Legal Services India - Law Articles is a Treasure House of Legal Knowledge and information, the law resources is an ever growing database of authentic legal information.

» Home
Friday, September 20, 2024

Biggest Betrayal Of Constitution And Justice In India

Posted in: Civil Laws
Tue, Jul 30, 24, 15:26, 2 Months ago
star star star star star
0 out of 5 with 0 ratings
comments: 0 - hits: 14440
It is definitely as clear as broad day sunlight that which State needs more High Court Benches and which State does not need even a single High Court Bench

"However good the Constitution may be, if those who are implementing it are not good it will prove to be bad". Therefore, providing law and procedure for its implementation may not result as desired if the persons who are implementing the same have mala fide intention or do not respect the law and its procedure."-- Dr BR Ambedkar

It is definitely as clear as broad day sunlight that which State needs more High Court Benches and which State does not need even a single High Court Bench! But the most unpalatable truth is that neither any Chief Justice of India nor any Prime Minister of India till date has ever bothered to take any initiative in this regard in last nearly 80 years of independence to do anything substantial to correct the most biggest Himalayan blunder committed in 1948 by creating only one High Court Bench for the most populated State of India with maximum number of pending cases that is Uttar Pradesh at Lucknow so near to Allahabad and nowhere else and worst of all attached litigants of 30 districts of West UP with not even Lucknow which falls 230 km earlier but right uptill Allahabad to seek justice which in itself is the biggest betrayal of Constitution in India and justice as litigants of West UP have to travel whole night and half day averaging 700 to 800 km. It is nothing but plain stupidity and sheer absurdity of the highest order that West UP owing for majority of the cases of UP has not even a single Bench and Eastern UP alone has both High Court and a single Bench so near to each other!

By all accounts, UP must be treated as "primus inter pares" which means first among equals! But the most unfortunate part is that UP, lawless Bihar and Rajasthan are placed in the last row by depriving them from having multiple High Court Benches most chillingly with West UP and Bihar having none and PM and CJI watching like a helpless, hapless and hopeless spectator! I am astounded, ashamed, appalled and aghast at how much temerity Centre has demonstrated in bulldozing the most legitimate demand for a High Court Bench in West UP, Purvanchal, Bundelkhand and lawless Bihar!

It is very rightly pointed out by eminent and senior lawyer and so also former General Secretary of Meerut Bar – Mr Tarun Dhaka in his enlightening legal article titled "How Can It Happen That UP Has Least High Court Benches In India And West UP Has None" published most prominently in June 2015 issue of the prestigious All India Reporter (AIR) Law Journal explaining in detail which is a "Must Read Article" that how most openly Uttar Pradesh has been so wrongly discriminated in allotment of High Court Benches and worst of all how West UP has been deprived from having even a single High Court Bench even though it owes for majority of the pending cases of Uttar Pradesh as acknowledged by Justice Jaswant Singh Commission appointed nearly 50 years ago by Centre itself headed by former Supreme Court Judge due to which it recommended a permanent main Bench for West UP!

It is absolutely mind blowing to see how the most populated State of India with maximum number of pending cases has been so chillingly, cunningly and callously discriminated against without any remorse when it comes to High Court Benches where there is just one at Lucknow so close to Allahabad where it was just not needed at all created way back in 1948 and in West UP, Purvanchal and Bundelkhand none just like in lawless Bihar where there is none! There has been a complete non-application of mind when it comes to the creation of High Court Benches in different regions and different States!

Coincidentally we see that incumbent PM Mr Narendra Modi is MP from Varanasi in UP and incumbent CJI Hon'ble Dr Dhananjaya Yashwant Chandrachud whose home State is Maharashtra which has maximum number of High Court Benches was Chief Justice of Allahabad High Court for nearly 3 years as he himself most proudly concedes. It was in his tenure as Chief Justice of Allahabad High Court that lawyers of 22 districts of West UP under one banner went on strike for 6 months demanding High Court Bench just like it was done in 2001 and still nothing was done to resolve the deadlock! As CJI Hon'ble Dr DY Chandrachud is on verge of completing two years in CJI post on November 10, 2024 when he will retire finally, he must do something on it which is the biggest and blackest stain on his otherwise unblemished track record which even his worst critics admire openly!

In this regard, I must say that it was most enlightening to read the legal article titled "Why CJI Never Dares To Speak Up On High Court Bench In West UP? by eminent, senior and distinguished lawyer of Meerut Bar – Mr Parvez Alam published in prestigious web portal "Legal Services India" dated 9 February 2023 and his many other legal articles on "High Court Bench in West UP" has also been published in 'The Daily Guardian' newspaper like Neither High Court Nor Even A Bench For Western UP" updated on November 29, 2022 and so also "Centre Or Apex Court Must Order Bench In West UP" updated on December 9, 2022 underscoring how desperately UP needs more High Court Benches and so also West UP! It is most saddening to note that UP has given maximum PM to India since independence still most unfortunately has just one High Court Bench which cannot be justified under any circumstances! It is definitely most pathetic and is most disheartening to see as it is the "biggest betrayal of Constitution and justice" with no one wanting to catch the bull by the horns!

Let me go first and foremost to the root of the matter by asking few most elementary questions. Which person in his/her right senses or any political party believing in what the Constitution stands for about the very concept of equality as enshrined in Article 14 of the Constitution ever try to justify the denial of even a single High Court Bench to West UP knowing it fully well that it is West UP which owes for more than half of the total pending cases of Uttar Pradesh (as acknowledged even by Justice Jaswant Singh Commission appointed by Centre itself) which is the most populated State of India with maximum number of pending cases among all the States in India and still has been mercilessly deprived from having even a single High Court Bench?

Why only Eastern UP has been equipped with both High Court at Allahabad and a single High Court Bench in Lucknow so close to Allahabad and nowhere else and worst of all attached litigants of West UP with not even Lucknow but right uptill Allahabad to seek justice which in itself is the biggest injustice? Denial of even a single High Court Bench to West UP has well shred the modicum of civility that remains in Indian politics knowing fully well that West UP owes for majority of cases of UP for whom even Justice Jaswant Singh Commission appointed by Centre itself recommended permanent High Court Bench in West UP yet not created but for States like Maharashtra which already had multiple High Court Benches at Nagpur and Panaji we saw how one more was created at Aurangabad in Maharashtra even though it is Maharashtra which tops the State List Ranking in Justice Index and UP and lawless Bihar figures very lower down and still Centre does not favour more High Court Benches in UP and even a single in West UP and Bihar! How long will affordable justice at doorsteps remain a pipe dream for more than 10 crores people of West UP?

What makes my blood boil the most is that Centre since last 78 years has treated UP, lawless Bihar and Rajasthan in most ruthless manner by giving them either one Bench or not even a single like Bihar which is most deplorable! It is truly most incomprehensible that why Centre took no time in 2014 to approve both High Court and Capital for Telangana with just 3 crore people but not a single High Court Bench for West UP with more than 10 crores people even ten years later in 2024! Now it is being reported in media that Centre is contemplating to divide West Bengal further into North and South Bengal which already has multiple High Court Benches thus creating more High Courts for it but again not a single Bench for West UP! How can Centre discriminate so ruthlessly with impunity and yet our Supreme Court most shockingly never says a word on it! This must change now! The earlier, the better!

It is definitely most striking, shocking and saddening to see that even after more than 77 years of independence we still see that no party ruling in Centre has ever cared for the endless woes of the litigants of West UP which they have been facing due to the most despicable, dastardly and derisive stand of Centre to not allow even a single High Court Bench in whole of West UP or even in whole of UP even though former Mumbai Commissioner of Police and former Union Cabinet Minister in PM Narendra Modi's regime Dr Satyapal Singh very strongly pitched his voice right inside Parliament a few years back in 2016 in support of two High Court Benches for West UP at Meerut and Agra and in addition also demanded High Court Bench in Varanasi, Gorakhpur and Jhansi!

As if this was not enough, former PM late Mr Atal Bihari Vajpayee himself demanded High Court Bench for West UP at Meerut in 1986 as Opposition Leader in Parliament and still till now with more than half of 2024 having expired and August about to begin we see no High Court Bench set up anywhere not just in West UP but in whole of UP except the one at Lucknow created way back in 1948 so near to Allahabad where High Court is located where it was just not needed at all! Centre's firm determination to help the "poorest of the poor" litigants can come to fruition only by the creation of more High Court Bench in needy regions like West UP, Purvanchal and Bundelkhand where not a single Bench created in last nearly 80 years!

It was on auspicious November 26, 1949 that Constitution was prepared by eminent jurists and experts under Chairmanship of Dr BR Ambedkar who is the key architect to ensure equality, liberty, justice and secularism without any discrimination on any ground whatsoever! Why Centre in last nearly 80 years has bulldozed what Dr BR Ambedkar so fervently pitched for in granting separate Statehood for Western, Central and Eastern UP yet we see not even a single High Court Bench being created in Western or Central part what to talk about High Court for West UP which owes for majority of the cases of UP! At this juncture, it would be material to note that justice and truth can be ensured only if there is a level playing field.

What we see in case of distribution of High Court Benches in different States most unequally and most disgracefully is by Centre giving few elite States like Maharashtra, Assam, Karnataka, West Bengal and Madhya Pradesh multiple High Court Benches leaving out big States like UP, Rajasthan and Bihar to suffer most unjustly with just one or no Bench which makes a complete mockery of the very concept of justice, truth and equality as enshrined in Constitution and is definitely the biggest disrespect to it and many like me term it as "murder of Constitution"!

Why Centre keeps mocking at UP knowing fully well that it is UP which tops the States list in having maximum number of pending cases and has maximum population and here too it is West UP which owes for more than half of the total pending cases of UP and has more population than most of the States in India including Karnataka, Madhya Pradesh, West Bengal, Assam among others who have multiple High Court Benches apart from High Court but West UP has ruthlessly been deprived from having even a single High Court Bench ?

Why is it ignored that even legal giants like Ram Jethmalani, Soli J Sorabjee, Kapil Sibal etc have time and again reiterated the dire need for setting up a high court bench in West UP? Why is it ignored that Soli J Sorabjee as Attorney General had said in 2001 that, "Centre can create a High Court Bench in West UP without any recommendation from the State Government or the Chief Justice." Why is it ignored that even former Supreme Court Bar Association President BN Krishnamani had said that, "Only by the creation of a high court bench in West UP will the people living there get real and effective justice.

It should not be denied to them rather should be given at the earliest." Why is it conveniently ignored that incumbent President of Supreme Court Bar Association Kapil Sibal had recommended for High Court Bench in West UP at Meerut when he was Union Law Minister in UPA regime? Why is it ignored that former UP CM Sampoornanand recommended a High Court Bench for West UP in 1955 at Meerut but Centre overruled him! The incumbent UP CM Mr Yogi Adityananth himself more than 25 years ago demanded High Court Bench in Parliament for Gorakhpur and in 2015 even presented a Private Member Bill in Parliament for the same with tears in eyes!

The former UP CM Ms Mayawati recommended partition of UP into few parts in 1995 with West UP to be created as a separate State to be named "Harit Pradesh" and she still affirms by it! But on ground we see not even a single High Court Bench approved even though incumbent CM Mr Yogi Adityanath recommended for a High Court Bench in West UP to Allahabad High Court in January 2024 only to be withdrawn the very next day for some undisclosed reasons! These are all bone chilling facts and they cannot be just swept beneath the carpet!

Let me put it this way: Why is Centre mutilating Article 14 of Constitution by denying West UP even a single Bench and equipping Eastern UP alone with both High Court and a Bench? Why Maharashtra tops in latest Justice Index Ranking States list and still has maximum Benches and UP even though figuring in bottom and owing for maximum cases still one Bench only? Why West UP owing for more than half of the total pending cases has no Bench? This is nothing but sheer subversion of Constitution itself and what it stands for!

What is worst is that even after 77 years we hardly notice any big change in Bench distribution and the 230th Report of Law Commission of India which recommended creation of more High Court Benches in States is still gathering dust after more than 14 years! Why even Apex Court not once in last 77 years has dared to take suo motu cognizance of it under Article 142 of Constitution is truly incomprehensible? Why not one Bench created in last 77 years in Uttar Pradesh which owes for maximum pending cases among all States and West UP owes for more than half of them yet no Bench?

The billion dollar question is: Why lawless Bihar has no High Court Bench? What is the point in denying West UP even a single Bench when it owes for more than half of the total pending cases of UP and High Court at Allahabad is so far about 700 km on average for which Justice Jaswant Singh Commission also recommended strongly a Bench? This article aims to really explore dispassionately why such blatant, brazen and blind disrespect of Constitution has been allowed to fester, flourish and linger inordinately for such a long time! I must ventilate my deepest grievances on it.

I really just can't fathom one single cogent reason as to why Eastern UP which already had High Court at Allahabad since more than 250 years was given High Court Bench also so close to Allahabad at Lucknow just about 230 km away way back in July 1948 and worst of all what I find most unfathomable is that we saw how all other regions including West UP and hilly areas of undivided Uttar Pradesh were deprived of even a single High Court Bench right since 1947 due to which litigants of hilly areas had to travel thousands of kilometers like a slave all the way to Allahabad not even Lucknow to seek justice which is more than 230 km away from Lucknow due to which litigants of West UP have to travel about 700 to 750 km on an average which means whole night and half day spent on just travelling alone and even in 2024 the position of West UP is no different and only hilly areas have got justice finally with people agitating and Centre ultimately granting it separate Statehood in November 2000 and thus it got High Court itself but the 10 crore people of West UP are still empty handed with Centre not allowing even a single High Court Bench to come up in any of the districts of West UP! If Lucknow is capital of Uttar Pradesh then Bhopal is capital of Madhya Pradesh but it has neither High Court which is at Jabalpur nor Bench which are at Indore and Gwalior and so also we see in many other States like Assam where capital is Dispur but it has neither High Court which is at Guwahati nor even a Bench!

PM Shri Narendra Modi is cent percent right that appeasement is the biggest hurdle for development and country's growth. I hold PM in highest esteem and I really admire his government approving huge amount for Bihar which is so backward but I would humbly submit that what rankles, ruffles and ruptures my peace of mind most is: Whom is Centre appeasing by denying West UP even a single High Court for nearly 80 years since independence even though Justice Jaswant Singh Commission recommended maximum three High Court Benches for Uttar Pradesh yet not one has been created even after completion of 50 years of its most historic recommendations and a single Bench for lawless Bihar which has none with 15 crores population and States like Karnataka with just 6 crores people have multiple High Court Benches?

I have just no inkling as to why West UP is facing most brutal, brazen, baseless and blind discrimination from Centre by denying it even a single Bench even though it contributes more than 75 percent of State revenue and owes for more than half of the total pending cases of UP which is most despicable, dangerous and dastardly act being perpetrated most openly and most irrationally trampling what Constitution stands for as enshrined in Article 14 which cannot be ever justified under any circumstances! Bihar at least still has High Court but West UP does not have even a single High Court Bench inspite of being so deserving to be given the same!

The heart of the matter is: Centre itself has turned out to be the biggest stumbling block in the creation of a High Court Bench in West UP and other needy regions. I am always left scratching my head as to why Centre is dilly-dallying this key issue since last 77 years when former CJI Mr Ranjan Gogoi too had ruled as CJI while listening to a PIL filed by KR Chitra who is a woman lawyer through an NGO titled "Fighting For Human Rights" and who leaded the legal battle for High Court Bench for West UP in Supreme Court but the then CJI Mr Ranjan Gogoi in November 2018 dismissed the petition while appreciating the compelling grounds that she listed apart from distance factor for a High Court Bench in West UP and said that it was not for Supreme Court but for Centre to decide! Why since last 77 years Centre has never allowed the dice to be loaded in favour of West UP by approving a Bench and why most discriminatingly it is only Eastern UP which has been allowed to hold the sway over both High Court and a single Bench without any compelling ground whatsoever? This is precisely my point!

In the most blatant act of discrimination, partiality and cheating perpetrated openly upon by Centre most chillingly by approving one more High Court Bench for a peaceful State like Maharashtra at Aurangabad as recommended even though Maharashtra with much less pending cases already had multiple High Court Benches at Nagpur and Panaji and so also for West Bengal at Jalpaiguri for just 6 districts as recommended by Justice Jaswant Singh Commission headed by former Supreme Court Judge even though it had a Bench at Port Blair for just 3 lakh people and so also for Madurai at Tamil Nadu as recommended but not a single for UP even though it recommended maximum three for UP including one for West UP! Since May 1981 till July 2024, the lawyers of West UP have been going on strike every Saturday apart from six months strike in 2001 and 2014 and one month hunger strike in 1978 and many more such similar strikes in protest like on every Wednesday which was discontinued so that litigants don't suffer endlessly against this worst discrimination that was perpetrated upon most brutally by Centre and repeatedly made pleas for creating a Bench in any of the districts of West UP but all pleas fell on deaf ears!

When Centre can most pompously spend billions of rupees to reduce the time limit in travelling from Meerut to Delhi which is just about 70 kms then why can't it simply just create a High Court Bench in any of the 30 districts of West UP so that the litigants who suffer the most endlessly by being made to travel whole night and half day averaging 700 to 750 km all the way not even till Lucknow but right uptill Allahabad and after most tiring journey then rush to High Court to submit important details including photograph and then start searching for hotel which many times are not available or are available at exorbitant rates but Centre most shockingly has done just nothing to address it which I find totally incomprehensible and term it as "A theatre of the absurd"! Centre must act now and provide most durable solution by approving High Court Bench not just in West UP but also in other needy regions of UP like Bundelkhand and Purvanchal! It definitely now brooks no more delay anymore!

What sense does it make that West UP has been denied a Bench since last 77 years due to which litigants have to travel whole night and half day till Allahabad to seek justice which in itself is the biggest injustice and equipping only Eastern UP which already had High Court with Bench also created 75 years ago at Lucknow so near to Allahabad and then attached West UP not even with Lucknow which falls 230 km earlier but right uptill Allahabad most despotically? Why more than half of the pending cases are from West UP for whom even Justice Jaswant Singh Commission headed by former Supreme Court Judge appointed by Centre itself strongly recommended High Court Bench in West UP at Agra and still no Bench here but for other States like Maharashtra which already had multiple High Court Benches one more was approved at Aurangabad just like at Jalpaiguri in West Bengal even though it is UP which tops the States list in having maximum number of pending cases? What rubbish!

As if this was not enough, Centre most disgracefully yet again approved two High Court Benches for Karnataka with a population of just 6 crores at Dharwad and Gulbarga respectively for just 4 and 8 districts only but for West UP with a population of more than 10 crores and 30 districts with 22 districts coming under one banner yet we see Centre not approving even a single High Court Bench and keeps dishing out one lame excuse or the other to justify denial of even a single High Court Bench to West UP which cannot be ever justified! To top it all, we find that even the Apex Court has failed to take suo motu cognizance of this open blatant fraud striking at the very root of the concept of "justice at doorsteps" and "equality" as envisaged in Article 14 of the Constitution! More than anything else, what pinches the people of West UP most is that Lucknow which is so close to Allahabad can have a High Court Bench since 1948 for just 12 districts but West UP with 30 districts even as August 2024 is about to start is still not deemed fit by Centre for a Bench!

The billion dollar question is: When will Centre bring the curtains down on the most pressing issue of setting up a High Court Bench in West UP which has been hanging fire for a mind boggling time of more than 77 years? When will Centre go full throttle in ensuring that the creation of a High Court Bench in West UP is done now without any more dilly-dallying on one pretext or the other? On a broader plane, what must weigh maximum in Centre's scheme of things is its commitment to ensure that the litigants of West UP gets justice at doorsteps which is its Constitutional obligation also which is possible only by the creation of a High Court Bench in any of the district of West UP at the earliest!

It is high time and Centre must now implement the 230th Report of the Law Commission of India which about 15 years ago headed by its Chairman and former Supreme Court Judge and so also a very eminent jurist late Dr AR Lakshmanan who strongly recommended creation of more High Court Benches in States! The unvarnished truth is: It is the primary responsibility of Centre to ensure that more High Court Benches are created in West UP, Bihar and Rajasthan! What leaves me scratching my head in wonder is that no PM has ever dared to mend the biggest injustice perpetrated on creation of High Court Benches in West UP, Bihar, Purvanchal and Bundelkhand where there is not even a single High Court Bench by thinking out-of-the-box and taking bold initiatives in this regard!

It must definitely be asked: Why should most peaceful States have multiple High Court Benches like Karnataka, Maharashtra among others and West UP and Bihar not have even a single High Court Bench? I very strongly feel that Centre should definitely disband all the High Court Benches in India without wasting any more time if West UP and Bihar cannot be given even a single High Court Bench as they deserve the most yet are deprived most blindly, brutally and baselessly and I have just no hesitation whatsoever to say that denial of even a single High Court Bench to West UP and Bihar is nothing but "ghastly murder of Constitution" and "biggest betrayal of Constitution and justice"! There can be definitely just no denying or disputing it!

Sanjeev Sirohi, Advocate,
s/o Col (Retd) BPS Sirohi, A 82, Defence Enclave,
Sardhana Road, Kankerkhera, Meerut - 250001, Uttar Pradesh

Comments

There are no comments for this article.
Only authorized users can leave comments. Please sign in first, or register a free account.
Share
Sponsor
About Author
Sanjeev Sirohi Advocate
Member since Apr 20, 2018
Location: Meerut, UP
Following
User not following anyone yet.
You might also like
Present space law framework in the country. Space has heightened the curiosity of mankind for centuries. Due to the advancement in technology, there is fierce competition amongst nations for the next space war.
The scope of Section 151 CPC has been explained by the Supreme Court in the case K.K. Velusamy v. N. Palanisamy
Co-operative Societies are governed by the Central Co-operative Societies Act 1912, where there is no State Act. In West Bengal they were governed by the West Bengal Co-operative Societies Act
Registration enables an NGO to be a transparent in its operations to the Government, Donors, to its members and to its urgent community.
The ingredients of Section 18 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 are
Drafting of legal Agreements and Deeds in India
ST Land rules in India,West Bengal
The paper will discuss about the provisions related to liquidated damages. How the law has evolved. Difference between the provisions of England and India.
A privilege may not be a right, but, under the constitution of the country, I do not gather that any broad distinction is drawn between the rights and the privileges that were enjoyed and that were taken away.
It is most hurting to see that in India, the soldiers who hail from Jammu and Kashmir and who join forces either in Army or in CRPF or in BSF or in police or in any other forces against the will of majority
Pukhraj v/s State of Uttarakhand warned high caste priests very strongly against refusing to perform religious ceremonies on behalf of lower caste pilgrims. It took a very stern view of the still existing practice of exclusion of the SC/ST community in Haridwar.
This article aims to define delay in civil suits. It finds the general as well as specific causes leading to pendency of civil suits and over-burdening of courts. This articles suggests some solutions which are pragmatic as well as effective to reduce the burden of the courts and speed up the civil judicial process.
This article deals with importance, needs, highlights and provisions of the Surrogacy Bill 2016, which is passed by the lok sabha on 19th December 2018 .
Cross Examination In Case of Injunction Suits, Injunctions are governed by Sections 37, 38, 39 to Section 42 of Specific Relief Act.
Satishchandra Ratanlal Shah v Gujarat inability of a person to return the loan amount cannot give rise to a criminal prosecution for cheating unless fraudulent or dishonest intention is shown right at the beginning of the transaction..
Dr.Ashok Khemka V/s Haryana upheld the integrity of eminent IAS officer because of his upright and impeccable credentials has emerged as an eyesore for politicians of all hues but also very rightly expunged Haryana Chief Minister ML Khattar adverse remarks in his Personal Appraisal Report
State of Rajasthan and others v. Mukesh Sharma has upheld the constitutional validity of Rule 8(2)(i) of the Rajasthan Prisons (Shortening of Sentences) Rules, 2006.
Gurmit Singh Bhatia Vs Kiran Kant Robinson the Supreme Court reiterated that, in a suit, the plaintiff is the dominus litis and cannot be forced to add parties against whom he does not want to fight unless there is a compulsion of the rule of law.
explicitly in a latest landmark ruling prohibited the use of loudspeakers in the territory without prior permission from the authorities.
The Commissioner of Police v/s Devender Anand held that filing of criminal complaint for settling a dispute of civil nature is abuse of process of law.
Rajasthan Vs Shiv Dayal High Court cannot dismiss a second appeal merely on the ground that there is a concurrent finding of two Courts (whether of dismissal or decreeing of the suit), and thus such finding becomes unassailable.
Complete Guide to Pleadings in India, get your Written statement and Plaint Drafted by highly qualified lawyers at reasonable rate.
Sushil Chandra Srivastava vs UP imposed absolute prohibition on use of DJs in the state and asked the state government to issue a toll-free number, dedicated to registering complaints against illegal use of loudspeakers. It will help control noise pollution to a very large extent if implemented in totality.
Rajasthan v/s Shri Ramesh Chandra Mundra that institutional independence, financial autonomy is integral to independence of judiciary. directing the Rajasthan Government to reconsider the two decade old proposal of the then Chief Justice of Rajasthan High Court to upgrade 16 posts of its Private Secretaries as Senior Private Secretaries
The Indian Contract act, 1872 necessities significant consideration in a few of its areas. One such area of the Indian Contract act of 1872 is where if any person finds a lost good belonging to others and takes them into his custody acts as the bailee to the owner of the good.
Government has notified 63 provisions of the Motor Vehicles Amendment Act 2019 including the ones dealing with enhanced penalties
Jose Paulo Coutinho vs. Maria Luiza Valentina Pereira no attempt has been made yet to frame a Uniform Civil Code applicable to all citizens of the country despite exhortations by it. Whether succession to the property of a Goan situated outside Goa in India will be governed by the Portuguese Civil Code, 1867
In a major legal setback to Pakistan, the High Court of England and Wales rejecting rightly Pakistan's frivolous claims and ruling explicitly that the VII Nizam of Hyderabad's descendants and India can collect 35 million pounds from Londons National Westminster Bank.
Power of Attorney and the Specific Relief Act, 1963
air pollution in Delhi and even adjoining regions like several districts of West UP are crossing all limits and this year even in districts adjoining Delhi like Meerut where air pollution was never felt so much as is now being felt.
Dr Syed Afzal (Dead) v/sRubina Syed Faizuddin that the Civil Courts while considering the application seeking interim mandatory injunction in long pending cases, should grant opportunity of hearing to the opposite side, interim mandatory injunctions can be granted after granting opportunity of hearing to the opposite side.
students of Banaras Hindu University's (BHU's) Sanskrit Vedvigyan Sankay (SVDVS) went on strike demanding the cancellation of the appointment of Assistant Professor Feroze Khan and transfer him to another faculty.
Odisha Development Corporation Ltd Vs. M/s Anupam Traders & Anr. the time tested maxim actus curiae neminem gravabit which in simple and straight language means that, No party should suffer due to the act of Court.
M/S Daffodills Pharmaceuticals Ltd v/s. State of U.P that no one can be inflicted with an adverse order, without being afforded a minimum opportunity of hearing. In other words, the Apex Court reiterated the supreme importance of the legal maxim and latin phrase titled Audi alteram partem
Ram Murti Yadav v/s State of Uttar Pradesh the standard or yardstick for judging the conduct of the judicial officer has necessarily to be strict, that the public has a right to demand virtually irreproachable conduct from anyone performing a judicial function.
Judicial Officers Being Made Scapegoats And Penalized By Inconvenient Transfers And Otherwise: SC
Desh Raj v/s Balkishan that the mandatory time-line for filing written statement is not applicable to non-commercial suits. In non-commercial suits, the time-line for written statement is directory and not mandatory, the courts have the discretion to condone delay in filing of written statement in non-commercial suits.
M/S Granules India Ltd. Vs UOI State, as a litigant, cannot behave as a private litigant, and it has solemn and constitutional duty to assist the court in dispensation of justice.
To exercise one's own fundamental right to protest peacefully does not give anyone the unfettered right to block road under any circumstances thereby causing maximum inconvenience to others.
Today, you have numerous traffic laws as well as cases of traffic violations. People know about safe driving yet they end up defying the safety guidelines. It could be anything like driving while talking on the phone, hit and run incidents, or driving under the influence of alcohol.
The legal processes are uncertain. Also, there are times when justice gets denied, and the legal outcomes get delayed. Hence, nobody wants to see themselves or their loved one end up in jail.
Arun Kumar Gupta v/s Jharkhand that judicial officer's integrity must be of a higher order and even a single aberration is not permitted. The law pertaining to the vital subject of compulsory retirement of judicial officers have thus been summed up in this noteworthy judgment.
Online Contracts or Digital Agreements are contracts created and signed over the internet. Also known as e-contracts or electronic contracts, these contracts are a more convenient and faster way of creating and signing contracts for individuals, institutions and corporate.
Re: Problems And Miseries Of Migrant Labourers has asked Maharashtra to be more vigilant and make concerted effort in identifying and sending stranded migrant workers to their native places.
Gerald Lynn Bostock v/s Clayton County, Georgia that employees cannot be fired from the jobs merely because of their transgender and homosexual identity.
This article compares two cases with similar facts, yet different outcomes and examines the reasons for the same. It revolves around consideration and validation of contracts.
Odisha Vikas Parishad vs Union Of India while modifying the absolute stay on conducting the Jagannath Rath Yatra at Puri has allowed it observing the strict restrictions and regulations of the Centre and the State Government.
Soni Beniwal v/s Uttarakhand even if there is a bar on certain matters to be taken as PIL, there is always discretion available with the Court to do so in exercise of its inherent powers.
Indian Contract Act was commenced in the year 1872 and since then, several deductions and additions have happened to the same. The following piece of work discusses about the concept of offer under the Indian Contract Act, 1872
Top