Supreme Court of India.1. Sanjiv Rajendra Bhatt v. Union of India & Ors..[Item 1A in court 1 for judgment – Writ Petition (Crl.) 135/2011].Bench: Chief Justice HL Dattu, Arun Mishra J. .The application filed by IPS officer Sanjiv Bhatt seeking impleadment of Amit Shah and S Gurumurthy in the 2011 case before the Supreme Court. In 2011, Bhatt had approached the Supreme Court alleging that the Gujarat government was trying to scuttle the investigation and blunt his efforts..In his present application, Bhatt has also made allegations against current Additional Solicitor General Tushar Mehta for his alleged role in trying to scuttle the investigation and has sought an SIT probe..The Court will pronounce its verdict today..Today in court: Court dismissed the petition and also held that the trial against Sanjiv Bhatt could proceed according to law. Read the full judgment here..2. Justice Sunanda Bhandare Foundation v. Union of India & Anr..[Item 4 in court 5 – IA 10/2015 in Writ Petition (Civil) 116/1998].Bench: Dipak Misra J., PC Pant J. .Check evening updates..Today in court: The Court asked all the States and Union Territories to provide the Central government, details of cases registered by them for the offence of trafficking of girls for sexual exploitation for the period starting 2015 till date, reports PTI. The Court also sought a report from the Centre by November 15 on the progress made in setting up of the Organised Crimes Investigating Agency for investigating cases of human trafficking..3. Rajbala & Ors. v. State of Haryana & Ors..[Item 1 in court 6 – Writ Petition (Civil) 671/2015].Bench: Jasti Chelameswar J., AM Sapre J. .A challenge to the validity of the Haryana Panchayati Raj (Amendment) Act, 2015 which, fixes minimum educational qualifications for candidates to contest Panchayat polls. The Supreme Court had stayed the operation of the Act whereupon the Panchayat polls had been deferred in Haryana. Petitioners’ arguments are progressing in the case..Senior Advocate Indira Jaising is making her submissions. During the last hearing, she sought reference to a larger Bench contending that a Constitutional question pertaining to Article 326 read with Articles 243(c) and 243(f) is yet to be decided. Her submission was that the government cannot prescribe qualifications to contesting elections..“You cannot add a qualification which requires acquisition of social skill like education”, she submitted..The Bench seemed reluctant to refer the case to a larger Bench; instead saying that it will decide the case even if it involves interpretation of Constitution. The hearing will resume today..Today in court: Senior Advocate Indira Jaising concluded her arguments today. Attorney General Mukul Rohatgi is now arguing for the State of Haryana. The hearing will continue tomorrow. Read the full report here..Delhi High Court.Association of Radio Taxis v. Bhavish Aggarwal & ANI Technologies Pvt Ltd. v. Govt of NCT of Delhi & Ors .[Item 22 and 26 in Court 8 – Cont. Cas (C) 643/2015, WP (C) 6668/2015].Bench: Manmohan J. .A contempt petition filed by Association of Radio Taxis against OLA Cabs. The genus of the petition was that OLA Cabs were still plying in the city despite a Single Bench order of the Delhi HC and later, a Division Bench that had refused to lift the ban on the cab service imposed by the Delhi Govt..Previously, Senior Counsel P Chidambaram appearing for Aggarwal (CEO of OLA Cabs) had informed the Court that steps were underway to phase out OLA taxis ‘entirely from the diesel platform’..On the last date of hearing, senior counsel Nidhesh Gupta appearing for the Association informed the Court that OLA was subverting the Court’s orders by running their diesel vehicles through their wholly owned subsidiary, Taxi For Sure cabs..Highlighting certain technical glitches within the OLA Application, Gupta further informed the Bench that in spite of submissions to the contrary on the last date of hearing, OLA still had around 12,000 cabs plying in the city as opposed to a meagre 500 CNG cabs. Senior Counsel Sandeep Sethi who appeared for OLA submitted before the Bench that none of these figures were reflected on record through any affidavit filed before the Court..Taking into account these submissions, the Bench had granted time to both the parties for filing the required affidavits and applications..Today in Court: Senior Counsels P Chidambaram, Rajeev Nayyar, Nidhesh Gupta and Dayan Krishnan appeared for OLA cabs, Uber India, Association of Radio Taxis and Uber BB respectively. The arguments ranged from OLA violating the Court’s orders to phasing out of diesel cabs gradually from the capital..In a hearing that went on for nearly an hour, the Bench said that it will pronounce an interim order on the issue tomorrow at 3.30 pm..2. Damini Chawla Vs Union of India & Ors. (Lead matter in a batch of three connected matters).[Item 10-12, Court 1- WP (C) 8749/2014].Bench: Chief Justice G Rohini, Jayant Nath J. .A batch of petitions seeking directions from the Court to the Central Government on regulating radio taxis in the capital region. Damini, in her petition, has claimed that many taxi/ cab operators, which are internet or telephonic based, are operating in violation of the Radio taxi Scheme, 2006 formulated by the Delhi government..Today in Court: The matter was adjourned to October 28.
Supreme Court of India.1. Sanjiv Rajendra Bhatt v. Union of India & Ors..[Item 1A in court 1 for judgment – Writ Petition (Crl.) 135/2011].Bench: Chief Justice HL Dattu, Arun Mishra J. .The application filed by IPS officer Sanjiv Bhatt seeking impleadment of Amit Shah and S Gurumurthy in the 2011 case before the Supreme Court. In 2011, Bhatt had approached the Supreme Court alleging that the Gujarat government was trying to scuttle the investigation and blunt his efforts..In his present application, Bhatt has also made allegations against current Additional Solicitor General Tushar Mehta for his alleged role in trying to scuttle the investigation and has sought an SIT probe..The Court will pronounce its verdict today..Today in court: Court dismissed the petition and also held that the trial against Sanjiv Bhatt could proceed according to law. Read the full judgment here..2. Justice Sunanda Bhandare Foundation v. Union of India & Anr..[Item 4 in court 5 – IA 10/2015 in Writ Petition (Civil) 116/1998].Bench: Dipak Misra J., PC Pant J. .Check evening updates..Today in court: The Court asked all the States and Union Territories to provide the Central government, details of cases registered by them for the offence of trafficking of girls for sexual exploitation for the period starting 2015 till date, reports PTI. The Court also sought a report from the Centre by November 15 on the progress made in setting up of the Organised Crimes Investigating Agency for investigating cases of human trafficking..3. Rajbala & Ors. v. State of Haryana & Ors..[Item 1 in court 6 – Writ Petition (Civil) 671/2015].Bench: Jasti Chelameswar J., AM Sapre J. .A challenge to the validity of the Haryana Panchayati Raj (Amendment) Act, 2015 which, fixes minimum educational qualifications for candidates to contest Panchayat polls. The Supreme Court had stayed the operation of the Act whereupon the Panchayat polls had been deferred in Haryana. Petitioners’ arguments are progressing in the case..Senior Advocate Indira Jaising is making her submissions. During the last hearing, she sought reference to a larger Bench contending that a Constitutional question pertaining to Article 326 read with Articles 243(c) and 243(f) is yet to be decided. Her submission was that the government cannot prescribe qualifications to contesting elections..“You cannot add a qualification which requires acquisition of social skill like education”, she submitted..The Bench seemed reluctant to refer the case to a larger Bench; instead saying that it will decide the case even if it involves interpretation of Constitution. The hearing will resume today..Today in court: Senior Advocate Indira Jaising concluded her arguments today. Attorney General Mukul Rohatgi is now arguing for the State of Haryana. The hearing will continue tomorrow. Read the full report here..Delhi High Court.Association of Radio Taxis v. Bhavish Aggarwal & ANI Technologies Pvt Ltd. v. Govt of NCT of Delhi & Ors .[Item 22 and 26 in Court 8 – Cont. Cas (C) 643/2015, WP (C) 6668/2015].Bench: Manmohan J. .A contempt petition filed by Association of Radio Taxis against OLA Cabs. The genus of the petition was that OLA Cabs were still plying in the city despite a Single Bench order of the Delhi HC and later, a Division Bench that had refused to lift the ban on the cab service imposed by the Delhi Govt..Previously, Senior Counsel P Chidambaram appearing for Aggarwal (CEO of OLA Cabs) had informed the Court that steps were underway to phase out OLA taxis ‘entirely from the diesel platform’..On the last date of hearing, senior counsel Nidhesh Gupta appearing for the Association informed the Court that OLA was subverting the Court’s orders by running their diesel vehicles through their wholly owned subsidiary, Taxi For Sure cabs..Highlighting certain technical glitches within the OLA Application, Gupta further informed the Bench that in spite of submissions to the contrary on the last date of hearing, OLA still had around 12,000 cabs plying in the city as opposed to a meagre 500 CNG cabs. Senior Counsel Sandeep Sethi who appeared for OLA submitted before the Bench that none of these figures were reflected on record through any affidavit filed before the Court..Taking into account these submissions, the Bench had granted time to both the parties for filing the required affidavits and applications..Today in Court: Senior Counsels P Chidambaram, Rajeev Nayyar, Nidhesh Gupta and Dayan Krishnan appeared for OLA cabs, Uber India, Association of Radio Taxis and Uber BB respectively. The arguments ranged from OLA violating the Court’s orders to phasing out of diesel cabs gradually from the capital..In a hearing that went on for nearly an hour, the Bench said that it will pronounce an interim order on the issue tomorrow at 3.30 pm..2. Damini Chawla Vs Union of India & Ors. (Lead matter in a batch of three connected matters).[Item 10-12, Court 1- WP (C) 8749/2014].Bench: Chief Justice G Rohini, Jayant Nath J. .A batch of petitions seeking directions from the Court to the Central Government on regulating radio taxis in the capital region. Damini, in her petition, has claimed that many taxi/ cab operators, which are internet or telephonic based, are operating in violation of the Radio taxi Scheme, 2006 formulated by the Delhi government..Today in Court: The matter was adjourned to October 28.
