Relative Content

Tag Archive for 上海品茶网ZVZ

High Courts Weekly Round Up

first_imgNews UpdatesHigh Courts Weekly Round Up Akshita Saxena31 May 2020 5:53 AMShare This – xWeek Commencing May 25, 2020 To May 31, 2020 Allahabad High Court 1) Submit Report On Scheme To Reduce Migration Of Natives Of UP To Other States: Allahabad HC Directs UP Govt. In Plea On Migrants Issue [Ritesh Srivastava & Anr. v. State of UP] Division Bench of Justice Govind Mathur and Justice Ramesh Sinha issued notice to the Uttar Pradesh Government inquiring as to…Your free access to Live Law has expiredTo read the article, get a premium account.Your Subscription Supports Independent JournalismSubscription starts from ₹ 599+GST (For 6 Months)View PlansPremium account gives you:Unlimited access to Live Law Archives, Weekly/Monthly Digest, Exclusive Notifications, Comments.Reading experience of Ad Free Version, Petition Copies, Judgement/Order Copies.Subscribe NowAlready a subscriber?LoginWeek Commencing May 25, 2020 To May 31, 2020 Allahabad High Court 1) Submit Report On Scheme To Reduce Migration Of Natives Of UP To Other States: Allahabad HC Directs UP Govt. In Plea On Migrants Issue [Ritesh Srivastava & Anr. v. State of UP] Division Bench of Justice Govind Mathur and Justice Ramesh Sinha issued notice to the Uttar Pradesh Government inquiring as to the steps being taken to ensure that its natives are not forced to seek employment in other states. The bench has ordered the Government to apprise it about the “scheme of the Government for rehabilitation of migrant workmen and their families in the State of Uttar Pradesh itself. The State is also required to give a complete layout to reduce migration of the natives of Uttar Pradesh to other parts of the country to earn minimum livelihood.” The matter is now listed for June 1. Also Read: Social Security In India During COVID-19 2) [COVID-19] ‘Situation In Meerut Is Highly Critical & Sensitive’: Allahabad HC Seeks Status Report From District Collector [Court suo moto v. State] In a letter petition raising alarm as to the “highly critical, grievous and sensitive” situation in Meerut district of UP due to the outbreak of Covid-19 pandemic, a Division Bench comprising of Justices Ramesh Sinha and Siddhartha Varma has asked the concerned District Collector to apprise the Court about the prevailing situation therein. 3) Allahabad HC Issues Notices On Plea For Waiver Of School Fees For Children With Benchmark Disability [Rajanya Kumar Pal Thru. Father Krishan Kanhaiya Pal v. State of UP & Ors.] The bench comprising of Justice Pankaj Kumar Jaiswal and Justice Saurabh Lavania issued notice to the CBSE on a PIL seeking to waive off school fee for differently abled children who are unable to attend online classes due to their benchmark disability, covered under the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016. The case will be heard on June 18. 4) Provide Details Of Members Of Tablighi Jamat Who Are Lodged In Quarantine Centers Or Are Released: Allahabad HC Tells State [Shaad Anwar v. State of UP] The bench of Chief Justice Govind Mathur and Justice Ramesh Sinha asked the Uttar Pradesh Government to apprise it with the status of members of Tablighi Jamat, who were quarantined after their arrival in the state. The court directed the state to “make available all details pertaining to the members of Tablighi Jamat, who were quarantined, released after completing the quarantine period or have yet not been released despite completing tenure of quarantine.” Andhra Pradesh High Court 1) ‘Temporary Camps On Highways, Registration Within 8 Hours, Shifting By Bus/Train Within 2-4 Days’, AP HC Passes Directions For Migrants’ Travel [K Ramakrishna v. Union of India & Ors.] Noting the lack of coordination between some Officers of the Government with the Red Cross and Para Legal Volunteers, the bench of Justice JK Maheshwari and Justice Lalitha Kanneganti formulated a model in the State for shifting of migrant workers. Slew of directions have been issued thereof including, establishment of temporary camps on highways, registration of migrants for shifting within 8 hours, and enabling their repatriation by buses/trains within 2-4 days. Also Read: Human Sufferings And The Pandemic: Accessibility Of Legal Services Authorities Vital For Unlocking The Rights And Empowering People 2) AP HC Initiates Contempt Action Against Abusive Social Media Posts Against Judges A bench comprising Chief Justice J K Maheshwari and Justice C Praveen Kumar issued suo moto contempt notices to 49 persons, including a Member of Parliament and a former Member of Legislative Assembly, observing that they made intimidating and abusive social media posts against judges. 3) ‘Ordinance Brought Only To Appoint SEC Of CM’s Choice, That Too A Former HC Judge Which Is Against Constitutional Morality’: Andhra Pradesh HC [Dr. N. Ramesh Kumar v. State of Andhra Pradesh & Ors.] The Division Bench of Chief Justice JK Maheshwari and Justice M. Satyanarayana Murthy struck down an Ordinance promulgated on April 10 curtailing the tenure of the State Election Commissioner from five to three years. It also quashed a Government Order appointing retired judge V Kanagaraj as the new State Election Commissioner. Bombay High Court 1) “Such An Award Shocks The Conscience Of The Court”; Bombay HC Sets Aside Sole Arbitrator’s Award Against Jackie Shroff [Jackie K Shroff v. Ratnam Sudesh Iyer] While hearing an arbitration petition filed by actor Jackie Shroff, Justice SC Gupte set aside the award passed by a sole arbitrator on noting that the conclusions arrived at by the arbitrator were not just wrong, but “exhibit an unmitigated perversity and is shocking to the conscience of the court.” The impugned award was passed against Shroff in a matter between him and Ratnam Sudesh Iyer, both of whom were shareholders in a company called Atlas Equipfin Pvt Ltd. 2) Bombay HC Rejects Petition By Pune Hospital To Utilize Money In ‘Indigent Patient Fund’ For Covid-19 Patients Not Falling Under EWS [Grant Medical Foundation Ruby Hall Clinic v. State of Maharashtra & Ors.] Justice SJ Kathawalla rejected a petition filed by Grant Medical Foundation Ruby Hall Clinic, Pune seeking directions to the State to allow withdrawal of funds meant for patients belonging to the economically weaker section of the society under the ‘Indigent Patient Fund’, for Covid-19 patients in the hospital who do not belong to the weaker section. 3) Decongestion Of Prisons: Courts Are Not Supposed To Act As Mere Post-Offices Says Bombay HC In PIL Seeking Early Disposal Of 14000+ Bail Applications [PUCL & Anr. v. State of Maharashtra & Ors.] While hearing two PILs alleging laxity on part of the state government in ensuring safe and early release of some 14,000 prisoners egligible to be released as per directions of the State High Power Committee, Division bench of Chief Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice KK Tated remarked, “courts are not supposed to act as mere post-offices and allow applications without application of mind. We have no doubt in our mind that in the light of the guidelines issued by the High Powered Committee, the relevant courts, to the best of its ability and with the resources available at its disposal, have been striving to take appropriate steps to dispose of as many applications for bail as possible in accordance with law and in the light of the guidelines.” The bench then directed the Public Prosecutor to take instructions from the State regarding testing of inmates who came in contact with any of the 158 inmates who tested positive for Covid-19 at Arthur Road Prison. 4) “PIL May Have been Filed With Ulterior Motives”; Bombay HC Directs Petitioners To Deposit Rs.1 Cr As A Precondition For Hearing [Abhinav Bharat Congress & Anr. v. State of Maharashtra & Ors.] Division bench of Chief Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice KK Tated directed the ‘Abhinav Bharat Congress’ and its founder Pankaj Phadnis to deposit Rs. 1 crore with the registry as a precondition for hearing a PIL filed by them seeking directions to State and Municipal Corporation to take control of the management of two hospitals under the Wadia hospital trust in Mumbai during the current pandemic of Covid -19. The court observed that petitioners bona fide may be suspect. Also Read: Bombay HC Expresses Displeasure As State Files Unsigned Written Note Stating Covid-19 Testing Facilities Not Required In All Districts Of The State 5) Publicise WhatsApp Details Of Shopkeepers & 24hr Helpline Meant For Citizens In Need; Bombay HC Suggests Civic Body [Muzaffaruddin v. State of Maharashtra] Division bench of Justice PB Varale and Justice S Kulkarni suggested the Aurangabad Municipal Corporation (AMC) to explore the possibility of publishing the WhatsApp numbers of the shopkeepers in the notified/particular areas, to facilitate easier access of the citizens during this ongoing phase four of nationwide lockdown enforced to contain the Coronavirus. 6) Certify Names Of Kaamgars Involved In Covid-19 Related Duties, Pay Them Rs.300/Day Allowance; Bombay HC Tells Navi Mumbai Civic Body [Samaj Samata Kamgaar Sangh v. NMMC & Ors.] Justice SJ Kathawalla directed the Navi Mumbai Municipal Corporation (NMMC) to certify names of kamgaars (workers) who are involved in Covid-19 related duties and pay them a daily allowance of Rs.300, the same amount that is being provided to employees of the said Corporation as ‘they are risking their lives’ in the line of duty. 7) Arbitrary & Discriminatory; Bombay HC (FB) Quashes GR Allowing Fee Reimbursement To Only Those Undergrad SC/ST Students Who Took Admission Through CAP [Yash Pramesh Rana v. State of Maharashtra & Anr.] A full bench of the High Court comprising Justice AA Sayed, Justice DS Naidu and Justice PD Naik held a Government Resolution dated February 27, 2013 as arbitrary and discriminatory against those SC and ST students who did not take admission in undergrad engineering courses in the State through the Common Admission Process (CAP). Court set aside the said GR and directed the State to reimburse the fees deposited by such students. Also Read: Fee Reimbursement A Facet Of Affirmative Action; Paucity Of Funds No Ground To Discriminate : Bombay HC Full Bench Also Read: To CAP Or Not To CAP: The Bombay High Court On Equality And Access To Education 8) Bombay HC Refuses To Allow Over The Counter Sale Of Liquor In Mumbai, Asks Municipal Commissioner To Decide [Maharashtra Wine Merchants Association v. State of Maharashtra & Ors.] Division bench of Justices Nitin Jamdar and NR Borkar heard a writ petition filed by Maharashtra Wine Merchants Association and refused to allow the prayer for over the counter sale of liquor in Mumbai. Court asked the Municipal Commissioner to decide on the issue. Delhi High Court 1) Doctrine of Promissory Estoppel Doesn’t Apply To Education: Delhi HC Refuses to Quash National Board of Examination’s Decision to Extend the Training Period of Medical Students [Dr. Devyesh J. Pathak & Ors. v. National Board of Examination & Ors.] Noting that the doctrines of promissory estoppel and legitimate expectation do not apply to matters of education, Justice Asha Menon refused to set aside National Board of Examination’s decision to extend the completion of the training period of the final year students of Diplomate of National Board (DNB). 2) Cheating Is A Pandemic That Can Ruin the Education System: Delhi HC Notes While Denying Relief to DU Student Who Was Caught Cheating During Exam [Aarzoo Aggarwal v. University of Delhi] Justice Prathiba M Singh refused to provide relief to a student who was denied her results for cheating during the examination and observed, “Copying and cheating in examinations is like the Plague. It is a pandemic which can ruin society and the educational system of any country. If the same is left unchecked or if leniency is shown, the same can have a deleterious effect.” 3) Delhi HC Takes Suo Moto Cognizance Of Video About Failure Of COVID-19 Helplines; Issues Directions To Centre, Dehli Govt [Court on its own motion v. GNCT of Delhi] After taking suo moto cognizance of the grievances faced by a citizen whose mother is COVID19 positive, Division Bench of Justice Vipin Sanghi and Justice Rajnish Bhatnagar has directed both the Centre as well as the Delhi Government to place on record the status of arrangements and helplines put in place to deal with serious COVID19 patients who need hospitalisation. The court has further directed both the governments to assess the adequacy of the helpline capacity and state whether the same is sufficient to deal with the present call traffic and the traffic expected in the foreseeable future, keeping in view the continuous rise in the number of cases being reported each day. The matter will be taken up on June 3. 4) Coal Block Allocation: Delhi HC Sets Aside MoC’s Invocation Of Bank Guarantees Given By Tata Sponge Iron Ltd; Asks Ministry To Reconsider [Tata Sponge Iron Pvt Ltd. v. Union of India & Ors.] Justice Vibhu Bakhru set aside the orders passed by the Ministry of Coal in 2012 and 2015 whereby the Ministry had decided to invoke the bank guarantees given by Tata Sponge Iron Pvt Ltd. and remanded the matter back to the MoC to decide it afresh, take an informed decision and pass a speaking order, after providing an opportunity of hearing to TSIL. 5) Delhi HC Allows The Release of Foreign Nationals Related to Tablighi Jamaat Event From Quarantine Facility And Shifting Them To Alternate Accommodations [Mohammad Jamal & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors.] Division Bench of Justice Vipin Sanghi and Justice Rajnish Bhatnagar allowed the plea for release of foreign nationals related to Tablighi Jamaat event and shifting them to alternate accommodations after a No Objection Certificate was given by the Revenue Department of Delhi Government for the same. 6) Horrific Handling of Bodies of Those Who Died Of COVID19: Delhi HC Takes Suo Moto Cognizance of a Newspaper Report [Court on its own motion v. GNCT of Delhi & Ors.] The Division Bench of Justice Rajiv Sahai Endlaw and Justice Asha Menon took suo moto cognizance of a newspaper report which highlighted the sad state of affairs in which the bodies of those who have died of COVID19 are being handled by the mortuary as well as crematoriums. The court thereafter passed an order to bring the alleged human rights violations to the notice of the Chief Justice, to take up the aforesaid matter in public interest, for issuing requisite directions. Also Read: Delhi HC Directs Delhi Govt To File Status Report In Suo Moto Matter Concerning Proper Disposal Of Bodies of COVID19 Victims 7) Delhi HC Directs Delhi Govt To Set Up Help Desks For Distribution Of e-Coupons For Food, Asks Authorities To Monitor PDS Shops [Delhi Rozi-Roti Adhikar Abhiyan v. Union of India & Ors.] The Division Bench of Justice Hima Kohli and Justice Subramonium Prasad directed the Delhi Government to put up help desks with a computer at all 580 centres through which rations are distributed through e-coupons within 5 working days to act as a one stop centre for applying for e-coupons. The court also asked the Delhi Government to ensure that all the requirements including uploading of photo, documents etc. should be completed there on the spot. Also Read: Delhi HC Directs Delhi Govt To Monitor Ration Shops And Ensure That Ration Is Being Disbursed To Beneficiaries 8) Bois Locker Room: Delhi HC Issues Notice in Plea Seeking Removal of Illegal Content Against Minors From Social Media Division Bench of Justice Hima Kohli and Justice Subramonium Prasad issued notice in a Section 151 application seeking removal of fake news and hate speech on social media platforms through designated officers of various intermediaries. The application was filed in the backdrop of unwanted episodes like ‘Bois Locker Room’. Also Read: Beware! Even Private Obscene Messages Online Could Land One In Jail : Know About IT Act Offences 9) Delhi HC Issues Notice in Plea Seeking Direction To Family Courts To Record Evidence Through Video Conferencing [Ananad Vaid v. Preeti Vaid & Ors.] The Division Bench of Justice Rajiv Sahai Endlaw and Justice Asha Menon issued notice to the Delhi Government, Headquarters of Family Courts, and the Delhi High Court on a plea seeking a direction to be issued to Family Courts to record evidence in pending cases through video conferencing. 10) Delhi HC Issues Series of Directions To Ensure Proper Facilities and Treatment For Persons Residing In Night Shelters, Asks Authorities To Keep Spread of COVID19 In Check [Karan Seth v. Union of India & Ors.] passed a series of directions to Delhi Urban Shelter Improvement Board, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, and the Delhi Government to ensure proper facilities and treatment are provided to the residents of night shelters set up within the AIIMS premises. Also Read: Submit Report On Shelter Provided To Stranded Migrant Workers & Other Arrangements Made For Their Sustenance; Bombay HC Tells State 11) Expiry Of Cheque Due To Lockdown ‘Unfortunate Issue’, Says Delhi HC; Seeks RBI Response [Abhinav Chawla v. Union of India & Ors.] Terming the expiry of cheque on account of the sealing of the branch of bank where it was deposited amid lockdown ‘unfortunate issue’, Justice Jayanth Nath sought the response of the Reserve Bank of India on the issue. 12) Delhi HC Grants Injunction In Reliance Industries’ Plea Claiming That OLX Is Hosting Fraudulent Recruitment Advertisements For Jio And Reliance Trends [Reliance Industries Ltd. & Anr. v. OLX India BV & Anr.] Single Bench of Justice Mukta Gupta granted injunction in favour of Reliance Industries who had raised the concern of fraudulent recruitment advertisements being put up on the website of OLX which was harming the reputation of its marks ‘Jio’ and ‘Reliance Trends’. 13) Financial Assistance Scheme For Rickshaw Drivers: Delhi HC Directs Delhi Govt To Transfer The Benefits to All The Eligible Beneficiaries Within 10 Days [Nayee Soch Society v. Ministry of Home Affairs & Ors.] The Division Bench of Justice Hima Kohli and Justice Subramonium Prasad directed the Transport Department of Delhi Government to clear the list of all the eligible beneficiaries of the financial assistance scheme announced for the auto rickshaw drivers within 10 days by depositing a sum of ₹5000 in their bank accounts. 14) Delhi HC Directs RBI To Consider The Difficulties Faced By Depositors Due To Moratorium On Withdrawal From PMC Bank [Bejon Kumar Misra v. Union of India & Ors.] The Division Bench of Chief Justice DN Patel and Justice Prateek Jalan directed the Reserve Bank of India and the Central Government to appreciate the difficulties faced by the senior citizens with respect to moratorium on withdrawal from Punjab & Maharashtra Bank and directed that upon receipt of any representation from any individual or group of depositors in this regard, the decision shall be taken by the concerned respondent authority within a period of four weeks. 15) Delhi HC Directs Telegram To Block Channels Providing ‘Dainik Jagran’ Newspaper In PDF Forms [Jagran Prakashan Limited v. Telegram Fz LLC & Ors.] A single judge bench of Justice Mukta Gupta passed an ad interim ex parte order against Telegram Mobile Internet application, directing them to block within 48 hours the channels providing PDF versions of ‘Dainik Jagran’ newspaper in breach of its copyright and trademark. The court also directed Telegram to disclose details of the infringing channel owners. 16) [Virtual Hearings] Close Old Tabs And Log-in Again To Avoid Login Issue : Delhi HC [Jasdan Energy Pvt. Ltd. v. Inox Wind Ltd. & Anr.] Single Judge Bench Justice Pratibha M Singh issued a direction to advocates to close meeting windows which they might have opened before the hearing to avoid any technical glitches during virtual hearings. This direction was passed to ensure effective virtual hearing by preventing the Advocates from being locked out and allowing them to join the hearing when it starts. 17) COVID-19 A Force Majeure Event; But Not An Excuse For Breach Of Deadlines Before Pandemic Outbreak : Delhi HC [M/S Halliburton Offshore Services Inc v. Vedanta Limited & Anr.] A single bench of Justice Prathiba M Singh observed that COVID-19 is a Force Majeure event, but its application will depend on the facts and circumstances of each case; every breach or non-performance cannot be justified or excused merely on the invocation of COVID-19 as a Force Majeure condition, it said. The court noted that it would have to assess: (i) conduct of the parties prior to the outbreak; (ii) deadlines that were imposed in the contract; (iii) steps that were to be taken; (iv) various compliances that were required to be made. Also Read: COVID-19 A Force Majeure Event- Threshold Of A New Jurisprudence Gujarat High Court 1) Ahmedabad Civil Hospital : Too Early To Give Final Certificate; Be Ready For Surprise Visits, Says Gujarat HC [State of Gujarat v. Suo Moto] While taking note of some of the corrective measures adopted by the Gujarat Government following the sharp criticism from the High Court regarding the “pathetic conditions” at the Ahmedabad Civil Hospital, a bench comprising Justices J B Padriwala and Ilesh J Vora said that it was still too early to give a “final certificate” to the government regarding the hospital. The Court sounded a word of caution saying that the Hospital authorities should be ready for a surprise inspection by the judges any time. Himachal Pradesh High Court 1) Practice Of Surrendering Before Court To Obtain Bail Does Not Override Legislative Intent Of Restraining Pre-Arrest Bail Under SC/ST Act: Himachal Pradesh HC [Saroj Kumari v. State of HP] The single-Judge bench of Justice Anoop Chitkara held that mere non-application of the provision for anticipatory bail to offenders accused under the SC/ ST Act does not preclude them from surrendering before the court and seeking regular bail. The court has clarified that when the provisions of the SC/ ST Act have been used as a tool to send and keep people in custody, then it shall be legal to grant ad-interim bail or regular bail to the accused. 2) ‘Furnish Details Of Aadhar Card, Phone Number, Whatsapp Number, E-Mail Address, Facebook Account & Bank Account’: Himachal Pradesh HC Imposes Bail Condition In at least 15 bail orders passed during this month by Justice Anoop Chitkara of the Himachal Pradesh High Court, the accused were asked to furnish the details of their AADHAR Card, phone number(s), WhatsApp number, e-mail address, Facebook account, etc. “There shall be a presumption of proper service to the petitioner about the date of hearing in the trial Court, even if such service takes place through phone/mobile/SMS/WhatsApp/E-Mail/Facebook or any other similar medium, by the trial Court, or by the Prosecution,” the orders state. It is further stipulated that if the accused fails to enter appearance based on such notice, then the trial Court may issue “Non-Bailable warrants” to procure his/ her presence. Jammu & Kashmir High Court 1) Ideology Of Detenu Like A ‘Live Volcano’: J&K HC Upholds Detention Of HC Bar Association President Mian Abdul Qayoom [Mian Abdul Qayoom v. Union Territory of J&K & Ors.] Noting that the 70-year old detenue has a “tendency” of disturbing law and order, a Division Bench comprising of Justice Ali Mohammad Magrey and Justice Vinod Chatterji Koul upheld the Government orders relating to preventive detention of Senior Advocate and J&K High Court Bar Association President Mian Abdul Qayoom, under the J&K Public Safety Act 1978. Karnataka High Court 1) ‘Sovereignty & Integrity Of India Takes Precedence Over Right To Personal Liberty’: Karnataka HC Denies Bail To Engineer Accused Of Encouraging People To Spread Coronavirus [Mohammed Mujeeb v. State By Electronic City PS] The bench of Justice KS Mudagal refused to grant bail to a 38 year old Software Engineer, who allegedly encouraged people to spread the novel corona virus through social media. The court held that the alleged acts committed by the Petitioner threatened the integrity of the country and hence, even though the offence which he was indicted for prescribed a maximum punishment of 3 years, the court refused to grant him interim bail, in terms of the recommendations made by the High Power Committee. 2) Evolve A Scheme For The Benefit Of The Advocates Clerks: Karnataka HC Tells Bar Council A division bench of Chief Justice Abhay Oka and Justice M Nagaprasanna noted that the Advocates’ Clerks “play an important role for the benefit of members of the Bar” and directed the Advocates’ Association of Bengaluru and Karnataka State Bar Council to evolve a scheme for the benefit of the registered Advocates’ Clerks, who are suffering due to closure of courts during the lockdown. 3) Karnataka HC Asks State To Consider Extending Financial Help To Archaks Amid Lockdown Chief Justice Abhay Oka and Justice P Krishna Bhat directed the state government to decide the process to extend financial help to ‘Archaks’, who cannot be paid regular salaries as there is no income to the temples, during the lockdown. The matter is now posted for June 3. 4) Karnataka HC Says In Absence Of Legislation It Cannot Define Hate Speech [Campaign Against Hate Speech & Ors. v. State of Karnataka & Ors.] Observing that “in absence of any specific legislation, it would not be proper for the court to make a substantive analysis or give a concrete definition of hate speech”, a division bench of Justice B V Nagarathna and Justice M G Uma recently dismissed a writ petition seeking action against media houses and political leaders who allegedly made statements against a minority community. 5) Legal And Technical Issues To Be Faced By Trial Courts During Virtual Hearing: Karnataka HC Takes Suo Motu Cognizance [Suo Moto PIL] A division bench of Chief Justice Abhay Oka and Justice Suraj Govindaraj directed the Registrar General to file a suo-motu public interest litigation to address various legal and technical issues that would arise before the district and trial courts from June 1, when they start ‘limited functioning’ as per the Standard Operating Procedure issued by the High Court. Also Read: [Technical Glitches] National Information Technology Sena Moves SC Seeking Recall Of Dismissal Order Of Plea Seeking Relief For Employees Against Lay-Off 6) Karnataka HC Seeks State’s Response On Plea Against Relaxation Of Labour Laws; Denies Interim Relief [Maruthi H v. State] The Division Bench of Chief Justice Abhay Oka and Justice Sachin Shankar Magadum issued notice to the state government on a petition filed against Government notification dated May 22, whereby provisions of the Factories Act relating to working hours, overtime etc. were relaxed in the state until August 21, 2020. Also Read: Taking Labour Laws Seriously 7) [Shramik Trains] No Transparent & Rational Policy By State In Selecting Persons For Travel Out Of Registered Migrants : Karnataka HC A division bench of Chief Justice Abhay Oka and Justice B V Nagarathna directed the state to place on record its systematic plan to facilitate transport of more than 6,00,000 people who are yet to return to their respective States and are registered on the Seva Sindhu portal. Also Read: ‘Many Migrants Lost Lives Due To Long Walk & Hunger’ : Karnataka HC Directs Govt To Inform Policy On Special Trains Also Read: No Migrant Should Be Denied Opportunity To Travel Back Only Because Of Incapacity To Pay Rail Fare : Karnataka HC Also Read: Shramik Trains : Karnataka HC Asks Centre & State About Arrangements To Provide Food & Water To Migrants 8) Karnataka HC Grants Bail To 126 Persons Doubting Police Version That They Tried To Spread COVID-19 By Attacking Health Workers [Vazeer Khan & Ors. v. State of Karnataka] Raising serious doubts on the prosecution case, Justice John Michael Cunha granted bail to 126 people who were arrested by the police on the allegation that they formed an unlawful assembly with intention to spread ‘Corona infection’ and obstructed medical officers and police, who went to identify and shift secondary contacts of COVID-19 patients from the Padarayanapura area to quarantine facilities. 9) What Financial Help State Government Can Give To Advocate Clerks? Asks Karnataka HC A division bench of Chief Justice Abhay Oka and Justice and Justice Sachin Shankar Magadum asked the state government to consider in what manner it can help needy members of the Karnataka State Level Advocates Clerks Association who due as a result of closure of courts during the lockdown are left with no source of income. Kerala High Court 1) Kerala HC Grants Relief To Cardiac Patient Who Complained Of Denial Of Treatment To Non-COVID Patients In Govt Hospital [Radhakrishnan R. v. State of Kerala & Ors.] A bench of Justice Anu Sivaraman directed the State authorities to take up the request for medical review of a cardiac patient at the earliest, after he moved the Court complaining that Medical College Hospital, Alappuzha was denying treatment to non-COVID patients. 2) Foreigners Detention : Kerala HC Directs Prison Authorities To Grant Better Facilities To Nigerian Nationals, In The Absence Of Model Detention Centres In State Justice Anu Sivaraman passed an interim order directing the authorities of Viyyur Central Prison in the state to allot separate cells and A-class facilities to two Nigerian nationals, who were detained there for alleged violation of the provisions of the Foreigners Act, 1946. 3) ‘Common For Elders To Sometimes Scold Youngsters; Making Daughter-In-Law Do Household Work Not Something Unusual’: Kerala HC [Rajnith PC v. Asha Nair P.] “Making a daughter in law to do the house hold/domestic work is also not something unusual”, remarked the bench of Justice AM Shaffique and Justice Mary Joseph recently, allowing a plea for dissolution of marriage on the ground of cruelty by a husband. “No family is totally devoid of clashes among members constituting it. It is common for elders to scold and sometimes abuse youngsters… From the evidence tendered by the respondent, it is all the more clear that the aforestated factors formed the basis for her ill-will to petitioner’s mother”, the bench proceeded to observed. Madhya Pradesh High Court 1) ‘Not A Case Of Single Mistake’: Madhya Pradesh HC Issues Contempt Notice To Collector For Wilfully Disobeying Its Order On Multiple Occasions [PN Chaturvedi v. Chandramohan Thakur & Anr.] The bench of Justice Vishal Dhagat initiated contempt proceedings against the District Collector posted at Anuppur, for disobeying a High Court order on multiple occasions. Rejecting the unconditional apology tendered by the Collector Chandramohan Thakur, the court observed that “it is not a case where Collector has committed a single mistake”. 2) [Medical Education] It Is Obligatory For Students To Satisfy Bond To Serve At Govt. Hospital Executed At Time Of Admission’: MP HC [Dr. Mulayam Singh Yadav v. State of MP & Ors.] Justices Sheel Nagu and Rajeev Kumar Shrivastava of the Gwalior bench held that since there is no fundamental right to pursue post-graduation medical education, specially in Government colleges where higher education is subsidised, it is obligatory for the students to execute bond to render services at government hospitals for a stipulated period at the time of their admission. 3) MP HC Grants Bail To 8 Tablighi Jamaat Members, Including 6 Hailing From Foreign Countries [Sajid Kareem & Ors. v. State Of MP] Noting that two similarly-situated accused, facing trial arising out of same crime number and for allegedly committing similar offence, were enlarged on bail by the lower court on April 30, Justice Sujoy Pal granted bail to eight members of Tablighi Jamaat, including six foreigners. 4) MP HC Dismisses Plea Seeking Financial Assistance For Lawyers With Liberty To Challenge Provisions Of MP Advocates’ Welfare Scheme The Division Bench comprising of Chief Justice AK Mittal and Justice VK Shukla dismissed a PIL seeking financial assistance for needy lawyers with liberty to file a fresh petition against alleged shortcomings in the MP Advocate’s Assistance (Natural Disaster and Unforseen Circumstances) WelfareScheme, 2020. Also Read: Bhopal Bar Association Moves HC Against MP Advocates Assistance (Natural Disaster and Unforeseen Circumstances) Scheme 2020 5) Donate Money For Preparation & Distribution Of Food To Downtrodden Persons Including Migrants: Madhya Pradesh HC Imposes Bail Condition Justice SA Dharmadhikari of the Gwalior Bench of the Madhya Pradesh High Court has set a new trend of directing the UTPs to donate money for preparation and distribution of food to poor and underprivileged sections of the society, as a precondition for bail. Madras High Court 1) Madras HC Recalls Order Allowing MACTs To Record Compromise Settlements Without Physical Appearances [M/s. Cholamandalam MS Genl Ins Co Ltd v. Ayyannar S & Ors.] Justice N Anand Venkatesh withdrew an earlier order of the High Court allowing the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunals in the Tamil Nadu to entertain compromise applications, without the need for any transfer petitions; to record compromise settlements themselves based on digital consent of parties. The court had in the said order on May 11 authorised the Claims Tribunals to examine and entertain digital consent and if satisfied that they were true and trustworthy, go ahead and record the compromise, dispensing with the need or insistence on physical appearance or signing of Joint Memos of Compromise. 2) Madras HC Requires Oil Corporations To Ensure Availability Of Safety Masks, Gloves, Sanitisers To LPG Cylinder Delivery Boys [T. Sivakumar v. Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas & Ors.] Observing that a proper and effective mechanism has been put in place for the safety of LPG Cylinder delivery boys, Justice M. Sathyanarayanan and Justice Pushpa Sathyanarayana required that the managements of Oil Corporations shall also cause periodical inspections and surprise inspections to ensure compliance with the provision of safety gears such as masks, sanitisers etc., and shall also follow it up properly at regular intervals. 3) Final Hearing, Involving Consideration Of Pleadings, Submissions Of Respective Parties, Not Possible Via Virtual Hearing, Observes Madras HC [M.Kalidasan & Ors. v. State of Tamil Nadu & Ors.] In a string of writ petitions challenging both a Government Order and the consequential works in the tender notification of the Highways and Minor Ports Department of the state of Tamil Nadu, where the respective pleadings and submissions of the parties were to be considered, Justice K. Ravichandrabaabu remarked that “such final hearing cannot be done by way of Video-Conferencing mode”. Also Read: Resistance To The Idea Of Virtual Courts Is Misplaced 4) Madras HC To Consider Plea For Injunction Against Centre From Procuring COVID Diagnostic Test Kits Without DGCA Approval Justice MM Sundresh and Justice Petitioner Asha issued notice on a PIL seeking an injunction against the Centre and the state of Tamil Nadu from procuring and using in their Healthcare Systems such In-Vitro Diagnostic Test Kits for COVID-19 (RT-PCR Test Kits as well as Antibody Rapid Test Kits) that do not have the approval of the Regulator- the Drug Controller General of India. 5) Madras HC Declares Jayalalithaa’s Nephew & Niece As Her Heirs; Asks TN Govt To Reconsider Decision To Convert Her Residence As Memorial [J. Deepak v. J. Deepa along with K. Pugazhenthi & Anr. v. Administrator General of Tamil Nadu & Ors.] Ehe bench of Justice N. Kirubakaran and Justice Abdul Quddhose declared that J. Deepak and J. Deepa, nephew and niece respectively of former Tamil Nadu Chief Minister late J Jayalalithaa, as her legal heirs are hence entitled to administer the estate left behind by her. The court also advised the Tamil Nadu Government against spending public money for creation of a memorial at Jayalalithaa’s Poes Garden residence, when so many essential amenities are yet to be provided by the welfare State. Further it suggested that the property was equipped with all facilities and infrastructures required for using as “Official Residence-cum-Office of the Chief Minister of the State”. 6) Appeal Against Acquittal In Cheque Bounce Cases Can Be Filed Only Before High Court U/s 378(4) CrPC: Madras HC Full Bench [K.Rajalingam Vs. R.Suganthalakshmi] A full bench of the High Court comprising Justices MM Sundresh, V Bharathidasan and N. Anand Venkatesh held that the appeal against acquittal of the accused in a cheque bounce case can be filed only before the High Court under Section 378(4) of Cr.PC. Orissa High Court 1) Orissa HC Passes Interim Order Against Disclosure Of Identities Of Covid Patients [Ananga Kumar Otta v. Union of India & Ors.] In a plea highlighting the “devastating consequences” attached to disclosure of identity of Covid patients, the bench comprising of Chief Justice Mohammad Rafiq and Justice Dr. BR Sarangi passed an interim order directing the state authorities to preserve the identities of Covid-19 patients/ suspects, and ensure that the same are not disclosed either to the media or during inter-departmental communications. The bench also issued notices to the Union Ministry of Health & Family Welfare, the Government of Orissa and State’s Department of Revenue & Disaster Management, returnable by June 4. Also Read: ‘Order Necessary To Protect Patients From Public Wrath’: Madhya Pradesh HC Upholds Govt Order For Non-Disclosure Of Covid Patients’ Identity Patna High Court 1) Patna HC Directs Govts. To Ensure That Transgender Persons Not Possessing Ration Cards Also Benefit Under Social Security Schemes [Veera Yadav v. Govt. of Bihar & Ors.] The division bench of Chief Justice Sanjay Karol and Justice S Kumar directed the Government to ensure that the persons belonging to the Transgender community are not deprived of food grains distributed under the social security schemes, solely for not possessing a ration card. The court has made it incumbent upon the Government Counsel to ensure that the services reach transgender persons in Bihar. Also Read: Karnataka HC Directs State To Extend Relief To Transgenders Also Read: COVID19: Jharkhand HC Directs State Govt. To Ensure Basic Neccesities For Transgenders During Lockdown, Seeks Reply On Other Welfare Measures Also Read: Provide Free Of Cost Ration, Food and Medicines To Transgenders : Telangana HC To State Govt 2) ‘Shocking & Unfortunate’ : Patna HC Takes Sou Moto Cognizance Of Video Showing Toddler Near Dead Mother At Railway Station [Court on its own motion] The Patna High Court Bench comprising of Chief Justice Sanjay Karol and Justice S. Kumar has taken suo moto cognizance of the harrowing video of a toddler trying to wake up his dead mother at the Muzaffarpur Railway Station in Bihar. Calling the incident “rather shocking and unfortunate”, the court has posted the matter for hearing on 3rd June and the concerned Principal Secretaries have been directed to file personal affidavits before the next date. Punjab & Haryana High Court 1) Schools To Charge 70% School Fees; Pay 70% Salary To Teachers: Directs Punjab & Haryana HC [Independent Schools’ Association Chandigarh (Regd.) & Ors. v. State of Punjab & Ors.] The bench of Justice Ritu Bahri allowed private unaided schools to collect 70% school fees from the students. The schools have also been asked to pay 70% salaries of the teachers. This interim direction has come in a petition filed by Independent Schools’ Association, Chandigarh, against a Memo dated May 14, whereby on one hand the schools had been precluded from collecting building charges, transportation charges, and charges for meals etc., while on the other hand they had been directed not to reduce the salary of the teachers. Also Read: Schools Are Justified In Charging Tuition Fee For Conducting Online Classes: Delhi HC Holds While Refusing To Intervene In DoE’s April 17 Order 2) “Courts Should Not Engage Itself In Social Mores Or Introduce Personal Ideas On Morality In A Protection Petition”: Punjab & Haryana HC [Sumanpreet Kaur & Anr. v. State of Punjab & Ors.] In a Protection Petition filed by a runaway couple, Justice Rajiv Narayan Raina remarked, “It is not for this Court in a protection petition to engage itself in social mores, norms and human behaviour or introduce personal ideas on morality.” He made it clear that in such cases, the court should not present its personal views regarding morality, and must ensure that the couple’s rights under Article 21 are protected. 3) Journalists’ Salary Cut : Punjab & Haryana HC Directs Labour Commissioner To Decide Complaints [The Tribune Trust Employees Union, Chandigarh v. Union Territory, Chandigarh & Ors.] The single-Judge bench of Justice Arun Monga directed the Labour Commissioner, Chandigarh to consider the representation made by the Tribune Trust Employees Union – an association of journalists working in ‘The Tribune’ – against permanent reduction in the wages/ salaries of its members. Rajasthan High Court 1) SC Order Extending Limitation Not Cloak For Investigating Agency To Claim Self-Serving Extension Under 167(2) Cr. P. C.’: Rajasthan HC [Pankaj v. State] In the absence of any amendment in the statute and without there being any remote reference of investigation or provisions of the Code in the order of Supreme Court, Justice Dinesh Mehta rejected the contention that till the lockdown continues, the period prescribed in Section 167(2) Cr. P. C. stands automatically extended in view of the March 23 order of the Supreme Court. Also Read: Right To Default Bail During Lockdown Telangana High Court 1) Telangana HC Inquires About Availability Of Ambulances On National/State Highways For Migrant Workers, Including Pregnant Women [Sreenitha Pujar v. Union of India & Ors.] Chief Justice Raghvendra Singh Chauhan and Justice B .Vijaysen Reddy observed that the state must ensure that Ambulances are available on National and State Highways being presently used by migrant workers to reach their destinations. 2) Telangana HC Issues Notice To Centre, State Over Illegal Sales Of Drugs [A Scetharam tsabr.r, Occ. Pharmacist v. Union of India & Ors.] A bench comprising Chief Justice Rachvendra Singh Chauhan and Justice B. Vijaysen Reddy issued notice to the Centre and the state on a letter petition alleging that most of the Chemists and Druggists stores are run in the absence of a recognised Pharmacist, seeking the implementation of the various provisions of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act and the Pharmacy Act. 3) Low Testing Of Covid19 Is Like Inviting Trojan Horse Into Citadel: Telangana HC Slams Govt For Abysmal Testing & Vague Reports [Prot’. P.L. Vishweshwar Rao & Anr. v. Union of India & Ors.] A bench of Chief Justice Raghavendra Singh Chauhan & Justice Vijaysen Reddy pulled up the State Government for the abysmally low testing rate of the deadly Coronavirus infection in the state of Telangana. The court directed the State Government to continually test people for covid19 and increase the number of tests throughout the state as far as practicable. Uttarakhand High Court 1) ‘Executive Entitled To Elbow Room And Free Play In Its Joints To Protect Citizens In These Times Of Global Pandemic’: Uttarakhand HC [Akshay Sharma v. Union of India & Ors.] Disposing of a PIL complaining of irrational classification of Red and Orange Zones in the state, Chief Justice Ramesh Ranganathan and Justice RC Khulbe remarked, “in their endeavour to protect the life and health of its citizens / inhabitants, the executive is entitled to some elbow room and a free play in its joints.” The plea was disposed of after the court noted that the Government had re-classified zones within the State, as per the number of reported cases in each district. 2) Lackadaisical Approach Adopted By Government To Ameliorate The Plight Of Migrants Does Not Show Them In Good Light’: Uttarakhand HC [Preetam Singh Panwar v. Union of India & Ors.] A bench comprising of Chief Justice Ramesh Ranganathan and Justice RC Khulbe expressed deep dissatisfaction on the measures being taken by both the Central as well as the State Government to bring back the migrants who are stranded in various parts of the country, amid the lockdown. “Transporting merely 2000 persons by train per day would require at least 50 days, from the 01st of June, to bring back the remaining one lakh stranded persons from different parts of the country to the State of Uttarakhand during which period they would continue to suffer from lack of food, water and shelter,” it observed. Next Storylast_img read more