Law and Literature

The legal footing earlier was that if the court found that the termination was illegal, reinstatement with full back wages would eventually follow but this legal dynamic has gradually changed overtime and now the court is of the view that if  the employment of a temporary workman is terminated or retrenched in violation of section 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947  and if the termination was not justified with specific reasons and was found illegal, a one time monetary compensation is the correct remedy and not reinstatement or regularization with back wages. The proviso of section 25F  of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947   states that: No workman employed in any industry who has been in continuous service for not less than one year under an employer shall be retrenched by that employer until— a)  the workman has been given one month’s notice in writing indicating the reasons for retrenchment and the period of notice has expired, or the workman has been ...

The Singapore International center for arbitration is one of the leading international arbitration centers in the world, It is the mostly favored arbitration institute by companies for its competitive cost, efficient adjudication in a very time constrained manner. This article highlights the advancements made in the field of commercial dispute resolution in India over the years, its drawbacks and the Indian law ministry's endeavor to improve and adjudicate commercial disputes and how India can proceed further given the country's rapid improvements in the global market and on the path to become the fifth largest economy in the world. India at present is not  geographically distant  to the world and the endeavor  should remain the same   with respect to choosing India as a favored place for arbitration like Singapore. ADVANCEMENST  IN TECHNOLOGY IN THE LEGAL FIELD IN LAST FEW YEARS IN INDIA. l  Online service of summons The Supreme Court of India in  Cen...

"history owes an apology to the members of this community and their families, for the delay in providing redressal for the ignominy and ostracism that they have suffered through the centuries.”  - Justice (retd) Ms.Indu Malhotra. A review petition challenging to re -look the judgement passed in ‘ Suprio & Anr vs Union of India 2023 INSC 920  was dismissed by the supreme court on 9 th  January, 2025. The revised bench refused to revisit the already well structured 3:2 majority constitutional judgement that failed to legalize same sex marriage in 2024. Has the supreme court of justice denied the legal recognition of same sex marriage or has the Supreme Court rightly justified its reasoning due to its constitutional limitations and restrictions? The Supreme court in its landmark judgement in  NALSA vs UOI 2014 SC 1863  had categorically recognized transgender people as a ‘third gender’  observing that gender identity is not to be categorized with respect t...