Filter posts by category

strangest legal cases ever filed in India
Law school

Strangest Legal Cases Ever Filed in India

By / / 14 minutes of reading

The strangest legal cases ever filed in India reveal the quirks and complexities of the Indian legal system, from a parrot arrested for verbal abuse to a woman suing a TV station for a wrong weather forecast. These bizarre lawsuits, spanning identity theft, consumer grievances, and even supernatural claims, highlight the diverse challenges faced by courts. This blog explores some of the most unusual cases in Indian legal history, offering insights for Judiciary, APO, and JLO aspirants preparing for 2025 exams.

Strangest Legal Cases Ever Filed in India Read More »

Doon School Trademark Relief
Legal Updates, Landmark Judgements

Doon School Trademark Relief 2025: Dehradun Court’s Interim Order

By / / 10 minutes of reading

In a significant ruling, the Doon School Trademark Relief 2025 was granted by a commercial court in Dehradun, restraining Doon School, Srinagar from using the trademark ‘The Doon School’. The interim order protects the 94-year-old institution’s reputation. The Doon School Trademark Relief 2025 highlights the importance of trademark protection in education. This blog explores the Doon School Trademark Relief 2025, its background, and implications for Judiciary, APO, and JLO aspirants preparing for 2025 exams.

Doon School Trademark Relief 2025: Dehradun Court’s Interim Order Read More »

Tamil Nadu Governor Action Illegal
Landmark Judgements

Tamil Nadu Governor Action Illegal 2025: Article 200 Explained

By / / 13 minutes of reading

In a landmark ruling, the Supreme Court in State of Tamil Nadu v. The Governor of Tamil Nadu and Anr declared the Tamil Nadu Governor Action Illegal 2025 by reserving 10 re-enacted bills for the President as illegal and erroneous. The court set aside all subsequent actions. It clarified Article 200 and set timelines for gubernatorial decisions. The Tamil Nadu Governor Action Illegal 2025 ruling stresses that Governors must not create roadblocks. This blog explores the Tamil Nadu Governor Action Illegal 2025 judgment, Article 200, and its significance for Judiciary, APO, and JLO aspirants preparing for 2025 exams.

Tamil Nadu Governor Action Illegal 2025: Article 200 Explained Read More »

Supreme Court RJS Ruling 2025
Job Updates, Landmark Judgements

Supreme Court RJS Ruling 2025: No Relief for Late Caste Certificates

By / / 10 minutes of reading

In a significant decision, the Supreme Court RJS Ruling 2025 in Sakshi Arha v. The Rajasthan High Court and Ors. dismissed appeals by five candidates for the Rajasthan Civil Judge post. The court upheld the Rajasthan High Court’s decision to deny appointments due to late submission of caste certificates. The Supreme Court RJS Ruling 2025 emphasizes strict adherence to cut-off dates. This blog explores the Supreme Court RJS Ruling 2025, its background, and implications for Judiciary, APO, and JLO aspirants preparing for 2025 exams.

Supreme Court RJS Ruling 2025: No Relief for Late Caste Certificates Read More »

8th April 2025 Current Affairs
Current Affairs

8th April 2025 Current Affairs for Judiciary, APO & JLO Exam

By / / 15 minutes of reading

Stay updated with the 8th April 2025 Current Affairs for Judiciary, APO, and JLO exams, covering Sudarsan Pattnaik’s historic win at the Fred Darrington Sand Art Award, Justice Arun Palli’s appointment as Chief Justice of J&K and Ladakh High Court, PM Modi’s inauguration of the New Pamban Rail Bridge, and more. These events are crucial for aspirants preparing for 2025 exams, offering insights into legal, cultural, and infrastructural developments.

8th April 2025 Current Affairs for Judiciary, APO & JLO Exam Read More »

Chhattisgarh Civil Judge Exam Postponed
Job Updates

Chhattisgarh Civil Judge Exam Postponed: High Court Stays Recruitment

By / / 13 minutes of reading

The Chhattisgarh Civil Judge Exam postponed, as the Chhattisgarh High Court stayed the recruitment process on April 7, 2025, aligning with other state judiciary exams halted due to the Supreme Court’s reserved judgment in All India Judges Association v. Union of India. The court directed the Chhattisgarh Public Service Commission (CGPSC) to maintain the status quo, impacting aspirants across states. This blog explores the postponement, today’s court proceedings, and its implications for Judiciary, APO, and JLO aspirants preparing for 2025 exams.

Chhattisgarh Civil Judge Exam Postponed: High Court Stays Recruitment Read More »

Prompt Medical Care is a Fundamental Right
Landmark Judgements

Prompt Medical Care Is a Fundamental Right

By / / 14 minutes of reading

In the case of House Owners Welfare Association (Regd.) v. State of Haryana and others (2025 P&H HC), the Punjab and Haryana High Court ruled that prompt medical care is a fundamental right under Article 21 of the Constitution, refusing to quash a layout plan incorporating a clinic in Sector 17, Panchkula, despite claims of increased traffic. Justices Sureshwar Thakur and Vikas Suri emphasized the importance of accessible healthcare for the elderly and disabled, balancing it against the right to trade under Article 19(1)(g). This blog explores the ruling, its legal implications, and its significance for Judiciary, APO, and JLO aspirants preparing for 2025 exams.

Prompt Medical Care Is a Fundamental Right Read More »

Landmark Judgements

Munnesh v. State of UP (2025 SC): New Supreme Court Guidelines on Bail and Anticipatory Bail

By / / 13 minutes of reading

In Munnesh v. State of UP (2025 SC), the Supreme Court issued new guidelines on bail and anticipatory bail, mandating petitioners to disclose their criminal antecedents in the petition synopsis. Justices Dipankar Datta and Manmohan warned that false disclosures could lead to petition dismissal, addressing the issue of non-disclosure that often misleads courts. This blog explores the Supreme Court guidelines on bail, their implications, and their relevance for Judiciary, APO, and JLO aspirants preparing for 2025 exams.

Munnesh v. State of UP (2025 SC): New Supreme Court Guidelines on Bail and Anticipatory Bail Read More »

Landmark Judgements, Job Updates

Supreme Court Guidelines on Setting Aside Selection Process: State of West Bengal v. Baishakhi Bhattacharyya (2025 SC)

By / / 16 minutes of reading

In State of West Bengal v. Baishakhi Bhattacharyya (2025 SC), the Supreme Court laid down 4 key principles for setting aside an entire selection process due to irregularities, upholding the cancellation of 25,000 teaching and non-teaching appointments by the West Bengal SSC in 2016. Justices Sanjiv Khanna and Sanjay Kumar emphasized systemic fraud, evidence standards, and the priority of process purity over candidate inconvenience. This blog explores the Supreme Court guidelines on setting aside selection process, their implications, and their relevance for Judiciary, APO, and JLO aspirants preparing for 2025 exams.

Supreme Court Guidelines on Setting Aside Selection Process: State of West Bengal v. Baishakhi Bhattacharyya (2025 SC) Read More »

Landmark Judgements

Supreme Court on Bonus Rights: Charitable Trusts Must Pay Workers Bonus

By / / 16 minutes of reading

In Management of Worth Trust v. The Secretary, Worth Trust Workers Union (2025 SC), the Supreme Court ruled that charitable trusts running factories cannot deny workers their bonus rights under the Payment of Bonus Act, 1965, emphasizing employee welfare. Justices Sudhanshu Dhulia and K. Vinod Chandran rejected the trust’s claim for exemption, ordering bonus payments within a month. This blog explores the Supreme Court on bonus rights, its implications, and its relevance for Judiciary, APO, and JLO aspirants preparing for 2025 exams.

Supreme Court on Bonus Rights: Charitable Trusts Must Pay Workers Bonus Read More »

Landmark Judgements

Essential vs Over Qualification in Govt Jobs: Supreme Court’s Landmark Ruling in Jomon KK v. Shajimon P (2025 SC)

By / / 17 minutes of reading

In Jomon KK v. Shajimon P (2025 SC), the Supreme Court clarified that there is no universal rule to prefer candidates with higher qualifications over those with the essential qualification in government jobs, emphasizing fairness in the selection process. Justices Dipankar Datta and Manmohan upheld the exclusion of a candidate with a Syrang’s licence from the post of Boat Lascar, highlighting the need for a level playing field. This blog explores the Supreme Court on essential vs over qualification, its implications, and its relevance for Judiciary, APO, and JLO aspirants preparing for 2025 exams.

Essential vs Over Qualification in Govt Jobs: Supreme Court’s Landmark Ruling in Jomon KK v. Shajimon P (2025 SC) Read More »

Shopping Basket
Scroll to Top