“Indian Judicial System Has Always Set Its Benchmarks High In All Situations. When The Entire World Was Caught Amidst This Pandemic Situation, The Judicial System Had Been On Its Foot To Render Justice To The Citizens Of The Country. Embracing The Technology, Courts Have Begun To Solve The Cases Virtually And Have Delivered Various Landmark Judgements In The Year 2020.”
Various Landmark Judgements That Are Worth Reading Are Given Below:
Right To Access The Internet Is Equivalent To A Fundamental Right.
Anuradha Bhasin Vs. Union Of India –
4 Main Propositions Were Laid Down In This Judgment:
The Internet As A Mode Of Communication Serves As An Important Medium Through Which Citizens Can Actualize Fundamental Rights Concerning The Right To Freedom Of Speech And Expression Under Article 19(1)(A) And Article 19(1)(G).
There Is A Need To Strike A Balance Between Liberty Grants And Security Concerns By The State To Secure The Right To Life Under Article 21.
If Any Restrictions Are Imposed On Rights Conferred Under Article 19(1), It Should Be Done Under The Reasonable Exceptions Laid Down Under Article 19(2)–Article 19(6).
It Should Be Based On The Test Of Proportionality And Should Not Exceed Beyond A Reasonable Doubt.
No Time Limit Can Be Set For The Grant Of Anticipatory Bail.
The Protection Granted Should Not Invariably Be Limited.
An Order Of Anticipatory Bail Does Not Restrict The Rights Or Duties Of The Police Or Investigating Agency To Investigate The Charges Against The Person Who Seeks Or Granted Pre-Arrest Bail.
But, If There Are Circumstances In Which The Court Has To Reduce Or Limit The Period, It Can Do So- Based On Special Facts And Circumstances Only.
Tenancy Issues Can Be Resolved By Arbitration
Vidya Drolia And Others(S) Versus Durga Trading Corporation (2019 Scc Online Sc 358)
All Tenancy Matters Can Be Solved By Arbitration Mode Of Dispute Resolution”. However, Certain Matters Relating To The Tenancy Will Still Be Outside The Arbitration Scope. Parties Will Have To Knock On The Doors Of Tribunals Or Concerned Courts To Resolve The Disputes.
In The Cases Where No Designated Courts Are Appointed To Deal With Rent And Tenancy Matters, Arbitration Shall Be Allowed.
If We Give Any Particular Court Exclusive Jurisdiction To Deal With The Rent Matters, The Tenancy Case Shall Be Considered Non-Arbitral.
Government Jobs For Reservations Is Not Mandatory
Mukesh Kumar And Anr. Vs. The State Of Uttarakhand And Ors –
Grant Of Reservations In Public Jobs Is Within The State Government’s Sole Discretion To Decide, And There Is No Mandatory Obligation On The Government To Provide Reservations.
There Is No Fundamental Right To Claim Reservation In Public Jobs Under The Law.
Private Institutions Cannot Conduct Separate Medical Entrance Test
Christian Medical Vellore Association V. Union Of India
The Court Laid Down That To Get Admission In The Medical Field In The Country, National Eligibility Entrance Test (NEET) Shall Be The Uniform Entrance Test And That No Institution Could Hold Its Separate Exam.
Daughter’s Right Over Property Is Indisputable In All Cases.
Vineeta Sharma V. Rakesh Sharma
The Presence Of The Father, Alive Or Not On The Date Before 2005, Will Not Affect The Daughter’s Rights In A Succession Of The Property.
A Married Daughter’s Eligibility Rights Must Be Placed On The Same Footing As That Of An Unmarried Daughter To Claim The Benefits; Otherwise, It Would Be Unfair, Gender-Biased, And Unreasonable.
Land Acquisitions Proceedings Cannot Lapse Due To The State’s Inability To Deposit Dues.
Indore Development Authority V. Manoharlal
Land Acquisition Proceedings Will Not Lapse Merely Due To A Failure To Pay Compensation To Landowners.
If The State Also Fails To Take Possession Of The Land, Then In Such Situations, The Chances Of The Possibility Of Lapse Are Higher.
The Term “Payment” Does Not Mandate The State To Deposit Money In A Landowner’s Account. The Mere Issue Of Notice Of Compensation Is Sufficient To Conclude The Acquisition.
The Sarfaesi Act Will Govern Co-Operative Banks In The Same Way As Commercial Banks
Pandurang Ganpati V. Vishwasrao Patil Murgud Sahakari Bank Ltd -
All The Banks Enlisted Under The State Legislation And Multi-State Level Co-Operative Societies Enrolled Under The MSCS Act, 2002 Falling Under The Term ‘Banking’ Will Be Governed By The SARFAESI ACT.
All The Aspects Dealing With “Commencement, Incorporations, Daily Affairs Of The Business, Winding Up And Registration Regulations Of The Co-Operative Banks Owned Or Managed By The Co-Operative Societies Registered Under The State Legislation Will Be Governed By The Act.
The Co-Operative Banks As Per State Legislation And Multi-State Co-Operative Banks Will Fall Under The Purview Of ‘Banks’ As Per Section 2 (1) (C) Of Securitisation And Reconstruction Of Financial Assets And Enforcement Of Security Interest Act, 2002.
The Act Does Not Confine The Meaning Of “Goods” Under Article 366 (12) Of India’s Constitution, And No Restrictive Meaning Is Given To The Same.
RECENT JUDGEMENT ON PRO RATA PENSION
Pro rata is the term used to describe a proportionate allocation.
As per Rule 37 of Central Civil Services Pension Rules 1972 and as amended from time to time this provision of pro rata pension was made applicable to Central Govt employees inducted into public sector undertaking or an autonomous body, all Government servants of that Department shall be transferred en-masse to that public sector undertaking or autonomous body as the case may be on terms of foreign service without an deputation allowance till such time as they get absorbed in the said undertaking or body as the case be and such transferred Government servants shall be absorbed in the public sector undertaking or autonomous body as the case may be.
This policy was also made applicable only to Commissioned Officers of Defence Services and not to Personnel Below Officer Rank (PBOR) of the Defence Services.
The same issue was raised before Hon’ble Delhi High Court in WP(C) 10026/2016 by Govind Kumar Srivastava.
He applied for grant of Pro Rata Pension which was denied.
The country is currently witnessing a high political drama going on in Karnataka where the fate of a Congress-led coalition government is at stake.
Congress and its allies are crying foul over Supreme Court’s order that has exempted rebel MLAs of Congress and JD(S) from mandatorily taking part in the floor test.
It has termed the SC judgement as ‘bad’.
So, if debarring MLAs from voting helps in passing the floor test, it is okay, but, if exempting MLAs from the voting weakens the case of Congress, it is a ‘bad judgement’.
When BJP emerged as the single largest party, short of the majority mark, in the Karnataka assembly elections (2018), the Supreme Court had given 24 hours of time to BJP to prove its majority.
The fact that the floor test has still not happened means that a minority government of a post-poll coalition where the parties had fought the election against each other, has continued for almost 3 weeks now.
The Supreme Court dismissed the bail application of a petitioner, who is an Officer of the office of the Alipore District Judge’s Court, accused of floating a tender without the permission of the District Judge.
During the investigation, it has been found that there were no supplies but entries were affected in the documents of the office.
The Counsel, appearing for the State of West Bengal, opposed the bail application and submitted that the petitioner is not cooperating with the investigation.
Whereas the Counsel, appearing for the petitioner, submitted that he needs time to file a rejoinder.Read More....
stopforeclosurefraud.com Help Stop Unlawful Foreclosures, Bank Repossession, Evictions and Foreclosure Fraud with the power of Resources, Education and Each Other.Official Home Of Stop Foreclosure Fraud | Help Stop Unlawful Foreclosures, Bank Repossession, Evictions and Foreclosure Fraud with the power of Resources, Education and Each Other.http://www.stopforeclosurefraud.com
