VIDHAN LAW CLASSES

दोस्तों
मेरा नाम इंद्रविजय सिंह राजपूत है और मैं आप को कानून के विषय पर बहुत सारी रोचक जानकारी इस यूट्यूब चैनल के माध्यम से देने वाला हूं मेरा उद्देश्य भारत के प्रत्येक नागरिक को उसके कानूनी अधिकारों से अवगत कराना है जिससे वह अपने कानूनी अधिकारों को प्राप्त कर सके और व्यक्तियों की कानूनी अज्ञानता का कोई भी व्यक्ति फायदा ना उठा सके साथ ही साथ प्रत्येक व्यक्ति कानून के विषय में जागरूक एवं आत्मनिर्भर हो सके

My object through this YouTube channel is to bring basic knowledge of law in simple language.

मैं MP CIVIL JUDGE प्रारंभिक परीक्षा 8 बार उत्तीर्ण हुआ हूं अर्थात मेरा प्रतियोगी परीक्षाओं के संबंध में भी अनुभव काफी है और मैं कानून से संबंधित प्रतियोगी परीक्षाओं की तैयारी करवाता हूं जिसमें MP CIVIL JUDGE एवं MP ADPOपरीक्षा महत्वपूर्ण है और मेरे इंस्टिट्यूट की रिजल्ट बहुत ही बेहतर हैं

Pls like and share my videos
And subscribe my channEL

Contact for
Business enquiry and coaching class
Indravijay Singh Rajput
indravijay1313@gmail.com
87709-59205

View channel on YouTube

Switch Invidious Instance

Videos

Shorts

Livestreams

Playlists

Posts

VIDHAN LAW CLASSES

8 months ago | [YT] | 0

View 0 replies

VIDHAN LAW CLASSES

Justice B.R. Gavai Appointed as the Next Chief Justice of India

9 months ago | [YT] | 5

View 0 replies

VIDHAN LAW CLASSES

11 months ago | [YT] | 11

View 4 replies

VIDHAN LAW CLASSES

youtube.com/shorts/Q5LOPrupsN...

1 year ago | [YT] | 1

View 0 replies

VIDHAN LAW CLASSES

1 year ago | [YT] | 2

View 0 replies

VIDHAN LAW CLASSES

1. Challenge to the Abrogation of Article 370

In Re: Article 370 of the Constitution

On 11 December, a Constitution Bench led by Chief Justice D.Y. Chandrachud upheld the Central Government’s revocation of the special status of the erstwhile state of Jammu and Kashmir (J&K).

Parties challenging the abrogation claimed that the Union broke a constitutional promise made to J&K and breached the internal sovereignty enjoyed by the state per Article 370 of the Indian Constitution. They also contended that the provision was permanent and could not be abrogated after the dissolution of the J&K Constituent Assembly. The Union, on its part, claimed that the provision was temporary and that its abrogation had ensured complete integration of J&K into India.

The Court agreed with the Union that Article 370 was a temporary provision as indicated by its placement under Part XXI. It also upheld the validity of the presidential orders that abrogated Article 370, ruling that it was not a mala fide exercise of power. However, the presidential order amending Article 367 was held to be constitutionally invalid. The Court refused to comment on the validity of the reorganisation of the state on the ground that the Solicitor General had submitted that statehood would be restored to J&K in due time.

Supreme Court Observer reported extensively on 16 days of hearings in the case. Reports of each day of hearings are available on the case page. A summary and matrix of the judgement highlights the view taken by the five judges.

1 year ago | [YT] | 6

View 0 replies

VIDHAN LAW CLASSES