Legopolis

The Delhi High Court on Monday quashed orders issued by the Directorate of Education on a plea filed by the association of private unaided schools as it prevented unaided recognised schools/members from collecting a part of the fees i.e. the annual charges and development fees even beyond the lockdown period, till physical opening of schools. Justice Jayant Nath noted in his order that it cannot be said the school building is completely shut. The building would remain functional for administrative reasons and even, depending upon the facts and circumstances of the case, for conducting online classes etc. There are expenses like rent, taxes, repair and maintenance of building and maintenance of equipment etc. In case, the said repairs and expenses are not done, it is bound to cause damage to the building, infrastructure and functioning of schools. “The private recognised unaided schools are clearly dependent only on the fees collected to cover their salary, establishment and all other

The Delhi High Court Monday disposed of a plea seeking capping of prices at private hospitals for treatment of Covid patients. (Vivek Aggrawal vs UOI and others) The division bench of Chief Justice D.N. Patel and Justice Jyoti Singh has disposed of this petition with a liberty to file an Interim Application in a writ petition no. 3031/2020 pending before the division bench of Justices Vipin Sanghi and Jasmeet Singh with similar prayers. The court said the practice of filing the writ petitions on the similar matter pending before any other bench of the concerned court will bring the multifariousness of the writ petitions. This present petition is filed as a PIL seeking direction regarding capping the price taken by the private hospitals from the patients for their treatment of Covid-19. The petitioner submitted that hospitals are not following Covid protocols. The Directorate General of Health Services had observed that hospitals were admitting mild and moderate cases of Covid-19 whi

The Delhi High Court on Monday asked the Delhi Government and the Department of Health and Family Welfare to treat a plea filed seeking directions to regulate/cap the rate of High Resolution Computerised Tomography (HRCT) Test/Scan in Delhi, specifically for patients with Covid-19 symptoms, as a representation. The division bench of Chief Justice D.N. Patel and Justice Jyoti Singh said the court cannot fix a price for the test. Thus, the authorities concerned have to keep in mind the priority and other factors in accordance with the law, and the government policies applicable to the facts of the case. Advocate Amresh Anand, the petitioner for the Counsel, submitted that this HRCT test is nowadays massively recommended to the general public having symptoms of Covid-19 and during the pendency of this petition, three more states — Karnataka, Bihar and Punjab — have also fixed the price of HRCT test. According to the petition, the government has already fixed the price for the HRCT Tes

By Aakshat Khetarpal The Supreme Court of India heard the Solicitor general today to assess the measures, policy and actions taken by the Central government with respect to the acquiring and administering the COVID19 vaccines. The matter is of the Suo Moto cognizance taken by the Supreme Court by virtue of which the National Task Force was set up. The bench today has restricted itself to only hear the Solicitor General and the court appointed Amicus Curiae on the procurement, distribution and administration of the vaccines, the ground reality and the policy made thereof.  The Solicitor general told the bench that the National task force has been made and a graph report is also ready and it shall be submitted before the bench once the task force reviews the report. The Solicitor General (SG) informs the Apex Court that the entire eligible population of the country would be vaccinated by the end of this year and the same may be expedited if the central government successfully acquires

The Supreme Court on Monday said it was of the view that provisions of Sections 124A (promoting disaffection against State) and 153 (promoting enmity between groups) of the Indian Penal Code “require interpretation particularly on the right of press and free speech”. The bench of Justices D.Y. Chandrachud, L. Nageswara Rao and S. Ravindra Bhat was hearing a sedition case filed against Telugu news channels TV5 News and ABN Andra Jyoti. Issuing six-week notice in this regard, the bench also stayed any coercive action against the news channels by Andhra Pradesh Police. The police had lodged an FIR against the channels under Sections 124A, 153A, 505 r/w 120B of the Indian Penal Code, stating that these channels conspired with Narsapuram MP Raghurama Krishnam Raju and provided “premeditated” and “organised” slots to Raju and gave him a platform to echo his hate speeches against the government and his own party leader, Chief Minister Y.S. Jaganmohan Reddy. It has also been alleged that the

The Delhi High Court bench of Justices Vipin Sanghi and Jasmeet Singh on Monday made it clear that East Delhi MP Gautam Gambhir’s action of distributing Covid medication from his trust, without a proper licence to do so, may have been a clear violation of existing rules. The court also did not like Gambhir’s comment that he will do it again when complaints were filed against him for hoarding medicines for Covid and said that this will go against him if he says it again. The hearing was on a plea with respect to hoarding of drugs by politicians such as Gambhir, Praveen Kumar and Preety Tomar. Regarding MLA Tomar, the court said it was satisfied with the status report filed, but was, again, dissatisfied with the action of Praveen Kumar. Earlier, the Drug Controller had been directed to file a status report in this regard. Advocate Nandita Rao, appearing for the Drug Controller, pointed out to the bench that the “Drug Controller is not familiar with the criminal procedure and they don’t

The Supreme Court on Monday said it was of the view that provisions of Sections 124A (promoting disaffection against State) and 153 (promoting enmity between groups) of the Indian Penal Code “require interpretation particularly on the right of press and free speech”. The bench of Justices D.Y. Chandrachud, L. Nageswara Rao and S. Ravindra Bhat was hearing a sedition case filed against Telugu news channels TV5 News and ABN Andra Jyoti. Issuing six-week notice in this regard, the bench also stayed any coercive action against the news channels by Andhra Pradesh Police. The police had lodged an FIR against the channels under Sections 124A, 153A, 505 r/w 120B of the Indian Penal Code, stating that these channels conspired with Narsapuram MP Raghurama Krishnam Raju and provided “premeditated” and “organised” slots to Raju and gave him a platform to echo his hate speeches against the government and his own party leader, Chief Minister Y.S. Jaganmohan Reddy. It has also been alleged that the

The Delhi High Court bench of Justices Vipin Sanghi and Jasmeet Singh on Monday made it clear that East Delhi MP Gautam Gambhir’s action of distributing Covid medication from his trust, without a proper licence to do so, may have been a clear violation of existing rules. The court also did not like Gambhir’s comment that he will do it again when complaints were filed against him for hoarding medicines for Covid and said that this will go against him if he says it again. The hearing was on a plea with respect to hoarding of drugs by politicians such as Gambhir, Praveen Kumar and Preety Tomar. Regarding MLA Tomar, the court said it was satisfied with the status report filed, but was, again, dissatisfied with the action of Praveen Kumar. Earlier, the Drug Controller had been directed to file a status report in this regard. Advocate Nandita Rao, appearing for the Drug Controller, pointed out to the bench that the “Drug Controller is not familiar with the criminal procedure and they don’t

The Delhi High Court on Monday transferred to another bench, the hearing of a lawsuit filed by Bollywood actor Juhi Chawla against implementation of 5G technology in India stating that until and unless the technology is certified safe, its roll out should not be permitted. The bench of Justice C. Harishankar on Monday recused to hear the matter due to a reason and the matter has been transferred to another bench of Delhi HC. The matter will now be heard on 2nd June. Chawla, along with Veeresh Malik and Teena Vachani filed a case against Science & Engineering Research Board, & organisation, where they strenuously submitted that the people of India are not ‘guinea pigs’ whose health – rather, life – the Government of India can sell at a profit, claiming that 5G technology expose people and animal to RF radiation that is 10 to 100 times than it exists today.  “The essence of the suit – which addresses the dire and palpable risks to the public at large which an indiscriminate an

The Delhi High Court on Monday transferred to another bench, the hearing of a lawsuit filed by Bollywood actor Juhi Chawla against implementation of 5G technology in India stating that until and unless the technology is certified safe, its roll out should not be permitted. The bench of Justice C. Harishankar on Monday recused to hear the matter due to a reason and the matter has been transferred to another bench of Delhi HC. The matter will now be heard on 2nd June. Chawla, along with Veeresh Malik and Teena Vachani filed a case against Science & Engineering Research Board, & organisation, where they strenuously submitted that the people of India are not ‘guinea pigs’ whose health – rather, life – the Government of India can sell at a profit, claiming that 5G technology expose people and animal to RF radiation that is 10 to 100 times than it exists today.  “The essence of the suit – which addresses the dire and palpable risks to the public at large which an indiscriminate an

Justice D.Y. Chandrachud of the Supreme Court made a sarcastic observation on the punitive actions being taken against people complaining of lack of facilities during the Covid-19 pandemic in Uttar Pradesh. In court on Monday, while hearing a suo motu matter related to the Covid 19 situation in the country, Justice Chandrachud quipped enquiring if a sedition case had been lodged against the channel which showed a dead body being dropped into the river from a bridge in Uttar Pradesh. This seems to be pointing a finger to recent incidents where an FIR had been lodged against one person for complaining on social media that there were no medical facilities available in his area. The issue related to the dignified disposal of bodies of the Covid dead raised after Amicus Curiae Meenakshi Arora submitted, “We have seen of late there is no dignity in death. There are many crematoriums which are not working across the country.” Solicitor General Tushar Mehta had countered: “There is a suo mo

The Supreme Court on Monday directed the Central government to procure Covid vaccines for the whole country at a uniform rate. The bench of Justice D.Y. Chandrachud and Justice S. Ravindra Bhat said Article 1(1) of the Constitution ensures that India or Bharat is a union of states. The Central government should act as an agency of the whole of the country to negotiate for the procurement of vaccines. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta said: To vaccinate the entire population of India by the end of this year, the government is making procurement efforts. The Government is talking to various vaccine manufacturing companies in this regard, including Pfizer. After the last sitting, some development has taken place on three fronts. The report regarding the developments will be submitted by the task force, Mehta added. Justice Bhat: We need around Rs 250 crore to vaccinate the whole population. I have no doubt that the government is making efforts. But the policy of double pricing, one price

The Supreme Court on Monday directed the Central government to procure Covid vaccines for the whole country at a uniform rate. The bench of Justice D.Y. Chandrachud and Justice S. Ravindra Bhat said Article 1(1) of the Constitution ensures that India or Bharat is a union of states. The Central government should act as an agency of the whole of the country to negotiate for the procurement of vaccines. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta said: To vaccinate the entire population of India by the end of this year, the government is making procurement efforts. The Government is talking to various vaccine manufacturing companies in this regard, including Pfizer. After the last sitting, some development has taken place on three fronts. The report regarding the developments will be submitted by the task force, Mehta added. Justice Bhat: We need around Rs 250 crore to vaccinate the whole population. I have no doubt that the government is making efforts. But the policy of double pricing, one price

The Calcutta High Court today directed the formation of a three-member committee to help those persons displaced in the post violence in the state to go back to their homes. The committee will comprise nominees from the State Human Rights Commission, National Human Rights Commission and Member Secretary of the West Bengal State Legal Services Authority. This was decided by the five-judge bench of Acting Chief Justice Rajesh Bindal and Justices IP Mukherji, Harish Tandon, Soumen Sen and Subrata Talukdar. The court directed that those who were not being allowed to go back to their homes have to communicate this to the West Bengal Legal Services Authority (WBLSA) on the official email address of the WBLSA. The committee shall then contact the concerned police officer of the locality to ensure that persons displaced by post poll violence in West Bengal are able to return to their houses. The order was passed in a petition alleging that around 200 persons who were displaced due to the vio

Introduction An agreement enforceable by law constitutes a valid contract. In the case of a contract, each party is legally bound between both parties. Under section 2(h) of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 (ICA), the term contract has been defined as an agreement enforceable by law. The term agreement has been defined under section 2(e) […] The post A Detailed Analysis of Provisions Related to Competency to Contract Under the Indian Contract Law appeared first on Law Times Journal .

Justice Rekha Palli of the Delhi High Court on Monday observed the information technology (IT) rules of the Centre, if not stayed, will have to be obeyed by Twitter India and other such social media platforms. The judge allowed three weeks for replies in an appeal filed by Advocate Amit Acharya, seeking action against Twitter and Twitter India for its failure to comply with the Centre’s IT guidelines within the legally tenable framework. This was after the respondents clarified that it had, on May 28, appointed a resident grievance officer. The judge said: “I am inclined to issue notice. If the rules have not been stayed, then they have to comply with the rules.” Advocate Sajan Poovayya for Twitter said: “The rules were not complied when the petition was filed but now we have complied. The resident grievance officer was appointed on May 28 and I’ll file an affidavit with regards to the same.” There was a small interjection by Advocate Ripudaman Bhardwaj, for the petitioner, saying:

West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee today, in a letter to Prime Minister Narendra Modi, requested him to withdraw the order recalling Chief Secretary Alapan Bandyopadhyay to the Centre and said that the state will not be releasing Bandyopadhyay, as directed by the Centre. The Chief Ministeer has said that the order of the Centre recalling the Chief Secretary on the date of his retirement (which is today, while he has been given a three-month extension to oversee the cyclone relief and Covid relief work of the state) was “legally untenable, historically unprecedented and wholly unconstitutional”. Banerjee has been quoted as saying: “I must confess that I have been shocked and stunned by the unilateral order of May 28, sent to us by the Government of India, asking us to release Alapan Bandyopadhyay IAS, Chief Secretary, West Bengal, so that he may join the government of India on May 31, the normal date of his superannuation.” She said the Centre had agreed to the state’s reque

Justice Rekha Palli of the Delhi High Court on Monday observed the information technology (IT) rules of the Centre, if not stayed, will have to be obeyed by Twitter India and other such social media platforms. The judge allowed three weeks for replies in an appeal filed by Advocate Amit Acharya, seeking action against Twitter and Twitter India for its failure to comply with the Centre’s IT guidelines within the legally tenable framework. This was after the respondents clarified that it had, on May 28, appointed a resident grievance officer. The judge said: “I am inclined to issue notice. If the rules have not been stayed, then they have to comply with the rules.” Advocate Sajan Poovayya for Twitter said: “The rules were not complied when the petition was filed but now we have complied. The resident grievance officer was appointed on May 28 and I’ll file an affidavit with regards to the same.” There was a small interjection by Advocate Ripudaman Bhardwaj, for the petitioner, saying:

West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee today, in a letter to Prime Minister Narendra Modi, requested him to withdraw the order recalling Chief Secretary Alapan Bandyopadhyay to the Centre and said that the state will not be releasing Bandyopadhyay, as directed by the Centre. The Chief Ministeer has said that the order of the Centre recalling the Chief Secretary on the date of his retirement (which is today, while he has been given a three-month extension to oversee the cyclone relief and Covid relief work of the state) was “legally untenable, historically unprecedented and wholly unconstitutional”. Banerjee has been quoted as saying: “I must confess that I have been shocked and stunned by the unilateral order of May 28, sent to us by the Government of India, asking us to release Alapan Bandyopadhyay IAS, Chief Secretary, West Bengal, so that he may join the government of India on May 31, the normal date of his superannuation.” She said the Centre had agreed to the state’s reque

The Delhi High Court on Monday dismissed with a cost of Rs 1 lakh, a petition, seeking halt on the ongoing Central Vista construction in the national capital, in view of the Covid-19 pandemic and also claiming that this was not an ‘essential’ service, as declared by the Central government. The division bench of Chief Justice D.N. Patel and Justice Jyoti Singh said that the Central Vista project is of national importance. The Court further said that since workers are staying at the worksite, there would be no spread of novel coronavirus, as all the precautions have been taken up by the Centre and it cannot halt the construction under the DDMA order of April 19. Earlier on May 17, the same bench had reserved its verdict on the petition. Senior Advocate Siddharth Luthra had said: “When the plea was moved, concerns were raised about the health and safety of the workers at the site and of the people in Delhi.” Read Also:   Delhi HC to hear plea seeking priority for vaccination of NRIs

The Delhi High Court will today hear a petition, seeking prioritisation of vaccination for people, including NRIs holding valid visa of foreign countries, who normally reside and work in the respective foreign countries, and also for those students, who opt for foreign education with a valid offer letter from the Universities abroad. A division bench of Chief Justice D.N. Patel and Justice Jyoti Singh will take up the plea, filed by a registered society, incorporated for the welfare of migrants and also for providing legal services to poor and destitute migrants. The plea stated that most of the foreign countries are accepting only people who are vaccinated; and unless and until the migrant community, including NRIs holding valid visa of foreign countries, are not put in priority list of vaccination, they would not be in a position to return back and thereby, have high chances of losing their jobs. The plea further stated that Indian students enrolled in foreign universities have to

The Delhi High Court on Monday dismissed the plea seeking a stop to the Central Vista construction in the national capital in view of the current Covid pandemic situation. The bench of Chief Justice D.N. Patel and Justice Jyoti Singh passed the order, and said that petition is not a genuine public interest litigation petition but a motivated one and proceeded to impose costs of Rs. 1 lakh on the petitioners. The petition was filed in the Delhi High Court by Anya Malhotra and Sohail Hashmi through Advocates Gautam Khazanchi and Pradyuman Kaistha. It sought interim relief of halt on work of the Project, in light of the Covid-19 pandemic that has ravaged the country. The Union of India has called it an abuse of the process of law and another attempt to stall the project and sought its dismissal with cost. Representing petitioner, Senior Advocate Siddharth Luthra had submitted that when the plea was moved, concerns were raised about the health and safety of the workers at the site and

The Delhi High Court will today pronounce the verdict on the plea seeking a stop to the Central Vista construction, considering the current Covid pandemic situation and also claiming that this was not an “essential” service as declared by the Central government. The bench of Chief Justice D.N. Patel and Justice Jyoti Singh had reserved the order on May 17 after hearing both the sides. The petition was filed in the Delhi High Court by Anya Malhotra and Sohail Hashmi through Advocates Gautam Khazanchi and Pradyuman Kaistha. It sought interim relief of halt on work of the Project, in light of the Covid-19 pandemic that has ravaged the country. The Union of India has called it an abuse of the process of law and another attempt to stall the project and sought its dismissal with cost. Representing petitioner, Senior Advocate Siddharth Luthra had submitted that when the plea was moved, concerns were raised about the health and safety of the workers at the site and of the people in Delhi.

A petition has been filed before the Hon’ble Supreme Court to cancel ICSE, CBSE 12th boards. This public interest litigation has been filed by Advocate Mamta Sharma who sought directions for nullifying the Notification dated 14th,16th, and 19th of  April this year issued by the Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE) and Council for the […] The post Public Interest Litigation Before Supreme Court To Cancel 12th Boards appeared first on Law Times Journal .

Earlier in January 2021, the Central Vista redevelopment project which acquired judicial clearance by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in a majority judgment proposes to replace the existing parliament structure with three times bigger parliament and to modify the use of 86.1 acres of land in the national capital.  However, with the upsurge in Covid-19 cases […] The post Delhi HC To Pronounce Verdict On Monday Regarding PIL Seeking Suspension of Construction Activities Related to Central Vista Project appeared first on Law Times Journal .

The Youth Bar Association has approached the Hon’ble apex court to seek cancellation of class 12th board examinations for ICSE and CBSE boards. Advocate Mamta Sharma, on behalf of 521 students has filed the Public Interest Litigation. The plea seeks the intervention of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the notifications issued on 14th, 16th, and […] The post Youth Bar Association files plea in the Supreme Court for the cancellation of exams appeared first on Law Times Journal .

Dear brother and sister Judges, my friends from the Bar, respected members of the audience and members of Soli’s family, It is difficult to accept that it has already been a month since we have lost one of the greatest legal minds, an advocate for the rule of law and a champion of constitutional rights. It would be a herculean task to describe in few words the achievements of an eminent jurist over his long and illustrious career. Soli Sorabjee started his practice before the Bombay High Court in 1953, when the freedom movement was still fresh in the nation’s mind. No doubt, the freedom movement and the vision of the framers of the Constitution influenced him greatly. He was a man with an unflinching faith in the Constitutional ideals, particularly those relating to the freedom of speech and human rights. He was a defender of civil liberties during the tough Emergency era. He played a crucial role in some of the most iconic cases which have defined the legal landscape of this great na

Dear brother and sister Judges, my friends from the Bar, respected members of the audience and members of Soli’s family, It is difficult to accept that it has already been a month since we have lost one of the greatest legal minds, an advocate for the rule of law and a champion of constitutional rights. It would be a herculean task to describe in few words the achievements of an eminent jurist over his long and illustrious career. Soli Sorabjee started his practice before the Bombay High Court in 1953, when the freedom movement was still fresh in the nation’s mind. No doubt, the freedom movement and the vision of the framers of the Constitution influenced him greatly. He was a man with an unflinching faith in the Constitutional ideals, particularly those relating to the freedom of speech and human rights. He was a defender of civil liberties during the tough Emergency era. He played a crucial role in some of the most iconic cases which have defined the legal landscape of this great na

A petition has been filed in the Hon’ble Madras High Court by a transgender rights activist, Grace Banu Ganeshan, seeking the order that directs the State Government to extend the cash benefits to transgenders that the State has already extended to ration card carry holders.  The petitioner argued before the division judge bench compromising of […] The post The state should come to the aid of the transgenders who require immediate relief: Madras HC appeared first on Law Times Journal .

Introduction The Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act, 1956 was enacted in the seventh year of independence on 21 December 1956. The Act lays down the provisions regarding the adoption and maintenance of Hindu children and Hindu parents. The act was a part of the Hindu code bills along with legislation like the Hindu Marriage Act, […] The post Obligation to Maintain Children and Parents under Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act, 1956 appeared first on Law Times Journal .

Meaning of AdoptionAdoption is a process whereby a person assumes the parenting of another, usually a child, from that person’s biological or legal parent or parents. In the Act adoption is not described but in a Hindu law it is derived from uncodified Hindu laws of Dharamsastra, specifically Manusmriti. Adoption has been described in Manusmriti as ‘taking someone else’s […] The post Who can adopt a Child Under Hindu Adoption And maintenance Act, 1956 appeared first on Law Times Journal .

The Supreme Court has elucidated the law under Section 304-B, IPC, in order to curb the social evil of dowry and the deaths related to it. The bench of Chief Justice N.V. Ramana and Justice Aniruddha Bose on Friday elucidated the Section 304-B, IPC read with Section 113-B, Evidence Act. According to the elucidated law: i. Section 304-B, IPC must be interpreted keeping in mind the legislative intent to curb the social evil of bride burning and dowry demand. ii. The prosecution must at first establish the existence of the necessary ingredients for constituting an offence under Section 304-B, IPC. Once these ingredients are satisfied, the rebuttable presumption of causality, provided under Section 113-B, Evidence Act operates against the accused. iii. The phrase “soon before” as appearing in Section 304-B, IPC cannot be construed to mean ‘immediately before’. The prosecution must establish existence of “proximate and live link” between the dowry death and cruelty or harassment for dow