A summary of important cases from the causelists of the Supreme Court of India, the Bombay High Court, and the Delhi High Court..Supreme Court of India.For judgment.Kerala Pub. Service Commn. & Ors. v. State Information Commn. & Anr.[Item 1A in court 8 – C.A. NO…/2016 ARISING FROM SLP(C) NO. 15919-15950/2011.Bench: MY Eqbal, Arun Mishra JJ..Check evening updates to know more..Today in court: This case is an appeal against a judgment of the Kerala High Court and pertains to whether State Public Service Commissions are amenable to RTI. The Court today answered the question in the affirmative and held that PSCs are required to supply copies of answer sheets to candidates..It, however, held that the details of examiners, who have evaluated the answer sheets need not be disclosed..Read the full story here..1. Nabam Rebia v. Registrar General, Gauhati High Court and Ors..[Item 501 in court 3 – SLP(C) 876/2016].Bench: Jagdish Singh Khehar, Dipak Misra, Madan B Lokur, PC Ghose, NV Ramana JJ..This case pertains to the removal of Arunachal Pradesh Speaker Nabam Rebia and is an appeal against the decision of the Gauhati High Court..Recently, the Union Cabinet recommended imposition of President’s Rule in the State which has been challenged by the ruling party. Senior Advocate Vikas Singh made his submissions yesterday. The hearing will resume today..Today in court: Senior Advocate Rakesh Dwivedi, appearing for rebel Congress MLAs, submitted today that it was not obligatory for the Governor to take the aid and advice of the Chief Minister and his council of ministers in summoning the assembly session and that the Governor can act on his own in “exceptional” and “special” circumstances. The Court summoned dispatch records containing details of correspondences of Arunachal Pradesh assembly from October till date. The Court also remarked that it cannot remain silent “if democracy is slaughtered”. The hearing will continue tomorrow..2. Board of Control for Cricket v. Cricket Association Of Bihar & Ors..[Item 301 in court 1 – Civil Appeal 4235/2014].Bench: Chief Justice TS Thakur, FML Kalifulla.The hearing pertaining to implementation of Lodha Panel Committee report. The Committee had suggested among other things, a bar on ministers occupying positions in BCCI and legalising betting in cricket..Today in court: The Court today gave strong indication that it will accept the report of the Lodha Committee. Chief Justice TS Thakur told Senior Advocate Shekhar Naphade, who is representing the BCCI, to,.“Take a realistic view of the recommendations. These recommendations deserve respect. Best course is for you to fall in line and carry out the suggestions. This is not a second innings for you.”.Naphade then submitted that the legal team of BCCI is meeting on February 7 to deliberate on the report and sought four weeks time to respond to the report. The court allowed the same and posted the case for hearing on March 3..The Court also accepted Lodha panel’s exoneration of IPL Chief Operating Officer, Sundar Raman..Delhi High Court.For order.Action Committee of Unaided Recognized Private Schools Vs Directorate of Education and Forum for Promotion of Quality Education For All Vs Government of NCT of Delhi & Anr..Court 10- W.P.(C) 448/2016.Bench- Manmohan J..A batch of petitions filed against AAP government’s decision to scrap management and all other quotas, except for economically weaker sections, in the city’s private schools for nursery admissions..Previously, Senior Advocate Guru Krishna Kumar had appeared for the government, submitting that absolute and unregulated power cannot be given to private schools. He further argued that the decision of scrapping management quota and other criteria was justified in order to ensure that private schools adopt a criteria that is ‘fair, just and reasonable.’.Today in Court- The Bench stayed the office order of the AAP Govt that had scrapped all quotas (including management). The Court has also said that private schools, prima-facie, have the right to administer without interference, not warranted by rule of law..(Read the full report).1. Court on its own motion (Air Pollution in Delhi) Vs Union of India & Ors..[Item 5, Court 2- W.P.(C) 1346/2015].Bench- BD Ahmed J., Sanjeev Sachdeva J..A suo motu petition concerned with the dwindling forest cover in Delhi, as a result of rampant encroachment. The Bench had appointed Senior Advocate Kailash Vasdev as amicus..On the last date of hearing, the Bench had expressed its displeasure over rampant non-compliance of court’s orders by government authorities..Today in Court- The Bench admitted compliance reports/status reports filed by various Govt authorities and expressed its reservations over rubble lying around construction sites of the Delhi Metro. The case was partly heard when the Bench adjourned it for next week. It will now come up on February 10..2. Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi Vs Union of India, Rajendra Prashad Vs Govt of NCT of Delhi, MA Usmani Vs Union of India & Ors, Naresh Kumar Vs Govt of NCT of Delhi & Ors..[Item 28-37, Court 1].Bench: Chief Justice G Rohini, Jayant Nath J..A batch of petitions questioning the apportionment of powers between the Chief Minister and Lt-Governor. On the last date of hearing, ASG Sanjay Jain had begun his submissions for the Union. He is expected to continue today..Today in Court- ASG Sanjay Jain continued with his arguments and submitted that the role of the Lt-Governor is ‘unique’ in Delhi and comparing his post to the Governors of other states would be a ‘fundamentally flawed’ argument..Stating that the Governor in Delhi assumed the role of an administrator, Jain also argued that the primacy of the Union Government over all three Lists in Delhi would be ‘all pervasive’. He is expected to continue with his submissions on February 8, the next date of hearing..3. Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd Vs Telecom Regulatory Authority of India and Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Ltd Vs Telecom Regulatory Authority of India.[Item 7 & 8, Court 1-W.P.(C) 1338/2014 & W.P.(C) 2816/2014].Bench: Chief Justice G Rohini, Jayant Nath J..Check evening updates..Today in Court- These cases were mentioned, and adjourned..4. Cairn India Ltd & Ors Vs Directorate General of Foreign Trade & Ors..[Item 25, Court 10- W.P.(C) 11600/2015].Bench- Manmohan J..Check evening updates..Today in Court- Cairn India Ltd had moved Delhi High Court in December seeking permission to export surplus crude oil from Barmer oil field in Rajasthan. The company had argued that due to the delay in requisite permissions from the Government, it was incurring heavy losses by selling crude to domestic players..Today, ASG Tushar Mehta submitted that Product Sharing Contract (PSC) conditions did not allow Cairn to export oil. The Centre agreed to file recommendations made by the Committee looking into the issue, before the next date of hearing. The case was adjourned to February 15..5. Centre for Law & Good Governance through its Chairman Vs Ministry of Power & Ors. .[Item 40, Court 1- W.P.(C) 972/2016].Bench- Chief Justice G Rohini, Jayant Nath J..A fresh petition. Check evening updates..Today in Court- The petition challenged appointment of Chairman & Managing Director of NTPC. The case was dismissed on grounds of maintainability..6. F. Hoffman La Roche Ltd Vs SD Kaul & Ors. .[Item 28, CS (COMM) 63/2016].Bench- Vipin Sanghi J. .A fresh petition. Check evening updates..Today in Court- This case could not be tracked. Any inputs/leads would be appreciated..Bombay High Court.1. Bombay Environment Action Group v. State of Maharashtra.[Item 912 Court 43 – NMWST(O)/603/2016].Bench: V.M. Kanade, Revati Mohite Dere JJ..A notice of motion in the original PIL/(O)/87/2006. The PIL is regarding construction activities by CIDCO and JNPT near protected mangrove forests in Airoli..Today in court: This matter could not be tracked..2. Movement for Peace & Justice v. State of Maharashtra.[Item 902 Court 54 – PIL(O)/85/2014].Bench: Naresh H. Patil, G.S. Kulkarni JJ..A group of six PIL’s relating to the public distribution system of the central and state government. In particular, the petitions deal with the implementation of the National Food Security Act of 2013. (Read the previous order).Today in court: Government pleader, A.B. Vagyani informed the division bench that the state was already providing rice at Rs.3/kg and wheat at Rs. 2/kg to eligible persons. A.S. Kulkarni J pointed out that under the National Food Security Act, this must be given to eligible people for free. .Vagyani informed the court that the Food Commission, prescribed under section 16 of the said Act has still not been constituted. He asked for 2 months time to monitor the implementation of the scheme and also conduct a survey with regard to eligible persons under the scheme. .The next hearing is in 8 weeks..3. Janhit Manch & 1 other v. State of Maharashtra & 1 other..[Item 904 Court 13 – PILST(O)/133/2015].Bench: A.S. Oka, C.V. Bhadang JJ..Today in court: This matter could not be tracked..4. The Bombay Environment Action group v. State of Maharashtra & 6 ors..[Item 920 court 43 – CHWST(O)/211/2014].Bench: V.M Kanade, Revati Mohite Dere JJ..The PIL is regarding construction of infrastructure by CIDCO and JNPT near protected mangrove forests..Today in court: Rohit Sakhadeo, lawyer for Navi Mumbai Municipal corporation sought permission to establish a portion of a proposed pipeline for a sewage treatment plant in Navi Mumbai. He informed the court that only a portion of the pipeline passes through the area that falls under buffer zone of mangroves..Shriya Parikh , BEAG’s lawyer submitted that the petitioners did not wish to hamper projects but they were concerned for the mangroves in the area..Although the Maharashtra Coastal Zone Management Authority has granted permission to the civic body, it was still bound by a previous High Court order to obtain permission in this regard..V.M. Kanade J directed the authorities to ensure erection of mangroves in a phased manner so that tidal flow is not hampered. He also directed the Navi Mumbai Municipal corporation to plant 5 times the amount of mangroves erected at a suitable location.
A summary of important cases from the causelists of the Supreme Court of India, the Bombay High Court, and the Delhi High Court..Supreme Court of India.For judgment.Kerala Pub. Service Commn. & Ors. v. State Information Commn. & Anr.[Item 1A in court 8 – C.A. NO…/2016 ARISING FROM SLP(C) NO. 15919-15950/2011.Bench: MY Eqbal, Arun Mishra JJ..Check evening updates to know more..Today in court: This case is an appeal against a judgment of the Kerala High Court and pertains to whether State Public Service Commissions are amenable to RTI. The Court today answered the question in the affirmative and held that PSCs are required to supply copies of answer sheets to candidates..It, however, held that the details of examiners, who have evaluated the answer sheets need not be disclosed..Read the full story here..1. Nabam Rebia v. Registrar General, Gauhati High Court and Ors..[Item 501 in court 3 – SLP(C) 876/2016].Bench: Jagdish Singh Khehar, Dipak Misra, Madan B Lokur, PC Ghose, NV Ramana JJ..This case pertains to the removal of Arunachal Pradesh Speaker Nabam Rebia and is an appeal against the decision of the Gauhati High Court..Recently, the Union Cabinet recommended imposition of President’s Rule in the State which has been challenged by the ruling party. Senior Advocate Vikas Singh made his submissions yesterday. The hearing will resume today..Today in court: Senior Advocate Rakesh Dwivedi, appearing for rebel Congress MLAs, submitted today that it was not obligatory for the Governor to take the aid and advice of the Chief Minister and his council of ministers in summoning the assembly session and that the Governor can act on his own in “exceptional” and “special” circumstances. The Court summoned dispatch records containing details of correspondences of Arunachal Pradesh assembly from October till date. The Court also remarked that it cannot remain silent “if democracy is slaughtered”. The hearing will continue tomorrow..2. Board of Control for Cricket v. Cricket Association Of Bihar & Ors..[Item 301 in court 1 – Civil Appeal 4235/2014].Bench: Chief Justice TS Thakur, FML Kalifulla.The hearing pertaining to implementation of Lodha Panel Committee report. The Committee had suggested among other things, a bar on ministers occupying positions in BCCI and legalising betting in cricket..Today in court: The Court today gave strong indication that it will accept the report of the Lodha Committee. Chief Justice TS Thakur told Senior Advocate Shekhar Naphade, who is representing the BCCI, to,.“Take a realistic view of the recommendations. These recommendations deserve respect. Best course is for you to fall in line and carry out the suggestions. This is not a second innings for you.”.Naphade then submitted that the legal team of BCCI is meeting on February 7 to deliberate on the report and sought four weeks time to respond to the report. The court allowed the same and posted the case for hearing on March 3..The Court also accepted Lodha panel’s exoneration of IPL Chief Operating Officer, Sundar Raman..Delhi High Court.For order.Action Committee of Unaided Recognized Private Schools Vs Directorate of Education and Forum for Promotion of Quality Education For All Vs Government of NCT of Delhi & Anr..Court 10- W.P.(C) 448/2016.Bench- Manmohan J..A batch of petitions filed against AAP government’s decision to scrap management and all other quotas, except for economically weaker sections, in the city’s private schools for nursery admissions..Previously, Senior Advocate Guru Krishna Kumar had appeared for the government, submitting that absolute and unregulated power cannot be given to private schools. He further argued that the decision of scrapping management quota and other criteria was justified in order to ensure that private schools adopt a criteria that is ‘fair, just and reasonable.’.Today in Court- The Bench stayed the office order of the AAP Govt that had scrapped all quotas (including management). The Court has also said that private schools, prima-facie, have the right to administer without interference, not warranted by rule of law..(Read the full report).1. Court on its own motion (Air Pollution in Delhi) Vs Union of India & Ors..[Item 5, Court 2- W.P.(C) 1346/2015].Bench- BD Ahmed J., Sanjeev Sachdeva J..A suo motu petition concerned with the dwindling forest cover in Delhi, as a result of rampant encroachment. The Bench had appointed Senior Advocate Kailash Vasdev as amicus..On the last date of hearing, the Bench had expressed its displeasure over rampant non-compliance of court’s orders by government authorities..Today in Court- The Bench admitted compliance reports/status reports filed by various Govt authorities and expressed its reservations over rubble lying around construction sites of the Delhi Metro. The case was partly heard when the Bench adjourned it for next week. It will now come up on February 10..2. Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi Vs Union of India, Rajendra Prashad Vs Govt of NCT of Delhi, MA Usmani Vs Union of India & Ors, Naresh Kumar Vs Govt of NCT of Delhi & Ors..[Item 28-37, Court 1].Bench: Chief Justice G Rohini, Jayant Nath J..A batch of petitions questioning the apportionment of powers between the Chief Minister and Lt-Governor. On the last date of hearing, ASG Sanjay Jain had begun his submissions for the Union. He is expected to continue today..Today in Court- ASG Sanjay Jain continued with his arguments and submitted that the role of the Lt-Governor is ‘unique’ in Delhi and comparing his post to the Governors of other states would be a ‘fundamentally flawed’ argument..Stating that the Governor in Delhi assumed the role of an administrator, Jain also argued that the primacy of the Union Government over all three Lists in Delhi would be ‘all pervasive’. He is expected to continue with his submissions on February 8, the next date of hearing..3. Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd Vs Telecom Regulatory Authority of India and Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Ltd Vs Telecom Regulatory Authority of India.[Item 7 & 8, Court 1-W.P.(C) 1338/2014 & W.P.(C) 2816/2014].Bench: Chief Justice G Rohini, Jayant Nath J..Check evening updates..Today in Court- These cases were mentioned, and adjourned..4. Cairn India Ltd & Ors Vs Directorate General of Foreign Trade & Ors..[Item 25, Court 10- W.P.(C) 11600/2015].Bench- Manmohan J..Check evening updates..Today in Court- Cairn India Ltd had moved Delhi High Court in December seeking permission to export surplus crude oil from Barmer oil field in Rajasthan. The company had argued that due to the delay in requisite permissions from the Government, it was incurring heavy losses by selling crude to domestic players..Today, ASG Tushar Mehta submitted that Product Sharing Contract (PSC) conditions did not allow Cairn to export oil. The Centre agreed to file recommendations made by the Committee looking into the issue, before the next date of hearing. The case was adjourned to February 15..5. Centre for Law & Good Governance through its Chairman Vs Ministry of Power & Ors. .[Item 40, Court 1- W.P.(C) 972/2016].Bench- Chief Justice G Rohini, Jayant Nath J..A fresh petition. Check evening updates..Today in Court- The petition challenged appointment of Chairman & Managing Director of NTPC. The case was dismissed on grounds of maintainability..6. F. Hoffman La Roche Ltd Vs SD Kaul & Ors. .[Item 28, CS (COMM) 63/2016].Bench- Vipin Sanghi J. .A fresh petition. Check evening updates..Today in Court- This case could not be tracked. Any inputs/leads would be appreciated..Bombay High Court.1. Bombay Environment Action Group v. State of Maharashtra.[Item 912 Court 43 – NMWST(O)/603/2016].Bench: V.M. Kanade, Revati Mohite Dere JJ..A notice of motion in the original PIL/(O)/87/2006. The PIL is regarding construction activities by CIDCO and JNPT near protected mangrove forests in Airoli..Today in court: This matter could not be tracked..2. Movement for Peace & Justice v. State of Maharashtra.[Item 902 Court 54 – PIL(O)/85/2014].Bench: Naresh H. Patil, G.S. Kulkarni JJ..A group of six PIL’s relating to the public distribution system of the central and state government. In particular, the petitions deal with the implementation of the National Food Security Act of 2013. (Read the previous order).Today in court: Government pleader, A.B. Vagyani informed the division bench that the state was already providing rice at Rs.3/kg and wheat at Rs. 2/kg to eligible persons. A.S. Kulkarni J pointed out that under the National Food Security Act, this must be given to eligible people for free. .Vagyani informed the court that the Food Commission, prescribed under section 16 of the said Act has still not been constituted. He asked for 2 months time to monitor the implementation of the scheme and also conduct a survey with regard to eligible persons under the scheme. .The next hearing is in 8 weeks..3. Janhit Manch & 1 other v. State of Maharashtra & 1 other..[Item 904 Court 13 – PILST(O)/133/2015].Bench: A.S. Oka, C.V. Bhadang JJ..Today in court: This matter could not be tracked..4. The Bombay Environment Action group v. State of Maharashtra & 6 ors..[Item 920 court 43 – CHWST(O)/211/2014].Bench: V.M Kanade, Revati Mohite Dere JJ..The PIL is regarding construction of infrastructure by CIDCO and JNPT near protected mangrove forests..Today in court: Rohit Sakhadeo, lawyer for Navi Mumbai Municipal corporation sought permission to establish a portion of a proposed pipeline for a sewage treatment plant in Navi Mumbai. He informed the court that only a portion of the pipeline passes through the area that falls under buffer zone of mangroves..Shriya Parikh , BEAG’s lawyer submitted that the petitioners did not wish to hamper projects but they were concerned for the mangroves in the area..Although the Maharashtra Coastal Zone Management Authority has granted permission to the civic body, it was still bound by a previous High Court order to obtain permission in this regard..V.M. Kanade J directed the authorities to ensure erection of mangroves in a phased manner so that tidal flow is not hampered. He also directed the Navi Mumbai Municipal corporation to plant 5 times the amount of mangroves erected at a suitable location.
