Abstract

http://ssrn.com/abstract=1121817
 
 

Footnotes (54)



 


 



Minerva Mills Ltd. & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors: A Jurisprudential Perspective


Raghav Sharma


National Law University Jodhpur (NLUJ)

April 16, 2008


Abstract:     
The divergence of majority and minority opinion within the Supreme Court of India in the case of Minerva Mills Ltd. & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors poses interesting jurisprudential issues relating to balance of interests, the decision making process of judges in areas where no pre-ordained rules are present and the peculiar place of Part IV (Directive Principles of State Policy), declared to be unenforceable by the Constitution of India, in the Hohfeldian right-duty paradigm. The object of this short paper is the identification and exposition of these jurisprudential issues posed by the Minerva Mills' case.

Number of Pages in PDF File: 19

Keywords: Jurisprudence, Constitution, Supreme Court of India, Hohfeld, Roscoe Pound, Benzamin Cardozo, Directive Principles of State Policy, Minerva Mills, Basic Structure, India

working papers series


Download This Paper

Date posted: April 17, 2008  

Suggested Citation

Sharma, Raghav, Minerva Mills Ltd. & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors: A Jurisprudential Perspective (April 16, 2008). Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1121817 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1121817

Contact Information

Raghav Sharma (Contact Author)
National Law University Jodhpur (NLUJ) ( email )
NH-65, Nagour Road
Kamala Nehru Nagar, Jodhpur
Mandore, Jodhpur, Rajasthan 34230
India
Feedback to SSRN


Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 3,545
Downloads: 711
Download Rank: 18,773
Footnotes:  54

© 2014 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.  FAQ   Terms of Use   Privacy Policy   Copyright   Contact Us
This page was processed by apollo2 in 1.500 seconds