Footnotes (54)



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

Raghav Sharma

National Law University Jodhpur (NLUJ)

April 16, 2008

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

Open PDF in Browser 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
Feedback to SSRN

Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 4,464
Downloads: 923
Download Rank: 15,286
Footnotes:  54

© 2015 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.  FAQ   Terms of Use   Privacy Policy   Copyright   Contact Us
This page was processed by apollo3 in 0.297 seconds