LL.

B IV Term

LB 401 CONSTITUTIONAL LAW - II

Cases Selected and Edited By

Kamala Sankaran
Mahavir Singh
Meena S. Panicker
Akash Anand
Anjay Kumar Sharma
Anju Sinha
Anumeha Mishra
Balajinaika BG
Basuki Nath Dubey
Cholaraja Mudimannan
Krishna Murari Yadav
Narender Nagarwal
Parikshet Sirohi
Pramod Tiwari
Seema Singh
Upendra Nath
Vikesh Ram Tripathi

FACULTY OF LAW
UNIVERSITY OF DELHI, DELHI- 110 007

May 2022

(For private use only in the course of instruction)

 LL.B. IV Term
Paper: LB – 401: Constitutional Law – II

[Fundamental Rights, Directive Principles of State Policy, Civil Servants

and Amendment of the Constitution]

Prescribed Text: The Constitution of India, 1950

Prescribed Books:
1. D.D. Basu, Shorter Constitution of India (15th ed., 2018)
2. H.M. Seervai, Constitutional Law of India (4 th ed., Vol 1 (1991), Vol. 2 (1993),
Vol. 3 (2019 Rep.)
3. M.P. Jain, Indian Constitutional Law (8th ed., 2018)
4. M. P. Singh, V. N. Shukla’s Constitution of India (13th ed., 2019)
5. S. Choudhary, M Khosla and PB Mehta, The Oxford Handbook of the Indian
Constitution (1st ed. , 2016)
6. Udai Raj Rai, Fundamental Rights and their Enforcement (2011)
Recommended Readings:
1. Granville Austin, The Indian Constitution: Cornerstone of a Nation (1966)
2. Granville Austin, Working a Democratic Constitution - A History of the Indian
Experience (1999)
3. B. Shiva Rao, The Framing of India’s Constitution– Select Documents (1967)
4. Report of the National Commission to Review the Working of the Constitution
(2002)

Topic 1 – Fundamental Rights (General)

A. ‘State’ under Article 12

1 Som Prakash v. Union of India (1981) 1 SCC449 2

2 Pradeep Kumar Biswas v. Indian Institute of (2002) 5 SCC 111 17
Chemical Biology
3 G. Basi Reddy v. International Crops Research (2003) 4 SCC225 32
Institute
4 Zee Telefilms Ltd. v. Union of India (2005) 4 SCC 649 35
5 State of U.P. v. RadheyShyam Rai (2009) 5 SCC577 46
6 Jatya Pal Singh v.Union of India (2013) 6SCC 452
7 BCCI v. Cricket Association of Bihar (2015)3 SCC 251
8 Dr. Janet Jeyapaul v. SRM University (2015) 16 SCC530

B. ‘Law’ under Article 13; Also Articles 31A, 31B,31C,368

(i) Doctrine of Eclipse

9 Keshavan Madhava Menon v. State of Bombay AIR 1951 SC 128 52

10 Bhikaji Narain Dhakras v. State of M. P. AIR 1955 SC 781 73
11 State of Gujarat v. Sri Ambica Mills (1974) 4 SCC656 55

(ii) Waiver of fundamental rights

12 Bashesher Nath v. CIT AIR 1959 SC 149

(iii) Severability

13 State of Bombay v. F.N. Balsara AIR 1951 SC 318

14 RMDC v. Union of India AIR 1957 SC 628

(iv) Personal laws

15 Shayara Bano v. Union of India (2017) 9 SCC 1

Topic 2 – Right to Equality (Articles 14-18)

A. Equality among Equals; Treating un-equals as equals violates equality clause

B. Classification as such not completely prohibited: Reasonable Classification Permissible
C. Single Person may be treated as a separate class
D. Establishment of Special Courts
E. Conferment and/or exercise of discretionary or arbitrary power is antithesis of right to
equality
F. Distribution of state largesse
G. Special provisions for women and children; requirements relating to residence;
requirement of a particular religion being professed by the incumbent of an office
related to a religious or denominational institution
H. Protective Discrimination - Reservations in appointments and promotions; Special
provisions for socially and educationally backward classes of citizens and for
Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes
I. The Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016
J. The Central Educational Institutions (Reservation in Admission) Act, 2006

K. Direct and Indirect Discrimination

16 State of W. B. v. Anwar Ali Sarkar AIR 1952 SC 75

17 Kathi Raning Rawat v. State of Saurashtra AIR 1952 SC 12 79
18 Lt. Col Nitisha v. Union of India 2021 SCC Online SC
261
19 Indra Sawhney v. Union of India AIR 1993 SC 477; 88
1992 Supp (3) SCC 217
20 M. Nagaraj v. Union of India (2006) 8 SCC 212 196
21 Ashoka Kumar Thakur v. Union of India (2008) 6 SCC 1 138
22 Gulshan Prakash v. State of Haryana (2010) 1 SCC477 188
23 Rohtas Bhankar v. Union of India (2014) 8 SCC 872
24 Jarnail Singh v. Lachhmi Narain Gupta (2018) 10 SCC 396 220

24A Jarnail Singh II v. Lachmi Narain Gupta 2022 SCC Online SC 96

25 BK Pavitra v. Union of India (2017) 4 SCC 620

25A BK Pavitra II v. Union of India (2019) 16 SCC 129

26 Mukesh Kumar v. State of Uttarakhand (2020) 3 SCC 1
27 Dr. Jaishri Laxmanrao Patil v. The Chief Minister, 2021 SCC Online SC 36
Maharashtra 2
28 Pramati Educational & Cultural Trust v. Union of (2014) 8 SCC 1
India
29 Modern Dental College & Research (2016) 7 SC 353
Centre v. State of Madhya Pradesh
30 Joseph Shine v. Union of India (2019) 3 SCC 39
L. Abolition of untouchability (Article 17,35)

(i) The Protection of Civil Rights Act, 1955

(ii) Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment
Act, 2018

31 State of Karnataka v. Appa Balu Ingale AIR 1993 SCC1126;

1995 Supp (4) SCC 469
32 Safai Karmachari Andolan v. Union of India (2014) 11 SCC 224
33 Prathvi Raj Chauhan v. Union of India (2020) 4 SCC 727

M. Abolition of titles (Article 18)

34 Balaji Raghavan v. Union of India (1996) 1 SC 361

Topic 3 – Right to Freedom (Articles 19-22)

A. Right to Freedoms available only to citizens of India; Foreign nationals and artificial
persons like bodies corporate (companies) are not citizens either under Part III of the
Constitution of India or under the Citizenship Act, 1955
1.
Freedom of speech and expression;
2.
Freedom to assemble peaceably and without arms;
3.
Freedom to form association or unions or cooperative societies;
4.
Freedom to move freely throughout the territory of India;
5.
Freedom to reside and settle in any part of the territory of India;
6.
Freedom to practice any profession, or to carry on any occupation, trade or
business.
The freedoms are not absolute but subject to reasonable restrictions which can be imposed by
law made by the state for the purposes mentioned in clauses (2) to (6) of Article 19. The term
‘reasonable restriction’ includes total prohibition.

(i) The Right to Information Act, 2005

(ii) The Sports Broadcasting Signals (Mandatory Sharing with Prasar Bharati)
Act, 2007

35 Bennett Coleman & Co. v. Union of India (1972) 2 SCC788 234

36 Secretary, Ministry of I & B, Govt. of India v. (1995) 2 SCC 161 249
 Cricket Association of Bengal
37 Shreya Singhal v. Union of India (2015) 5 SCC 1
38 People’s Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL) v. (1997) 1 SCC 301
Union of India
39 Anuradha Bhasin v. Union of India (2020) 3 SCC 637
40 Foundation for Media Professionals v. Union (2020) 5 SCC 746
Territory of Jammu and Kashmir & Another
41 Communist Party of India (M) v. Bharat Kumar (1998) 1 SCC201
42 AIADMK v. Chief Secretary, Government of (2009) 5 SCC 452
Tamil Nadu
43 Chintaman Rao v. State of M.P. AIR 1951 SC 118
44 Narendra Kumar v. Union of India AIR 1960 SC 430
45 State of Gujarat v. Mirzapur Moti Kureshi Kassab (2005) 8 SCC 534
Jamat
46 Tehseen S Poonawala v. Union of India (2018) 9 SCC 501

B. Protection in respect of conviction for offences (Article 20)

(i) Ex post facto Law
(ii) Doctrine of Double Jeopardy
(iii) Right against Self Incrimination

47 Selvi v. State of Karnataka (2010) 7 SCC 263

C. Protection in life and personal liberty, Doctrine of Proportionality (Article 21)

48 Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India (1978) 1 SCC 248 266

49 AK Roy v.Union of India (1982) 1 SCC 271

50 National Legal Services Authority v. Union of (2014) 5 SCC 438
India
51 Animal Welfare Board v. A. Nagaraja (2014) 7 SCC 547
52 Justice KS Puttaswamy v. Union of India (2017) 10 SCC 1 283
53 Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India (2018) 1 SCC 791
 D. Right to education (Article 21 A)

54 Pramati Educational and Cultural Trusts v. (2014) 8 SCC 1

Union of India

E. Protection against arrest and detention (Article 22)

55 DK Basu v. State of West Bengal (1997) 1 SCC 416 303

56 People’s Union for Civil Rights v. Union of India (2004) 9 SCC 580

Topic 4 – Right against Exploitation (Articles 23,24)

57 People’s Union for Democratic Rights v. Union of (1982) 3 SCC 235

India

Topic 5– Right to Freedom of Religion (Articles 25-28)

The Orissa Freedom of Religion Act, 1967; the T.N. Prohibition of Forcible Conversion Act,
2002; the Gujarat Freedom of Religion Act, 2003; the Uttarakhand Freedom of Religion Act,
2018; the Himachal Pradesh Freedom of Religion Act, 2019; the Madhya Pradesh Freedom of
Religion Act, 2021

58 Seshammal v. State of Tamil Nadu (1972) 2 SCC 11 314

59 N. Adithayan v. Travancore Devaswom Board (2002) 8 SCC 106 328

60 Commissioner of Police v. Acharya (2004) 12 SCC 770 339
Jagadishwarananda Avadhuta

61 Adi Saiva Sivachariyargal Nala Sangam v. The (2016) 2 SCC 725

Government of Tamil Nadu

62 Rev. Stainislaus v. State of M.P. (1977) 1 SCC 677

63 Bijoe Emmanuel v. State of Kerala (1986) 3 SCC 615 349

64 Indian Young Lawyers Association v. State of (2019) 11 SCC 1
Kerala
65 Kantaru Rajeevaru v. Indian Young Lawyers (2020) 9 SCC 121
Association
66 Resham v. State of Karnataka 2022 SCC Online Kar
315

Topic 6 - Educational and Cultural Rights (Articles 29, 30)

Right to establish and administer educational institutions – rights of minorities and non-
minorities; Degree of State Control in aided and non-aided educational institutions

67 Islamic Academy of Education v. State of Karnataka 2003 (6)SCC 697 355

68 T.M.A. Pai Foundation V. State of Karnataka (2002) 8 SCC481
69 P.A. Inamdar v. State of Maharashtra (2005) 6 SCC537
70 Sindhi Education Society v. Chief Secretary, (2010) 8 SCC 49
Government of NCT of Delhi

Topic 7– Right to Constitutional Remedies (Article 32)

Power of Judicial Review under Article 32 is a basic feature of the Constitution;

Concurrent jurisdiction of the High Courts under Article 226 – Res judicata; Laches,
Rule of locus standi, Public Interest Litigation; Existence of alternative remedies; Nature
and scope of relief

71 State of Uttaranchal v. Balwant Singh Chaufal (2010) 3 SCC 402

72 Guidelines for Public Interest Litigation issued by https://main.sci.gov.in/pd
the Supreme Court of India f/chamberAllotement/pil
guidelines.pdf

Topic 8 – Fundamental Duties (Article 51 A)

73 Hon’ble Shri Rangnath Mishra v. Union of India 2003 (7) SCC 206
 Topic 9 – Directive Principles of State Policy (Articles 36-51)

Relationship between the Fundamental Rights and the Directive Principles of State Policy.

Topic 10 – Civil Servants (Articles 308-323)

74 Union of India v. Tulsiram Patel (1985) 3 SCC 398 365

75 J.P. Bansal v. State of Rajasthan (2003) 5SCC 134
76 Managing Director, ECIL v. B. Karunakar (1993) 4 SCC727
77 T.K. Rangarajan v. Govt. of Tamil Nadu (2003) 6 SCC 581

Topic 11 – Amendment of the Constitution (Article 368)

78 Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973) 4 SCC225

79 Kihoto Hollohon v.Zachillhu 1992 Supp (2) SCC 651
80 I.R. Coelho v. State of Tamil Nadu, (2007) 2 SCC 1 385
81 L. Chandra Kumar v. Union of India (1997) 3 SCC 261
82 Madras Bar Association v. Union of India (2014) 10 SCC 1

IMPORTANT NOTE

1. The topics and cases given above are not exhaustive. The teachers teaching the course
shall be at liberty to add new topics/cases.
2. The students are required to study the legislations as amended up-to-date and consult the
latest editions of books.

*****
 ‘STATE’ UNDER ARTICLE 12

The Constitution of India, Article 12 : “In this part, unless the context otherwise requires,
“the State” includes the Government and Parliament of India and the Government and the
Legislature of each of the States and all local or other authorities within the territory of India
or under the control of the Government of India.”

Tests to decide which “other authorities” could be considered as

agencies or instrumentalities of state
The cumulative effect of all the following factors has to be seen:
1. “If the entire share capital of the corporation is held by government, it would
go a long way towards indicating that the corporation is an instrumentality or agency
of government.”
2. The existence of “deep and pervasive State control may afford an indication
that the Corporation is a State agency or instrumentality.”
3. “It may also be a relevant factor…whether the corporation enjoys monopoly
status which is State conferred or State protected.”
4. “If the functions of the corporation are of public importance and closely
related to governmental functions, it would be a relevant factor in classifying the
corporation as an instrumentality or agency of government.”
5. “Specifically, if a department of government is transferred to a corporation, it
would be a strong factor supportive of this inference” of the corporation being an
instrumentality or agency of government.
 i

LL.B. IV TERM

LB-402 Administrative Law

Cases Selected and Edited by

Sarbjit Kaur
Alka Chawla
Anu
Maotoshi Ao
Parveen
Shankar Singh Yadav
Mercy K Khaute
Anjay Kumar
Ajay Sonawane
Shikha Sharma
Shakti Kumar Agarwal
Shilpi

FACULTY OF LAW
UNIVERSITY OF DELHI, DELHI- 110007
January, 2023
(For private use only in the course of instruction)
 ii

LL.B. IV Term

Paper : LB - 402 - Administrative Law

Prescribed Books:
1. M.P. Jain and S.N. Jain’s Principles of Administrative Law Revised by
Amita Dhanda (7th ed., 2017)
2. I.P. Massey, Administrative Law (7h ed., 2008)
3. S.P. Sathe, Administrative Law (7h ed., 2004)
4. H.W.R. Wade and C.F. Forsyth, Administrative Law (8th ed., 2000)
5. S.N. Jain, Administrative Tribunals in India (1977).
Additional Readings:
1. Harry Woolf, Jeffery Jowell and Andew Le Sueur, De Smith’s Judicial
Review (6th ed., 2007)
2. Report of the Committee on Ministers’ Powers (Donoughmore Committee),
(Cmd. 4060) (1932)

Topic 1 – Nature and Scope of Administrative Law

1.1 Definition and Scope of Administrative Law
1.2 Rule of Law – Dicey’s Rule of Law
1.3 Theory of Separation of Powers

H.M. Seervai “The Supreme Court of India and the Shadow of Dicey 01
The Position of the Judiciary under the Constitutional of India, 83-96
(1970)
Cases
1. Rai Sahib Ram Jawaya Kapur v. State of Punjab, AIR 1955 SC 549. 08
2. Asif Hameed v. State of J. & K., AIR 1989 SC 1899. 17
3. State of M.P. v Bharat Singh, AIR 1967 SC 1170. 21
4. ADM Jabalpur v. Shivkant Shukla, AIR 1976 SC 1207.
5. Indira Gandhi (smt.) v. Raj Narian AIR 1975 SC 2299

Recommended Readings:
1. Justice H.R. Khanna, Rule of Law, (1977) 4 SCC (Jour) 7.
2. Lord Bingham, The Rule of Law, The Cambridge Law Journal, Vol. 66, No.
1 (March 2007), pp. 67-85.
 iii

Topic 2 – Delegated Legislation

2.1. Meaning
2.2. Reasons for growth
2.3. Conditional Legislation
2.4. Permissible limits of delegation of legislative power
2.5. Judicial control
2.6. Legislative control – laying requirement
2.7. Procedural Control - Pre-and post-publication, consultation of affected
interests; The General Clauses Act, 1897, sections 20-24
6. In re Delhi Laws Act, AIR 1951 SC 332. 26
7. Lachmi Narain v. Union of India, AIR 1976 SC 714. 40
8. Darshan Lal Mehra v. Union of India, AIR 1992 SC 1848. 52
9. Govind Lal v. A.P.M. Committee, AIR 1976 SC 263. 55
10. Sonik Industries, Rajkot v. Municipal Corpn. of the City of Rajkot (1986) 2
SCC 608 : AIR 1986 SC 1518. 62
11. Atlas Cycle Industries Ltd. v. State of Haryana, AIR 1979 SC 1149. 65
12. Rajnarain Singh v. Chairman, Patna Administration Committee, AIR 1954
SC 519.

Topic 3 – Administrative Discretion

3.1 Meaning of discretion; Judicial Review of conferment and exercise of
discretionary power, abuse of discretionary power;
3.2 Nature and Scope of Judicial Review
3.3 Grounds of Judicial Review:
3.3.1 Abuse / Misuse of discretion - mala fides/ ill-will, motive,
Unreasonableness / Arbitrariness, Improper Purpose,
Ignoring relevant considerations, Relying on irrelevant
considerations;
3.3.2 Non application of mind – acting mechanically, acting under
dictation, imposing fetters by self-imposed rules or policy
decisions;
3.3.3 Violation of the Principles of Natural Justice

13. Dwarka Prasad Laxmi Narain v. State of U.P., (1954) SCR 803: AIR 1954
SC 224. 74
14. A.N. Parasuraman v. State of Tamil Nadu, AIR 1990 SC 40: (1989) 4 SCC
683. 82
 iv

15. J. R. Raghupathy v. State of A. P., AIR 1988 SC 1681. 86

16. Coimbatore District Central Cooperative Bank v. Coimbatore District
Central Co-op. Bank Employees Assn., (2007) 4 SCC 669. 104
17. Om Kumar & Others v. Union of India, AIR 2000 SC 3689 114
18. R. v. Secretary of State for the Home Department, Ex Parte Daly, (2001)
UKHL 26 128
19. G. Sadananadan v. State of Kerala, AIR 1966 SC 1925: (1966) 3 SCR 590. 135
20. Express Newspapers (Pvt.) Ltd. v. Union of India, AIR 1986 SC 872.
21. State of Bombay v. K.P. Krishnan, (1961) 1 SCR 227: AIR 1960 SC 1223. 141
22. Ranjit Singh v. Union of India, AIR 1981 SC 461. 151
23. Nandlal Khodidas Barot v. Bar Council of Gujarat and others
AIR 1981 SC 477. 154
24. Shri Rama Sugar Industries Ltd. v. State of Andhra Pradesh, (1974) 1 SCC
534: AIR 1974 SC 1745. 156
25. Associated Provincial Picture Hose Ltd. V Wednesbury Corporation(1947)
26 DM Aravali Golf Club v Chander Hass, 2007 (14) SCALE 1.
27. Internet & Mobile Assn. of India v. RBI, (2020) 10 SCC 274
.

Topic 4 – Principles of Natural Justice

4.1 Administrative and quasi-judicial functions
4.2 Meaning and need for Administrative Adjudication, lis inter partes,
concept of fairness
4.3 Nemo judex in causa sua (rule against bias)
4.4 Audi alteram partem (rule of fair hearing)
4.4.1 Notice
4.4.2 Right to cross-examination
4.4.3 Right to legal representation
4.5 Reasoned Decision (Speaking Order)
4.6 Effect of non-observation of the Principles of Natural Justice
4.7 Requirement of supplying Enquiry Report – Effect of non-supply of
such Report.
28. A.K. Kraipak v. Union of India, AIR 1970 SC 150. 165
29. Ashok Kumar Yadav v. State of Haryana, AIR 1987 SC 454. 171
30. G.N. Nayak v. Goa University, AIR 2002 SC 790. 187
31. Amar Nath Chowdhuary v. Braithwaite & Co. Ltd., (2002) 2 SCC 290: AIR 193
2002 SC 678.
 v

32. State of W.B. v. Shivananda Pathak (1998) 5 SCC 513. 195

33. Hira Nath Mishra v. Principal, Rajendra Medical College, (1973) 1 SCC 201
805: AIR 1973 SC 1260.
34. J.K. Aggarwal v. Haryana Seeds Development Corpn. Ltd. , (1991) 2 SCC
283: AIR 1991 SC 1221. 205
35. Bharat Petroleum Corpn. Ltd. v. Maharashtra General Kamgar Union,
(1999) 1 SCC 626. 209
36. Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India (1978) 1 SCC 248. 215
37. H.L. Trehan v. Union of India, AIR 1989 SC 568. 223
38. K I Shepherd v. Union of India, AIR 1988 SC 686.
39. S.N. Mukherjee v. Union of India, AIR 1990 SC 1984. 227
40. Managing Director, ECIL, Hyderabad v. B. Karunakar, (1993) 4 SCC. 245
727

Topic 5 – Judicial Review

5.1 Review and Appeal
5.2 Power of Judicial Review of the Supreme Court and the High Courts –
Articles 32, 136, 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India
5.3 Writs – Certiorari, Mandamus, Prohibition, Habeas Corpus, Quo
Warranto
5.3.1 Certiorari – (to decide the legality of an order/decision
already passed/given) and for that purpose to produce all records
of the case before the writ court - Grounds on which issued
5.3.2 Jurisdictional Errors – Excess of jurisdiction, Exercising
jurisdiction not vested; Non-exercise of jurisdiction. The court
exercising power does not act as an appellate court and therefore
neither the merits of the case nor re-appraisal of evidence is
allowed; Errors of law alone can be subject of judicial review but
not the errors of fact howsoever grave they may be; Review
possible if a decision/order was based on ‘no evidence’ or on
irrelevant considerations;
5.3.3 Non-compliance with the prescribed procedure or the rules of
natural justice;
5.3.4 Errors of law apparent on the face of record can be corrected –
that may occur when the conclusion of law recorded by the lower
court/tribunal is based on an obvious mis-interpretation of the
relevant statutory provision, or sometimes in ignorance of it or
even in disregard of it or is expressly founded on reasons which
are wrong in law.
 vi

5.4 Mandamus – To command the performance of a statutory or public

duty; not issued for exercise of discretionary power or against the
legislature/legislators; can be issued both against the executive
authorities as well as private individuals/persons.
5.5 Prohibition – To decide the legality of pending proceedings
5.6 Habeas Corpus – To decide the legality of an arrest/detention. It is
necessary to produce the arrested/detained person in the court and if
dead, the dead body must be produced in the court.
5.7 Quo warranto – To decide the legal authority of a person to hold a
public office.
5.8 Ouster clauses (constitutional and statutory exclusion)
5.9 Curative Petition
41. Syed Yakoob v. K.S. Radha Krishanan (1964) 5 SCR 64: AIR 1964 SC 477. 252
42. Surya Dev Rai v. Ram Chander Rai, AIR 2003 SC 3044: (2003) 6 SCC 675. 261

43. Anadi Mukta Sadguru S.M.V.S.S.J.M.S. Trust v. V.R. Rudani,

(1989) 2 SCC 691 : AIR 1989 SC 1607. 274
44. Common Cause v. Union of India, AIR 2003 SC 4493. 279
45. Rupa Ashok Hurra v. Ashok Hurra, AIR 2002 SC 1771. 280

Topic 6 – Right to Information

6.1.Transparency and accountability of the administration; Right to
Information under the Constitution of India;
6.2.The Right to Information Act, 2005 - Object of the legislation –
effective and responsive Government/public authorities; Scope of the
right to information – Obligation of public authorities to supply
information; Grounds of refusal to disclose information
46. Secretary General, Supreme Court of India v. Subhash Chandra Agarwal, 287
166 (2010) DLT 305 (FB).
47. Disclosure of Accounts and Funding of Political Parties, CIC Order
Dated 3rd June 2013.

Topic 7 – Tribunals
7.1. Concept; Justice by Tribunals – Advantages: Openness, Fairness,
Impartiality, Absence of Technicalities of Evidence and
Procedure, Cheapness;
7.2. Constitution of India, Articles 323A and 323B;
 vii

7.3. Overview of Tribunals in India with particular reference to

Administrative Tribunals established under the Administrative
Tribunals Act, 1985;

48. L. Chandra Kumar v. Union of India and others, AIR 1997 SC 1125 318
49. Union of India v. R. Gandhi, President, Madras Bar Association 2010 328
(5) SCALE 514
50. Rojer Mathew v. South Indian Bank Ltd. & Ors. (2020) 6 SCC 1 335

Recommended Reading
272 Law Commission of India Report on Assessment of
Statutory Framework of Tribunals in India (October, 2017)

Topic 8 – Commissions of Inquiry &

Central Vigilance Commission
8.1. The Commissions of Inquiry Act, 1952 - Object and Scope of the legislation – ‘to
inquire into any definite matter of public importance’;
8.2. Power of Central/State Government to appoint a Commission of Inquiry –
discretionary and mandatory nature of power;
8.3. Powers and Procedure of the Commission of Inquiry; Compliance with the
principles of natural justice;
8.4. Submission of report and follow up action – effectiveness.
8.5. The Central Vigilance Commission Act, 2003 – Constitution, Powers and
Functions.

Topic 9 – Regulatory Agencies

Need of Regulatory Bodies; Composition, powers, functions and
procedure; of the Regulatory Bodies including the securities and
exchange board of India;
The Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992; Telecom
Regulatory Authority of India Act, 1997; The Insurance Regulatory
and Development Authority Act, 1999; Electricity Commission);
Competition commission of India under the Competition Act, 2002
 viii

Topic 10- Redressal of Complaints against the administration:

The Institution of Ombudsman

IMPORTANT NOTE:
i. The cases given above are not exhaustive. The teachers teaching the course
shall be at liberty to add new cases.
ii. The students are required to study the legislations as amended up-to-date and
consult the latest editions of books.
 LL.B. IV Term

LB-403-Labour Law

Cases Selected and Edited by

Anu
Ruchita Chakraborty
Namita Vashishtha
Daya Devi
Kislay Soni
Parveen
Sukanya Singha

FACULTY OF LAW
UNIVERSITY OF DELHI
January 2023
(For private use only in the course of instruction)
 LL.B. IV Term
Paper – LB – 403 - Labour Law

General Readings:
1. Report of the National Commission on Labour (1969)
2. Report of the Second National Commission on Labour (2002)
Prescribed Legislations:
1. The Trade Unions Act, 1926
2. The Industrial Disputes Act, 1947
3. The Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946
4. The Essential Services Maintenance Act, 1981
Prescribed Books:
1. Kamala Sankaran, Freedom of Association in India and International Labour
Standards (2009)
2. G.B. Pai, Labour Law in India (2001)
3. P.L. Malik, K.D. Srivastava’s Law Relating to Trade Unions and Unfair Labour
Practices in India (4th ed., 2002, with Supplement 2003)
4. S.C. Srivastava (Rev.) Labour Law and Labour Relations: Cases and Materials
(Indian Law Institute, 2007)
5. E. M. Rao, O.P. Malhotra’s The Law of Industrial Disputes (6th ed., 2004)
6. K.D. Srivastava, Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946 (4th ed., 1998
with Supplement 2003)

PART – A: TRADE UNIONS

Topic 1: Introduction to Labour Law
History and Development of Labour Law, Importance and its Sociological
Understanding, Philosophical Issues, Marxism and Labour Law
1. 1. Kahn Freund’s Labour and Law (Hamlyn Lecture Series) 1
Introduction: Some Reflections on Law and Power, pp. 14-20 (1983).
2. Marxism and Labour Law (Edited version based on Hugh Collins, Marxism
and Law, Claredon Press, Oxford, 1982). 4

Additional Reading: Debi S. Saini, “Labour Legislation and Social Justice: Rhetoric and
Reality.”
 Topic 2: Trade Union – Definition, Registration and Recognition
Definitions of ‘trade union’, ‘workman’ and ‘trade dispute’ - The Trade Unions Act,
1926, Sections 2(g) and (h), 3-13, 15, 22
3. Rangaswami v. Registrar of Trade Unions, AIR 1962 Mad. 231 7
4.The Tamil Nadu Non-Gazetted Government Officers’ Union, Madras v.
The Registrar of Trade Unions, AIR 1962 Mad. 234 12
5. In Re Inland Steam Navigation Worker’s Union, AIR 1936 Cal 59 19
6.The Food Corporation of India Staff Union v. Food Corporation of
India & Ors, AIR 1995 SC 1344. 23

Topic 3: Immunities – Criminal and Civil

The Trade Unions Act, 1926, Sections 17 and 18; The Indian Penal Code, Sections
120-A, 120-B
7. R.S. Ruikar v. Emperor, AIR 1935 Nag. 149 27
8. Rohtas Industries Staff Union v. State of Bihar, AIR 1963 Pat. 170
(Also see Rohtas Industries v. Its Union, AIR 1976 S.C. 425) 30

PART – B: INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES

Topic 4: ‘Industry’ – Conceptual Analysis
The Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, Section 2(j)
9. Bangalore Water Supply and Sewerage Board v. A. Rajappa,
AIR 1978 SC 548 38
10. State of U.P. v. Jai Bir Singh (2005) 5 SCC 1 82
11. Arihant Siddhi Co.Op. Hg. Soc. Ltd. V. Pushpa Vishnu More 97
Bombay High Court, Writ Petition No. 787 OF 2007, Order dated 22-
06-2018

Topic 5: ‘Industrial Dispute’ v. ‘Individual Dispute’ - Contrast

The Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, Sections 2(k), 2A
11. Workmen of Dimakuchi Tea Estate v. Management of Dimakuchi
Tea Estate, AIR 1958 SC 353 99
12. Municipal Corporation of Delhi v. Female Workers (Muster Roll)
AIR 2000 SC 1274: (2000) 3 SCC 224 107
13. J.H. Jadhav v. Forbes Gokak Ltd. (2005) 3 SCC 202 112
 Topic 6: Concept of ‘Workman’
Distinction between contract for services and contract of service: Due control and
super-vision test; Predominant nature of duty test, The Industrial Disputes Act, 1947,
Section 2(s)
14. Dharangadhra Chemical Works Ltd. v. State of Saurashtra,
AIR 1957 SC 264 115
15. A. Sundarambal v. Government of Goa, Daman & Diu,
AIR 1988 SC 1700 121
16. H.R. Adyanthaya v. Sandoz (India) Ltd. (1994) 5 SCC 737 125

Topic 7: ‘Strike & Lock out’

Concepts, legality and justification – The Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, Sections 2(q),
2(l), 2(n), 10(3), 10A(3A), 22-28; The Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act,
1946; The Essential Services Maintenance Act, 1981
17. Management of Chandramalai Estate v. Its Workmen,
AIR 1960 SC 902 138
18. Syndicate Bank v. K. Umesh Nayak (1994) 5 SCC 572 142
19. Essorpe Mills Ltd. v. P.O.; Labour Court (2008) 7 SCC 594 156
20. T. K. Rangarajan v. Government of Tamil Nadu and others, (2003) 6
SCC 581 161

Topic 08: ‘Lay off’ ‘Retrenchment’ & ‘Closure’

Analysis of the Concepts, Pre-requisites, The Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, Sections
2(cc), 2(kkk), 2(oo), Chapters VA, VB; The Industrial Employment (Standing Orders)
Act, 1946
21. Punjab Land Development and Reclamation Corporation Ltd. v.
Presiding Officer, Labour Court (1990) 3 SCC 682 170

22. The Workmen of Fire Stone Tyre & Rubber Co. Pvt. Ltd. v. Fire
Stone Tyre & Rubber Co. Pvt. Ltd. (1976) 3 SCC 819:
AIR 1976 SC 1775 186
23. U.P. State Brassware Corporation Ltd. v. Uday Narain Pandey (2006)
1 SCC 479 191
24. Deepali Gundu Surwase v. Kranti Junior Adhyapak & Ors (2013) 10
SCC 324 201
25. Management of the Barara Cooperative Marketing cum Processing
Society Ltd. v. Workman Pratap Singh AIR 2019 SC 228 224
 27. Manju Saxena v. Union Of India, Supreme Court of India
Civil Appeal Nos. 1176611767 OF 2018, Judgment Dated: 3.12.2018 227
28. Ram Manohar Lohia Joint Hospital v. Munna Prasad Saini
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 5810 OF 2021, Judgment Dated: 20 September, 2021 235

IMPORTANT NOTE
1. The topics as well as cases mark the broad contours of the study domain. The teachers
may feel free to extend the topics/cases for the larger benefit of the society and the students.
2. The students are required to study the legislations as amended from time to time and
consult the latest editions of books as well as issues/debates.
 LL.B. IV TERM

LB-4036- Intellectual Property Rights Law- I

Cases Selected and Edited by

V.K. Ahuja
Raman Mittal
Alka Chawla
Poonam Dass
Sunanda Bharti
Sanjivni Raina
Ashwini Siwal
Parikshet Sirohi
Archa Vashishtha
Kislay Soni
Isha Wadhwa

FACULTY OF LAW
UNIVERSITY OF DELHI, DELHI- 110007

January, 2023
 LL.B. IV Term

Paper : Intellectual Property Law-I

1. Introduction to Intellectual Property and its Abuse

1. General Principles of Intellectual Property Rights
Nature and Concept of IPR, WTO/TRIPs
Brief evolution of IPR and its importance in present context
Types of Intellectual Property
Enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights (Art. 9-39 TRIPs), by various national laws
2. Abuse of Intellectual Property—Concept

3. Brief on International legal instruments relating to IPR

Paris Convention, 1883 and TRIPs
Reciprocity and Priority
Concept of Minimum Standards
Concept of National Treatment
Concept of Most Favoured Nation (MFN)
Madrid Agreement, Madrid Protocol, 1989 amended on Oct 3, 2006 and Nov 12, 2007, The
Trade Marks (Amendment) Bill, 2009
2. Trade Marks Law
[Legislation :Trade Marks Act, 1999, in force from 15th Sep 2003]
Note: Students should note that some cases are decided under the previous Act of 1958 (the
meanings assigned to words and expressions under the old Act are to be understood and
may be applied to the provisions of new Act of 1999 also). However, students are not
required to study the 1958 Act, as such.
1. Introduction
1.1 Definitions/Meaning of: ‘Mark’ S.2(1)(m); ‘Trade mark’ S.2(1)(zb); ‘Service’ S.2(1)(z);
‘Goods’ S.2(1)(j); ‘Package’ S.2(1)(q); ‘Well known trade mark’ S.2(1)(zg), Need for
Protection of Trademarks, Registered and Unregistered Trade Marks
1.2 Use of trade mark on goods/services– S.2(2)(b) & (c), 29(6)
1.2.1 Use in Advertisements –declared as use and ground for protection even without
goods/services
N. R. Dongre v. Whirlpool Corporation, (1996) 5 SCC 714

1.2.2 Protecting Domain Names as Trade Marks

Satyam Infoway Ltd v. Sifynet Solutions Pvt. Ltd, AIR 2004 SC 3540

1. Trade Mark for Services

Balakrishna Hatcheries v. Nandos International Ltd,
2007(35) PTC 295(Bom)
Health and Glow Retailing Pvt. Ltd v. Dhiren Krishna Paul, Trading as
Health and Glow Clinic,2007(35) PTC 471(Mad)
2.
2. Registration of trade mark for goods/services
Procedure (S.18 -23), Grounds of Refusal (S.9 & 11), Prior/Vested Rights, Rectification of
register (S.57 )
2.1 Absolute Grounds for Refusal of Registration: S.9(1) Distinctive character in 9(1)(a) ,
8 types of Descriptive, laudatory marks or indications or words in S.9(1)(b), customary
or bonafide practices of trade in clause 9(1)(c), Proviso to S.9(1) - Acquired Distinctive
character and well known marks

1. M/s Hindustan Development Corporation Ltd v. The Deputy Registrar of 1

Trade Marks, AIR 1955 Cal 319
2. The Imperial Tobacco Co. of India v. The Registrar of Trade Marks, AIR 8
1977 Cal 413
3. Geep FlashLight Industries v. Registrar of Trade Marks, 18
AIR 1972 Del 179

2.2. S.9(2): Nature of mark as to deceive the public or cause confusion

Wide power – no mention of marks or goods
Note, that under 1958 Act it was covered under the expression Deceptive Similarity
4. Sunder Parmanand Lalwani v. Caltex (India) Ltd, AIR 1969 Bom 24 22
5. Sony Kabushuki Kaisha v. Samrao Masker, AIR 1985 Bom 327

3. Relative Grounds for Refusal u/s11

3.1 Later trade mark similar with Earlier Trade Marks –S.11(1)
Identity or similarity of Marks resulting -- in likelihood of confusion or Association with
earlier Mark (Dilution) and Identitiy or similarity of goods/services-Overlap
with s 9(2)
Determination of Similarity of goods/services (See Jelineks Appln, (1946) 63 RPC and
Panda Case)
6. K. R. Krishna Chettiar v. Sri Ambal & Co, AIR 1970 SC 146 40

3.2 Earlier Trade mark – if a Well Known Trade Marks: S.11(2)

 Prohibition of registration even for different goods/ services
Factors for determination - 11(6) to 11(9
Effect of Trade marks registered or used in good faith – S.11(11),
Effect of Acquiescence
7. Carrefour v. V. Subburaman, 2007(35) PTC 225 (Mad.) 44
(Also on passing off – )

3.3 Refusal of registration on grounds of passing off or under law of copyright u/s 11(3)
3.4 Prior/ Vested Rights
Honest and Concurrent user – S.12, Prior user of mark and vested rights– S. 34, Name,
Place of Business, Address or Description of Character or Quality of Goods or Services–
S.35, Acquiescence – S. 33

4. Passing off, Infringement and Exceptions to Infringement Action

4.1 Enlargement of Infringement protection – S. 29
4.2 For same, similar or different goods/services
4.3 Difference between passing off and infringement
Passing off- for similar goods/different goods/transborder reputation
8. Parley Products v. J P & Co, (1972) 1 SCC 618 58
9. Cadila Health Care Ltd v. Cadila Pharmaceuticals Ltd,
(2001) 5 SCC 73 : 2001 PTC 300 (SC) 62
10. Carrefour v. V. Subburaman, 2007(35) PTC 225
11. Bata India Ltd. v. Pyare Lal & Co., AIR 1985 All 242
12. Milmet Oftho Industries v. Allergen Inc., (2004) 12 SCC 624 76
13. Balakrishna Hatcheries v. Nandos International Ltd, 2007(35) PTC
295(Bom) 79
 14. Health and Glow Retailing Pvt. Ltd v. Dhiren Krishna Paul, Trading as
Health and Glow Clinic, 2007(35) PTC 471(Mad)
Kapil Wadhwa v. Samsung Electronics Co.
15
Ltd.,194(2012)DLT23; MIPR2012(3)191
95

4.4 Exceptions –S.30

16. Hawkins Cookers Limited v Murugan Enterprises, 2012(50)PTC389(Del) 119

5. Trade Mark Dilution and Contemporary Areas (S.11(1), S.29(4), S.29(8))

17. ITC Limited v Philip Morris Products S.A., 2010(42) PTC 572 (Del) 123

Protection of Trade Dress & colour combinations; Tarnishment of Trade

marks/Comparative Advertising/Disparagement See Also S 29(8)
18. N Ranga Rao v. Anil Garg, 2006 (32) PTC 15 (Del) 141

19. Pepsi Co Inc v. Hindustan Coca Cola Ltd., 162

2003 (27) PTC 305 (Del) (DB)

20. Dabur India Ltd. v. Colgate Palmolive 2004 (29) PTC 401 (Del) 172

6. Exhaustion of IPR: Art. 6 TRIPs, S.29(6) Trade Marks Act, 1999

7. Licencing of Trade Marks – Ss.48 - 53

Permission of Central Government not required in 1999 Act
Necessity of Actual Quality Control
 Paradox of Quality Control
Supremacy of Licencing Agreement

21. Pioneer HiBred v. Pioneer Seeds, 1990 IPLR 17

22. Baker Huges Ltd v. Hiroo Khushalini,

1998 PTC 580; 2004 PTC 153 (SC)

23. MTV Holdings v. Mistrale Publishing Pvt. Ltd,

2005 (30) PTC 489 (Del)

24. Gujarat Bottling v. Coca Cola, AIR 1995 SC 2372

3. Geographical Indications
[Legislation: The Geographical Indications of Goods (Registration and Protection) Act,
1999, in force from 15th Sep 2003]
Guidelines for permitting the use of Geographical Indication (GI) Logo and Tagline, issued
by the Ministry of Commerce & Industry, Department for Promotion of Industry, GOI on
24 th June, 2019 [SUPPLIED]

1. Definitions- ‘Geographical Indication’(S.2(e)), ‘Indication’(s.2(g)), ‘Goods’ (S.2(f)),

‘Producer’(S.2(k)), Certification Trade Mark, Collective Marks
2. Concept of Indication of source, Geographical Indication and appellations of origin,
Community Right
3. Kinds of Geographical Indications and Registration
Procedure for Registration(Ss. 3-8, Ss. 11-17)
Grounds for Refusal of Registration of GI’s (S.9)
Registration of homonymous Geographical Indications (S.10)
Duration of protection and renewal(Ss18-19)
4. Infringement, penalties and remedies(Ss. 20-23, Chapter Ss. 37-54, Ss. 66-67, Rules for
allowing use of registered GI by authorised users)
5. Conflict of GI’s with Trade marks (Ss. 25-26)
4. Industrial Designs Law
[Legislation: The Designs Act, 2000]
4.1 Need for protection of industrial designs
4.2 Subject matter of Protection - Design, S.2(d), Original, S.2(g), new or original,
appeal to eye, copyright S.2(c)
4.3 Copyright in Design (duration)– S.11
4.4 Registration of design for articles – Ss.3-9 (No provision for opposition)
5.5 Cancellation of Design- S.19
1.6 Piracy or Infringement of copyright in Designs – S.22
1.7 Overlap of Design, Copyright and Trade Marks
25. Bharat Glass Tube Limited v. Gopal Glass Works Limited, 183
2008 (37) PTC 1 (SC)

26. Reckitt Benckiser(India) Ltd v. Wyeth Limited, 200

2010 (44) PTC 589 (Del (DB))

27. Samsonite Corporation v. Vijay Sales, 1998 (18) PTC 372 (Del)

28. Crocs Inc. USA v. Bata India Ltd, CS (COMM) No. 772/2016 and
connected cases 2018 Del HC.

Books Recommended
• Ashwani Kr. Bansal, Law of Trade Marks in India ( 2009)
• Ashwani Kr Bansal, Law of Designs, GIs, ( 2011 )
• P. Narayanan, Law of Trade Marks and Passing off (6th ed., 2004)
• Kailasam, Law of Trade Marks and Geographical Indications (2nd ed. 2009)
• V.K. Ahuja, Law Relating to Intellectual Property Rights (2009)
• P. Narayanan, Copyright and Industrial Designs (2007)
• Latha R Nair & Rajendra Kumar, Geographical Indication- A search for Identity (2005)
• WIPO Background Reading Material on Intellectual Property
 LL.B. IV TERM
LB 4031
GENDER JUSTICE AND
FEMINIST JURISPRUDENCE

Course Materials: Selected and Edited By

Ved Kumari
Usha Tandon
Vageshwari Deswal
Shiva Priyamvada

Faculty of Law
University of Delhi, Delhi – 110007
January 2023
(For private use only in the course of instruction)
 GENDER JUSTICE AND FEMINIST JURISPRUDENCE
Paper LB-4031
This course aims at questioning the understanding that law is universal, protects
everybody equally and is accessible to all equally. It uses gender, particularly in relation to women
and persons with non-heterosexuality as examples to show discrimination perpetuatedby law
and legal processes. It has long been recognised that law, lawyers and judges are insensitive and
unaware of the problems and perspectives of women resulting in grave injustice to them in various
ways. Orientation and in-service refresher training programmes for lawyers and judges on these
aspects have been suggested by all concerned and indeed such training programmes are being
organised too. Law Schools in this scenario have the important obligation to generate awareness
of the gender bias operating in society and legal system in India. This course aims to focus on
discrimination on the ground of sex and non- heterosexuality in the extant law and judicial
decisions. It also explores the jurisprudential explanations for the existing state of affairs. It
focuses on the patriarchal nature of state and family and contemporary feminist and queer debates.
It is expected that the students will acquire analytical skills and knowledge to critically
analyse functioning of legal provisions and judicial responses from the perspectives of the
deprived and powerless groups in society as an outcome of this course. These skills are important
not only from the perspective of municipal laws but also in the context of discrimination between
the first and third world countries and international law.
Prescribed Readings:
1. Sarla Gopalan, TOWARDS EQUALITY – THE UNFINISHED AGENDA – STATUS OF WOMEN
IN INDIA 2001. National Commission for Women.
2. Amita Dhanda, Archana Parashar (ed) ENGENDERING LAW ESSAYS IN HONOUR OF
LOTIKA SARKAR (1999). Eastern Book Depot.
3. Ratna Kapur and Brendia Cossman, SUBVERSIVE SITES: FEMINIST ENGAGEMENTS WITH
LAW IN INDIA (1996).
4. TOWARDS EQUALITY Report of the Committee of Status in India Government of India
(1974).
5. Kalapana Kannabhiran (ed), WOMEN AND LAW CRITICAL FEMINIST PERSPECTIVES (Sage
Publications India 2014)
6. Usha Tandon (ed), Gender Justice: A Reality or Fragile Myth (2015)
7. Rajesh Talwar, The Third Sex and Human Rights (2016)
8. National Family Health Survey-4 (2017)
 CONTENTS
(15 weeks course - Total Classes = 60+15)

TOPIC ONE: INTRODUCTION (7 LECTURES)

• What is Gender justice
o Notions of sex and gender
o Deconstructing ‘Man’, ‘Woman’, ‘Other’
o Private-public dichotomy
• Women in ancient, medieval and modern India: An overview
• Indicators of Status: Difference in - likelihood of survival; female foeticide, assigned
human worth; and control over property, valued goods and services, working conditions,
knowledge and information, political processes, symbolic representation, one’s body,
daily lifestyles, reproductive processes
Readings:
1. *Moira Gatens, “A Critique of the Sex/Gender Distinction” in A Phillips ed. FEMINISM
AND SUBJECTIVITY, pp. 139-154
2. Carol Pateman, “Feminist Critique of the Public and Private” in A Phillips ed.
Feminism and Equality, pp. 103-123
3. India Report under CEDAW 2011availabale at
<http://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/cedaw/docs/AdvanceVersions/CEDAW-C-IND-
4-5_en.pdf>
4. National Family Health Survey-4 (2017), available at
https://dhsprogram.com/pubs/pdf/FR339/FR339.pdf
5. Lotika Sarkar, “Women’s Movement and the Legal Process” Occasional Paper 24,
CWDS, http://www.cwds.ac.in/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/WomensMovement.pdf
6. *Usha Ramanathan, “Images (1920-1950) Reasonable Man, Reasonable Woman and
Reasonable Expectations” in AmitaDhanda, ArchanaParashar (ed) ENGENDERING LAW,
pp. 33-70 (1999). Eastern Book Company. http://www.ielrc.org/content/a9906.pdf
7. *Rajesh Talwar, “Introduction” in THE THIRD SEX AND HUMAN RIGHTS (2016)
TOPIC TWO: PATRIARCHY AND FEMINIST J URISPRUDENCE (8 LECTURES)
• Understanding Patriarchy
• Issues and contradictions in feminism
• Sameness and difference debate
• Liberal feminism
• Radical feminism
• Socialist/Marxist feminist approaches
8. *Kamla Bhasin, What is Patriarchy, Kali/Women Unlimited (2004)
 9. Ratna Kapur and Brendia Cossman, Subversive Sites: Feminist Engagements with Law
in India 43-75 (1996).
10. Alison Jagar “Introduction : Living with Contradictions: Controversies in Feminist
Social Ethics” (1994) Westview Press
11. *Heywood, “Feminism in Political Ideology: An Introduction” pp. 252-265 (2004)
Palgrave McMillan.
TOPIC T HREE : “LGBTQH++ and Human Rights” (4-5 LECTURES)
12. *National Legal Services Authority v. Union of India, [(2014) 1 SCC 1]
13. *Arun Kumar v. Inspector General, 22nd April 2019 Mad HC, available at
https://indiankanoon.org/doc/188806075/
14. *Arvind Narrain, “'That despicable specimen of humanity’: Policing of homosexuality in
India” in Kalpana Kannabiran (ed),CHALLENGING THE RULE(S) OF LAW: COLONIALISM,
CRIMINOLOGY AND HUMAN RIGHTS IN INDIA (2008) Sage India
15. Navtej Singh Johar & Ors v. Union of India Ministry of Law and Justice Secretary, Writ
Petition(s)(Criminal) No(s).76/2016 available at
https://indiankanoon.org/doc/119980704/
16. *EXCERPTS: Born Free and Equal: Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity in
International Human Rights Law (UN Human Rights Office of the High Commissioner)
HR/PUB/12/06 (2012)
17. Report of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights on Discriminatory
laws and practices and acts of violence against individuals based on their sexual
orientation and gender identity (2014) available at
https://www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=A/HRC/19/41
18. The Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Act 2019
TOPIC FOUR: INTERNATIONAL INSTRUMENTS ON GENDER J USTICE (4-5 LECTURES)
• UDHR, ICESCR, ICCPR
• UN Convention for the Elimination of Discrimination against Women
• The Yogyakarta Principles, 2007, available at
http://data.unaids.org/pub/manual/2007/070517_yogyakarta_principles_en.pdf
• UN Human Rights Council Resolution on Human rights, Sexual Orientation and Gender
Identity, 2011
• Human Rights Council Resolution on sexual orientation and gender identity (2014),
available at https://www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=A/HRC/19/41
TOPIC FIVE: SEXUALITY AND MORALITY IN LAW (6 LECTURES)
• Indian Penal Code 1860
Ø Rape Laws
 Ø Adultery
• Immoral Traffic Prevention Act 1956 read with section 370 IPC
• Indecent Representation of Women (Prohibition) Act, 1986
19. *Ved Kumari, “Gender Analyses of Indian Penal Code” in Amita Dhanda, Archana
Parashar (ed) ENGENDERING LAW Essays in Honour of Lotika Sarkar, pp.139-160
(1999). Eastern Book Company.
http://www.womenstudies.in/elib/crime_ag_women/ca_gender_analysis.pdf
20. *Usha Tandon and Sidharth Luthra, “Rape: Violation of the Chastity or Dignity of
Woman? A Feminist Critique of Indian Law”, FICHL Policy Brief Series No. 51 (2016)
http://www.fichl.org/fileadmin/user_upload/160615_PBS_No._51 2016 Tandon
Luthra_.pdf
21. *Bobby Art International, Etc v Om Pal Singh Hoon&Ors (SC 1996)
22. Joseph Shine v. UOI, 2018 SCC online SC 1676
TOPIC SIX: ECONOMIC EMPOWERMENT AND LAW (8 LECTURES)

• Labour Laws:
Ø Gender protective laws
Ø Gender neutral laws
Ø Gender corrective laws
• Law Protecting Women against Sexual Harassment at Workplace
Ø The Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and
Redressal) Act 2013
23. *C.B. Muthammav. Union of India, 1979(4)SCC 260
24. *Air India and others v.Nergesh Meerza, 1982 SCR (1) 438
25. *Richa Mishra v. State of Chhattisgarh, (2016) 4 SCC 179,
http://judis.nic.in/supremecourt/imgs1.aspx?filename=43378
26. Charu Khuranav. UOI , WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO.78 OF 2013 decided by SC on
November 10, 2014
27. Medha Kotwalv. U.O.I (2013)1 SCC 297
28. *Catharine A. MacKinnon, Where #MeToo Came From, and Where It’s Going: The movement
is moving the culture beneath the law of sexual abuse, available at
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/03/catharine-mackinnon-what-metoo-has-
changed/585313/

29. Vanessa Sheridan, “Transgender Economic Equality: The New Frontier” in HUFFPOST
available at https://www.huffingtonpost.com/vanessa-sheridan/transgender-economic-
equality-the-new-frontier_b_3914614.html
TOPIC SEVEN: REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS (6 LECTURES)
• Indian Penal Code, 1860
 • Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, 1971
• Maternity Benefits Act, 1964
• PC & PNDT Act 1994
30. *Municipal Corporation of Delhi v. Female Workers (Muster Roll) and Another, (2000)
3 SCC 224
31. *Sabu Mathew George v. Union of India &Ors (2008 SC)
32. *Vinod Soniv. UOI, 2005 Bombay High Court
TOPIC EIGHT: LAW PROTECTING WOMEN AGAINST VIOLENCE AT HOME: DOMESTIC
VIOLENCE, DOWRY HARASSMENT, SATI. (5 LECTURES)
• Protection of Women against Domestic Violence Act 2005
• Dowry Prohibition Act 1961
• Commission of Sati (Prevention) Act 1987
33. *S.R. Batra and Anrv.Taruna Batra, (SC 2006)
34. *Hiral P. Harsora And Orsv. Kusum Narottamdas Harsora¸2016 SCC OnLine SC
1118, decided on 06.10.2016
35. *All India Democratic Women's Association and Janwadi Samitiv. Union of India
&Ors., 1989 SCR (2) 66
36. *Staying Alive: Evaluating Court Orders Sixth Monitoring & Evaluation Report 2013
on the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (LAWYERS
COLLECTIVE)
Readings with an asterisk (*) indicate that these are supplied in the Course Materials.
Students are required to study the other readings from the Library.
It may be noted that the list of reading prescribed and suggested is subject to revision with
new publications and developments.