LEGAL NEWS 28.10.09

Case against Nirmal Yadav closed: Moily

 

http://www.tribuneindia.com/2009/20091029/main5.htm

 

R Sedhuraman
Legal Correspondent

 

New Delhi, October 28
A decision has been taken to close the case against Punjab and Haryana High Court Judge Nirmal Yadav in the cash-at-doorstep scam.

 

Law Minister M Veerappa Moily told The Tribune today that his understanding was that the matter was treated as closed before he assumed office on May 29.

 

The decision was apparently taken on the advice of the then Attorney-General, Milon K Banerjee, he said. He, however, clarified that his ministry was never in the picture in the case, at least after he took over. Such matters were handled by the Chief Justice of India and the Law Ministry got involved only after receiving a communication from the CJI in cases requiring impeachment.

 

Justice Yadav was asked to go on leave following delivery of Rs 15 lakh in cash at the residence of Justice Nirmaljit Kaur on August 13 last year. It was then alleged that the money was actually meant for Justice Yadav, but was delivered at the residence of Justice Kaur because of some similarity in the name.

 

The case came to light following an FIR registered by Justice Kaur. Subsequently, Chief Justice of India KG Balakrishnan sought explanations from Justice Yadav, who wrote at least three letters, pleading her innocence. She had also sought several documents based on which the CJI had sought her response. In his January 29 letter to Justice Yadav, the CJI maintained that all documents she had sought had been supplied.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

UN rights investigator warns US drone attacks may violate international law

 

http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/paperchase/2009/10/un-rights-investigator-warns-us-drone.php

 

Amelia Mathias at 9:02 AM ET

 

Wednesday, October 28, 2009

 

[JURIST] UN Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions Philip Alston [official website] said Tuesday that the use of unmanned warplanes by the US to carry out attacks in Pakistan and Afghanistan may be illegal. Alston criticized the US policy in a report to the UN General Assembly’s human rights committee and then elaborated at a press conference [press release; recorded video]:

 

My concern is that these drones, these predators, are being operated in a framework which may well violate international humanitarian law and international human rights law. The onus is really on the government of the United States to reveal more about the ways in which it makes sure that arbitrary executions, extrajudicial executions, are not in fact being carried out through the use of these weapons. The response of the US is simply untenable, and that is that the Human Rights Council and the General Assembly by definition have no role in relation to killings that take place in relations to an armed conflict. that would remove the great majority of issues that come before these bodies right now.

 

Alston’s report was presented as part of a larger demand that no state be free from accountability.

Alston previously raised the issue of US drone attacks in June. The US government responded that its position is that such attacks are carried out in a war zone where the UN has no role. The controversial attacks have killed about 600 people in northwestern Pakistan since August 2008, including around 400 militants. US Senator John Kerry said this week that the attacks would continue [RTTNews report], claiming that they have been successful in combatting al Qaeda and have resulted in minimal collateral damage. Also this week, a Pakistani court upheld the dismissal of a petition [The Nation report] against US drone attacks that sought to declare the US an enemy state.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Supreme Court CPIO seeking adjournment at CIC

 

http://www.merinews.com/article/supreme-court-cpio-seeking-adjournment-at-cic/15787014.shtml

 

The Supreme Court central public information officer seeking adjournment at Central Information Commission Court till disposal of its appeal at Delhi High Court on eight pending petitions relating to Honourable Chief Justice raises several aspects.

 

 

CJ: SUBHASH CHANDRA..

 

 

 

Wed, Oct 28, 2009 14:32:14 IST  

 

INDEFINITE ADJOURNMENT sought by central public information officer of Supreme Court till disposal of its appeal at Delhi High Court on eight pending petitions on information relating to Honourable Chief Justice of India raises several aspects:

 

  • Can simply filing of an appeal (that too without getting any stay-order) in a case involving CIC-verdict put complete Right to Information Act on hold?
  • Is filing an appeal at division bench against single-bench verdict equivalent to a refused stay-order by the higher bench?
  • Can simply a mention of a writ-petition (288/2009) in a petition (CIC/WB/A/2008/000859) put all the eight petitions on hold indefinitely especially also when this mention of the writ-petition is only in one petition (CIC/WB/A/2008/000859) for which a separate notice for hearing is issued while combined notice for hearing for other seven petitions is different.
  • A division bench of Honourable Supreme Court observed against adjournment-culture by mention that many-a-times petitioners seek stay-orders on filing a writ/appeal and drag the case for years with many-a-times ultimately losing the case even.
  • Central Information Commission usually proceeds with hearings overlooking adjournment-requests like was done in petition-number CIC/AT/A/2008/00736 in the matter (Subhash Chandra Agrawal vs Department of Justice).
  • There are several issues of national importance in these petitions fixed for hearing, which may lose relevance if hearing is postponed.
  • Central Information Commission has an admirable practice of not entertaining adjournment-requests which otherwise has become a culture in our courts for which concern is being expressed by even those in judicial-system.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Dinakaran’s conduct unbecoming’

 

http://www.expressbuzz.com/edition/story.aspx?Title=%E2%80%98Dinakaran%E2%80%99s+conduct+unbecoming%E2%80%99&artid=l4XfeTltpQ0=&SectionID=Qz/kHVp9tEs=&MainSectionID=wIcBMLGbUJI=&SectionName=UOaHCPTTmuP3XGzZRCAUTQ==&SEO=

 

 

 

C Shivakumar

 

First Published : 28 Oct 2009 06:47:33 AM IST

 

Last Updated : 28 Oct 2009 08:19:22 AM IST

 

 

 

CHENNAI: In a new representation filed before the Chief Justice of India, the Forum for Judicial Accountability (FJA) has cited an instance of judicial misconduct where Karnataka Chief Justice P D Dinakaran failed to excuse himself from hearing a case in which he was close to one of the parties.

 

The Forum has referred to a 2005 property case in the Madras High Court involving the Pentecostal Mission, Chennai and Anandhi Murthy, a close associate of Justice Dinakaran and his family.

 

The Forum states: “Contrary to accepted norms of judicial conduct that a judge shall not hear any matter to which a person close to him is a party, as it erodes the confidence of the public in the impartiality of the judicial system, Justice P D Dinakaran heard a writ petition in 2005 filed in the Madras High Court and passed certain questionable orders.” The Pentecostal Mission had filed a writ petition in the Madras High Court, praying that the police be restrained for interfering with its peaceful possession of its property near Chennai.

 

However, a Canadian resident, Anandhi Murthy, contested the Pentecostal Mission’s title over the property and filed a petition to be impleaded in the writ petition. By an order dated August 19, 2006, Justice Dinakaran allowed Anandhi Murthy to be impleaded, the representation said.

 

“Not stopping with that, Justice Dinakaran continued to pass extraordinary orders on September 6, 2006 and September 20, 2006, and other dates recording that the writ petitioner and his senior counsel conceded that the averments in the writ petition were false and passed other orders,” the representation alleged.

 

“According to the averments of the writ petitioner in his appeal, viz. W A No. 1329 of 2006, no such concession was made and that they had in fact wanted to withdraw the writ petition and approach the civil court. Yet, Justice Dinakaran continued to hear the matter and pass highly questionable orders.” The Forum says that Justice Dinakaran had enjoyed the hospitality of Anandhi Murthy and her husband Karuna Murthy in Canada just a year before the case was filed.

 

“In 2004, Justice Dinakaran, his wife and two daughters visited Canada en route to the US for admission of his daughter Amudha Porkodi in Suny College of Technology at Utica, New York State. Justice Dinakaran and his family stayed with Anandhi Murthy and Karuna Murthy in Canada between August 11 and 15, 2004. Later, it is learnt that Anandhi Murthy and Karuna Murthy actually joined the Dinakarans at Utica, US, at the time of Amudha Porkodi’s admission to college,” the representation said.

 

“Justice Dinakaran thus had a close connection with one of the parties to the case and despite that continued to hear the case, violating the accepted code of judicial conduct as enunciated in the Bangalore Principles,” the representation said.  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

PIL against medical college teachers strike filed

http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report_pil-against-medical-college-teachers-strike-filed_1304180

 

PTI

 

Wednesday, October 28, 2009 17:12 IST

 

Kochi: A PIL seeking to declare the ongoing strike by government medical college teachers was illegal, unconstitutional and unwarranted was filed in the Kerala High Court today.

 

When the petition by journalist Leela Menon came up before a division bench comprising chief justice SR Bannurmath and justice AK Basheer, the court adjourned the PIL to Tuesday.

 

The government informed the court that a high level meeting had been convened and decision was conveyed to the striking doctors. Only after getting their response, further action would be taken.

 

The petitioner also sought for a declaration that members of the Kerala government college teachers association and its president Dr Varghese Thomas were responsbile for any deaths during the strike period. The petitioner also sought to invoke ESMA against the members of the association.

 

©2009 PTI. All rights reserved. Republication or redistribution of PTI content, including by framing or similar means, is expressly prohibited without the prior written consent.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Gurkhas fight for rights in High Court

 

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/top-stories/2009/10/28/one-big-step-to-justice-115875-21778879/

 

By Andrew Gregory 28/10/2009

 

Gurkha veterans stand on the steps of the High Court yesterday as they launch a legal battle for the same pension as other servicemen.

 

Their legal team told the judges the MoD gives 24,000 veteran Gurkhas just a third of payments handed out to retired British soldiers.

 

They claim that current rules say Gurkhas who retired before 1997 cannot join the Armed Forces Pension Scheme.

 

They have to stay in their own scheme which pays substantially lower benefits based on the cost of living in their Nepal homeland.

 

The veterans, who won the right to settle in Britain after a campaign led by Joanna Lumley, claim they are victims of discrimination.

 

Lumley T heir lawyer Declan O’Dempsey said: “Although they took the same risks as other members of the British Army and have served with wide praise and distinction, they are not being treated with the same effect as regards matters of welfare, including their pensions, as other members of the British armed forces.”

 

Retired Gurkhas wearing poppies and campaign medals and carrying banners flocked to the High Court in Central London to publicise their campaign.

 

The MoD says that Gurkha pensions can be paid from the age of 33 – so over the course of their retirement veterans do end up getting the same money.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Karnataka orders CID probe on ‘love jihad’

http://twocircles.net/2009oct28/karnataka_orders_cid_probe_love_jihad.html

 

Submitted by admin4 on 28 October 2009 – 12:35pm.

 

By TwoCircles.net Staff Correspondent,

 

Kochi: The Karnataka government has ordered for a probe by the Criminal Investigation Department to know whether an organisation called ‘love jihad’ was functioning in the state. The decision was taken in the high level meeting of police officers presided over by the state Home Minister VS Acharya.

 

The DGP and the CID will conduct a detailed probe and submit report to the government in two weeks. More information would be collected about the existence, alleged funding and support of the ‘love jihad’. The DGP would collect more information on the missing girls also. Further decisions as to how to curb the forced conversions, if any, would be taken after the reports are submitted.

 

The Karnataka High Court had ordered the government to probe into the matter of the alleged ‘love jihad’ when hearing the habeas corpus filed by the parents of a girl from Mysore. The girl had married a Muslim boy from Kannur in Kerala and had converted to Islam. When produced in court, the girl had reportedly said that she had converted on her own will, yet the court asked her to be sent with her parents and to conduct an investigation on her husband. The girl has to live with her parents till the investigation on the boy is completed.

 

In Kerala also, two girls who had converted to Islam and married Muslim boys were sent with their parents by the High Court when the girls’ parents filed habeas corpus. The Court ordered probe into alleged ‘love jihad’ when considering the case. The state DGP submitted areport in the court on October 22 stating that such an organisation did not exist. The Central Intelligence Bureau also has informed the Kerala High Court yesterday that there was no evidence for a movement called ‘love jihad’ in the state.

 

Meanwhile, the People’s Union for Civil Liberties has decided to oppose the order of the High Court in the Supreme Court. The PUCL maintains that the HC decision to send the woman, who had converted to Islam and married a Muslim, with her Hindu parents was not right.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Work out arrangment, end dispute: SC tells Ambani brothers

 

http://www.hindustantimes.com/corporatenews/Work-out-arrangment-end-dispute-SC-tells-Ambani-brothers/470063/H1-Article1-469909.aspx

 

HT Correspondent, Hindustan Times

 

Email Author

 

New Delhi, October 27, 2009

 

First Published: 22:43 IST(27/10/2009)

 

Last Updated: 23:33 IST(27/10/2009)

 

The Supreme Court on Tuesday once again hinted to the Ambani brothers on the possibility of working out a “suitable arrangement” to resolve their gas dispute.

 

A three-judge bench headed by Chief Justice KG Balakrishnan inquired into the aptness of arbitration process as senior counsels from both sides resumed arguments.

 

“There are some parameters to arrive at suitable arrangements for supply of gas,” Justice RV Raveendran said. “If you are not able to reach a suitable arrangement… We can direct you to arrive at a suitable arrangement or direct you to go for arbitration.”

 

Arguing for Mukesh Ambani-managed Reliance Industries Ltd (RIL), as Harish Salve relied on the government’s gas utilisation policy to supply the gas, the bench reminded him that gas was a “natural resource”.

 

RIL contended that it couldn’t honour the commitment made in the 2005 family agreement between the two brothers due to the government’s pricing and distribution policies. At which, Anil Ambani’s Reliance Natural Resources Ltd (RNRL) senior counsel Ram Jethmalani said the policy was binding on new contracts and not existing ones.

 

However, Salve continued to draw support from the policy and said it was a better arrangement for the gas supply. He contended that supplying gas at any price lower than what has been fixed by the government would be “suicidal for RIL”.

 

Jethmalani intervened again, saying “the production tax of gas from KG basin is a meagre 89 cents.” He claimed RIL would make a profit of several thousands of crores of rupees despite selling the gas at $2.34 (Rs 112) per unit.

 

“It’s fraud on the nation,” Jethmalani said.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Lahore HC permits lawyer to meet Sarabjit in jail
http://www.indlawnews.com/Newsdisplay.aspx?1b1f370f-6a4a-4572-8e62-23ad1d3af6af

 

10/28/2009

 

The Lahore High Court today permitted Sarabjit Singh’s lawyer to meet the condemned Indian prisoner in the Kot Lakhpat jail.

Revealing this Ms Dalbir Kaur, sister of Sarabjit, said Mr Awas Sheikh, the lawyer fighting her brother’s case, had petitioned the High Court after he was not allowed to meet his client in jail. Kot Lakhpat Jail Superintendent and Punjab (Pak) Deputy Home Secretary too appeared in the court following summons, she said.

UNI

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Govt requests HC to lift stay on Gujjar quota

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/jaipur/Govt-requests-HC-to-lift-stay-on-Gujjar-quota/articleshow/5170462.cms

 

TNN 28 October 2009, 06:16am IST

 

JAIPUR: The state government on Tuesday told the Rajasthan High Court that it had adhered to constitutional norms while granting reservation to the Gujjar community and others under a special category.

The government has been empowered by Article 46 of the Constitution which says that state government can take necessary steps for the social and economic development of the economically backward communities, the government said in its reply. “The reservation bill was passed unanimously in the assembly before it became a law”, it said.

The government also requested the court to lift the stay on reservation.

On October 12, the high court, acting on a petition filed by a student G Sharma and others, stayed the implemention of Gujjar quota and sought a reply from the government.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

HC dismisses plea against SECRMU

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/nagpur/HC-dismisses-plea-against-SECRMU/articleshow/5170779.cms

 

28 October 2009, 04:48am IST

 

NAGPUR: The Bilaspur high court on Monday dismissed petition to derecognise South East Central Railway Men’s Union (SECRMU), which had won the elections held in 2007 to recognise railway unions across Indian Railways. The SECRMU had won the polls with a thumping majority.

Ashwin Francis, secretary of union’s Motibagh branch, said the high court refused to derecognise the SECRMU and rejected the petition filed by rival Bharatiya Railway Mazdoor Sangh (BRMS) and South East Central Railway Men’s Congress (SECRMC).

The basic contention of the petitioner-unions, who lost the polls, was that the SECRMU is registered as Dakshin Purva Madhya Railway Men’s Union but it filled the forms as SECRMU, which is a translated version of Hindi name. The two rival unions had pleaded registration of SECRMU should be cancelled and it should be derecognised.

However, the court rejected the plea and maintained the recognition of SECRMU, which has a membership base of over 64% in the entire South East Central Railway (SECR) zone comprising Nagpur, Raipur and Bilaspur railway divisions with a strength of 40,000 employees.

Following the court decision, the SECRMU celebrated the verdict by bursting crackers and distributing sweets in all the three divisions. Talking to TOI, Salil Lawrence, general secretary of SECRMU, said, “The petition was nothing but a vendetta against our union.”

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

HC seeks info on BEd colleges

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/patna/HC-seeks-info-on-BEd-colleges/articleshow/5169366.cms

 

TNN 27 October 2009, 07:01pm IST

 

PATNA: The Patna High Court on Tuesday directed Magadh University and National Council for Technical Education (NACTE) to reply to a PIL, stating violations of provisions in giving affiliation and recognition to BEd colleges lacking basic infrastructure.

A division bench comprising acting Chief Justice Shiva Kirti Singh and Justice Shyam Kishore Sharma issued the directive while hearing the PIL of Vijay Kumar. The case was adjourned for three weeks.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Again, HC rejects Telgi’s plea for home food

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/bangalore/Again-HC-rejects-Telgis-plea-for-home-food/articleshow/5170262.cms

 

TNN 28 October 2009, 02:39am IST

 

BANGALORE: The high court on Tuesday rejected a petition filed by Abdul Kareem Telgi, main accused in the multi-crore fake stamp paper racket. He had sought for home-cooked food.

Justice Arali Nagaraj dismissed the petition, observing that Kareem be given `diet food’ as per the chart made by the medical superintendent.

“The petitioner’s statement says he is not suffering from any inconvenience in the jail. Besides, Section 30 of the Karnataka Prisons Act has no provision for supply of food from outside to a convicted prisoner,” the judge observed.

Telgi, who claims to be HIV positive and a diabetic, sought home-cooked food on the ground that it will improve his health.

But the CBI countered his claim. “The petitioner is being provided food inside and outside the prison according to the provisions of the Karnataka Prisons Act, 1963, and Rules, 1974, and as per medical authorities. He is involved in many cases and as of now, he is being tried in two cases, which have almost reached judgment stage,” the CBI stated.

Telgi had challenged the August 7, 2008, order by the trial court, which rejected a similar application.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

HC raps BBMP, asks for population list

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/bangalore/TNN5-bbmptimFiled-ByTOI-KannadaCleared-by/articleshow/5170259.cms

 

TNN 28 October 2009, 02:36am IST

 

BANGALORE: Making a tough observation that guidelines issued for ward-wise reservation for the ensuing BBMP polls lacked legal as well as constitutional requirements, the Karnataka High Court on Tuesday directed the BBMP to provide by Wednesday the city’s population list. The list is to include the percentage figures about SC/ST population, and SC/ST women in each of the wards, through an affidavit.

“What sort of reservation list is this? There should be some legal and constitutional requirements associated with it. But the guidelines indicate that there is an attempt to delay the elections. Come with details. If you can’t do it (list), we will give you the chart as we have done in the case of panchayat elections some time ago,” Justice H N Nagamohan Das observed, before adjourning the hearing.

Earlier, Jayakumar Patil, counsel for the petitioners, told the court that replicating the Assembly constituency concept for determining ward-wise reservation of SC/STs is an artificial exercise and is found nowhere in the KMC Act, or even the constitutional scheme governing municipal elections.

“If reservation is fixed based on the guidelines issued as per the July 21 notification, only wards in a handful of assembly constituencies will benefit,” he argued.

On October 1, the court had stayed the July 21 guidelines with respect to reservation of wards for the forthcoming BBMP polls.

“In the guidelines, it was stated that reservation for SC/STs would be decided after taking into account the population in 23 assembly constituencies that come under BBMP. Thereafter, they would consider the highest population of SC/STs within a particular ward in that assembly constituency, for reserving it for SC/STs. As per the constitutional scheme under Article 243(T) and Sec.7 of the KMC Act, the BBMP area population should have been the basis for determining the reservation. Apart from this, they have also decided not to consider the 1995 and 2001 reservation lists. All these mistakes seem to have been intentionally made,” petitioners Ramakrishna Pai and K Devan have stated in their petition.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

HC gives killer servant 25 years in jail

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/delhi/HC-gives-killer-servant-25-years-in-jail/articleshow/5170619.cms

 

Abhinav Garg, TNN 28 October 2009, 01:45am IST

 

NEW DELHI: A domestic servant killed the son of his employer, seriously wounded one of his daughters and raped another. But the Delhi High Court on Tuesday ruled that his case didn’t fall in the `rarest of rare’ category.

A bench comprising Justice Pradeep Nandrajog and Justice Indermeet Kaur on Tuesday commuted the death sentence passed on Sanjay Dass by a lower court to a life term. However, the bench directed that he would not be entitled to any commutation or premature release and would have to be in jail for 25 years. Convicts awarded life imprisonment usually become eligible to be considered for remission by the executive after 14 years in jail.

“The crime commited by Sanjay is more than a murder of an ordinary category, having an aggravated content of the diabolical manner in which the offence was commited, we hold that the instant case falls in the category midway between, ie, of a category where the approapriate sentence to be imposed is of imprisonment for life with a direction that Sanjay would not be considered for being granted remission till he undergoes an actual sentence of 25 years,” the bench ruled, ignoring repeated pleas by public prosecutor Richa Kapoor to uphold the death penalty.

The HC was dealing with a death sentence reference sent to it for confirmation by the lower court that had in October last year awarded the maximum penalty to Sanjay for the ghastly crime after it convicted him.

According to the prosecution, on October 19, 2006, the Roop Nagar police station was informed that three children of a local businessman were seriously wounded by their servant who had escaped. While the four year old boy succumbed to his injuries at the hospital later (he was stabbed in the neck), the medical records showed one of the daughters of the businessman had been raped while the other was critically injured.

The police launched a manhunt for Sanjay who it emerged had joined just 5 days before at the recommendation of the household driver.

Though the prosecution highlighted the sheer brutality of the crime, the abuse of trust and the moral depravity exhibited by the crime, HC remained unmoved, instead relying on earlier Supreme Court verdicts to conclude that the case was of a “midway category” that didn’t call for the maximum penalty even as it warranted Sanjay stay in jail for the next 25 years.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

HC summons MCD commissioner

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/delhi/HC-summons-MCD-commissioner/articleshow/5169994.cms

 

TNN 28 October 2009, 04:09am IST

 

NEW DELHI: The commissioner of Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD) will have to appear before the Delhi High Court on Wednesday and explain the delay in complying with an HC order.

An irked HC on Tuesday summoned K S Mehra after it found that the court’s previous order asking the agency to submit an affidavit had not been complied with and was being unnecessarily delayed.

The affidavit to be submitted was to have a report of an MCD committee constituted to review the ban on cycle rickshaws in the capital.

HC is currently taking stock of MCD’s policy to ban the rickshaws as well as reviewing earlier orders of the court on the issue.

The bench was angry that despite its asking for an affidavit on the issue the agency claimed it awaited a word from the LG and standing committee whose deliberations are to be included in the report. The court slammed this delay on behalf of the MCD and quipped, “Either your commissioner doesn’t understand our orders or he doesn’t want to obey. Let him appear personally before the court and give an explanation.”

Tuesday’s stand of the MCD comes after earlier flip flops. On July 9, MCD had informed HC that the report was ready and will be filed in two weeks. However, on October 5 the agency claimed the report in the form of affidavit would take time as there was lack of consensus within the committee mainly between the MCD and traffic police.

HC was hearing a petition by NGO Manushi that HC’s order and MCD’s policy of banning rickshaws from the main arterial roads and Chandni Chowk area is arbitrary and violates the fundamental rights of rickshaw pullers. The petition also assails the ceiling imposed on the number of licences granted to rickshaw pullers in the city.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Collegium defers decision on Dinakaran’s elevation again

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Collegium-defers-decision-on-Dinakarans-elevation-again/articleshow/5160777.cms

 

TNN 26 October 2009, 01:26am IST

 

NEW DELHI: The collegium headed by Chief Justice K G Balakrishnan on Sunday deferred a decision on whether to withdraw its earlier recommendation to the Centre proposing appointment of Karnataka High Court Chief Justice P D Dinakaran as a judge of the Supreme Court.

The move to reconsider the earlier recommendation resulted from relentless bombardment of allegations and documents purportedly showing that Justice Dinakaran had amassed large tracts of land and even encroached upon government land, which was virtually substantiated by Thiruvallur district collector’s report to the CJI.

However, the collegium could not take a decision in the face of defiant response of Justice Dinakaran that he had not acquired an inch of land since his appointment as an HC judge and a counter allegation that the collector’s report was motivated. This was the second time within a month that the collegium deferred a decision on the controversial issue.

Though the Judicial Accountability Forum had forwarded additional documentary evidence to lace its earlier allegations against Justice Dinakaran, what made the collegium decide to seek further information from the Tamil Nadu government was documented representation from another lawyer group in support of the Karntaka Chief Justice, alleging that the charges were made to victimise the judge.

With the controversy refusing to die, the Centre has already put on hold the process for deliberating on the collegium’s recommendation on Justice Dinakaran and has decided to wait till a fresh word from the collegium — either standing by the earlier recommendation or rescinding it.

Justice Dinakaran had on Saturday told TOI, “I still stand by what I had told the Chief Justice of India when the controversy broke out. I have not acquired an inch of land after being appointed as a judge of the High Court. All allegations about encroachment of public land is patently false.”

Asked about the damning report of the Tiruvallur collector about alleged encroachment of 197 acres by him in Kaverirajapuran village, Justice Dinakaran stoically said, “The collector has got his facts wrong. I have never encroached a single inch of land.”

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Apex court to decide custody of NRI child abducted by mother

http://trak.in/news/apex-court-to-decide-custody-of-nri-child-abducted-by-mother/17631/

 

by Indo Asian News Service on October 27, 2009

 

in india

 

New Delhi, Oct 27 (IANS) The Supreme Court Tuesday decided to take a call next Wednesday on the question of the custody of a US-born minor child, abducted by his Indian mother from New York and brought here after she divorced her estranged husband.

 

A bench of Justice Tarun Chatterjee and Justice G.S. Singhvi decided to take a call on the issue of the child’s custody after the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), acting on the court’s Aug 29 order, traced seven-year-old Adithya, who was in the custody of his mother Vijayashree Voora, in Chennai Oct 25.

 

Voora had been on the run all over the country to keep the child in her custody.

 

The bench told the CBI to keep the child in its custody at the government’s guest house till next Wednesday.

 

The bench earlier had ordered the CBI to trace the child on a plea by his father V. Ravi Chandran, who had moved the apex court in September 2007 after his divorced wife brought the child to India violating the New York Supreme Court’s order, granting him and his divorced wife joint custody of the child.

 

The bench ordered the CBI to intervene after the police of various states failed to trace the minor child, with his mother consistently on the move from one state to another for the last two years to dodge the police.

 

The apex court’s order had come on the plea by Ravi Chandran, a New York-based medical practitioner, who had got married to Voora in Tirupathi in December 2000. The couple had a son on July 1, 2002 in the US.

 

But shortly thereafter, relations between the couple turned sour and Voora moved New York’s apex court in July 2003 for divorce. While adjudicating on the divorce plea, the New York court on April 18, 2005, granted the couple joint custody of the child, stipulating that both the parties would keep the other informed about the whereabouts of the child.

 

The New York family court had eventually also passed the divorce decree in September 2005, incorporating its order on the child’s custody in the decree, and stipulated that both the parties will have alternative physical custody of the minor child on a weekly basis.

 

But as per Chandran’s plea, Voora had brought the minor child to India and informed him that she would be living with the child in Chennai.

 

Chandran had first approached a New York family court, pointing out the violation of the state’s Supreme Court order by Voora.

 

The New York court granted exclusive custody of the child to Chandran, but for the enforcement of the New York court’s order, Chandran moved the Indian Supreme Court September 2007.

 

During adjudication of Chandran’s plea, the apex court found that despite efforts made by police officers and officials of different states, such as senior superintendent of police (SSP), Agra, SSP Chandigarh, director general of police (DGP), Tamil Nadu, DGP, Karnataka, and commissioner of police, Bangalore City, Adithya and his mother could not be traced.

 

Accordingly, the apex court asked CBI to trace the child.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Advertisements

One Response

  1. dear sir
    there was a news in dainik aaj news paper
    that the high court,allahbad decided that no any lobour colony ,kanpur will be demolished .
    if u have the knowledge about this order plz inform me.
    regards
    amit

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: