A PIL in the Delhi High Court challenges the Centre’s appointment of over 650 advocates as government counsel, alleging many have not cleared the mandatory AIBE. The Court has asked the Centre to clarify the selection criteria before the next hearing on December 11.
The Delhi High Court has raised serious concerns over the hereditary allotment of lawyers’ chambers, questioning if preferential treatment violates Article 14. The court highlights blatant discrimination affecting first-generation and early-career lawyers in Delhi.
Today, On 28th November, Supreme Court has sought the Rajasthan government’s response to a petition challenging the validity of the Rajasthan Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, 2025. The plea alleges the law contains arbitrary and unreasonable provisions that violate rights.
The Supreme Court will hear NHAI’s review plea challenging the retrospective application of its 2019 land compensation verdict that could cost Rs 32,000 crore. The Bench of Justices Surya Kant and Ujjal Bhuyan has listed the case for open court hearing on November 11, 2025.
The Supreme Court has dismissed a plea challenging the Rs 3,500 fee charged by the Bar Council of India for the All India Bar Examination, holding that the fee is not unconstitutional. The bench said BCI incurs “huge expenses” in conducting the exam.
Bagheera Carrom has moved the Delhi High Court against the new 2025 Online Gaming Act that bans all real-money games. The company argues the law is unconstitutional and violates fundamental rights.
Delhi HC has asked Delhi University to reply to a petition against its rule mandating a Rs 1 lakh security bond for students contesting DUSU polls. Petitioners call it unconstitutional and discriminatory.
The Supreme Court set aside a man’s death sentence in a minor’s rape-murder case, ruling that Article 32 empowers reopening of sentencing if Manoj guidelines were ignored. The Court stressed that the death penalty process must be “open, thorough and fair.”
CJI B R Gavai stressed that Article 14 envisions unequal treatment for unequals, highlighting the need for creamy layer principle within SC/ST reservations. He said children of top officials cannot be equated with those from marginalized labour backgrounds.
Former CJI Sanjiv Khanna told the JPC that the One Nation, One Election bill doesn’t directly weaken the rule of majority-backed governments but warned that deferring polls “may result in indirect President’s rule.” He flagged possible violations of the Constitution’s basic structure and federal principles.
