Manupatra Academy

Explore. Learn. Upskill. All Things Law

Courses, Cases, Research, and Resources in One Place

New

Internships

Opportunities : Playbook : Videos

Learn More

Law Notes (1^st - 5^th Year)

Structured notes with flashcards to help law students grasp core subjects quickly.

Know More

Manupatra Certified Legal Research Program

Module-based learning : Legal research skills : Certification test

Learn More

Courses

Structured learning : Practice-oriented modules : Different stages of legal practice

Learn More

News and Recent Judgment Gist

News
Gist

1. Allahabad High Court seeks reply on forensic laboratory shortage in Uttar Pradesh

Allahabad High Court seeks reply on forensic laboratory shortage in Uttar Pradesh

The Allahabad High Court's Lucknow bench expressed concern that Uttar Pradesh has only one state Forensic Science Laboratory and 12 regional forensic laboratories, noting that the existing infrastructure is inadequate for the state's size and population, as reported by Press Trust of India. A division bench of Justices Rajesh Singh Chauhan and Ram Manohar Narayan Mishra directed the director of the Uttar Pradesh Forensic Science Laboratory to file a detailed reply within four weeks while hearing a public interest litigation filed by advocate Piyush Gupta. The petition seeks directions to the state government to frame and notify a standard operating procedure setting maximum timelines for forensic examinations and report submission, priority for cases involving accused persons in judicial custody, and time-bound procedures for cases under Section 193(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, which requires investigations into specified sexual offences to be completed within two months. The petitioner also sought a mechanism requiring the laboratory director to record written reasons for delays beyond prescribed timelines and regular reviews of pending cases by a designated officer. The plea argues that delays in forensic reports can adversely affect trials involving undertrial prisoners, hamper prosecution in serious offences including rape and murder, and prolong the wait for justice for victims and their families. The court sought a detailed response from the state forensic laboratory director, and the matter will next be heard in the week beginning November 30, according to PTI.

2. Supreme Court flags MCA control over NCLT, NCLAT, issues notice on contractual staff plea

The Supreme Court on Thursday said the Ministry of Corporate Affairs had "completely hijacked" the National Company Law Tribunal and the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal, affecting their autono

3. Allahabad High Court: Promoter Must Obtain All Flat Owners' Consent Under Section 5(3)(a) for Layout Changes

Allahabad High Court: Promoter Must Obtain All Flat Owners' Consent Under Section 5(3)(a) for Layout Changes

The Allahabad High Court held that a promoter must obtain the written consent of all apartment owners under Section 5(3)(a) of the Uttar Pradesh Apartment (Promotion of Construction, Ownership and Maintenance) Act, 2010 before altering the plans, specifications and common areas disclosed to buyers when they purchased their flats. Justices Saral Srivastava and Sudhanshu Chauhan rejected the contention that consent is not required for alterations within the permissible floor area ratio. The Court noted that Section 5(3)(a) gives each owner's percentage of undivided interest in common areas and facilities a permanent character, alterable only with the written consent of all apartment owners and approval of the competent authority, while Section 4(1)(c) and (d) require the promoter to disclose approved plans, specifications and common-area details. The dispute concerned a group housing layout at 95, Katori Mill, Mohan Nagar, Sahibabad, Ghaziabad, sanctioned on 29.05.2006 for 34 towers and 904 dwelling units and cancelled on 03.07.2010 after Hindon Air Base officers objected to the promoter's title. The Ghaziabad Development Authority compounded the map on 15.11.2011, 13.01.2015 and 18.12.2024, the last regularising the ninth and tenth floors of Towers 16, 17, 18 and 19 and two new towers. Eleven apartment owners claimed their consent was not taken, the Authority was hand in glove with the promoter, and Indian Air Force land was counted in calculating the permissible floor area ratio. The promoter and Authority argued that Section 5(3)(a) applies only where the promoter seeks to increase the sanctioned number of dwelling units; that 1603 units were permissible on available FAR against 1096 sanctioned, so common areas and facilities were not reduced; and that the petitioners did not live in the towers to which floors were added. The Court relied on its Division Bench decision in M/s Designarch Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. v. Vice Chairman, Ghaziabad Development Authority and the Supreme Court's decision in Supertech Limited v. Emerald Court Owner Resident Welfare Association, which held that revised plans reducing the value of each flat owner's undivided interest in common areas breached Section 5 without consent, and that beyond minor additions and alterations under Section 4(4), a promoter cannot change plans and specifications without the previous consent of the intending purchaser. The Court observed that the first petitioner's sale deed was executed on 07.09.2012, after the first compounding, but recited only the layout sanctioned on 29.05.2006 and did not mention the 15.11.2011 compounding.

4. Women's Group Moves Supreme Court Against Transgender Persons Act Section 7, Rule 7

Women's Group Moves Supreme Court Against Transgender Persons Act Section 7, Rule 7

Women's Declaration International India, a women's group, has approached the Supreme Court challenging Section 7 of the Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Act, 2019, as amended in 2026, and Rule 7 of the Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Rules, 2020, along with related regulatory provisions that allow biological males to obtain opposite gender certificates and official documents recording a gender different from their biological sex. The petitioner also seeks reconsideration and clarification of the Supreme Court's 2014 judgment in National Legal Services Authority v. Union of India (NALSA), which recognised transgender persons' right to legal recognition of gender identity. The petitioner contends that these provisions adversely affect statutory protections and benefits specifically guaranteed for biological women, while stating that it supports provisions for transgender persons and does not question the right to identify or oppose discrimination against transgender persons. Senior Advocate Amit Sibal appeared for the petitioner, and Solicitor General Tushar Mehta said the reply in the main batch is being prepared and would include a response to this petition. A bench comprising CJI Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice V Mohana posted the petition along with other petitions challenging the 2026 amendment to the Transgender Protection Act. During the hearing, the court and counsel discussed arguments concerning biological sex, gender identity and statutory rights exclusive to biological females; the SG argued that the issue of conferring positive rights based on identification could be left to the legislature.

5. Andhra Pradesh High Court Holds Repeated Extensions Do Not Give Temporary Employees Right To Continue In Service

Andhra Pradesh High Court Holds Repeated Extensions Do Not Give Temporary Employees Right To Continue In Service

The Andhra Pradesh High Court dismissed a writ plea by 12 temporary employees of Sri Venkateswara University, Tirupati, who challenged the discontinuation of their services. The petitioners were initially appointed on a daily-wage basis for 89-day terms, and their engagements were extended from time to time with a one-working-day break between terms. They approached the court under Article 226 after the Registrar orally told them not to report for duty, reportedly following Vice-Chancellor instructions not to extend daily-wage engagements. The petitioners claimed violation of natural justice and their fundamental rights because no prior notice, formal order or hearing was given, and relied on the principle that an ad hoc employee cannot be replaced by another ad hoc employee. The university contended that the petitioners had been engaged afresh for fixed 89-day periods, outside the regular recruitment process, and that the workload did not justify permanent engagement; it said the engagements ended automatically on expiry and no separate termination order was needed. The court examined the appointment terms, which stated that the engagement was temporary, that the service would not count as university service, and that the appointment could be discontinued at any time without prior notice. It held that the petitioners had no enforceable right to continue beyond the specified tenure, that expiry by efflux of time did not amount to termination requiring natural justice compliance, and that repeated extensions did not create a right. The plea was dismissed.

1. ECL Finance Ltd. and Ors. vs. Abhinav Mukherjee and Ors. (27.10.2026 - SC)(MANU/SC/1224/2026)

The Supreme Court of India addressed the appeals by ECL Finance Ltd. and IDBI Trusteeship Services Ltd. against the NCLAT's decision affirming their exclusion from the Committee of Creditors (CoC) as

2. Raju Shantaram Koli vs. The State of Maharashtra (27.10.2026 - SC)(MANU/SC/1223/2026)

The Supreme Court of India addressed whether Raju Shantaram Koli's consecutive life sentences for murder and rape should run concurrently. The court referenced the precedent set in Muthuramalingam v.

3. Union of India (UOI) vs. Mohamed Rifas (27.10.2026 - SC)(MANU/SC/1222/2026)

The Supreme Court of India addressed whether a foreign citizen accused under the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAP Act) is entitled to bail, considering Section 43D(7) of the Act. The Union of I

4. Lakshmi Sugar Mills Co. Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi-II (27.10.2026 - SC)(MANU/SC/1225/2026)

The Supreme Court of India addressed whether the unpaid excise duty of Rs. 69,91,983 on uncleared closing stock could be added to Lakshmi Sugar Mills Co. Ltd.'s taxable income under Sections 43B and 1

5. Balakrishna (Dead) thr. L.Rs. vs. G.N. Kanniah Naidu (Dead) thr. L.Rs. and Ors. (26.10.2026 - SC)(MANU/SC/1218/2026)

The Supreme Court of India addressed the dispute between the legal representatives of Balakrishna and G.N. Kanniah Naidu regarding the ownership of Site No. 261 in Munnekolala New Extension, Bangalore

View More Gist.. View More News..

Law Students Hub

Notes : Flashcards : Landmark Cases & more…

Learn More

New

Legal Glossary

Complex terms decoded : Easy explanations

Learn More

On-demand Courses

Recorded classes : Comprehensive reading material :Quiz

Learn More

Self-Paced Certification

Courses to upskill or reskill

Learn More

Webinars

Recordings of experts views :Diverse topics

Learn More

Law Teachers Hub

Readings : Resources for legal educators

Learn More

Legal Posts

Explainers : Blogs : Articles : Case Analysis

Learn More

Survey Reports

AI Adoption : Technology in law

Learn More

Illustrated Cases

Legal Design : Supreme Court Cases : Multilingual Exploration

Learn More

New

Case Infographics

Quickly understand key facts, court decisions, and legal principles through easy-to-follow infographics.

Know More

Our Partners

Why Join Manupatra Academy

Brought to you by Manupatra the leaders in legal tech domain.

Curated Resources: A vast repository of meticulously compiled resources tailored for educators and learners.
Diverse Courses: An array of courses designed to cater to various levels of expertise, from beginners to advanced.
User-Friendly Interface: Accessible on any device, our intuitive interface ensures seamless navigation.

What Our Learners Say

User-Friendly Interface: Accessible on any device, our intuitive interface ensures seamless navigation.

Certification Courses 3-Day Civil Drafting Workshop

It was extremely beneficial and practical… really helped me understand the nuances of civil drafting and boosted my confidence in preparing real pleadings.

Certification Courses 3-Day Civil Drafting Workshop

The sessions were so insightful and well-structured… the faculty explained every concept with patience and clarity, which made learning much easier.

Certification Courses 3-Day Civil Drafting Workshop

Honestly, it was a great learning experience… the course covered everything from plaints to petitions in such a smooth and engaging way.

Certification Courses 3-Day Civil Drafting Workshop

The workshop was very hands-on and practical… I really liked the live feedback and the real examples shared during drafting exercises.

Certification Courses 3-Day Civil Drafting Workshop

Very well conducted and informative… I just wish it could’ve been a bit longer because the sessions were that helpful.

Certification Courses Mastering Microsoft Word for Legal Work

The session was honestly eye-opening! I never realized how much time I was wasting on formatting until now.

Certification Courses Mastering Microsoft Word for Legal Work

Really practical and focused on what lawyers actually need… I can already see how it’ll save hours in my daily work.

Certification Courses Mastering Microsoft Word for Legal Work

The trainer made even the technical tools so easy to understand… and I loved how they used real pleading examples.

Certification Courses Mastering Microsoft Word for Legal Work

Very relevant for lawyers and interns alike… it bridges the tech gap we all face while working on documents.

Certification Courses Mastering Microsoft Word for Legal Work

A concise and super useful masterclass… I now feel confident managing citations, templates, and formatting with ease.