Bombay HC Sets Aside Discriminatory Manual Scavenging Compensation for Private Workers; Orders ₹30 Lakh

Kerala HC Upholds 4% Disability Quota in Promotions, Sets Aside Contempt Interim Order

Kerala High Court has upheld the 4% disability quota in promotions, confirming the Kerala Administrative Tribunal's 2022 order in favour of an employee with 40% benchmark disability. It, however, set aside the tribunal's 2024 interim contempt order, ruling that positive directions cannot be issued in contempt proceedings. The judgment reinforces Supreme Court precedents in Siddaraju and Leesamma Joseph.

Bombay HC Rules Community Health Volunteers Entitled to Minimum Wage Under 1948 Act

The Bombay High Court has ruled that community health volunteers working for the BMC are entitled to minimum wages under the Minimum Wages Act, 1948, rejecting the argument that their honorarium exempts them. This judgment strengthens labour rights for contractual and volunteer workers, an important topic for UPSC labour jurisprudence and social security.

Bombay HC Upholds SC Order: Scheduled Caste Status Only for Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists

The Bombay High Court rejected a Muslim man's plea to be declared a Scheduled Caste, upholding the 1950 Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order which restricts SC status to Hindus, Sikhs, and Buddhists. The Court ruled it is bound by existing Supreme Court precedent under Article 141, even while a constitutional challenge is pending in the apex court. This decision reinforces the legal position that religious conversion can lead to loss of SC status.

SC & HCs Affirm Women's Bodily Autonomy: Menstrual Leave, Choice of Partner, Homemaker Value

In five recent rulings, the Supreme Court and various High Courts have strongly affirmed women's bodily autonomy, dignity, and personal liberty. Key judgments include upholding the right to choose a partner, recognizing the invaluable contribution of homemakers, and directing consideration of paid menstrual leave for women conductors. These rulings signal a progressive judicial shift that places women's agency over traditional social norms.

Karnataka High Court: Degree or Past Employment Doesn't Negate Homemaker Status, Enhances Compensation from ₹4.55L to ₹6.52L

The Karnataka High Court ruled that a woman's education or prior employment does not disqualify her from being considered a 'homemaker' for accident compensation. This landmark judgment redefines 'homemaker' as gender-neutral and emphasizes the value of unpaid domestic work, directly impacting Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 claim calculations.

Bombay HC Orders Reimbursement to 4 NEET Toppers Denied Govt Seats Due to EWS, Maratha Quotas

The Bombay High Court has directed the Maharashtra government to reimburse fees of four medical students who were denied government college seats despite higher NEET scores, due to the application of EWS and Maratha quotas. The court criticized the 'non-transparent' implementation of the state's reimbursement scheme and upheld the primacy of merit. This judgment is significant for understanding the judicial scrutiny of reservation policies and the principle of merit in public admissions.

Patna High Court Orders Family Pension for Second Wife Under Rule 23(2) of Bihar Conduct Rules

The Patna High Court has directed reconsideration of a second wife's family pension claim, emphasizing that long-standing marital relationship and six children cannot be ignored. The court faulted authorities for overlooking a 1982 permission application, applying Rule 23(2) of Bihar Government Service Conduct Rules, 1976. This judgment highlights the balance between service conduct rules and social reality.

Bombay HC: Private Forest Vesting Under 1975 Act Not Automatic, State Must Follow Procedure

The Bombay High Court ruled that the Maharashtra government cannot automatically declare private lands as 'private forests' under the 1975 Act without following due procedure, overriding the presumption that any forest land vested in the State on August 30, 1975. This judgment, based on Supreme Court precedents, affects hundreds of landholders and clarifies a recurring legal dispute between property rights and forest conservation.