From the resolution of contentious issues regarding distribution of legislative powers by the courts, ‘Principle of Federal Supremacy’ and ‘Harmonious Construction’ have emerged. Explain.
This question is available to read here. The practice button generates a fresh question from the same paper. Here, practise an answer plan in keywords. Choose your timer on the next screen. Feedback uses our common 15-point practice rubric, rather than the paper’s original mark allocation.
The Madras High Court recently dismissed a writ petition filed by AIADMK whip Agri S.S. Krishnamurthy challenging an amendment to a Tamil Nadu Assembly resolution regarding the Mekedatu project. The bench, comprising Chief Justice Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari and Justice G. Arul Murugan, rejected the plea to quash the amendment, which seeks the constitution of a tribunal to resolve the contentious water-sharing dispute between Tamil Nadu and Karnataka, highlighting the legal and federal dimensions of river governance.
On September 27, 2026, the Supreme Court engaged in crucial hearings regarding legal challenges to the Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Act, 2019. In a notable divergence of administrative stances, the Andhra Pradesh government submitted an affidavit stating it played no role in the enactment of the central legislation and maintained that it has not engaged in any discriminatory practices against transgender persons. Conversely, the Uttarakhand government defended the Act, asserting that the existing framework is beneficial for the community and sufficient to address their welfare needs. This judicial discourse highlights the complex interplay between central legislative mandates, state-level implementation, and the overarching constitutional protections for vulnerable groups.