A. Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016—Sections 16, 45—MBBS Admission—PwD Merit List—Functional Ineligibility—Exclusion of PwD candidates from the PwD merit list for MBBS admission, based on the Medical Board’s finding of functional ineligibility, is valid where the Board conducts a lawful and reasoned assessment—Such exclusion does not violate the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 or NEET UG-2025 guidelines when the decision is based on functional assessment, adherence to NMC norms, and consideration of patient safety and clinical competency—Petitioners failed to establish arbitrariness, illegality, or procedural infirmity. (Paras 7, 14, 25, 26, 29) B. National Medical Commission (NMC)—Interim Guidelines for AY 2025-26—Functional Competency-Based Eligibi...

A. Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Act, 1994—Sections 38(1) & 38(3) read with Rule 22, Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Rules, 1996—Disqualification of Elected Member—Disqualification order passed without comprehensive inquiry and opportunity for cross-examination violates principles of natural justice and due process; preliminary findings cannot form basis for disqualification. B. Right to Contest Elections—Fundamental Right—Right to contest elections is subject to statutory restrictions which must follow principles of natural justice and due process; disqualification must comply with strict statutory procedure and cannot be arbitrary. C. Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Act, 1994—Sections 38(1)(b) & 38(3)—Nature of Disqualification Order—Order declaring member guilty of misconduct and disqualifying...

A. Sri Karan Narendra Agriculture University Act, 2013—Sections 25-A(1) and 25-A(2)—Suspension of Vice-Chancellor—Chancellor’s power—Conditions precedent—Mandatory consultation with State Government, notice to University, and opportunity to show cause not complied with—Suspension order dated 07.10.2025 quashed. (Paras 29, 32, 35, 39, 42) B. Principles of Natural Justice—Audi alteram partem—Right to fair hearing—Suspension without notice or opportunity to show cause violates natural justice. (Paras 37, 38, 39) C. Sri Karan Narendra Agriculture University Act, 2013—Section 9(2)—Notice of inspection or inquiry—Chancellor’s duty—Failure to notify University of inquiry intention constitutes procedural lapse. (Para 30) D. Sri Karan Narendra Agricu...

A. Master Plan—Adherence—Jaipur Development Authority (JDA) and Rajasthan Housing Board (RHB) must follow the Master Plan strictly after public circulation and objections; arbitrary actions influenced by private developers are impermissible and undermine public confidence. (Para 38) B. Urban Planning—Deviation from Master Plan—Deviations allowed only for natural causes (floods, earthquakes); political or personal gains cannot justify altering the Master Plan. (Para 38) C. Illegal Regularization—Actions of JDA and RHB—Issuing NOCs and regularizing colonies on acquired land is impermissible; responsible officers must be held accountable. (Para 39) D. Encroachments and Unauthorized Constructions—Removal—Courts must adopt strict approach; illegal constructions should not be regularized ...

A. Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023—Section 528 BNSS—Inherent Powers—High Court empowered to modify bail conditions imposed by itself under Section 483 BNSS by invoking inherent powers under Section 528 BNSS to prevent miscarriage of justice, as bail conditions are interlocutory and modifiable. (Paras 4, 7, 12) B. Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023; CrPC, 1973—Sections 403 BNSS, 362 CrPC—Fuctus Officio Doctrine—Rejected argument that High Court loses power to modify bail after passing order; modification is a distinct inherent power separate from reviewing final judgment. (Paras 5, 6, 11) C. Constitution of India—Article 21—Right to Personal Liberty—Right to travel abroad recognized as fundamental right under Article 21, subject to reasonable restrictions balancing libe...

...

A. Constitution of India, 1950—Article 226—Writ Petition—Termination of Service—Forged Educational Documents—Petitioners appointed as Junior Accountants based on B.Com. qualifications—Verification revealed no admission or degree from alleged university—Termination upheld as cancellation of appointment for lack of eligibility, no separate enquiry required. (Paras 3, 15, 18, 19, 22, 24, 32) B. Penal Code, 1860 (IPC)—Sections 420, 467, 468, 471—Forgery and Fraud—Acquittal in Criminal Case—Petitioners acquitted on benefit of doubt—Acquittal does not entitle continuation in service based on forged documents due to different standards of proof. (Paras 8, 20, 21, 30, 31) C. Service Law—Termination of Probationer Trainee—Fraudulent Misrepresentation—Ap...

Civil Procedure Code, 1908—Order 6 Rule 17—The petitioners/tenants challenged the judgment dated 31.05.2025 passed by the Appellate Rent Tribunal, affirming the eviction order of the Rent Tribunal dated 12.10.2022 under Section 9 of the Rajasthan Rent Control Act, 2001—The eviction was sought by the respondent/landlord on grounds of personal bona fide necessity and sub-letting—The Tribunal rejected the ground of sub-letting but upheld the landlord’s bona fide need and passed an eviction order—Petitioners contended that the tenancy existed in the name of a partnership firm, M/s Vyapar Udhyog Pratishtan, and not the individual tenant, and that the non-joinder of the firm and a third partner rendered the eviction application defective—The Court held that the original tenancy was with Shankar Lal Fate...

Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947—Section 5(2)—This judgment pertains to the legality of investigation and conviction in a corruption case involving a Central Government employee under Section 161 IPC and Section 5(1)(d) read with Section 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947—The appellant challenged the trap proceeding conducted by the State Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB), contending it was unauthorised since only the Delhi Special Police Establishment (CBI) could investigate such matters—The Court rejected this argument, holding that State Police officers of rank not below Deputy Superintendent of Police are empowered to investigate offences under Section 5-A of the Act, even against Central Government employees—It cited relevant case law including H.N. Rishabud v. State of Delhi and Munna Lal v. St...

Rajasthan Municipalities Act, 2009, Section 39(1)—The petitioner, Chairperson of the Municipal Council, Karauli, challenged her suspension and initiation of judicial inquiry under Section 39(1) of the Rajasthan Municipalities Act, 2009, in relation to alleged illegal issuance of pattas—The Court held that preliminary fact-finding by subordinate officers does not vitiate proceedings, as such actions are administrative in nature and the principle of delegatus non potest delegare does not apply—The Court clarified that Article 14 does not support “negative parity,” and the petitioner cannot seek relief merely because no action was taken against the co-signing Commissioner—Suspension, being a temporary measure and not a punishment, was justified in view of serious allegations—The Court reaffirmed that...