- Home
- /
- Top Stories
- /
- Supreme Court Weekly Round Up:...
Supreme Court Weekly Round Up: August 1 To August 6, 2022
Shruti Kakkar
7 Aug 2022 9:39 AM IST
Supreme Court Judgments 1. Sec 24(1) RFCTLARR Act- Land Acquisition Proceedings Get "Initiated" From Publication Of Sec 4(1) Notification Under 1894 Act : Supreme Court Case details: Haryana State Industrial and Infrastructure Development Corporation vs Deepak Aggarwal | 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 644 | SLP (C) 6631-16632/2018 In a judgment delivered on Thursday (28...
Supreme Court Judgments
Case details: Haryana State Industrial and Infrastructure Development Corporation vs Deepak Aggarwal | 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 644 | SLP (C) 6631-16632/2018
In a judgment delivered on Thursday (28 July 2022), the Supreme Court explained the meaning of 'Initiation' for the purpose of Section 24(1) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013. The proceedings under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, shall be treated as initiated on publication of a notification under Section 4(1) thereof, for the purposes of Section 24(1) of the RFCTLARR Act, the Court held.
Case Title: Bhagwandas B. Ramchandani vs British Airways | 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 645 | CA 4978 of 2022
The Supreme Court observed that the provisions of Limitation Act will not have apply when a Statute extinguishes the right itself. The distinction between barring a remedy as exception is well established, the bench observed in a judgment in which it dealt with the Rule 30 of the Second Schedule of the Carriage by Air Act, 1972.
Also Read: Carriage by Air Act 'Expressly Excludes' Provisions Of Limitation Act : Supreme Court
Case details: Rishi Pal Singh vs New India Assurance Co Ltd. | 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 646 | CA 4919 OF 2022
The Supreme Court observed that an owner of a vehicle cannot be expected to verify the genuineness of his driver's licence if he was satisfied with his driving skills. The owner of the vehicle is expected to verify the driving skills and not run to the licensing authority to verify the genuineness of the driving license before appointing a driver, the bench comprising Justices Hemant Gupta and Vikram Nath observed.
Case Details: Sunita Palita vs Panchami Stone Quarry 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 647 | SLP(Crl) 10396 of 2019
The Supreme Court observed that it is not necessary to make an averment that a Managing Director or Joint Managing Directors were in charge of and responsible for the conduct of the business of a company to make them accused under Section 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. The court reiterated that impleading of independent and non-executive directors of a Company on the basis of a statement that they are in charge of and responsible for the conduct of the business of the company, without anything more, does not fulfil the requirements of Section 141 NI Act.
Case Title: Asset Reconstruction Company (India) Limited vs Tulip Star Hotels Limited | 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 648 | CA 84-85 OF 2020
The Supreme Court observed the entries in Books of Account/Balance sheet of a company can be treated as acknowledgement of liability in respect of debt payable to a financial creditor.
An application under Section 7 of the IBC would not be barred by limitation, on the ground that it had been filed beyond a period of three years from the date of declaration of the loan account of the Corporate Debtor as NPA, if there were an acknowledgement of the debt by the Corporate Debtor before expiry of the period of limitation of three years. the bench comprising Justices Indira Banerjee and JK Maheshwari observed. In such a case the period of limitation would get extended by a further period of three years.
Case details: Mandar Deepak Pawar vs State of Maharashtra | 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 649 | CrA 442/2022
While quashing a rape case, the Supreme Court observed that there is a distinction between a false promise to marriage and a breach of promise which is made in good faith but subsequently not fulfilled.
The court noted that, in this case, both parties were admittedly in a consensual relationship from 2009 to 2011. Though the victim contended that this relationship was on an assurance of marriage by the accused, the complaint was filed only in 2016 after three years, which led to registration of FIR under Section 376 and 420, IPC. The Bombay High Court had earlier dismissed the writ petition filed by the accused observing that rape 'is said to be an offence against the society'.
Case details: Dauvaram Nirmalkar vs State of Chhattisgarh | 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 650 | CrA 1124 OF 2022
The Supreme Court observed that, for the purpose of Exception 1 of Section 300 IPC, the last provocation has to be considered in light of the previous provocative acts or words, serious enough to cause the accused to lose his self-control. The bench comprising Justices Sanjiv Khanna and Bela M. Trivedi also clarified that this principle does not do away with the requirement of immediate or the final provocative act, words or gesture. Further, this defence would not be available if there is evidence of reflection or planning as they mirror exercise of calculation and premeditation, the court added.
Case Title : Satyajit Kumar and others versus State of Jharkhand and others | 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 651
The Supreme Court on Tuesday quashed a notification issued by the State of Jharkhand in 2016 to provide for 100% reservation for local residents in District Cadre Class III and Class IV posts in the 13 Scheduled Districts of the State.
The Court held that "100% reservation provided for the local residents of the concerned Scheduled Districts / Areas only would be violative of Article 16(2) of the Constitution of India and affecting rights of the other candidates / citizens of non scheduled areas / Districts guaranteed under Part III of the Constitution of India".
Case Title: Noor Mohammed vs Khurram Pasha | 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 652 | SLP (Crl) 2872 of 2022
The Supreme Court observed that right to cross-examine the witnesses examined on behalf of the complainant cannot be denied to an accused for his failure to deposit interim compensation under Section 143A of Negotiable Instruments Act.
"Any such order foreclosing the right would not be within the powers conferred upon the court and would, as a matter of fact, go well beyond the permissible exercise of power", the bench of Justices Uday Umesh Lalit, S. Ravindra Bhat and Sudhanshu Dhulia observed.
Case details: Siddharth Mukesh Bhandari vs State of Gujarat 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 653 | CrA 1044-1046 of 2022
The Supreme Court reiterated that a High Court while exercising powers under Section 482 CrPC, can grant stay of investigation or any other interim relief only in the rarest of rare cases. The bench observed thus while setting aside orders passed by Gujarat High Court while considering petitions filed under Section 482 CrPC read with Article 226 of the Constitution granting interim reliefs staying further criminal proceedings and resultantly staying further investigation.
12. Advise States To Implement Digital DIN System : Supreme Court To Centre & GST Council
Case Title: Pradeep Goyal vs Union of India | 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 654 | WP(C) 320 OF 2022
The Supreme Court has directed the GST Council to issue advisory / instructions / recommendations to the respective States regarding implementation of the system of electronic (digital) generation of a Document Identification Number (DIN) in the indirect tax administration.
The bench comprising Justices MR Shah and BV Nagarathna observed that the system, which is already being implemented by the States of Karnataka and Kerala, would be in the larger public interest and enhance good governance. It will bring in transparency and accountability in the indirect tax administration, which are so vital to efficient governance, the bench said.
Case Title : Dr J Vijayan and others vs State of Kerala and others| 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 655
The Supreme Court on Tuesday dismissed an appeal which sought a direction to enhance the retirement age of college teachers to 65 years in the State of Kerala as per a recommendation made by the University Grants Commission in 2010(Dr J Vijayan and others vs State of Kerala and others). A bench comprising Justices Indira Banerjee and Justice JK Maheshwari affirmed the view taken by the Kerala High Court that the fixing the age of superannuation is a policy of the state government and that the UGC regulations cannot override the service rules framed under Article 309 of the Constitution.
Case Name: M/s. Total Environment Building Systems Pvt. Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes And Ors. | 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 656
The Supreme Court, on Tuesday, held that service tax could not be levied on composite works contracts prior to the introduction of the Finance Act, 2007, which by amending the Finance Act, 1994 had introduced Section 65(105)(zzzza) defining works contracts. The Apex Court noted that in the absence of a charging section and the modalities to levy and assess, service tax cannot be levied on the service element of works contract. The Apex Court had reached the same conclusion in its judgment in Commissioner, Central Excise and Customs, Kerala v. Larsen and Toubro Ltd. (2016) 1 SCC 170. However, in the present proceedings the Revenue had sought reconsideration of the said judgment.
Case details: Mahanadi Coalfields Ltd. vs IVRCL AMR Joint Venture | 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 657 | CA 4914 of 2022
The Supreme Court observed that an arbitration agreement should disclose a determination and obligation on behalf of parties to refer disputes to arbitration.
The bench comprising Justices DY Chandrachud and AS Bopanna noted that mere use of the word "arbitration" or "arbitrator" in a clause will not make it an arbitration agreement, if it requires or contemplates a further or fresh consent of the parties for reference to arbitration.
Case details: Jai Prakash Tiwari vs State of Madhya Pradesh | 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 658 | CrA 704 OF 2018
The Supreme Court observed that while examining an accused under Section 313 CrPC, all the adverse evidence has to be put in the form of questions so as to give an opportunity to the accused to articulate his defence and give his explanation.
"If all the circumstances are bundled together and a single opportunity is provided to the accused to explain himself, he may not be able to put forth a rational and intelligible explanation," the bench comprising CJI NV Ramana and Justices Krishna Murari and Hima Kohli observed. The court clarified such an omission does not ipso facto vitiate the trial, unless the accused fails to prove that grave prejudice has been caused to him.
Case Title : Reliance Industries Ltd versus Securities and Exchange Board of India| 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 659
A regulator like the Securities and Exchange Board of India(SEBI) has a duty to act fairly, while conducting proceedings or initiating any action against the parties, stated the Supreme Court in a judgment delivered on Friday while allowing the plea of Reliance Industries Limited (RIL) to access certain documents relied on by the SEBI to file a criminal complaint against the company.
"It is expected that parties in such proceedings are transparent, more so for Regulators like SEBI, who are expected to share all the documents, which are necessary for understanding the issue", a bench led by the Chief Justice of India observed in the judgment(Reliance Industries Ltd versus Securities and Exchange Board of India).
Case Title : Commissioner of Service Tax New Delhi versus Quick Heal Technologies Ltd| 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 660
The Supreme Court has dismissed the appeals filed by the Commissioner of Service Tax seeking to levy service tax to the tune of over Rs 56 crores on Quick Heal Technologies Ltd for its sale of anti-virus software during the period 2012-2014.
The Court held that the sale of software in CDs/DVDs is a sale of goods and once sales tax has been paid on the sale consideration, service tax is not leviable on the same transaction on the ground that updates are being provided to the customer.
Case Name: All India Football Federation v. Rahul Mehra And Ors.| 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 661
Opining that the "National Sports Code, 2011 cannot be read in the manner of a statute", the Supreme Court passed a direction to include the representation of 36 football players (24 male and 12 female) in the electoral college for the ensuing executive committee election of All India Football Federation.
Supreme Court Updates
Supreme Court Dismisses Plea To Accept Nomination For Vice President Election
The Supreme Court of India on Monday rejected a petition filed by Dr. Mandati Thirupati Reddy seeking to direct the Election Commission of India to accept his nomination to the post of Vice President of India.
The Supreme Court on Monday appointed former Supreme Court Judge Justice RV Raveendran as a mediator in the ongoing family dispute between businessman Lalit Modi, his mother Bina Modi and his siblings. The bench of Chief Justice of India NV Ramana, Justices Krishna Murari and Hima Kohli also asked the parties to maintain confidentiality during the mediation proceedings and not use social media in relation to the matter.
The Supreme Court, on Monday, suggested the Union Government to not interfere with the disability pension payable to a soldier, who was discharged from service on disciplinary grounds due to alcohol dependency. It urged the Government to curve out an exemption for the individual. A Bench comprising Justices D.Y. Chandrachud and Sudhanshu Dhulia noted that if the pension was not granted to the veteran by the Armed Forces Tribunal and he would have come before the Apex Court seeking the same, the Court could have 'shown him the door'. But considering the fact that he was granted pension by the Tribunal, it would not be in the interest of justice to interfere with the same. Saying this, the bench urged the union to look at 'the human side of justice'.
Opposing the petitions filed by Uddhav Thackeray faction in the Supreme Court in respect of the issues arising out of the rift within the Shiv Sena party, Maharashtra Chief Minister Eknath Shinde has said that the actions taken by the Governor and the Speaker are not amenable to judicial review.
Shinde has said that to accept the arguments of the Uddhav group would result in the following consequences :
(i) minority tyranny within the House;
(ii) anti-democratic and minority Government to continue illegally in office; and
(iii) Chief Minister, who has lost the confidence of his own party to continue in office.
The Supreme Court on Monday requested the Bombay High Court to expedite the hearing in the petition filed by Lt Col Prasad Purohit seeking the quashing of the sanction granted to prosecute him in the 2008 Malegaon blast case. Purohit had approached the Supreme Court challenging his prosecution in the case. The bench comprising Justices Hemant Gupta and Vikram Nath, taking note of the fact that the petition filed by Purohit seeking to quash the sanction granted under Section 197(2) of the Code of Procedure is pending consideration before the High Court, disposed of his plea requesting the HC to expeditiously decide the same.
In a batch of petitions seeking declaration of virtual hearing as a Fundamental Right, the Supreme Court, on Monday, allowed impleadment of High Courts, which have stopped virtual hearing.
Advocate, Mr. Siddharth R Gupta appearing for the petitioner, informed a Bench comprising Justices D.Y. Chandrachud and Sudhanshu Dhulia that some High Courts which includes High Court of Gujarat High Court and that of Madhya Pradesh, were not allowing requests for virtual hearing and sought permission to implead them to the present proceeding. He submitted that last year in August, the Uttarakhand High Court had stopped virtual hearing completely. Other High Courts, he indicated, have followed suit. He urged the Bench to consider the application pertaining to virtual hearing before the High Courts at priority, while the main issue, he suggested, can be decided on a later date. The Bench agreed to consider the same.
Refer Motor Accident Claims Which Can Be Compromised To Lok Adalat : Supreme Court
The Supreme Court has directed compromisable insurance claims from the High Court and the Motor Accidents Claim Tribunal (MACT) which adds up to one lakh fifty five thousand cases to be placed before the Lok Adalat that is proposed to be held on 13th August, 2022 for appropriate orders. It also encouraged pre-discussions amongst the organisers of the Lok Adalats, the High Courts and the insurance companies to facilitate disposal of all these cases.
"Question Of Policy": Supreme Court Dismisses Pleas Challenging NEET SS 2022 Exam Pattern Change
The Supreme Court, on Monday, dismissed petitions preferred by MD Radiation Oncologists and MD Anaesthesiologists NEET SS 2022 aspirant challenging the changed examination pattern which would now consist of 150 questions from the general/basic component of the primary feeder broad specialty subject and from all sub- specialty/systems/component of that primary feeder broad specialty subject.
The Supreme Court, on Monday, imposed a cost of INR 5 lakh on the petitioner who approached it by way of a PIL seeking alternative direction other than demolition of the Supertech Twin Towers.
On 31.08.2021, by a detailed judgment the Apex Court had directed the demolition of the illegal twin towers situated in Section 93A NOIDA, on the ground of serious violation of building regulations.
While hearing the PIL, a Bench comprising of Justices D.Y. Chandrachud and Sudhanshu Dhulia noted that no petition under Article 32 of the Constitution of India can be entertained once the judgment dated 31.08.2021 had attained finality.
The Supreme Court, on Monday, turned down a plea seeking modification of the tenure of members of National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) appointed pursuant to the notification dated 20.09.2019 issued by the Ministry of Corporate Affairs, from 3 years to 5 years. It refused to extend tenure for the concerned 23 members, but clarified that while making appointments in future the Central Government would be bound by Section 413 of the Companies Act, 2013, which prescribes the tenure of the members of NCLT to be 5 years. The Apex Court was of the view that an administrative notification for appointment ought to be consistent with the statute.
The Supreme Court on Monday issued notice in a plea preferred by Senior Division Civil Judges aggrieved by the notification dated May 30, 2022 issued by the State of UP which only made the officers who had completed three years of experience till December 31, 2021 eligible for taking Suitability Test of UP Higher Judicial Service-2020.
Supreme Court Refuses To Interfere With Order Granting Parole To Life Convict To Beget A Child
The Supreme Court on Monday refused to interfere with the Rajasthan High Court's order of granting parole to a life convict to perform conjugal relationship with his wife to beget a child, as the parole period of 15 days was already over.
However, the Court observed that it has "reservations" on some observations made by the High Court's order passed on April 5, 2022.
The Supreme Court recently stayed the proceedings in a criminal case against international shooter Vartika Singh who had filed a complaint against Union Minister Smriti Irani and others for allegedly demanding bribe to appoint her as a member of the National Commission for Women (NCW). The bench of Justices BR Gavai and PS Narasimha stayed Allahabad High Court's order dated May 11 by which the High Court had vacated the relief which it had granted to Singh on April 29, 2022.
Hijab Case Listing Delayed As Judges Weren't Well, Will Constitute Bench Soon : CJI NV Ramana
The Hijab case was again mentioned before the Chief Justice of India on Tuesday for urgent listing.
Before Senior Advocate Meenakshi Arora, who was there for the mentioning, started her submission, CJI NV Ramana told her- "I will constitute a bench. One of the judges is not well".
Arora indicated that the petitions were filed way back in March. "It was in March...at least if a date could be given", she said.
"Wait. If judges would've been alright, the matter would've come", CJI Ramana said.
Supreme Court Bar Association Requests CJI To Declare Holiday On Raksha Bandhan
Senior Advocate Vikas Singh, the President of the Supreme Court Bar Association, made a request before the Chief Justice of India for declaring "Raksha Bandhan" as a holiday.
"It's a request from the bar. Let Saturday be a working day instead", Singh submitted.
"I'll ask my other brother judges also, if they're willing...", CJI NV Ramana said.
The Attorney General for India KK Venugopal has written to the Supreme Court of India taking strong exception to the action taken by the Maharashtra State Board of Wakfs in replacing him as a counsel in a case. The AG said that such last minute change of counsel amounts to an "unwarranted attempt to interfere with the administration of justice" and went to the extent of stating that it "amounts to contempt of court".
Supreme Court Issues Notice To Centre On Pleas Challenging Extension Of ED Director's Tenure
The Supreme Court on Tuesday issued notice in the petitions challenging the order issued by the Central Government on November 17, 2021 to extend the term of the ED Director Sanjay Kumar Mishra by one more year. The petitions also challenge Central Vigilance Commission (Amendment) Act 2021 which allows the extension of the term of the Director of the Enforcement of Directorate up to 5 years.
The Bar Council of India has passed a resolution, granting a 6-months window to law graduates to quit their jobs after declaration of result of the All India Bar Examination for enrollment as an Advocate.
A resolution to this effect was passed by the statutory body in light of the Supreme Court accepting the suggestion that persons engaged in other employments can be permitted to provisionally enrol as Advocates.
The suggestion was put forth by Amicus Curiae Senior Advocate KV Vishwanathan in BCI's appeal against a judgment of the Gujarat High Court, which allowed persons with other employments, whether full time or part-time, to enrol as Advocates without resigning from their jobs.
The Supreme Court on Wednesday dismissed as withdrawn former IPS officer Sanjiv Bhatt's plea seeking suspension of sentence in the 1990 custodial death case in view of the Gujarat High Court now hearing his appeal against the conviction.
When the matter was taken today, Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for Bhatt, submitted that the petition is being withdrawn as the Gujarat High Court is hearing the appeal on a day to day basis. Sibal requested that the Court be asked to decide the appeal without being influenced by the observations made in the earlier order refusing to suspend the sentence.
The bench of Justices M. R. Shah and B. V. Nagarathna dismissed the Special Leave Petition as withdrawn. The bench observed in the order that it is needless to say that the appeal shall be decided in accordance with law on merits and that the observations made while considering sentence suspension cannot influence the appeal.
"No Political Party Will Debate Freebies Issue": Supreme Court To Form Expert Body For Suggestions
The Supreme Court on Thursday opined that an expert body consisting of various stakeholders such as Niti Aayog, Finance Commission, Law Commission, Reserve Bank of India, members of ruling and opposition parties would be required to give suggestions to address the issue of promise of freebies during election campaigns.
To enable the Court to pass an order for the constitution of such a body, the bench of Chief Justice of India NV Ramana, Justices Krishna Murari and Hima Kohli directed the petitioner, Central Government and the Election Commission of India to give suggestions.
"We direct all the parties to make suggestions about the composition of such a body to enable us to pass an order for the constitution of the body so that they can make suggestions," the bench said in its order.
The Supreme Court, on Wednesday, directed the Committee of Administrators (CoA) to conduct the elections to the executive committee of the All India Football Federation (AIFF) expeditiously as per the timelines proposed by CoA and consistent with the manner prescribed in Article 26 of the draft Constitution of the AIFF. Article 26 prescribes the term, tenure, age limit and other conditions of eligibility. A Bench comprising Justices D.Y. Chandrachud and J.B. Pardiwala made it abundantly clear that the elected committee would be an interim body, which would continue for a period of 3 months subject to further orders of the Court. It stated that, in the interim, the constitution of AIFF can be finalized.
The Supreme Court on Wednesday set aside the Madras High Court's order directing CBI probe into the corruption allegations against former Tamil Nadu Chief Minister E Palaniswami over awarding road contracts.
The bench of Chief Justice of India NV Ramana, Justices Krishna Murari and Hima Kohli directed the High Court to consider the matter afresh without taking into consideration the observations made in the impugned order.
"Heard the counsel without hearing the parties in length. We request the High Court to look into the report and examine the matter. So far as the probe under CBI is concerned we set aside the order. All the observations will not come in the way," the bench said in its order.
Hockey India : Supreme Court Affirms Delhi HC Order Constituting CoA; Directs Expeditious Elections
The Supreme Court, on Wednesday, refused to interfere with the order of the Delhi High Court, which had put the affairs of Hockey India into the hands of Committee of Administrators (CoA), till the constitution of the National Sports Federation (Hockey India) is duly amended in consonance with the National Sports Code. While passing the impugned order, the High Court had placed reliance on the order passed by the Supreme Court in the matter pertaining to the election of the executive committee of the All India Football Federation.
Supreme Court Issues Notice On Adani Port Trust's Plea Challenging Disqualification In JNPA Tender
The Supreme Court on Wednesday issued notice in a plea by Adani Port Trust and Special Economic Zone aggrieved by Bombay High Court's order of dismissing its plea challenging the disqualification for upgradation of the container terminal in Navi Mumbai by the Board of Trustees of Jawaharlal Nehru Port Authority (JNPA).
The matter was listed before the bench of Chief Justice of India NV Ramana, Justices Krishna Murari and Hima Kohli.
Appearing for the Adani Port Trust, Senior Advocate AM Singhvi submitted that the matter required consideration as the Trust is being disqualified in multiple tenders and bids.
The Supreme Court, on Thursday, accepted the unconditional apology of an advocate in the Unitech matter, who had allegedly collected money from the homebuyers for uploading the update of the Court proceedings. On 27.07.2022, the Apex Court had issued him a show cause notice and asked him to file an affidavit providing details of the money he had collected. On Thursday, the Counsel vouched to return the money collected from the homebuyer without retaining any part of it and the Apex Court dropped the proceedings against him, initiated by way of the show cause notice.
The Supreme Court, on Thursday, asked the Union Government to follow up on the steps taken by the concerned authorities to trace the whereabouts of Capt. Sanjit Bhattacharjee, an Indian army officer who went missing from the Indo-Pak border 25 years ago, and apprised his 83-year old mother about the same, on a quarterly basis. The Court was hearing a writ petition filed by the mother of the missing officer seeking directions to trace him.
"Utterly Incomprehensible" : Supreme Court Sets Aside HC Judgment Saying Reasons Can't Be Discerned
The Supreme Court recently set aside a judgment of the Himachal Pradesh High Court for being "utterly incomprehensible."
"The judgment of the High Court is utterly incomprehensible. The reasons on the basis of which the High Court has proceeded to allow the petitions and set aside the reassessment cannot be discerned from the judgments," a bench of Justices DY Chandrachud and Sudhanshu Dhulia held.
The Supreme Court, on Thursday, impleaded the National Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission, in the proceedings pertaining to the plea of workers of various Consumer Fora, including technical support staff, appointed on contractual basis seeking parity with their counterparts working at other Judicial Fora/Commissions such as High Court, District Court, NCLT, NCDRC, Human Rights Commission, NCW etc. About 300 contractual workers have approached the Apex Court seeking fixed tenure, fixed compensation and guidelines delineating the same.
During the course of a hearing on Thursday, Supreme Court Judge Justice D.Y. Chandrachud, who also heads the Court's e-committee, informed the lawyers present that he has told the concerned Registrar to provide the lawyers the same scanned copies of the files that are given to the judges.
"…from now on we will give members of the Bar the same scanned pages which come to us", Justice Chandrachud announced while he was struggling to find a document referred to by the Counsel.
He indicated that if the same documents are before the members of the Bench and that of the Bar, it would be convenient to 'be on the same pages'. Moreover, he noted that it might come as a relief for the Advocates, as they no longer would be inconvenienced to carry piles of papers with them.
Supreme Court Judge Justice MR Shah Castigates Registry For Deleting Cases From List
Supreme Court judge Justice M. R. Shah on Thursday expressed displeasure at the practice of the Supreme Court registry of deleting matters posted for any particular day.
A 3-judge bench of the Supreme Court on Thursday said that it will decide on referring the issues arising out of the rift in Shiv Sena political to a Constitution Bench. The Chief Justice of India, leading the bench, orally said that a decision on reference is likely by August 8.
The bench also orally asked the Election Commission of India to not take any precipitative action on the claim raised by Eknath Shinde group for recognizing them as the real Shiv Sena party in the meanwhile. he bench observed in the order that ECI may give reasonable adjournment to the Uddhav Thackeray Group to file their responses in view of the pendency of the matter in the Supreme Court.
The Election Commission of India took the stand that the disqualification proceedings under the tenth schedule operate in a different territory and do not affect the Commission's power to decide the claim of rival factions for official recognition.
The Supreme Court recently clarified that neither it nor the Government-appointed Board of Directors of Unitech has authorized any person to act as an intermediary to collect any charges from the Company's home buyers or any other person for providing an update with regard to the court proceedings.
The Employees Provident Fund Organisation (EPFO) on Tuesday told the Supreme Court of India the structure of Employee Provident Fund Scheme (EPFS) and Employee Pension Scheme (EPS) is entirely different. EPFO, appearing through Senior Advocate Aryama Sundaram made the submission before Justices UU Lalit, Aniruddha Bose and Sudhanshu Dhulia.
The Supreme Court on Thursday strongly condemned the conduct of certain officers of the Indian army in Secunderabad for encroaching upon a civilian's property near the Army Quarters and razing down its boundary wall in violation of the injunction orders of a civil court.
The Supreme Court on Friday refused to entertain a writ petition challenging the permission granted to members of Sikh community to carry "kirpan" in domestic flights. The bench asked the petitioner to move the jurisdictional High Court.
The petition was filed by an organization named Hindu Sena which challenged the exemption given to Sikh community by the Bureau of Civil Aviation Security as discriminatory.
"You go to the High Court. Dismissed, with liberty to approach the High Court", the bench comprising Justices S Abdul Nazeer and JK Maheshwari told the petitioner.
The Supreme Court on Friday expressed dissatisfaction with the counter-affidavit filed by the Union Government in response to a writ petition which seeks guidelines for the seizure of personal electronic devices by investigating agencies.
"We are not satisfied with the counter and we seek a new and proper reply", a bench comprising Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and MM Sundresh observed in the order. The bench said that the Centre should also refer to the international practices in this regard.
The Supreme Court on Friday granted interim protection from arrest to Zee News Editor Rajnish Ahuja in the multiple FIRs registered over the airing of a doctored video of Congress leader Rahul Gandhi.
The Court issued notice to the States of Rajasthan and Chhattisgarh and the Union Government and ordered that no coercive steps be taken against the petitioner with respect to the existing FIRs and future FIRs which are registered on the same subject matter.
The Court allowed the investigation to proceed in the first FIR registered in Jaipur but stayed the investigation in the subsequent FIR registered in Raipur. The petition has been tagged with the earlier petition filed by anchor Rohit Ranjan, who was granted interim protection from arrest by a vacation bench on July 8.
The Mumbai Metro Rail Corporation Ltd (MMRCL) on Friday told the Supreme Court that no cutting of trees has been carried out in the Aarey forest region in Mumbai. The Court was hearing a batch of applications filed by activists and residents alleging that the authorities have resumed the tree cutting in Aarey forest region contrary to the status quo order passed by the Supreme Court in November 2019.
The Supreme Court on Friday adjourned the special leave petition filed by Tamil Nadu Director General of Police against the order of the Madras High Court (Madurai Bench,) which transferred the investigation in the case relating to the suicide of a girl in Thanjavur to the Central Bureau of Investigation. A bench comprising Justices Sanjiv Khanna and Bela M Trivedi said that it will post the matter in October 2022 for final disposal. The High Court had ordered CBI probe in the matter after taking a critical view of the local police ruling out the allegations that attempts at religious conversion were the cause for the suicide of the girl, who was studying in a missionary school in Thanjavur district.
The Supreme Court on Friday allowed an interlocutory application seeking to have alleged conman millionaire Sukesh Chandrashekhar appear via video conferencing mode before a CBI Court, Chennai in a money laundering case registered against him. The IA was filed by the investigating agency in a writ petition filed by Sukesh Chandrashekhar and his wife Leena Paulose seeking their transfer from Tihar Jail to a prison outside Delhi.
The bench of Justices UU Lalit, Ravindra Bhat and Sudhanshu Dhulia allowed the application, observing that,
"…the ld. Counsel appearing for Sukesh Chandrashekar alias Sukesh has no objection to the grant of the prayer made (In the IA). In the premises, we allow this application in terms of prayer 1 quoted above."
The Supreme Court on Friday expunged observations made against Ernakulam Principal District and Sessions Judge Honey M Varghese in a judgement of the Kerala High Court which suggested that she had exhibited political favouritism.
The bench of Justices S Abdul Nazeer and JK Maheshwari observed that it'll be just and proper to expunge the observations/adverse remarks made against the judicial officer in the impugned order.
In a plea filed by a 25 year old unmarried woman seeking medical termination of her 24 week pregnancy, the Supreme Court, on Friday, reflected on ways to extend the benefit of Section 3(2)(b) of the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, 1971, to unmarried women so that they can also seek medical termination of pregnancy which exceeds the period of 20 weeks but does not not exceed 24 weeks.
Plea Seeking To Stop Alleged Attacks Against Christians : Supreme Court To Hear On August 16
In a plea seeking directions to stop the alleged attack against Christian communities and their institutions in the country, at the request of the Solicitor General, the Supreme Court, on Friday, adjourned the matter allowing him to file a short response.
A Bench comprising Justices D.Y. Chandrachud and J.B. Pardiwala clarified that it will not get into the enquiry of individual cases. It noted that the judgment in Tehseen Poonawalla v. Union of India, wherein the Apex Court had issued a slew of directions regarding mob violence and lynching, already being in place, in the present proceedings the Court merely has to see if the framework is being followed by the State Government.
While hearing a suit filed by the State of Meghalaya, seeking to sell their lottery outside their own state, the Supreme Court orally asked whether a state banning goods from another state was permissible in a federal structure.
The Supreme Court, on Friday, stated that the Commissioner of Delhi Police shall take necessary steps to ensure that the cost of INR 10 lakhs imposed on one Mukesh Jain, who, along with one late Swami Om Ji(a self proclaimed godman), had pursued a frivolous litigation assailing the existing procedure adopted for the appointment of Chief Justice of India (CJI), be recovered as arrears of land revenue from his immovable properties in Delhi.
Adoption Process Tedious In India, Precluding People From Adopting : Supreme Court Tells Centre
The Supreme Court, on Friday, adjourned the hearing of the petition seeking simplification in the process of adoption in India. Additional Solicitor General, Mr. K.M. Nataraj apprised a Bench comprising Justices D.Y. Chandrachud and J.B. Pardiwala that he had not received the petition. The Bench asked the petitioner-in-person to handover a copy to him. As a preliminary objection, Mr. Nataraj indicated that the writ petition might not be maintainable as it is filed by a society. The Bench noted that the process of adoption in India is indeed cumbersome and tedious and needs to be addressed. Stating that it is a genuine PIL, the bench requested the ASG not to treat it as adversarial litigation.
While hearing a contempt plea preferred by victims of Endosulfan alleging failure on the part of State of Kerala to disburse 5 lakhs compensation, the Supreme Court, on Friday, was apprised by Senior Advocate, Mr. Jaideep Gupta appearing for the State of Kerala, that all applicants other than the 14 applicants, in whose case there is some dispute amongst the legal heirs, have been paid compensation.
The Supreme Court on Friday granted liberty to withdraw a petition which sought to direct the Bar Council of India to initiate disciplinary proceedings against a senior advocate for professional misconduct under the Advocates Act, 1961.
A prominent face in Indian Business, Anil Ambani has moved the Supreme Court challenging the validity of certain provisions of Part III (Insolvency Resolution and Bankruptcy for Individuals and Partnership Firms) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 pertaining to Personal Guarantors of a Corporate Debtor.
