Constitutional Law – Reservation in Education – Constitutional validity of OBC and EWS reservation in AIQ seats – Permissibility under Article 15(5) – Reservation in postgraduate medical courses not prohibited – Reservation as a means to ensure substantive equality and address structural barriers faced by disadvantaged classes – Constitutional amendment and legislative provisions upheld [Paras 1-29].

Merit and Reservation – Reconceptualization of Merit – Merit not solely based on exam scores – Structural inequalities and socio-economic factors influencing merit – Reservation ensuring equal opportunity and addressing historical disadvantages – Merit as a social good advancing equality [Paras 17-29].

Judicial Precedent – AIQ Reservation – Development of AIQ seats through judicial decisions – No prohibition on reservation in AIQ seats for OBCs and EWS – Analysis of relevant cases and constitutional provisions [Paras 30-31].

Decision: Writ petitions challenging the validity of OBC and EWS reservation in AIQ seats dismissed – Constitutional validity of reservation provisions upheld – Reservation to be implemented in the current and subsequent academic years as directed by the court.

Service Law – Promotion Regulations – ESIC Recruitment Regulations 2015 vs. DACP Scheme – High Court erred in applying DACP Scheme over ESIC Recruitment Regulations 2015 for teaching cadre promotions – ESIC Recruitment Regulations 2015, being statutory, have precedence over DACP Scheme – Concession by appellant’s counsel before CAT irrelevant as legal position is clear [Paras 1-27].

Statutory Regulations – Precedence over Executive Instructions – DACP Scheme as executive instruction cannot override statutory ESIC Recruitment Regulations 2015 – Recruitment advertisements referencing DACP Scheme do not supersede statutory regulations – High Court’s reliance on DACP Scheme misplaced [Paras 10-25].

Estoppel and Concessions – No Estoppel against Statutory Provisions – Concession by appellant’s counsel before CAT not binding – Legal errors in concession do not affect statutory interpretation – Appeals court bound by correct legal position irrespective of lower court concessions [Paras 23-25].

Decision: Appeal allowed – High Court judgment set aside – Promotions to be governed by ESIC Recruitment Regulations 2015 – Revised seniority list to reflect promotions as per ESIC regulations, not DACP Scheme

Land Acquisition – Higher Compensation – BDA Act vs. 2013 Act – LA Act incorporated into BDA Act remains applicable – High Court erred in applying 2013 Act to BDA acquisitions – 2013 Act provisions not applicable where BDA Act governs acquisition – Repeal of LA Act does not affect ongoing BDA proceedings [Paras 1-24].

Legislation by Incorporation – Provisions of LA Act within BDA Act – Section 36 of BDA Act mandates that LA Act provisions as incorporated remain effective – Subsequent amendments to LA Act do not alter incorporated provisions – Consistent legal precedent upholding this principle [Paras 12-16].

Judicial Precedent – Misapplication of Offshore Holdings Private Limited Case – High Court misinterpreted principles of incorporation vs. reference – BDA Act remains self-contained code with selective incorporation of LA Act – Constitutional Bench’s findings in Offshore Holdings reaffirmed [Paras 22-23].

Decision: Applications allowed – High Court judgment in Sri Sudhakar Hegde case overruled – 2013 Act not applicable to acquisitions under BDA Act – LA Act provisions, as incorporated, continue to govern BDA acquisitions.

Hindu Law – Succession – Self-acquired Property – Inheritance Rights – Property of a male Hindu dying intestate – Daughter’s right to inherit – Property to devolve by inheritance, not survivorship – Daughter entitled to inherit father’s self-acquired property in preference to collaterals – Recognized under old customary Hindu Law and judicial pronouncements [Paras 1-79].

Hindu Succession Act, 1956 – Section 15 – Order of Succession – Female Hindu’s property – Scheme under Section 15 – Property to devolve on her own heirs, failing which, on heirs of her father – Distinction between property inherited from father/mother and husband/father-in-law – Ensuring inherited property of issueless female reverts to the source [Paras 66-76].

Decision: Appeal allowed – Judgment and decree of the Trial Court and High Court set aside – Suit decreed – Ramasamy Gounder's daughters entitled to 1/5th share each in the suit properties.

Specific Performance – Readiness and Willingness – Financial Capacity and Conduct – Court must assess both financial capacity and conduct of the plaintiff in determining readiness and willingness – Delay in performance, conduct inconsistent with agreement obligations, or inequitable benefit to plaintiff can bar specific performance – Contractual obligations, particularly regarding discharge of encumbrances, must be clear and adhered to by both parties [Paras 1-29].

Equitable Relief – Discretionary Nature – Section 20 of Specific Relief Act – Specific performance is discretionary – Court considers conduct of parties, escalation of property prices, and fairness in granting relief – Plaintiff’s failure to consistently demonstrate readiness and willingness impacts entitlement to specific performance [Paras 30-36].

Decision: Appeal allowed – High Court judgment set aside – Specific performance not granted due to respondent’s lack of demonstrated readiness and willingness – Appellants directed to refund advance amount with interest.

Land Tax – Vested Forest Lands – Validity of Ownership – Respondents' claims to ownership based on canceled jenmam rights and purchase certificates – Forest Tribunal's ruling against respondents stands unchallenged – Acceptance of basic tax from respondents would wrongly imply ownership – Appeal allowed [Paras 1-7].

Judicial Review – Role of Civil Courts – Forest Tribunal Jurisdiction – Civil courts lack jurisdiction over vested forest land disputes – Exclusive jurisdiction of Forest Tribunal upheld – High Court’s mandamus for tax acceptance reversed to prevent creation of implied ownership rights [Paras 6-7].

Decision: Appeal allowed – High Court’s judgments set aside – No acceptance of basic tax from respondents for vested forest lands.

Competition Law – Jurisdiction of CCI – Anti-competitive Practices – CCI's role in investigating bid rigging, collusive bidding, and cartelization in lottery tenders – Lottery business regulated under Lotteries (Regulation) Act but CCI jurisdiction affirmed for anti-competitive aspects – Premature High Court intervention criticized – Proceedings remanded to CCI for completion [Paras 1-44].

Legal Interpretation – Service Definition – Inclusive Definition of Service under Section 2(u) of Competition Act – Services related to lottery distribution fall under Competition Act – Doctrine of res extra commercium not applicable to anti-competitive practices in regulated businesses [Paras 36-39].

Decision: High Court judgment set aside – CCI to proceed with investigation – State of Mizoram's writ petition closed – Private parties' writ petitions dismissed – Proceedings to conclude per Competition Act.

Trade Marks – Infringement – Identical Marks – Defendant’s use of a mark identical to the plaintiff’s registered mark – Presumption of confusion – Section 29 of Trade Marks Act applied – High Court erred by not acknowledging the legislative scheme presuming confusion when identical marks are used for similar goods/services – Appeal allowed with injunction granted [Paras 1-29].

Trade Marks – Honest Concurrent Use – Defendants' claim of good faith use rejected – Evidence showed deliberate adoption of plaintiff’s well-known mark – Registration and prior use rights upheld – Plaintiff's extensive use and reputation recognized [Paras 30-36].

Decision: Appeal allowed – High Court judgment set aside – Injunction granted against respondents from using "SAI RENAISSANCE" or any deceptively similar mark – Permanent injunction and removal of infringing materials ordered.

Promotion – Inspector General of Police's Authority – Punjab Police Rules – IG's power to review SP's recommendations for promotion under the 10% outstanding performance quota – Rule 13.7(14) empowers IG to scrutinize and approve SP's list – SP's recommendation not final until IG's approval – Three-stage scrutiny required for selection as Head Constable under 10% quota – State level comparative merit considered – Appeal dismissed [Paras 1-9].

Judicial Review – Decision-Making Process – Courts to review process, not decision – No arbitrariness in selection process – IG's scrutiny and approval justified – No indefinite right to promotion based on SP's recommendation [Paras 8-9].

Decision: Appeal dismissed – High Court judgment upheld – IG's scrutiny and approval powers affirmed – No right to retrospective promotion based on SP's initial recommendation.