LLM Notes: Air India v. Nargesh Meerza (1981) - IRAC Analysis

 Issue

The primary issue in Air India v. Nargesh Meerza was whether the service regulations imposed by Air India on female flight attendants (Air Hostesses) violated their fundamental rights under Articles 14, 15, and 16 of the Indian Constitution. Specifically, the case challenged regulations that required air hostesses to retire at age 35, terminate their service upon marriage within four years of employment, or upon first pregnancy - conditions that did not apply to male flight attendants.

The petitioner Nargesh Meerza, an Air India flight attendant, contested these discriminatory workplace policies that forced women to resign based on gender-specific conditions while male employees faced no such restrictions.

Rule

Print Page

LLM Notes: The Air India v. Nergesh Meerza Case: A Landmark Supreme Court Decision on Gender Equality in Aviation

 The Air India v. Nergesh Meerza case of 1981 stands as one of the most significant judicial decisions in Indian legal history concerning gender discrimination in the workplace. This landmark Supreme Court ruling challenged deeply entrenched discriminatory employment practices in the aviation sector and became a cornerstone for advancing women's rights in India. The case highlighted the constitutional principles of equality and non-discrimination while addressing the systemic barriers faced by female aviation professionals in the post-independence era.

Background and Historical Context

Formation of Air India Corporations

Print Page

Questions and answers on law (Part 68)

1) Supreme Court: High court or Session court must hear accused in revision against order of magistrate of dismissal of complaint

 We hold, as it must be, that in a revision petition preferred by complainant before the High Court or the Sessions Judge challenging an order of the Magistrate dismissing the complaint under Section 203 of the Code at the stage under Section 200 or after following the process contemplated under Section 202 of the Code, the accused or a person who is suspected to have committed crime is entitled to hearing by the revisional court. In other words, where complaint has been dismissed by the Magistrate under Section 203 of the Code, upon challenge to the legality of the said order being laid by the complainant in a revision petition before the High Court or the Sessions Judge, the persons who are arraigned as accused in the complaint have a right to be heard in such revision petition. This is a plain requirement of Section 401(2) of the Code. {Para 58}

Supreme Court of India

Manharibhai Muljibhai Kakadia & ... vs Shaileshbhai Mohanbhai Patel & ... on 1 October, 2012

Author: R Lodha

Bench: R.M. Lodha, Chandramauli Kr. Prasad, Sudhansu Jyoti Mukhopadhaya

https://www.lawweb.in/2013/02/an-accused-person-does-not-come-into.html

Print Page

Handbook on gender stereotypes- Supreme Court of India

Supreme Court has prepared a "Handbook on combating Gender Stereotypes", in order to identify and remove the use of words and phrases, which are loaded with gender stereotypes, in judgments and court language.

"This is to assist judges and the legal community to identify, understand, and combat stereotypes about women in legal discourse. It contains a glossary of gender unjust terms and suggests alternative words and phrases which may be used while drafting pleadings as well as orders and judgements. It is for lawyers as well as judges", CJI said.

"The handbook identifies common stereotypes by women, many of which have been utilised by courts in the past and demonstrates why they're inaccurate and how they may distort the application of law. The intention is not to criticize or cast doubts on judgements but merely to show how stereotypes may unwittingly employed. To raise awareness against the utilisation of harmful stereotypes, particularly those against women, the handbook aims to explain what stereotypes are", CJI added.

"It helps judges identify and avoid such stereotypes by first- identifying language which promotes gender stereotypes and offering alternative words and phrases; two, identifying common reasoning patterns based on gender stereotypes particularly about women. And three, highlighting binding judgements of Supreme Court which have rejected these stereotypes", CJI explained.

 https://drive.google.com/file/d/1XC4CmwKp1BrpRXG6Qo3cbucLJvQKz2-3/view?usp=sharing

Print Page

Important Supreme Court and Bombay HC Judgments on POSCO Act (Part 1)

 

1) Supreme court guidelines to Judges about Judgments writing in sexual offences.

APARNA BHAT & ORS. Vs STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH 

Author: S. RAVINDRA BHAT, J.

Dated:March 18, 2021.

https://www.lawweb.in/2021/03/supreme-court-guidelines-to-judges.html

2) Guidelines of supreme court for grant of compensation to child victim under POCSO Act.

NIPUN SAXENA Vs  UNION OF INDIA 

Dated: SEPTEMBER 05, 2018

https://www.lawweb.in/2018/10/guidelines-of-supreme-court-for-grant.html

3) Supreme Court: Copy of statement under section 164 Cr. P. C. of victim not to be given to accused until filing of chargesheet.

State of Karnataka  Vs. Shivanna @ Tarkari Shivanna

[Special Leave Petition (CRL.) No. 5073/2011]

Dated; 25 April 2014

https://www.lawweb.in/2014/05/latest-guidelines-of-supreme-court-in.html

Print Page