Read Time: 27 minutes
[Lavanya Death Case] Supreme Court refused to interfere in the Madras High Court order transferring investigation into 17-year old Thanjavur girl’s (Lavanya) alleged forceful conversion & suicide case to CBI. Top Court told the state of Tamil Nadu, insistent upon the quashing of transfer not to make this a “prestige issue” & that a lot had happened in the case. However, in the appeal, on the question of remarks made by the High Court against State police’s inaction and bolstering of counter narratives in the case, the Supreme Court has issued notice and that was under challenge by state of Tamil Nadu too. Bench: Justices Sanjiv Khanna & Bela M.Trivedi Case Title: Director General of Police v. Muruganantham Click here to read more
[Anti CAA Protest Notices] The Supreme Court suggested Uttar Pradesh government to withdraw notices and initiate new proceedings under the new Uttar Pradesh Recovery of Damages to Public and Private Property Act, 2020 for recovering damages for the loss of public property during CAA-NRC protests as the current notices were in violation of the guidelines laid down by the Court in the judgment of In Re Destruction of Public and Private Property vs State of AP and Kodungallur Film Society vs Union of India. Court however, did not pass any order in this regard and asked the AAG of UP, Garima Prashad, to deliberate on this and make her submissions by February 18. Bench: Justice DY Chandrachud and Justice Surya Kant Case Title: Parwaiz Arif Titu v. The State of Uttar Pradesh Click here to read more
[Uniform Education Code] The Supreme Court granted liberty to the petitioners to approach the High Court in a Public Interest Litigation seeking Uniform Education Code in line with the constitutional provisions and recognition of Gurukuls, Vedic Schools at par with Madrassas & Missionary Schools. The plea has been filed by Ashwini Upadhyay. Bench: Justices L Nageshwar Rao and BR Gavai Case Title: Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay v. Union of India Click here to read more
[Model Builder Buyer Agreement] The Supreme Court has directed the Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs, Government of India to assess whether the rules adopted by the Central Government deviate from the rules notified by the States in regard to the Model Builder Buyer Agreement. The bench has also directed Advocate Devashish Bharuka to assist the Court in the matter. The Petition filed by Advocate Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay has stated that the directions are required to ensure accountability and develop a mechanism to weed out the criminal conspiracy for wrongful gain, criminal breach of trust and dishonest misappropriation of buyers money committed by promoters, builders, and agents. Bench: Justice DY Chandrachud and Justice Surya Kant Case Title: Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay v. Union of India & Ors. Click here to read more
[Delhi LG's powers Plea] Supreme Court has agreed for the early listing of the Kejriwal Government's plea which has sought quashing of the four amended sections of the ‘Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi (GNCTD) Act’ and 13 Rules of the ‘Transaction of Business of the Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi Rules, 1993’. The bench listed the matter for hearing on March 3, 2022. Senior Advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi appearing for the Delhi Government mentioned the matter for urgent listing before the Chief Justice of India. The Delhi Government has averred before Top Court that the Centre, through its amendments, has “given more power to the Lieutenant Governor than the elected government of the people of Delhi” according to a press release in public domain. Bench: Chief Justice of India NV Ramana, Justice AS Bopanna and Justice Hima Kohli Case Title: GNCTD v. Union of India Click here to read more
[PG Admissions - Minority] Supreme Court has directed the Christian Medical College, Vellore to make 70% of Post Graduate admissions for 2021-22 from the Christian Minority students list of Tamil Nadu, on the basis of the NEET PG examination marks. The bench noted that the remaining 30% will be filled up by the college management following the procedure of previous academic year of 2020-21. Earlier, the Court had held that it was of the view that for the present academic year students shall be allotted by the state from the NEET PG merit list of students belonging to the Christian minority. Bench: Justice L Nageswara Rao and Justice BR Gavai Case Title: CMC Vellore v. State of Tamil Nadu Click here to read more
[Vanniyar Reservation] The Supreme Court refused to refer the Vanniyar community reservation matter to a larger bench. The bench was hearing a petition challenging the Madras High Court judgment which had declared the 10.5% internal reservation to the Vanniyar community under the existing 20% reservation to Most Backward Classes by Tamil Nadu Government, unconstitutional stating that it was an arbitrary micro classification. Today, the Top Court bench said that the parties may continue arguing on merits. Bench: Justice L Nageswara Rao and Justice BR Gavai Case Title: Pattali Makkal Katchi & Ors. v. Mayileruperumal Click here to read more
[PMLA challenge] Before the Top Court, Senior Advocate Menaka Guruswamy arguing for the petitioner in a batch of petitions challenging the provisions of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA) submitted that with conviction numbers in PMLA cases being low, appeals by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) should have been higher, however, that is not the case. She cited that in 2010 and 2011, in fact, there were no appeals by the ED. In addition to this, Guruswamy argued that there is no investigation manual with the ED. The bench has posted the matter for further hearing on February 22, 2022. Bench: Justice AM Khanwilkar, Justice Dinesh Maheshwari and Justice CT Ravikumar Case Title: Vijay Madanlal Chaudhary and Ors. v. Union of India & Other Click here to read more
[Plea in SC] A petition has been filed before Supreme Court challenging the Allahabad High Court order allowing bail to Ashish Mishra, the key accused in the Lakhimpur Kheri Violence case. The petitioner Advocate Shiv Kumar Tripathi has sought cancellation of the bail stating that "the concept of fairness in action and the postulate of 'justice not only done but seem to be done' still remains a far cry." Importantly, while challenging the High Court order Tripathi has alleged that the order is liable to be questioned in its wisdom because the concerned Union Minister of State (Home) namely Ajay Mishra Teni named as accused in FIR is yet to be interrogated by the prosecution. Case Title: In Re: Violence In Lakhimpur Kheri (UP) Leading to Loss of Life Click here to read more
[Anti-CAA protests] Before the Top Court, the Uttar Pradesh Government informed that the notices issued against the protestors for recovering damages for the loss of public property during CAA-NRC protests has been withdrawn by way of two Government orders. Upon this, while appreciating the stand taken by the State, the bench further directed that the properties attached for the purpose of recovery in the meantime shall be refunded. The development has taken place during hearing a plea seeking direction for quashing and staying notices dated December 2019 sent by the District Administration of the state of Uttar Pradesh to recover damages for the public loss caused to public property by alleged protestors on account of protests in December 2019 against the Citizenship Amendment Act, 2019 [CAA]/NRC. Bench: Justice DY Chandrachud and Justice Surya Kant Case Title: Parwaiz Arif Titu v. The State of Uttar Pradesh Click here to read more
[Domicile reservation] The Supreme Court has set aside Punjab & Haryana High Court order staying Haryana State Employment of Local Candidates Act, 2020 granting Haryana domiciles 75% reservation in private sector jobs implemented by the State of Haryana. The bench was hearing a petition filed by the State of Haryana challenging the High Court order. The concerned bill was passed by the State Assembly in the year 2020 allowing 75% reservation in the private companies established in Haryana to the people who have state domicile for the jobs paying less than Rs. 30,000/- per month, against which the industries had alleged that the Act will have an adverse impact on the businesses. Bench: Justice L Nageswara Rao and Justice PS Narasimha Case Title: State of Haryana v. Faridabad Industries Association & Anr. Click here to read more
[Mullaperiyar Dam] Before the Supreme Court, the state of Kerala in its written submission has submitted that the state of Kerala is only concerned with protecting and keeping safe the life and properties of the people in downstream reaches of the river basin of the river Periyar as it flows down the Western Ghats and meets the sea north of Cochin. The state government has said that the only permanent solution for removing the eternal threat of damage to the dam is to build a new dam in the downstream reaches of the existing Mullaperiyar dam. The submissions have been made in a writ petition highlighting the inaction of the Supervisory Committee appointed by the Supreme Court for taking care of material and safety aspects of Mullaperiyar Dam and urging the proper monitoring of the dam. Bench: The case was last heard before the bench of Justices AM Khanwilkar, Dinesh Maheshwari and CT Ravikumar Case Title: Dr. Joe Joseph & Ors v. State of Kerala Click here to read more
[Spicejet-KAL Airways] The Supreme Court was informed that Kalanithi Maran and KAL Airways have refused to accept the offer proposed by Spicejet regarding the one-time settlement of the dispute over the share transfer issue between Spicejet's former promoter Kalanithi Maran, Kal Airways Pvt Ltd and Spicejet. A 3-judge bench has listed the matter for consideration on merits for March 2, 2022. The court was hearing an application filed by decree holders seeking vacation of the stay, wherein the apex court had stayed the operation of the Delhi High Court's order in the plea by Spicejet challenging the High Court order directing Spicejet to deposit money to secure the decree holders to the extent of interest granted to them under an arbitral award in a share transfer issue Spicejet's former promoter Kalanithi Maran and Kal Airways Pvt Ltd. Bench: Chief Justice of India NV Ramana, Justice AS Bopanna and Justice Hima Kohli Case Title: M/s Spicejet Limited v. Kalanithi Maran Click here to read more
[Visually Impaired student] The Supreme Court has allowed a 100% visually impaired student to appear for state counselling for admission for MD Psychiatry while further allowing interim relief stating that the seat provisionally allotted to the petitioner shall not be disturbed till further orders. The petitioner student was declared ineligible for the post-graduate medical course by the Disability Assessment Board owing to his disability of 100% impaired vision in both eyes which further denied his admission to the course. Case Title: Iyer Seetharaman Venugopal v. Union of India amd Ors. Click here to read more
[Plea in SC] A plea has been filed in the Top Court that seeks for direction to the Centre and the Election Commission of India (ECI) for taking steps to regulate poll manifesto and make political parties accountable for promises they make in the same. The plea has been moved by Advocate Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay and Advocate Ashwani Kumar Dubey, seeking direction to the Election Commission to seize the poll symbol and deregister/derecognise the political parties that fail to fulfil their promises made in manifesto, “Direct to the Election Commission to seize the election symbol and derecognize/deregister the political parties, which fail to fulfil their essential rational promises, made in their election manifesto.” Case Title: Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay v. Union of India Click here to read more
[PMLA Challenge] Senior Advocate Amit Desai arguing for the petitioner in a batch of petitions challenging the provisions of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA) submitted that the law on bail is already settled, "When your Lordships see an offence punishable with 7 years, the question to consider is that should there be such a rule of restricting bail to people who have strong roots in the society?" The Court went on to opine in this regard that "it affects the economy of the country, and there are so many people who get affected." Bench: Justice AM Khanwilkar, Justice Dinesh Maheshwari and Justice CT Ravikumar Case Title: Vijay Madanlal Chaudhary and Ors. v. Union of India & Other Click here to read more
[Vacancies in Tribunals] The Chief Justice of India (CJI) NV Ramana slammed the Central Government over the issue of vacant positions at various tribunals while asking the Attorney General KK Venugopal whether the central government is "serious enough" to make appointments at various Tribunals. A 3-judge bench noted that everyday requests are being made regarding the non-availability of members at the tribunals, and that matters could not be heard before the tribunals. Bench: CJI NV Ramana, Justice AS Bopanna and Justice Hima Kohli Click here to read more
Please Login or Register
