VAKALATGIRI

In  Bhadar Ram vs Jassa Ram   the Supreme Court ruled that a person declared as Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe in one state cannot claim benefit of his status for employment, education or land allotment in any other state on migration. A bench of Justice M.R. Shah and Justice A.S. Bopanna said: "A person belonging to Scheduled Caste /Scheduled Tribe in relation to his original state of which he is permanent or an ordinarily resident cannot be deemed to be so in relation to any other state on his migration to that state for the purpose of employment, education etc." The Division Bench relied upon the decision of Action Committee on Issue of Caste Certificate to Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in the State of Maharashtra and Another v. Union of India and Another. In Action Committee, the question that arose for consideration was  whether a person belonging to caste or tribe specified for the purpose of Constitution to be Scheduled Caste or a Scheduled Tribe i...

  EVERY PERSON HAS A RIGHT TO KNOW WHAT THEY ARE CONSUMING : DELHI HIGH COURT In a recent ruling, the Delhi High Court observed that every person has a right to be informed about what he is consuming. The division bench, comprising Justices Vipin Sanghi and Jasmeet Singh, was hearing a plea moved by a trust comprising members following a strict vegetarian lifestyle. They were aggrieved by the fact that manufacturers of a plethora of products, including eatables, were keeping consumers in the dark by not disclosing the real source of the ingredients. The bench noted that it has found that several food articles which have ingredients sourced from animals are shown as “vegetarian” by affixing a green dot on the packaging. The  Delhi high court has ruled that there should be complete disclosure of all ingredients used to manufacture any food article so that people can determine if they are truly “vegetarian” or “non-vegetarian”, adding that “every person has a right to know what t...

In  Taj Mahal Hotel vs United India Insurance Company Ltd. & Ors. , Supreme Court held that when it comes to valet parking, hotel owners can’t not simply use a paper tag stating “parking at owners’ risk” as a way to escape liability. The Supreme Court upheld an order passed by the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (‘National Commission’) to pay compensation of Rs 2.8 lakh to an individual whose Maruti Zen car was stolen in 1998 from its parking area holding that there was deficiency in services rendered by the hotel management. The hotel had argued that the valet parking ticket clearly states that the vehicle will be parked at the guest’s own risk and responsibility and that the management will not be responsible for any loss, theft or damage.  Bench of Justice Mohan Shantanagoudar and Justice Ajay Rastogi held that the    hotel-owner cannot contract out of liability for its negligence or that of its servants in respect of a vehicle of...

In Shrimanth Balasaheb Patil vs Hon’ble Speaker, Karnataka , Supreme Court    upheld    the disqualification of 17 Congress - JD(S) MLAs in Karnataka by the then Assembly Speaker K.R. Ramesh Kumar but allowed their plea to contest the by-election to be held on December 5 for the seats that fell vacant in July. A three-judge bench of justices NV Ramana, Sanjiv Khanna and Krishna Murari held that the Speaker does not have the power to indicate the duration for which a member may not contest elections after being disqualified or after resigning. FACTS OF THE CASE In July this year, Writ Petitions were filed by 17 ex-MLAs of Karnataka challenging their disqualification by the previous Speaker of the Assembly. The resignation of the 17 MLAs from the Congress and JD(S) parties eventually brought down the HD Kumaraswamy-led regime in Karnataka in July this year.  Speaker rejected the resignation of the members asserting that they were not voluntary or gen...

PRESIDENT’S RULE  In layman’s term  President's Rule  is the suspension of state government and imposition of direct central government rule in a state. Article 356 of Indian Constitution deals with imposition of President’s Rule over a State of India. If a State Government is unable to function according to constitutional provisions, the Central government can take direct control of the state machinery. Executive authority is exercised through the centrally appointed governor, who has the authority to appoint other administrators to assist them.  During president's rule, the Council of Ministers is dissolved, vacating the office of Chief Minister. Furthermore, the Vidhan Sabha is either prorogued or dissolved, necessitating a new election.  The Governor is an appointee of the President and thus, effectively, a functionary of the Union Government.  S. R. Bommai v. Union of India   was a landmark judgment of the Supreme Court wher...

From the idol of Ram Lalla being found inside the mosque in December 1949 followed by the filing of the first couple of pleas in the matter to the eventual demolition of Babri Masjid on December 6, 1992, the Ayodhya dispute has long been a part of political discourse in the country, especially over the last three decades. TIMELINE OF EVENTS   1528-29 Babri Majid Constructed in Ayodhya by Mughal Emperor Babur’s commander Mir Baqi. 1885 Mahant Raghubir Das files a plea in the Faizabad district court, seeking to build a temple on land next to the mosque. Court rejects plea. December, 1949 Idol of Ram Lalla found inside the mosque. Hindus call it divine appearance; start offering prayers. Others say that it was smuggled in there. 1950 Suits filed in Faizabad Court by Gopal Singh Visharad and Paramahansa Ramachandra Das,seeking permission to worship the idols of Ram Lalla. 1959 Nirmohi Akhara files plea seeking possession of the disputed lan...

MEASURES FOR PREVENTION OF FATAL ACCIDENTS OF SMALL CHILDREN DUE TO THEIR FALLING INTO ABANDONED BORE WELLS AND TUBE WELLS In 2010, Supreme Court of India had issued the following directions when it came to the construction of bore wells and tube-wells :- (i) The owner of the land/premises, before taking any steps for constructing bore well/ tube well must inform in writing at least 15 days in advance to the concerned authorities in the area, i.e., District Collector/ District Magistrate/Sarpanch of the Gram Panchayat/any other Statutory Authority/concerned officers of the Department of Ground Water/Public Health/ Municipal Corporation, as the case may be, about the construction of bore well/tube well. (ii) Registration of all the drilling agencies, namely, Government/Semi Government/Private etc. should be mandatory with the district administration/Statutory Authority wherever applicable.    (iii) Erection of signboard at the time of construction ne...

ARTICLE 370- A BRIEF NOTE  Written By : Ms. Ankita Rana  Sr. Executive Law, BHEL  Article 370 of the Constitution of India, 1949 accords a special status to the State of Jammu & Kashmir. It limits the application of the provisions of the Constitution of India to the State of Jammu & Kashmir, (except Article 1 and Article 370 itself) and permits the state to draft its own Constitution. It restricts Parliament’s legislative powers in respect of J&K.  HISTORY OF ACCESSION OF J & K TO INDIA In order to understand Article 370, it is important to first understand the legislative history behind the provision. The provision was introduced in the Constitution as unlike other princely states, special conditions existed in the State of Jammu & Kashmir as follows: • India was at war with Pakistan and there was a cease fire agreed operating at the relevant time; • The internal condition in the state of J & K was still unusual and ...

SECOND WIFE IS ALSO ENTITLED TO MAINTENANCE UNDER SECTION 125 OF Cr.P.C: SUPREME COURT A bench of Justice Banumathi and Justice Bopanna has recently refused to interfere in the High Court order granting maintenance to a second wife. In  T K Surendran vs P Najima Bindu, Supreme Court    stated and held "In view of the judgment of this Court reported in  2014(1) SCC 188 titled Badshah vs. Urmila Badshah Godse and Anr ., we are not inclined to interfere with the impugned judgment affirming the award of maintenance to the respondent-wife. The special leave petition is, accordingly, dismissed". Badshah vs. Urmila Badshah Godse and Anr. 2014(1)SCC 188  In Badshah vs Urmila Badshah Godse case the court ruled that a woman, duped into marrying a person who was already having a subsisting marriage, would not be affected by the Hindu Marriage Act and would be treated as a legally wedded wife for the purpose of claiming maintenance...