SC: Menstrual Health is a Fundamental Right under Article 21; Orders Free Sanitary Pads in Schools  ||  Supreme Court: Industrial Court is the Proper Forum to Decide Issues Relating to Contract Labour  ||  Supreme Court: Only Civil Court of Original Jurisdiction Can Extend Arbitral Tribunal’s Mandate  ||  SC: Demolition of Private Property Must Rest on Clear Statutory Grounds and Due Consideration  ||  SC: After Complaint Was Withdrawn, BCI Disciplinary Committee Could Not Penalise Advocate  ||  MP HC: Decree Holder Cannot Defeat Compromise or Initiate Execution by Refusing Debtor’s Cheque  ||  MP HC: Spouse’s Income Cannot Be Clubbed With Public Servant’s for Disproportionate Assets Case  ||  Ker HC: Bar Association is Not Employer & Cannot Form Internal Complaints Committee under POSH Act  ||  SC: Ex-Contract Workers Must Be Preferred When Employers Replace Contract Labour With Regular Staff  ||  SC: Waqf Tribunals Cannot Hear Claims over Properties Not Listed or Registered under Waqf Act    

Meg. HC: HC/SC Can’t Interfere with Views of Specialized Body Unless Grossly Inappropriate - (10 Jul 2023)

CIVIL

Meghalaya High Court has held that body that deals with a particular type of matters is expected to have greater command over law applicable in the field and a Constitutional Court would not interfere with a view expressed on interpretation unless it appears to be grossly inappropriate.

Tags : MEGHALAYA HIGH COURT   SPECIALIZED BODY   CONSTITUTIONAL COURT  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2026 - All Rights Reserved