RNanaimha
to Etonewweal Backwed ctiom ot Carte.
’ SC acufhd 2/

Reurateu
Gel
Backwnd Clas yla llu) Can be Welnt
elntGel te
Cat, Not Dn Eioneme Beis.
bass acku..
alka abot oly Socil &Eelvatul
At. 340 lo
Backwand clas in IS() B.c': in l6() Same O Dfe?
Is C1) wulated to Sc/sT keme Dheat.
16(4) walatedto o8.
euryone be gien swvaton, whobely fo
Should
Soco- edcath'oal
andal (ommissi on gaicl who it accillglaholy acka,
backwaol too. Whet mee who s not
ecouo
wtlly backnd ais not ocia
econencaly
Cost 4ae Creamy Layer AS! a to Oß- Not to sc/st
( Maima limit So/.
"Provisien in (604) mut mesaily wmale

to law wkoull be or SL but

Can be mad cby P, SL anl ecuhe Body
So, jt Can
(6) whtkn clae (y)
I64) sort ol), not an
16(9) s exhaustve te vciy Conap kusenwaken
exaute
’ 6(4) is Cakaustive in fawoun ay oBc's omly, not eslhr

othun clasu

(15) Ashok kr. Tkkun V UoT 2008 e

93 Aoundl nt At 2o0
2003 was

imstittioy
eolueational isttitiÝns ike TIT &IM
IIM.

tools het ane wd to fouune

enu
oomk
(1) qulshan lrakash V st Hagana 2alo)
’ letihion want ussUanc wnit ayit eluhionl
itituts
uttotou in HR to allo 22 quet
PG Cowns.
y whethen Cow Can is swe lwnit for jmplemtto

3No, Cout Can not

tis uJa Is().

Som Kakant V. UoI (neo) Stetk A. l2.

Pobl'e funetiou
and whih eom altiea and caniu ut t Jansactoy

-Tnolian Petoleum Cont. tor these aso wa hl be s t

( ae Stt Bombay VFN

FN Balsara.
Balaana Suerabiht
Cowt celad e. I3[) the Beonbay hekbition At
1949 wot
Voilhot the cuhole At. bez. it viobks
At. I9() ) the cowt,
stu
 R.M.D. C V. Uo Seve dlolity
cto cbe in und ile
Ceut eplain allouing toinh katt
Boetie Seeili
Tukutin the etor
vlil Dwadid rovisio Cannot be
wkole At ults
sthe At,
Js
extong om
wht umany Canot Jbe enfored wlo miking athons k
modihieaios ten the whale act munt e struct elewn
voil, othewiu Jt wiI vmeut t
will aneuut

Axt. 1s - How much oewer dou state chave oer

Rivat Duttotio ?

(20) T. M. A. Pai Foundation V. St. knatka

lount J a Could hat mak,
ytat wwtiou Seat
wn edueahional ttohoy.
- D Piat initutiy admisiey Coul de len
(ommon admssien st
jintituheus

Tlam'e ang V. St.

kerala
Sted could hix quota or adlmision
admissies cold de alo thu cbass etrance
 V. St. MH (200s)
ulad
not llewig state
Over
Islamie Socicky Ce Juikrated doy mo}
Positiou
fosihen T.M.A. Pi Cae ws
adisto win pintly
to make vetiem
eoueatenal inytihotions
43Aaunlut adoted is(s)
Then Cane bvisioy for the aolanemet
enalled set to make adissio ún
in eloaton to
s, STs
edweatowel
Abak kr. Thaku
Anndmnt was challingdvalol.

23 m. Naga (eoo)
Petion challngd 99, 8I, 82, 8S emalt.
S Jodge Bneh upld lonati totisnal alility Reervahon in e
Promot
-uphld cousuntl soionith Rale yja l64a), Cany Fononl
Rule ua 16(4B) and roiso to ant. 335.
-Howecr
- Cowt
Anhe s no automatie siht to Jsovatu fromhi
for Sc/ss
Count halo t r watiou romahoa, Sktk Jes to mut
Contain Jpirenma he

nebant
Peve
Jlke Enfkeiency
Maitin the overall Admisation.
2) Selvi V. St. d kannatka Art. 2o(3)
Nanoanalgos, Palggaty and Brain inyn finting (8EA) teat dom
accu wlo thair cost ww Jld viclatie 2o(3)
againt th resnaton individul Sbety
Manka Ga V. UoT (i428) At. 21
Pantant imnhoundd. Al wit ptition Ula 32 Ror violahon hun
7judye beneh l that At. 19 &2| go hand-in-hand and t

Art. I4. That why (9,

I thi's Cau, SC
14,2! Goldn Trarg
overuled Ak.
Daw uhold be jt, ir and earonable."
(1 UDR V. UoT 1982
(ht. 23)
labow not the mimum as mniol
mu'nimm act l948.
Unaguad Diibuhion Tneo amoy mn womn were alss
hiyhty,
Se unterbrutd Stob Avt. 23 in
dhea Cas
Count huld tat he word fora' withn this tel hs a
vey dwide meaing Jineds
Qd othe economwe taetovs which fore a

Jabeun et a way s than the miimum

l
add that (omstuion wovk u's hazalo anl
csloun below 4 mu nt e
buovk.
 Ja Sanhai! Singh v. lachini Nanain Gulh ore) ( Reunke
Promotion duelaaol
het e colleetion t
M. Nagaj. But Cowt asdd /eT
backwandan o selsT s ot n l . bez.
Jhe
a Joacwanl lans
can aclel ercamy layn Csiknia
to Jewathon SeST to At. (4.

(28) Pramat Eslweatoul e Cuthunad Trut V. UoF (24)

Cout tohional Vally
-Ceut ld ! valid ut þro vids he opbertuny to the
Backwd eclan stuct
violate l4 (0,) - to do buins.

21) Seshammel V. St. TN /Ad. 2s224.

TN got. n
Same.

But

Kriest ( Arehka in thi Gase) s a

et is goi
Hune, Count aA
halal
Jhareiht
law vald.
val
30 N. V Travancore Deva suGu Boand. (h4. 2
26
Can Nen- Behmin Priest
Neua Bahn Can be

7 nof,yen thiy povtunty to othes,

othe,iti nolata
wolatu t At. Is.
 (2015)3SCC 251
BCClv. Cricket Association of Bihar
(2015) 16 SCCS30
Dr. Janet Jeyapaul v.SRM University
31B,31C368
B. Law' under Article 13: AlsoArticles 31A,

Doctrine of Eclipse Dacls FR as

() iwtoumam in Dormant stk an veid abini he
P Not Vald ab Post-Coutittionl laws, thy
L £clip nt aplied
AIR 1951 SC 128 52
Keshavan Madhava Menon v. State ofBombay
AIR 1955 SC 781 73
Bhikaji Narain Dhakras v. State of M. P,
(1974) 4 SCC656 55
State of Gujarat v. Sri Ambica Mills

(i) Waiver offundamental rights

AIR 1959 SC 149
Bashesher Nath v. CIT

(ii) Severability
AIR 1951 SC318
State of Bombayv. FN. Balsara
AIR 1957SC 628
RMDC v. Union ofIndia

Peronl Laun is nat dineld wnden dae exprsn

Bembiy v.
(iv) Personal laws
"laws in fore" used ula zlt 33)6).|st. 4 Naraw
(2017) 9 SCC 1
Shayara Bano v. Union of India
qualiy, Humnhh. t u's againt
(Articles 14-18) Twtvnhanel
Talea, coniud as int Topic 2-Right to Equality
equals violates equality clause
A Equality among Equals;Treating un-equals as Classification Permissible
Reasonable
B Classification as such not completely prohibited:
class
C. Single Person may be treated as a separate
Establishment of Special Courts
arbitrary power is antithesis of right to
D
E Conferment and/or exercise of discretionary or
equality
Distribution of state largesse residence;
children; requirements relating to
G. Special provisions for women and the incumbent of an office
being professed by
requirement of a particular religion institution
a religious or denominational
related to
 Special
Reservations in appointments and promotions; and for
Protective Discrimination - citizens
H.
socially and educationally backward classes of
provisions for
Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes
Disabilities Act, 2016
1. The Rights of Persons with
(Reservation in Admission) Act, 2006 sc/sT in eduahimal intitohan
J. TheCentral Educational Institutions aka L periie for
3Anndmnt s (s) addd’ she ca Pirat Jnytittions.
K. Direct and Indirect Discrimination fr adwis iew dneldng

State of W. B. V. AnwarAliSarkar AIR 1952 SC 75

|16
AIR 1952 SC 12 79
Kathi Raning Rawat v. State of Saurashtra
2021 SCCOnline SC
18 LI. Col Nitisha v. Union of lndia
261
tnendme AIR 1993 SC 477; 88
19 Indra Sawhney
dacisi
v.hotUnion of India ullibet,
to qie sewahon n Promot992 Supp (3) SCC 217

20 win vita
M. Nagaraj v. Union of Inaia segelowee (2006)8 SCC 212 196

Ashoka Kumar Thakur v. Union of lndia (2008) 6 SCC1 138

21
22 Gulshan Prakash v. State of Haryana (2010) 1 SCC477 188

23 Rohtas Bhankar v. Union of India (2014)8 SCC872

24 Jarnail Singh v. Lachhmi Narain Gupta (2018) 10SCC 396 220

24A Jarnail Singh lI v. Lachmi Narain Gupta 2022 SCCOnline SC 96

25 BK Pavitra v. Union of India (2017) 4 SCC 620

25A BK Pavitra II v. Union of India (2019) 16 SCC 129

26 Mukesh Kumar v. State of Uttarakhand (2020) 3 SCC I

27 Dr. Jaishri Laxmanrao Patil v. The Chief Minister, 2021 SCCOnline SC 36

Maharashtra 2

28 Pramati Educational & Cultural Trust v. Union of (2014) 8 SCC 1

India

29 Modern Dental College & Research (2016) 7 SC 353

Centre v. State ofMadhya Pradesh
30 Joseph Shinev. Union of India (2019) 3 SCC39
vialatd wenin's
abgy vielates Art. 2),
L Abolition of untouchability (Article 17,35)
(i) The Protection of Civil Rights Act, 1955
(ii) Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment
Act, 2018

State of Karnataka v,Appa Balu Ingale AIR 1993 SCC1126; showd

out st wat 995 Supp (4) SCC469
fom weW. Loweceetee HOs A Hunee

Safai Kymachari Andolan v. Unign of India (2014), 11 SCC 224

33 Prathvi Raj Chauhan v. Union of India (2020) 4 SCC 727

M. Abolition of titles (Article 18)

Balaji Raghavan v. Union of India (1996) 1 SC 361

Mot iolativet Mt. .
-SIA saus to utrive toens eKcallauce.
Topic 3- Right to Freedom (Articles 19-22)
nationals and artificial
A Right to Freedoms available only to citizens of India; Foreign
under Part III of the
persons like bodies corporate (conmpanies) are not citizens either
Constitution of India or under the Citizenship Act, 195S
1. Freedom of speech and expression;
2. Freedom to assemble peaceably and without arms;
3 Freedom to form association or unions or cooperative societies;
4. Freedom to move freely throughout the territory of India;
5. Freedom to reside and settle in any part of the territory of India;
or to carry on any occupation, trade or
6. Freedom to practice any profession,
business.
reasonable restrictions which can be imposed by
The freedoms are not absolute butsubject to term
mentioned in clauses (2) to (6) of Article 19. The
law made by the state for the purposesprohibition.
'reasonable restriction' includes total
2005
(i) The Right to Information Act,
(Mandatory Sharing with Prasar Bharati)
(ii) The Sports Broadcasting Signals
Act, 2007

i t on the Pag of ewsen vialats 19(0(a).

2 SCC788 234
35 Bennett Coleman & Co. v. Union of India,
Chuch- Cout hlalia
Rasonable Reshdethea Fyecdo 249
to
(1995) 2 SCC 161
Secretar, Ministry ofI &B, Govt. of Indiav.
36 teacayt te tournannt hegulahiony
9Cieh Aesoco ho abroach to the Dundarshan to teaeat.
Dunelarchan d ct is h monaooly ener the Cha
(nekt Assoahon Cotnlad violtes Ai Fred to exeion
Cout ld ho menapoly- Telieat Coms bnaler
Frcoon to etuasin
 Maau'
Cout
Auadha Basin in
iws is yoenmisi ble.

Cricket Association of Bengal

Saluauon f l hrgya Singhal v. Union of India dolad unotiH5)5 SCCs it 66A iolat bndn
nottons tHhe 190a)
e
People 's Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL) v., (1997) 1 SCC 301 rtiehomi
thot tew ha Rih hlo kuowUnion of. -S.33B RPA 19s1 hald unctsHtonal Jez itvislak (a).
39
Anradh Bhasinv. Union oflndidnkK, ikmet (2020) 3 SCC637- Frecom Pess lTrade
Shutoown Resbated
40 Foundation for Media Professionals v. Union (2020) S SCC 746
Territory of Jammu and Kashmir &Another
41 Communist Party of India (M) v. Bharat Kumar (1998) 1SCC201
42 AIADMKv. Chief Secretary, Government of (2009) 5 SCC 452
TamilNadu
43 Chintaman Rao v. State ofM.P. AIR 1951 SC118
44 NarendraKumar v. Union of India AIR 1960 SC 430
45 State of Gujarat v. Mirzapur Moti KureshiKassab (2005)8 SCC 534
Jamat
46 TehseenS Poonawala v. Union of India (2018)9 SCC 501

B. Protection in respect of conviction for offences (Article 20)

() Ex post facto Law
(i) Doctrine of Double Jeopardy
(üi) Right against Self Incrimination

|Selvi v. State of Karnataka (2010) 7 SCC 263

C. Protection in life and personal liberty, Doctrine of
Proportionality (Article 21)
48 Maneka Gandhi v. Union ofIndia (1978) 1SCC 248 266

49 AK Roy v. Union ofIndia (1982) 1 SCC 271

National Legal Services Authority v, Union of (2014) 5 SCC 438

51 Animal Welfare Board v. A. Nagaraja (2014) 7 SCC547

Justice KS Puttaswamy v. Union of India (2017) 10 SCC 1 283
Navtej Singh Johar v. Unionof India (2018) 1SCC 791
5S.37 bncoutttonl Rialt to iv with Human
 D. Right to education (Article 21 A)

Pramati Educational and Cultural Trusts v. (2014)8 SCC I

54
Union ofIndia

E. Protection against arrest and detention (Article 22)

(1997) 1SCC 416 303

55 DK Basuv. State of West Bengal
People's Union for Civil Rights v. Union of India (2004)9 SCC 580
56

Topic 4 - Right against Exploitation (Articles 23,24)

(1982) 3 SCC 235
57 People 's Union for Democratic Rights v. Union of
India

25-28)
Topic 5- Right to Freedom of Religion (Articles
TN.Prohibition of Forcible Conversion Act,
The Orissa Freedom of Religion Act, 1967; the
the Uttarakhand Freedom of ReligionAct,
2002; the Gujarat Freedom of Religion Act, 2003; Act, 2019; the Madhya Pradesh Freedom of
Religion
2018; the Himachal Pradesh Freedom of
Religion Act, 2021

beh (1972) 2 SCC 11 314

Seshammalv. State of Tamil Nadu Pujani ha
(2002) 8 SCC 106 328
Devaswom Board
59 N. Adithayan v. Travancore
339
(2004) 12 SCC 770
Commissioner of Police Acharye Snek
Jagadi_hwaranandaAvadhuta Tanlav Dane
60

Sangam v. The (2016) 2 SCC 725

61 Adi Saiva Sivachariyargal Nala
Government of TamilNadu
SCC677
62 Rev. Stainislaus v. State of M.P. u'is t incdJ(1977) 1

gf Kerala NtonAhai9s6).3 SCÇ 615, 349

y y.b
bijoe mane Spatee 2 . thairalierache alck alet
State L2019) 11 SCC 1
Rist w64 Indian Young Lawyers Association v.Bahmcley
Kerala - Lod Asha m
to Eaelh
(S Diseviminetion agait
 Topic 9 - Directive Principles of State Policy (Articles 36-51)
Relationship between the Fundamental Rights and the Directive Principles of State Policy.
Topic 10 Civil Servants(Articles 308-323)

(1985)3 SCC 398 365

74 Union ofIndia v. Tulsiram Patel
(2003) 5SCC 134
75 JP. Bansal v. State of Rajasthan
(1993) 4 SCC727
76 Managing Director, ECIL v. B. Karunakar
(2003) 6 SCC 581
77 T.K. Rangarajanv. Govt. of Tamil Nadu
368)
Topic 11 - Amendment of the Constitution (Article

(1973) 4 SCC225
78 Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala
tattnat
Kihoto Hollohon v.Zachillhu 1992'Supp
79
Valieity
(2007) 2'SC
laws unan 41 e waollenged.
80 LR. Coelho v. State of TamilNadu, dn R
(1997)3 SCC261
India
81 L. Chandra Kumnar v. Union of
(2014)10 SCC 1
ofndia
82 Madras Bar Association v. Union

IMPORTANT NOTE
the course
above are not exhaustive. The teachers teaching
given
1. The topics and cases consult the
shall be at liberty to add new topics/cases.
study the legislations as amended up-to-date and
required to
2. The students are
latest editions of books.