Op EdsOP. ED.

by Jai Anant Dehadrai† and Md Tasnimul Hassan††

Case BriefsSupreme Court

“When the migrant labourers form more than 1/4th population of the country, all Governments/authorities have to take special care regarding welfare of these migrant workers/labourers.”

Chhattisgarh High Court
Case BriefsCOVID 19High Courts

Chhattisgarh High Court: A Division Bench of Prashant Kumar Mishra ACJ. and Parth Prateem Sahu, J. laid down noteworthy observations regarding various

Case BriefsSupreme Court

Supreme Court: The bench of Ashok Bhushan and MR Shah, JJ has refused to pass any direction in the petition seeking effective

Case BriefsCOVID 19High Courts

Madhya Pradesh High Court: The Division Bench of Mohammad Rafiq, CJ. and Sujoy Paul, J., decided on a petition which was filed

Case BriefsSupreme Court

Delhi High Court had called oxygen shortage a ‘George Floyd moment for the citizens’ and had held the imposition of IGST on oxygen concentrators imported by individuals, unconstitutional.

Case BriefsHigh Courts

Delhi High Court: The Division Bench of Rajiv Shakdher and Talwant Singh, JJ., disposed of the petition which was filed in order

Case BriefsHigh Courts

Tripura High Court: The Division Bench of Akil Kureshi, CJ., and S. Talapatra, J., activated a public interest petition which was initiated

Case BriefsCOVID 19High Courts

Himachal Pradesh High Court: A Division Bench of Tarlok Singh Chauhan and Chander Bhusan Barowalia, JJ passed directions against the respondents in

Case BriefsCOVID 19High Courts

Delhi High Court: The Division Bench comprising of Vipin Sanghi and Rekha Palli, JJ., addressed the issue regarding rising death toll due

Case BriefsCOVID 19High Courts

Delhi High Court: The Division Bench of Vipin Sanghi and Rekha Palli, JJ., while addressing the concerns arising out the COVID-19 pandemic,

Case BriefsCOVID 19High Courts

A mask is a `Suraksha kavach’ for preventing the spread of the corona virus.

 

Case BriefsCOVID 19Supreme Court

There was no justification shown by the Government to restrict the relief of not charging interest on interest with respect to the loans up to Rs. 2 crores only and that too restricted to only 8 categories.

Case BriefsSupreme Court

“We are of the opinion that the order dated 15.03.2020* has served its purpose and in view of the changing scenario relating to the pandemic, the extension of limitation should come to an end.”

Case BriefsCOVID 19Supreme Court

“Even if one survives from COVID-19, many times financially and economically he is finished.”

Case BriefsCOVID 19Supreme Court

No such direction has been issued by the Government of India.

Case BriefsCOVID 19Supreme Court

Supreme Court: The 3-judge bench of L. Nageswara Rao, Hemant Gupta and Ajay Rastogi, JJ has issued directions to ensure education of

Case BriefsSupreme Court

Supreme Court: In a breather to customers in the case relating to waiver of interest on loan during the moratorium period, the

Case BriefsCOVID 19Supreme Court

Supreme Court: Refusing to interfere with the Delhi High Courts order staying Delhi Government’s decision to reserve 80% of ICU beds in

Case BriefsSupreme Court

Supreme Court: The 3-judge bench of Ashok Bhushan*, R. Subhash Reddy and MR Shah, JJ has asked the Central Government to consider