The Supreme Court said a plea challenging NTA’s decision to cancel and re-conduct NEET-UG 2026 for nearly 22 lakh candidates will be heard after court recess along with other NEET matters before Justice P.S. Narasimha Bench.
Former ADGHS Dr. Mangala Kohli approached the Supreme Court challenging NTA’s decision to cancel and re-conduct NEET-UG 2026 for nearly 22 lakh candidates, raising concerns over fairness, proportionality, accountability, and constitutional rights.
The Supreme Court issued notice on Centre’s plea seeking transfer of petitions challenging the Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Amendment Act, 2026 from various High Courts. The Court stayed proceedings and indicated it may hear the constitutional challenge.
The Calcutta High Court is examining the legality of recognising rebel TMC MLA Ritabrata Banerjee as Leader of Opposition in the West Bengal Assembly. Hearing Sobhandeb Chattopadhyay’s challenge, the Court directed that the Speaker’s recognition order be placed on record and scheduled further hearing for June 16.
The Bombay High Court granted industrialist Anil Ambani interim protection from prosecution and penalties in a tax-evasion case while admitting his petition challenging provisions of the Black Money Act. Ambani contends that certain provisions of the law are unconstitutional and violate the Constitution of India.
A petition before the Supreme Court challenges the reappointment of Bihar Panchayati Raj Minister Deepak Prakash, questioning the constitutional validity of a non-legislator continuing in ministerial office. The plea seeks a writ of quo warranto and interpretation of Article 164(4) of the Constitution.
The Supreme Court said it will await the outcome of a nine-judge Constitution Bench judgment before deciding a plea filed by a Parsi woman. The plea seeks directions to the Nagpur Parsi Panchayat to ensure equal treatment for women who marry persons belonging to another faith.
The Supreme Court of India expressed concern over successive governments failing to enact legislation ensuring the independent functioning of the Election Commission of India during hearings challenging the validity of the 2023 appointment law.
The Supreme Court of India observed that if every religious practice or ritual is challenged before constitutional courts, it could lead to excessive litigation, weakening religions and affecting India’s civilizational fabric, while stressing that religion remains deeply connected with the country’s social structure.
The Supreme Court ruled that Parliament is not bound by any undertaking given by the Centre before the Court while enacting a law. The remark came during the hearing on challenges to Section 152 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, which replaces the old sedition provision.
