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.1. State Of Kerala v. Wilfred J and Ors..[Item 12 in court 1 – IA 6-7 in CA 8550-8551/2014].Bench: Chief Justice TS Thakur, AK Sikri, R Banumathi JJ..A batch of matters pertaining to the construction of Vizhinjam port in Kerala and the environmental impact surrounding the same. While some of the fishermen have challenged the Environmental clearance given to the project, the State government and the Port developers have moved the Supreme Court against the NGT order transferring the case to principle Bench from Southern Bench..The Court had declined interim relief to the petitioners, while posting all related cases, (including appeals by the State government and the Port) for hearing today. .Today in court: This matter did not come up for hearing today..2. MC Mehta v. Union of India & Ors..[Item 14 in court 1– 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) No. 13029/1985].Bench: Chief Justice TS Thakur, AK Sikri, R Banumathi JJ..A batch of petitions relating to pollution in Delhi. Check evening updates..Today in court: This matter will be heard at 2 pm tomorrow after Senior Advocate Harish Salve sought an adjournment today..3. 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..Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal is making his submissions and will resume his arguments..4. Sachchidanand Gupta ”Sachchey” v. State of U.P Thr Chief Secretary and Ors..[Item 3 in court 7 – Writ petition (Civil) 872/2015].Bench: Ranjan Gogoi, Prafulla C Pant JJ.Case pertaining to appointment of Lok Ayukta in Uttar Pradesh. The court had initially appointed retired judge, Virendra Singh to the post. However, the UP government had agreed to defer the oath taking of Singh after a vacation Bench had heard this petition filed by Gupta, alleging that the UP government had misled the Supreme Court by including Virendra Singh J.’s name in list of names for appointment as Lokayukta despite strong resistance from Chief Justice of Allahabad High Court..Today in court: The court witnessed an eventful hearing today as the Bench seemed reluctant to change or vacate its order appointing Virendra Singh as Lok Ayukta. Senior Advocate TR Andhyarujina appeared for the Allahabad High Court and submitted that the Uttar Pradesh government had misled the Supreme Court into believing that Virendra Singh’s name was not objected to by the Chief Justice of the High Court. Advocates Kamini Jaiswal and Prashant Bhushan also submitted the same..The Court, however, said that even if that submission was accepted, the Court is not inclined to vacate its order since the Constitutional functionaries in the State were given adequate time to carry out the order of the court but failed..“Unless there are compelling reasons which shock our conscience, we won’t vacate our order. Assuming we have been misled, give us material to show why Virendra Singh should not be appointed. You will have to satisfy us since we have made the appointment”, remarked Justice Gogoi..The Court said that “if we find Virendra Singh not to be suitable, we will recall that order. But we are not sending the matter back to be decided by the State functionaries.”.The court then reserved its order..5. Kalpana Mehta & Ors. v. U.O.I. & Ors.[Item 1 in court 4 – Writ petition. (C) 558/2012].Bench: Dipak Misra, NV Ramana, Pinaki Chandra Ghose JJ..Check evening updates..Today in court: This Bench did not sit today..Delhi High Court.1. Micromax Informatics Ltd Vs Union of India & Ors. .[Item 47, 48, 50; Court 8- WP (C) 523/2016].Bench- Dr. S Murlidhar J., Vibhu Bakhru J. .A fresh petition. Check evening updates..Today in Court- The Bench issued notice over three petitions filed by Micromax challenging denial of refund claims by Customs Authorities in Delhi..2. Makemytrip (India) Pvt Ltd. Vs Union of India & Ors. .[Item 49, Court 8- W.P.(C) 525/2016].Bench- Dr. S Murlidhar J., Vibhu Bakhru J. .A fresh petition. Check evening updates..Today in Court- The Bench issued notice to the Govt over MakeMyTrip’s plea against arrest of one their senior officials for alleged service tax evasion of Rs. 67.44 crore..You can read the detailed report here. .3.Star India Pvt Ltd. Vs Telecom Regulatory Authority of India.[Item 27, Court 1- W.P.(C) 506/2016].Bench- Chief Justice G Rohini, Jayant Nath J. .A fresh petition. Check evening updates to know more about this case..Today in Court- This matter could not be tracked. Any leads/inputs would be appreciated..Bombay High court.1. Article in Mumbai Mirror 24/08/2010 Rescue Sham v. State of Maharashtra..[Item 5 Court 43 – PIL(Civil)/182/2010].Bench: ACJ, Revati Mohite Dere JJ..Taking suo moto cognizance of an article published in the Mumbai Mirror, the court issued notices to the state government, child welfare committee, Thane and the person in-charge of the children’s home in Shahpur, Thane. Satkarm Balgriha is a home for mentally challenged children who have been living in extremely poor conditions, according to the news report. Five children died aged between 9 and 12 due to malnutrition and starvation. After the affidavit filed by the state confirmed the facts stated in the report, all the children (18) were directed to be relocated and also to be evaluated by a psychologist at the civil hospital..Asha Bajpayee was appointed as Amicus in the case..The division bench had also asked the state whether the Nirbhaya scheme which provides insurance to metally challenged children has become operational..Today in court: The matter was adjourned and will be heard on 3rd March..2. Conscious Citizen Forum v.Union of India & anr..[Item 41 Court 43 – CRPIL/36/2015].Bench: ACJ, Revati Mohite Dere JJ..Today in court: The case was listed on the daily board and did not come up..3. Homeless Collective v. Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai.[Item 4 Court 13 – PIL/54/2013].Bench: A.S.Oka, C.V. Bhadang JJ..Homeless collective is an NGO that filed the PIL highlighting the plight of pavement dwellers. The division bench of A.S. Oka and G.S. Patel had enquired about the number of night shelters in the city and the possibility of alloting space to new shelters by the civic body. Quoting the NULM (National urban livelihood mission) the PIL states that for every one lakh people in the city there should be one night shelter, which would mean a total of 287 shelters for the city ideally..Today in court: The BMC submitted that it would construct 13 night shelters in the city in which around 500 children of homeless people and pavement dwellers will be kept.A total of 33,000 children are to be accomodated in the proposed shelters.The civic body also submitted that 7 shelters have already built..The Court enquired whether the present policy permitted construction of temporary shelters under flyovers. A meeting to be convened by Milind Motiram Bhalerao, assistant commissioner BMC has also been ordered. Gayatri Singh, senior counsel appearing in the case, and the BMC officials will attend the meeting..The case will now be heard on February 18.
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.1. State Of Kerala v. Wilfred J and Ors..[Item 12 in court 1 – IA 6-7 in CA 8550-8551/2014].Bench: Chief Justice TS Thakur, AK Sikri, R Banumathi JJ..A batch of matters pertaining to the construction of Vizhinjam port in Kerala and the environmental impact surrounding the same. While some of the fishermen have challenged the Environmental clearance given to the project, the State government and the Port developers have moved the Supreme Court against the NGT order transferring the case to principle Bench from Southern Bench..The Court had declined interim relief to the petitioners, while posting all related cases, (including appeals by the State government and the Port) for hearing today. .Today in court: This matter did not come up for hearing today..2. MC Mehta v. Union of India & Ors..[Item 14 in court 1– 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) No. 13029/1985].Bench: Chief Justice TS Thakur, AK Sikri, R Banumathi JJ..A batch of petitions relating to pollution in Delhi. Check evening updates..Today in court: This matter will be heard at 2 pm tomorrow after Senior Advocate Harish Salve sought an adjournment today..3. 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..Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal is making his submissions and will resume his arguments..4. Sachchidanand Gupta ”Sachchey” v. State of U.P Thr Chief Secretary and Ors..[Item 3 in court 7 – Writ petition (Civil) 872/2015].Bench: Ranjan Gogoi, Prafulla C Pant JJ.Case pertaining to appointment of Lok Ayukta in Uttar Pradesh. The court had initially appointed retired judge, Virendra Singh to the post. However, the UP government had agreed to defer the oath taking of Singh after a vacation Bench had heard this petition filed by Gupta, alleging that the UP government had misled the Supreme Court by including Virendra Singh J.’s name in list of names for appointment as Lokayukta despite strong resistance from Chief Justice of Allahabad High Court..Today in court: The court witnessed an eventful hearing today as the Bench seemed reluctant to change or vacate its order appointing Virendra Singh as Lok Ayukta. Senior Advocate TR Andhyarujina appeared for the Allahabad High Court and submitted that the Uttar Pradesh government had misled the Supreme Court into believing that Virendra Singh’s name was not objected to by the Chief Justice of the High Court. Advocates Kamini Jaiswal and Prashant Bhushan also submitted the same..The Court, however, said that even if that submission was accepted, the Court is not inclined to vacate its order since the Constitutional functionaries in the State were given adequate time to carry out the order of the court but failed..“Unless there are compelling reasons which shock our conscience, we won’t vacate our order. Assuming we have been misled, give us material to show why Virendra Singh should not be appointed. You will have to satisfy us since we have made the appointment”, remarked Justice Gogoi..The Court said that “if we find Virendra Singh not to be suitable, we will recall that order. But we are not sending the matter back to be decided by the State functionaries.”.The court then reserved its order..5. Kalpana Mehta & Ors. v. U.O.I. & Ors.[Item 1 in court 4 – Writ petition. (C) 558/2012].Bench: Dipak Misra, NV Ramana, Pinaki Chandra Ghose JJ..Check evening updates..Today in court: This Bench did not sit today..Delhi High Court.1. Micromax Informatics Ltd Vs Union of India & Ors. .[Item 47, 48, 50; Court 8- WP (C) 523/2016].Bench- Dr. S Murlidhar J., Vibhu Bakhru J. .A fresh petition. Check evening updates..Today in Court- The Bench issued notice over three petitions filed by Micromax challenging denial of refund claims by Customs Authorities in Delhi..2. Makemytrip (India) Pvt Ltd. Vs Union of India & Ors. .[Item 49, Court 8- W.P.(C) 525/2016].Bench- Dr. S Murlidhar J., Vibhu Bakhru J. .A fresh petition. Check evening updates..Today in Court- The Bench issued notice to the Govt over MakeMyTrip’s plea against arrest of one their senior officials for alleged service tax evasion of Rs. 67.44 crore..You can read the detailed report here. .3.Star India Pvt Ltd. Vs Telecom Regulatory Authority of India.[Item 27, Court 1- W.P.(C) 506/2016].Bench- Chief Justice G Rohini, Jayant Nath J. .A fresh petition. Check evening updates to know more about this case..Today in Court- This matter could not be tracked. Any leads/inputs would be appreciated..Bombay High court.1. Article in Mumbai Mirror 24/08/2010 Rescue Sham v. State of Maharashtra..[Item 5 Court 43 – PIL(Civil)/182/2010].Bench: ACJ, Revati Mohite Dere JJ..Taking suo moto cognizance of an article published in the Mumbai Mirror, the court issued notices to the state government, child welfare committee, Thane and the person in-charge of the children’s home in Shahpur, Thane. Satkarm Balgriha is a home for mentally challenged children who have been living in extremely poor conditions, according to the news report. Five children died aged between 9 and 12 due to malnutrition and starvation. After the affidavit filed by the state confirmed the facts stated in the report, all the children (18) were directed to be relocated and also to be evaluated by a psychologist at the civil hospital..Asha Bajpayee was appointed as Amicus in the case..The division bench had also asked the state whether the Nirbhaya scheme which provides insurance to metally challenged children has become operational..Today in court: The matter was adjourned and will be heard on 3rd March..2. Conscious Citizen Forum v.Union of India & anr..[Item 41 Court 43 – CRPIL/36/2015].Bench: ACJ, Revati Mohite Dere JJ..Today in court: The case was listed on the daily board and did not come up..3. Homeless Collective v. Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai.[Item 4 Court 13 – PIL/54/2013].Bench: A.S.Oka, C.V. Bhadang JJ..Homeless collective is an NGO that filed the PIL highlighting the plight of pavement dwellers. The division bench of A.S. Oka and G.S. Patel had enquired about the number of night shelters in the city and the possibility of alloting space to new shelters by the civic body. Quoting the NULM (National urban livelihood mission) the PIL states that for every one lakh people in the city there should be one night shelter, which would mean a total of 287 shelters for the city ideally..Today in court: The BMC submitted that it would construct 13 night shelters in the city in which around 500 children of homeless people and pavement dwellers will be kept.A total of 33,000 children are to be accomodated in the proposed shelters.The civic body also submitted that 7 shelters have already built..The Court enquired whether the present policy permitted construction of temporary shelters under flyovers. A meeting to be convened by Milind Motiram Bhalerao, assistant commissioner BMC has also been ordered. Gayatri Singh, senior counsel appearing in the case, and the BMC officials will attend the meeting..The case will now be heard on February 18.
