Talk:List of landmark court decisions in India

Landmark or not
I have moved most of the landmark cases out of the List section to the appropriate sections but the cases which remain don't readily fit under the name Landmark Judgement. Removing them from the page and adding them here for later reference in case one might wish to add them again. >>> Extorc . talk  08:47, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
 * 2019 Supreme Court verdict on Ayodhya dispute
 * Ashoka Kumar Thakur v. Union of India
 * Devinder Pal Singh Bhullar
 * Campa Cola Compound Case
 * DLF land grab case
 * Garhi Sampla Uddar Gagan land case
 * Gurugram Rajiv Gandhi Trust land grab case
 * Hadiya case
 * Haryana Forestry case
 * K. M. Nanavati v. State of Maharashtra
 * M/S R.M.D.C (Mysore) v. State of Mysore
 * M. C. Mehta v. Union of India
 * Maradu apartments demolition order
 * Novartis v. Union of India & Others
 * Orissa Mining Corporation v. Ministry of Environment & Forest
 * Rajbala v. State of Haryana
 * Sonepat-Kharkhoda IMT land case

Restructuring reverted
@Ftrebien, I have reverted your changes as you failed to discuss the changes. The conversion of external links to references is fine but you are also removing the nesting which I believe is useful. The color scheme can be mentioned in a legend. That nesting and color scheme clearly makes it useful for the reader to understand what is the current status of this ruling. >>> Extorc . talk  06:36, 30 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Anyone can boldly edit articles to fix problems without having to ask for permission. I re-applied some of the corrections that are supported by conventions and the manual of style. I still find the table structure a little strange, not only its nested structure, but also the many unnecessary line breaks. A table with paragraph long texts might be better turned into prose, perhaps as lists (whose nesting is more readable), like in List of landmark court decisions in the United States, for example. Many people read Wikipedia on mobile devices, and these types of large tables are difficult to read on mobile devices requiring a lot of horizontal scrolling (especially when the cells with tons of text cause other cells to stretch and remain mostly empty), while prose is properly laid out, so this type of table should be reserved only for cases where they are very necessary. For example, the smallest and the largest table entries could look like this if the tables were reworked as lists and prose:
 * Established that the Public trust doctrine applied in India.
 * : Decriminalisation of acts of Oral sex and Anal sex which effectively decriminalised Homosexual sex. Overruled, which upheld and reinstated the Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code criminalising Anal sex, and , on the decriminalization of homosexual acts involving consenting adults throughout India.
 * --Fernando Trebien (talk) 04:24, 1 May 2023 (UTC)