A summary of important cases from the causelists of the Supreme Court of India, the Delhi High Court and the Bombay High Court. We will also be tracking the cases of IP Firm Anand & Anand in the Delhi High Court today..LIST OF CASES.Supreme Court of India.Swaraj Abhiyan v. Union of India and Ors.U/A 143(1) Of The Constitution Of India [Reg: The Punjab Termination Of Agreement Act, 2004]State of Karnataka v. Selvi J Jayalalitha & Ors.Cellular Operators Association of India And Ors. v. Telecom Regulatory Authority of India And Ors.MC Mehta v. Union of India & Ors..Delhi High Court.Pfizer Ltd & Anr Vs Union of India & Anr and Laborate Pharmaceuticals India Ltd Vs Drugs Controller General of India & Anr. [Batch matters]Ajay Maken v. Union of India & Anr [Lead matter in a batch of 3 connected matters]Indian National Trade Union Congress Thr Its General Secretary Vs Union of India & Ors.Dr. Subramanian Swamy Vs State of UP & Ors..IPR Cases [Anand & Anand].Sujeet Kumar & Ors Vs Sunil Dawar & Anr.OLX BV & Ors Vs Padawan Ltd & Ors.The Indian Performing Rights Society Ltd Vs Jaypee Hotels Ltd..Bombay High Court.India Centre for Human Rights & Law & Ors v Union of India & OrsSwati Sayaji Patil v. State of MaharashtraBhagwan Sawlani and 3 Ors v. Divisional Railway Manager & AnrSociety for Fast Justice & Ors v. Union of IndiaHelp Mumbai Foundation & 2 Ors v. Chairman, Railway BoardDistillers Association of Maharashtra and 3 Ors. v. State of Maharashtra and 5 Ors..SUMMARY OF CASES.Supreme Court of India.1. Swaraj Abhiyan v. Union of India and Ors..[Item 2 in court 7 – Writ Petition (Civil) 857/2015].Bench: Madan B Lokur, NV Ramana JJ..A petition filed by Swaraj Abhiyan seeking among other things, a direction to provide free food-grains guaranteed under National Food Security Act to people living in drought-affected states. Arguments of Prashant Bhushan, who is appearing for the petitioner, is progressing in the matter..Today in court: This case could not be tracked. Any update/ information would be appreciated..2. U/A 143(1) Of The Constitution Of India [Reg: The Punjab Termination Of Agreement Act, 2004].[Item 502 in court 2 – Spl.Ref. 1/2004].Bench: Anil R Dave, PC Ghose, Shiva Kirti Singh, AK Goel, Amitava Roy JJ..The case is a special reference to the Supreme Court under Article 143 by the President in 2004. The reference pertains to the Punjab Termination of Agreements Act, 2004 passed by Punjab terminating all the water sharing agreements with the neighbouring States.This legislation had jeopardised the construction of Satluj-Yamuna Link canal..When the matter was last heard, the Court had ordered status quo to be maintained with respect to the canal land. Attorney General Mukul Rohatgi and Solicitor General Ranjit Kumar appeared for the Central government. Senior Advocate Ram Jethmalani is appearing for Punjab while Senior Advocate Shyam Divan is appearing for Haryana. (Read the full story here).Today in court: This case could not be tracked. Any update/ information would be appreciated..3. State of Karnataka v. Selvi J Jayalalitha & Ors..[Item 2 in court 9 – SLP (Crl.) 6117-6120/2015].Bench: Pinaki Chandra Ghose, Amitava Roy JJ..The appeal against the judgment of the Karnataka High Court acquitting Tamil Nadu Chief Minister Jayalalithaa in the disproportionate assets case. Senior Advocate BV Acharya and petitioner- in-person Subramanian Swamy completed their arguments yesterday. Senior Advocate TR Adnhyarujina will commence his arguments today for K Anbhazagan..Today in court: TR Andhyarujina completed his submissions and L Nageswara Rao began his arguments for Jayalalithaa. The hearing will continue on April 5..4. Cellular Operators Association of India And Ors. v. Telecom Regulatory Authority of India And Ors..[Item 4 in court 10 – SLP(C) 6521/2016].Bench: Kurian Joseph, Rohinton Fali Nariman JJ..Plea by cellular operators in the call drops matter. The Supreme Court has issued notice to the Central government and Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI), among others but refused to stay the judgment of the Delhi High Court. At the last hearing, the court had asked the TRAI to consider the technical aspects of call drops and inform the court on whether it could consider amending the regulations imposing penalty on telecom companies..Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal is appearing for the Cellular Operators Association of India while TRAI is being represented by ASG PS Narasimha. Read more here..Today in court: Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal appearing for telecom operators argued that the regulation imposing penalty is contrary to the regulation which the telecom operators are already subject to. “This regulation has nothing to do with standard of service. It is a penalty. Can they make a regulation which is contrary to a regulation to which I am already subject to?…The pith and substance of this regulation is ‘I don’t care what the reason for call drop is, I will penalise you’ “, he submitted..The hearing will resume on April 5..5. MC Mehta v. Union of India & Ors..[Item 301 in court 1 at 3 pm – IA Nos. 366, 367, 368, 370, 371, 372 in IA No. 365 in IA No.345, IA No. 369, 373, 374 in IA No. 366 in IA No. 365 in IA No. 345 in WP (C) 13029/1985].Bench: Chief Justice TS Thakur, AK Sikri, R Banumathi JJ..A batch of petitions relating to pollution in Delhi. Check evening updates to know more..Today in court: The Court extended the ban on registration of Diesel cars above 2000 cc in Delhi and will now hear the matter on a Saturday. Read the full report here..Delhi High Court.1. Pfizer Ltd & Anr Vs Union of India & Anr and Laborate Pharmaceuticals India Ltd Vs Drugs Controller General of India & Anr. [Batch matters in Court 12].Bench: RS Endlaw J..Petitions challenging the Govt’s notification banning FDC drugs..Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal concluded his arguments yesterday. The Bench has now directed the other petitioners in the case to submit a written ‘note’ of their arguments, pursuant to which Justice Endlaw will frame issues and the Centre is expected to argue on those points today..Today in Court- ASG Sanjay Jain made his submissions. The case will now be heard on Monday, April 4. The interim stay shall continue..2. Ajay Maken v. Union of India & Anr [Lead matter in a batch of 3 connected matters].[Item 25-28 in Court 1 – Writ Petition (Civil) 6702/2015].Bench: Chief Justice G Rohini, Jayant Nath J..Congress leader Ajay Maken’s petition against AAP’s ad campaigns. Maken has recently moved another application in the case, alleging that the AAP government had indulged in “large scale wastage of the taxpayers money” on its politicial activities by launching a massive advertisement campaign to glorify its one year in power..The application seeks to restrain the Delhi Govt from publishing or airing any advertisements and promotional campaign outside Delhi and also seeks a direction to it for launching campaigns in Delhi only, and that too in a cost-effective manner and in conformity with the guidelines of the Supreme Court..Today in Court- This Bench did not sit today..3. Indian National Trade Union Congress Thr Its General Secretary Vs Union of India & Ors..[Item 34, Court 10- W.P.(C) 2837/2016].Bench: Manmohan J..A fresh petition. Check evening updates..Today in Court- This case could not be tracked. Any updates/information would be appreciated..4. Dr. Subramanian Swamy Vs State of UP & Ors..[Item 3, Court 33- CRL.M.C. 3280/2013].Bench: GS Sistani, Sangita Dhingra Sehgal JJ..Check evening updates..Today in Court- This case was adjourned to May 19. You can read the detailed report here. .IPR Cases [Anand & Anand].5. Sujeet Kumar & Ors Vs Sunil Dawar & Anr..[Item 23, Court 24- CS(OS) 3611/2014].Bench: Vipin Sanghi J..Check evening updates..Today in Court- Case not taken up as file was not received..6. OLX BV & Ors Vs Padawan Ltd & Ors..[Item 2, Court 22- CS(COMM) 232/2016].Bench: Valmiki Mehta J..Check evening updates..Today in Court- This suit was a copyright and trademark infringment suit filed by OLX against a UK based company, seeking an injunction against the company from using the OLX logo and using the copyright information, literary work, listings on the website of OLX. Plaintiff also argued that the Defendant No 1 (the company) was creating large volumes of data from the Plaintiff’s proprietary database and thereby infringing Plaintiff’s copyright over their literary work..The suit also arraigned various internet service providers and the Plaintiff argued that it was through their medium that the Defendant was able to infringe copyright over Plaintiff’s work and also violate the trademark logo of OLX..The Bench restrained the Defendant from violating in any manner, the copyright held by the Plaintiff on its literary work, listings, information etc. The Court also restrained the Defendant from using the trademark or logo of OLX. Due to the location of the Defendant company, the Plaintiff was allowed to serve them by email. The case will now be heard on July 8..7. The Indian Performing Rights Society Ltd Vs Jaypee Hotels Ltd..[Item 11, Court 22- EX.P. 310/2010].Bench: Valmiki Mehta J..Check evening updates..Today in Court- This case was adjourned to August 2..Bombay High Court.1. India Centre for Human Rights & Law & Ors v Union of India & Ors .[Item 1 Court 13 – PIL(OS)/27/2007].Bench: AS Oka, PD Naik JJ..This PIL seeks to make all railway platforms in the city disabled friendly, lack of facilities like toilets for the disabled is also highlighted in this. In the previous hearing, appearing for the petitioner, senior counsel Gayatri Singh pointed out that most stations did not have toilets, and the ones that did were locked. The court has now asked for the names of all the concerned railway officials who were in-charge of implementing court orders..Today in court: The petitioners were asked to visit platforms all over the city and give a report with regard to compliance of previous orders. Gayatri Singh informed the court that out of 12 stations in western railway,10 stations in central railway and 10 stations in harbour line that they visited, none had complied with court orders..Facilities to be provided were raising the height of patforms to 920 mm, lowering of height of the booking windows, tactile indicators, ramps etc. The earlier deadline for the same was April 2016 but counsel for railways Suresh Kumar asked for an extension upto June..You do not require a dozen orders to provide basic facilities for the disabled. You have been given enough time, you just want to delay. Oka J said..General manager, central railway and western railway have been directed to give an undertaking stating the exact deadline by which the work will be completed by next Tuesday. The matter will now be heard on April 21..2. Swati Sayaji Patil v. State of Maharashtra.[Item 2 Court 13- PIL(OS)/12/2015].Bench: AS Oka, PD Naik JJ..The petitioner seeks directions for reducing the weight of school bags. The petition has also relied on a certificate issued by KEM Hospital which states that children may suffer from backaches, spondylosis, neck pain, and other orthopaedic problems if they continue to carry heavy bags regularly to school..After directions from the court, an expert committee under the chairmanship of Director, Primary Education was constituted in November 2014 to suggest ways to reduce the weight of school bags. In the last hearing court had asked GP Poornima Kantharia to submit whether the draft policy would apply to all schools, aided and non-aided..Today in court: The state government informed the division bench that the circular prescribing limits for weight of school bags applied to all schools in the state..In the next hearing on April 28, the state government is expected to provide details on mechanisms put in place for implementation of the government circular..3. Bhagwan Sawlani and 3 Ors v. Divisional Railway Manager & Anr.[Item 9 Court 13- NMW(OS)/101/2015].Bench: AS Oka, PD Naik JJ..A notice of motion in a PIL filed on behalf of disabled persons who were alloted STD, Internet booths at railway stations by the Western Railway..Today in court: This matter was heard along with the first matter..4. Society for Fast Justice & Ors v. Union of India.[Item 14 Court 13- PIL(OS)/19/2012].Bench: AS Oka, PD Naik JJ.Check evening updates..Today in court: This matter could not be tracked..5. Help Mumbai Foundation & 2 Ors v. Chairman, Railway Board.[Item 15 Court 13- PIL(OS)/134/2012].Bench: AS Oka, PD Naik JJ.This PIL highlights various issues regarding street vendors near railway stations. The issue of safety of women passangers is also a part of this PIL. The state had been directed to file a reply regarding finalisation of rules to be notified for implementation of the Street Vendors (Protection of Livelihood and Regulation of Street Vending) Act, 2014..Today in court: This matter was heard along with the first matter..6. Distillers Association of Maharashtra and 3 Ors. v. State of Maharashtra and 5 Ors..[Item 901 Court 52- WP(OS)/557/2016].Bench: CJ DH Waghela, MS Sonak J.The petitioners seek an interim stay on a government resolution prohibiting sale of Indian Made Foreign Liquor (IMFL) and domestic liquor in plastic pouches and polyethylene terephthalate (PET) bottles. The bench will decide on the plea for interim relief today since the GR goes in effect from April 1..For more details read yesterday’s report..Today in court: Mustafa Doctor, appearing for the Brewers Association submitted that his client will suffer gravely if the GR goes in effect as it requires all glass bottles to be embossed saying (For Sale in Maharashtra), this is a time consuming process and cannot be implemented immediately. Since their is a period of 3 months(31 March to June 30) given to the distillers for clearing their stock(PET bottles), he asked for a similar relaxation regarding embossing of glass bottles. .After listening to all parties, CJ Waghela kept the matter for tomorrow at 11 am. Final decision regarding interim relief to be granted will taken.
A summary of important cases from the causelists of the Supreme Court of India, the Delhi High Court and the Bombay High Court. We will also be tracking the cases of IP Firm Anand & Anand in the Delhi High Court today..LIST OF CASES.Supreme Court of India.Swaraj Abhiyan v. Union of India and Ors.U/A 143(1) Of The Constitution Of India [Reg: The Punjab Termination Of Agreement Act, 2004]State of Karnataka v. Selvi J Jayalalitha & Ors.Cellular Operators Association of India And Ors. v. Telecom Regulatory Authority of India And Ors.MC Mehta v. Union of India & Ors..Delhi High Court.Pfizer Ltd & Anr Vs Union of India & Anr and Laborate Pharmaceuticals India Ltd Vs Drugs Controller General of India & Anr. [Batch matters]Ajay Maken v. Union of India & Anr [Lead matter in a batch of 3 connected matters]Indian National Trade Union Congress Thr Its General Secretary Vs Union of India & Ors.Dr. Subramanian Swamy Vs State of UP & Ors..IPR Cases [Anand & Anand].Sujeet Kumar & Ors Vs Sunil Dawar & Anr.OLX BV & Ors Vs Padawan Ltd & Ors.The Indian Performing Rights Society Ltd Vs Jaypee Hotels Ltd..Bombay High Court.India Centre for Human Rights & Law & Ors v Union of India & OrsSwati Sayaji Patil v. State of MaharashtraBhagwan Sawlani and 3 Ors v. Divisional Railway Manager & AnrSociety for Fast Justice & Ors v. Union of IndiaHelp Mumbai Foundation & 2 Ors v. Chairman, Railway BoardDistillers Association of Maharashtra and 3 Ors. v. State of Maharashtra and 5 Ors..SUMMARY OF CASES.Supreme Court of India.1. Swaraj Abhiyan v. Union of India and Ors..[Item 2 in court 7 – Writ Petition (Civil) 857/2015].Bench: Madan B Lokur, NV Ramana JJ..A petition filed by Swaraj Abhiyan seeking among other things, a direction to provide free food-grains guaranteed under National Food Security Act to people living in drought-affected states. Arguments of Prashant Bhushan, who is appearing for the petitioner, is progressing in the matter..Today in court: This case could not be tracked. Any update/ information would be appreciated..2. U/A 143(1) Of The Constitution Of India [Reg: The Punjab Termination Of Agreement Act, 2004].[Item 502 in court 2 – Spl.Ref. 1/2004].Bench: Anil R Dave, PC Ghose, Shiva Kirti Singh, AK Goel, Amitava Roy JJ..The case is a special reference to the Supreme Court under Article 143 by the President in 2004. The reference pertains to the Punjab Termination of Agreements Act, 2004 passed by Punjab terminating all the water sharing agreements with the neighbouring States.This legislation had jeopardised the construction of Satluj-Yamuna Link canal..When the matter was last heard, the Court had ordered status quo to be maintained with respect to the canal land. Attorney General Mukul Rohatgi and Solicitor General Ranjit Kumar appeared for the Central government. Senior Advocate Ram Jethmalani is appearing for Punjab while Senior Advocate Shyam Divan is appearing for Haryana. (Read the full story here).Today in court: This case could not be tracked. Any update/ information would be appreciated..3. State of Karnataka v. Selvi J Jayalalitha & Ors..[Item 2 in court 9 – SLP (Crl.) 6117-6120/2015].Bench: Pinaki Chandra Ghose, Amitava Roy JJ..The appeal against the judgment of the Karnataka High Court acquitting Tamil Nadu Chief Minister Jayalalithaa in the disproportionate assets case. Senior Advocate BV Acharya and petitioner- in-person Subramanian Swamy completed their arguments yesterday. Senior Advocate TR Adnhyarujina will commence his arguments today for K Anbhazagan..Today in court: TR Andhyarujina completed his submissions and L Nageswara Rao began his arguments for Jayalalithaa. The hearing will continue on April 5..4. Cellular Operators Association of India And Ors. v. Telecom Regulatory Authority of India And Ors..[Item 4 in court 10 – SLP(C) 6521/2016].Bench: Kurian Joseph, Rohinton Fali Nariman JJ..Plea by cellular operators in the call drops matter. The Supreme Court has issued notice to the Central government and Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI), among others but refused to stay the judgment of the Delhi High Court. At the last hearing, the court had asked the TRAI to consider the technical aspects of call drops and inform the court on whether it could consider amending the regulations imposing penalty on telecom companies..Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal is appearing for the Cellular Operators Association of India while TRAI is being represented by ASG PS Narasimha. Read more here..Today in court: Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal appearing for telecom operators argued that the regulation imposing penalty is contrary to the regulation which the telecom operators are already subject to. “This regulation has nothing to do with standard of service. It is a penalty. Can they make a regulation which is contrary to a regulation to which I am already subject to?…The pith and substance of this regulation is ‘I don’t care what the reason for call drop is, I will penalise you’ “, he submitted..The hearing will resume on April 5..5. MC Mehta v. Union of India & Ors..[Item 301 in court 1 at 3 pm – IA Nos. 366, 367, 368, 370, 371, 372 in IA No. 365 in IA No.345, IA No. 369, 373, 374 in IA No. 366 in IA No. 365 in IA No. 345 in WP (C) 13029/1985].Bench: Chief Justice TS Thakur, AK Sikri, R Banumathi JJ..A batch of petitions relating to pollution in Delhi. Check evening updates to know more..Today in court: The Court extended the ban on registration of Diesel cars above 2000 cc in Delhi and will now hear the matter on a Saturday. Read the full report here..Delhi High Court.1. Pfizer Ltd & Anr Vs Union of India & Anr and Laborate Pharmaceuticals India Ltd Vs Drugs Controller General of India & Anr. [Batch matters in Court 12].Bench: RS Endlaw J..Petitions challenging the Govt’s notification banning FDC drugs..Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal concluded his arguments yesterday. The Bench has now directed the other petitioners in the case to submit a written ‘note’ of their arguments, pursuant to which Justice Endlaw will frame issues and the Centre is expected to argue on those points today..Today in Court- ASG Sanjay Jain made his submissions. The case will now be heard on Monday, April 4. The interim stay shall continue..2. Ajay Maken v. Union of India & Anr [Lead matter in a batch of 3 connected matters].[Item 25-28 in Court 1 – Writ Petition (Civil) 6702/2015].Bench: Chief Justice G Rohini, Jayant Nath J..Congress leader Ajay Maken’s petition against AAP’s ad campaigns. Maken has recently moved another application in the case, alleging that the AAP government had indulged in “large scale wastage of the taxpayers money” on its politicial activities by launching a massive advertisement campaign to glorify its one year in power..The application seeks to restrain the Delhi Govt from publishing or airing any advertisements and promotional campaign outside Delhi and also seeks a direction to it for launching campaigns in Delhi only, and that too in a cost-effective manner and in conformity with the guidelines of the Supreme Court..Today in Court- This Bench did not sit today..3. Indian National Trade Union Congress Thr Its General Secretary Vs Union of India & Ors..[Item 34, Court 10- W.P.(C) 2837/2016].Bench: Manmohan J..A fresh petition. Check evening updates..Today in Court- This case could not be tracked. Any updates/information would be appreciated..4. Dr. Subramanian Swamy Vs State of UP & Ors..[Item 3, Court 33- CRL.M.C. 3280/2013].Bench: GS Sistani, Sangita Dhingra Sehgal JJ..Check evening updates..Today in Court- This case was adjourned to May 19. You can read the detailed report here. .IPR Cases [Anand & Anand].5. Sujeet Kumar & Ors Vs Sunil Dawar & Anr..[Item 23, Court 24- CS(OS) 3611/2014].Bench: Vipin Sanghi J..Check evening updates..Today in Court- Case not taken up as file was not received..6. OLX BV & Ors Vs Padawan Ltd & Ors..[Item 2, Court 22- CS(COMM) 232/2016].Bench: Valmiki Mehta J..Check evening updates..Today in Court- This suit was a copyright and trademark infringment suit filed by OLX against a UK based company, seeking an injunction against the company from using the OLX logo and using the copyright information, literary work, listings on the website of OLX. Plaintiff also argued that the Defendant No 1 (the company) was creating large volumes of data from the Plaintiff’s proprietary database and thereby infringing Plaintiff’s copyright over their literary work..The suit also arraigned various internet service providers and the Plaintiff argued that it was through their medium that the Defendant was able to infringe copyright over Plaintiff’s work and also violate the trademark logo of OLX..The Bench restrained the Defendant from violating in any manner, the copyright held by the Plaintiff on its literary work, listings, information etc. The Court also restrained the Defendant from using the trademark or logo of OLX. Due to the location of the Defendant company, the Plaintiff was allowed to serve them by email. The case will now be heard on July 8..7. The Indian Performing Rights Society Ltd Vs Jaypee Hotels Ltd..[Item 11, Court 22- EX.P. 310/2010].Bench: Valmiki Mehta J..Check evening updates..Today in Court- This case was adjourned to August 2..Bombay High Court.1. India Centre for Human Rights & Law & Ors v Union of India & Ors .[Item 1 Court 13 – PIL(OS)/27/2007].Bench: AS Oka, PD Naik JJ..This PIL seeks to make all railway platforms in the city disabled friendly, lack of facilities like toilets for the disabled is also highlighted in this. In the previous hearing, appearing for the petitioner, senior counsel Gayatri Singh pointed out that most stations did not have toilets, and the ones that did were locked. The court has now asked for the names of all the concerned railway officials who were in-charge of implementing court orders..Today in court: The petitioners were asked to visit platforms all over the city and give a report with regard to compliance of previous orders. Gayatri Singh informed the court that out of 12 stations in western railway,10 stations in central railway and 10 stations in harbour line that they visited, none had complied with court orders..Facilities to be provided were raising the height of patforms to 920 mm, lowering of height of the booking windows, tactile indicators, ramps etc. The earlier deadline for the same was April 2016 but counsel for railways Suresh Kumar asked for an extension upto June..You do not require a dozen orders to provide basic facilities for the disabled. You have been given enough time, you just want to delay. Oka J said..General manager, central railway and western railway have been directed to give an undertaking stating the exact deadline by which the work will be completed by next Tuesday. The matter will now be heard on April 21..2. Swati Sayaji Patil v. State of Maharashtra.[Item 2 Court 13- PIL(OS)/12/2015].Bench: AS Oka, PD Naik JJ..The petitioner seeks directions for reducing the weight of school bags. The petition has also relied on a certificate issued by KEM Hospital which states that children may suffer from backaches, spondylosis, neck pain, and other orthopaedic problems if they continue to carry heavy bags regularly to school..After directions from the court, an expert committee under the chairmanship of Director, Primary Education was constituted in November 2014 to suggest ways to reduce the weight of school bags. In the last hearing court had asked GP Poornima Kantharia to submit whether the draft policy would apply to all schools, aided and non-aided..Today in court: The state government informed the division bench that the circular prescribing limits for weight of school bags applied to all schools in the state..In the next hearing on April 28, the state government is expected to provide details on mechanisms put in place for implementation of the government circular..3. Bhagwan Sawlani and 3 Ors v. Divisional Railway Manager & Anr.[Item 9 Court 13- NMW(OS)/101/2015].Bench: AS Oka, PD Naik JJ..A notice of motion in a PIL filed on behalf of disabled persons who were alloted STD, Internet booths at railway stations by the Western Railway..Today in court: This matter was heard along with the first matter..4. Society for Fast Justice & Ors v. Union of India.[Item 14 Court 13- PIL(OS)/19/2012].Bench: AS Oka, PD Naik JJ.Check evening updates..Today in court: This matter could not be tracked..5. Help Mumbai Foundation & 2 Ors v. Chairman, Railway Board.[Item 15 Court 13- PIL(OS)/134/2012].Bench: AS Oka, PD Naik JJ.This PIL highlights various issues regarding street vendors near railway stations. The issue of safety of women passangers is also a part of this PIL. The state had been directed to file a reply regarding finalisation of rules to be notified for implementation of the Street Vendors (Protection of Livelihood and Regulation of Street Vending) Act, 2014..Today in court: This matter was heard along with the first matter..6. Distillers Association of Maharashtra and 3 Ors. v. State of Maharashtra and 5 Ors..[Item 901 Court 52- WP(OS)/557/2016].Bench: CJ DH Waghela, MS Sonak J.The petitioners seek an interim stay on a government resolution prohibiting sale of Indian Made Foreign Liquor (IMFL) and domestic liquor in plastic pouches and polyethylene terephthalate (PET) bottles. The bench will decide on the plea for interim relief today since the GR goes in effect from April 1..For more details read yesterday’s report..Today in court: Mustafa Doctor, appearing for the Brewers Association submitted that his client will suffer gravely if the GR goes in effect as it requires all glass bottles to be embossed saying (For Sale in Maharashtra), this is a time consuming process and cannot be implemented immediately. Since their is a period of 3 months(31 March to June 30) given to the distillers for clearing their stock(PET bottles), he asked for a similar relaxation regarding embossing of glass bottles. .After listening to all parties, CJ Waghela kept the matter for tomorrow at 11 am. Final decision regarding interim relief to be granted will taken.