Tag: plea

SC Dismisses NEET PG 2023 Postponement Plea

[ad_1]
SRINAGAR: National Eligibility cum Entrance Test, (NEET) PG, 2023 is not postponed as Supreme Court of India dismissed the postponement plea on Monday.
The matter related to NEET PG 2023 postponement was heard by a bench comprising of Justices S Ravindra Bhat and Dipankar Datta. Upon hearing the matter, the apex court has decided to not postpone the NEET PG 2023 Exam.
The plea regarding postponement of NEET PG 2023 was heard by a bench comprising of Justices S Ravindra Bhat and Dipankar Datta on Friday. Upon hearing the matter, the apex court has decided to not postpone the NEET PG 2023 Exam.
The petitioners had sought for the postponement of the entrance exam by two to three months. They wanted the exam to postponed so to ensure the gap between NEET PG exam and councelling date is reduced.
A bench of Justices Dipankar Datta and S R Bhat was informed by Additional Solicitor General (ASG) Aishwarya Bhati, representing the National Board of Examinations (NBE), that NEET PG admit cards have been released on Monday as per the original schedule and the counselling may begin on July 15, 2023.
On Friday, the NBE told the Supreme Court that nearly 2.09 lakh students have registered for the NEET PG 2023 exam and no alternate date for conducting the medical examination may be at hand in the near future if the entrance exam is delayed.

“There is no date available in the near future with our technology partner to conduct the NEET PG exam,” she told the SC bench.

[ad_2]
#Dismisses #NEET #Postponement #Plea
( With inputs from : kashmirlife.net )

February 27, 2023
SC to hear on Monday plea by ex-servicemen for payment of OROP arrears in one installment

[ad_1]
New Delhi: A group of ex-servicemen moved the Supreme Court seeking a direction to the Centre that arrears of the One Rank-One Pension scheme be paid to all eligible pensioners in one installment instead of four installments.
A bench of Chief Justice DY Chandrachud and justices PS Narasimha and JB Pardiwala is scheduled to take up the application filed by Indian Ex-Servicemen Movement (IESM) through advocate Balaji Srinivasan for hearing on February 27.
The military veterans association has also sought the setting aside of the Centre’s communication dated January 20, 2023 issued by the Ministry of Defence.
The communication had said that “arrears on account of revision of pension from July 1, 2019 till date of its implementation shall be paid by the Pension Disbursing Agencies in four yearly installments. However, all the family pensioners including those in receipt of special/liberalized family pension and all gallantry award winners shall be paid arrears in one installment”.
The ex-servicemen have alleged that the Centre has unilaterally modified and sought to subvert the directions passed by this court in the last year’s judgement dated March 16, 2022.
“Shockingly, this has been done after taking indulgence of this court and seeking extension over the last ten months, during which time several assurances of compliance were given to this court (while seeking repeated extensions in time) to the lakhs of eligible pensioners depending on the payment of arrears”, the application has said.
The association said that approximately four lakh pensioners have died during the pendency of the petition and “several more would perish without seeing the fruits of the judgement dated March 16, 2022 if the respondents/ Union of India is not directed to comply with the judgement dated March 16, 2022, in time in as much as a majority of the pensioners are aged citizens “.
On January 9, the top court granted time till March 15 to the Centre for payment of arrears of OROP to all eligible pensioners of the armed forces.

The top court had asked the Centre to ensure that all arrears are paid expeditiously to the pensioners of the armed forces and that there is no further delay.
It had granted liberty to ex-servicemen association to file an application if they feel aggrieved by any action of the Centre on payment of arrears of the OROP.
This was the second extension given by the top court to the Centre to pay the arrears after it had first moved the apex court in June last year and sought three months to compute and make payments in accordance with the March 16, 2022 verdict of the top court.
The top court’s 2022 verdict had come on the plea filed by the IESM against the Centre’s formula of calculating OROP.
The verdict had said in terms of the communication dated November 7, 2015, the benefit of OROP was to be effected from July 1, 2014 and the communication states that “in future, the pension would be re-fixed every five years”.
“Such an exercise has remained to be carried out after the expiry of five years possibly because of the pendency of the present proceedings,” the bench had said, adding, “We accordingly order and direct that in terms of the communication dated November 7, 2015, a re-fixation exercise shall be carried out from July 1, 2019, upon the expiry of five years.
“Arrears payable to all eligible pensioners of the armed forces shall be computed and paid over accordingly within a period of three months,” the top court had said in its verdict.
[ad_2]
#hear #Monday #plea #exservicemen #payment #OROP #arrears #installment
( With inputs from www.siasat.com )

February 26, 2023
Tunisha Sharma case: Hearing on Sheezan Khan’s bail plea adjourned till February 27

[ad_1]
Palghar: A court in Maharashtra’s Palghar district has adjourned to February 27 the hearing on the bail petition of TV actor Sheezan Khan, arrested in the Tunisha Sharma suicide case.
Vasai Additional Sessions Judge SM Deshpande on Friday posted the matter for hearing on coming Monday after advocate Sanjay More sought time saying he had been appointed as the special public prosecutor and just got the case papers.
Khan’s lawyer Sharad Rai said the bail application mentioned that as the chargesheet has been filed (on February 16) and the investigation is complete, the actor can be released.
Khan, arrested for the alleged abetment of his co-actor Sharma’s suicide, is now in judicial custody.
Khan and Sharma were allegedly in a relationship earlier but had a break-up later.
Subscribe us on
[ad_2]
#Tunisha #Sharma #case #Hearing #Sheezan #Khans #bail #plea #adjourned #February

( With inputs from www.siasat.com )

February 24, 2023
‘Will be mental torture…’: SC on a plea for postponing NEET-PG exam

[ad_1]
New Delhi: The National Board of Examinations (NBE) on Friday told the Supreme Court that around 2.09 lakh candidates have registered for NEET-PG exam 2023, scheduled on March 5, and if the exam were to be postponed, then no alternative date may be available in the near future.
A bench comprising Justices S R Bhat and Dipankar Datta orally observed that postponing the exam would be a mental torture for those who are waiting for the exam, and added that it will not pass any order either way.
The bench asked Additional Solicitor General Aishwarya Bhati, representing the NBE, to bring a solution on the issue raised by the petitioners in connection with National Eligibility-cum-Entrance Test (NEET)-PG exam.
The bench noted: “When we postpone a judicial exam, there is agony for the candidates who are preparing for it. The whole dynamics change.”
The top court was hearing two petitions seeking postponement of the NEET-PG exam saying that counselling has to be conducted after August 11 since the cut-off date for internship has been extended to that date.
Sharing the information in connection with the exam, Bhati said around 2.09 lakh candidates have registered for the exam and all preparations have been made to conduct the test, which involved engaging a technology partner to conduct the test.
Opposing the postponement of the exam, she contended that no alternate test date may be available in the near future as the technology partner may not be available and authorities are trying to follow the schedule affirmed by the top court earlier.
Senior advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan, appearing for the petitioners, told the bench that though 13 petitioners have come before the court, the issue raised by them affects nearly 45,000 candidates. He added that when one would go to the counselling, the person would need to carry the internship certificate and since the date has been extended to August 11, therefore the counselling should happen after this date.

Sankaranarayanan contended that internship is for 12 hours a day and for these students there is not much time to prepare for the examination.
The bench noted that students preparing for months would have to wait.
Senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi, who also appeared for the petitioners, submitted that different states have different schedules for internship and the issue has arisen due to this.
After hearing arguments, the bench told Bhati: “We are not indicating that it will be postponed… we are not passing any order either way. We are keeping it open. You come with the figures”.
The top court has scheduled the matter for further hearing on February 27.
[ad_2]
#mental #torture #plea #postponing #NEETPG #exam
( With inputs from www.siasat.com )

February 24, 2023
Kerala HC rejects Mohanlal’s plea against trial court order in illegal ivory case

[ad_1]
Kochi: The Kerala High Court on Wednesday dismissed actor Mohanlal’s plea against a trial court order rejecting the state government’s move to withdraw prosecution proceedings against him in a case related to illegal possession of ivory tusks.
Justice A Badharudeen was of the view that an accused in a case “have no right to challenge an order refusing withdrawal of prosecution” since the said procedure is the prerogative of the prosecution.
The court, however, also set aside the trial court order and directed it to consider afresh the state government’s plea to withdraw prosecution in the case.
“…the prayer for withdrawal of prosecution of the present case sought for by the government requires reconsideration by the trial court,” the high court said.
It directed the parties to appear before the trial court on March 3.
“There shall be a direction to the trial court to hear and pass fresh orders as expeditiously as possible from the date of receipt of copy of this order, at any rate within a period of six months,” the high court said.
The state government had sought withdrawal of the prosecution contending that it would be a futile exercise and wastage of the court’s time.
The magisterial court, in its June 2022 order, indicated that it was not inclined to grant the prayer as the withdrawal petition was filed in a hasty manner without addressing the challenges raised before the High Court regarding legality of the ownership certificate issued to Mohanlal.

The state government had on February 7, 2020 extended consent for withdrawal from prosecution in this case.
The trial court, in its order, had noted that there was no gazette notification in this case and hence the alleged certificate of ownership of the tusks has no legal sanctity and was void ab initio.
Four elephant tusks were seized from the actor’s house in a raid conducted by the Income Tax authorities in June 2012, following which a case was registered against him.
The complainant had alleged that the top actor had used his clout to bury the case without any further investigation.
[ad_2]
#Kerala #rejects #Mohanlals #plea #trial #court #order #illegal #ivory #case
( With inputs from www.siasat.com )

February 22, 2023
Delhi HC seeks NIA stand on plea against PFI probe

[ad_1]
New Delhi: The Delhi High Court on Tuesday sought the stand of the National Investigation Agency (NIA) on a plea seeking quashing of its probe against the banned Popular Front of India (PFI) in connection with an alleged criminal conspiracy to carry out terror activities in the country.
Justice Jasmeet Singh issued notice on the petition by arrested PFI leader Oma Salam and asked the agency to file its response.
While the judge remarked during the hearing that “there is no question of stay” in the matter, the counsel for the petitioner said he was “not pressing it” either.
The counsel for the petitioner argued he was assailing the NIA case on “legal grounds” as the probe was not as per the NIA Act.
He contended that the offences being probed by the NIA have to be first registered by the state government, which has not been done in the present case.
The petitioner’s counsel also said no report under section 173 Criminal Procedure Code should be filed by the NIA in the case on completion of the investigation.
The case, registered in April last year, pertains to an alleged criminal conspiracy hatched by people associated with the PFI to raise funds from within India and abroad for committing acts of terror in various parts of the country.
The NIA has alleged that the accused were conducting training camps to indoctrinate and train their cadres to carry out terrorist activities.

A large number of alleged PFI activists were detained or arrested in several states during the massive raids preceding the nationwide ban imposed on it on September 28, 2022.
In near-simultaneous raids across the country as part of a multi-agency operation spearheaded by the NIA, several PFI activists were detained or arrested in 11 states for allegedly supporting terror activities in the country.
The arrests were made in states and Union Territories, including Kerala, Maharashtra, Karnataka, Tamil Nadu, Assam, Uttar Pradesh, Andhra Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, Puducherry, Delhi and Rajasthan.
The government banned the PFI and several of its associate organisations for five years under the stringent anti-terror law UAPA, accusing them of having links with global terror groups like the ISIS.
The matter will be heard next on July 11.
[ad_2]
#Delhi #seeks #NIA #stand #plea #PFI #probe
( With inputs from www.siasat.com )

February 21, 2023
NIA accuses Navlakha of links with ISI agent in US, opposes bail plea

[ad_1]
Mumbai: Activist Gautam Navlakha, arrested in the Elgar Parishad-Maoist links case, had connections with a Pakistani ISI agent arrested in the US, the National Investigation Agency (NIA) has told the Bombay High Court while opposing his bail application.
The agency, in its affidavit filed in response to Navlakha’s plea, also claimed that he had “committed acts that had a direct impact on the national security, unity and sovereignty.”
NIA lawyer Sandesh Patil on Monday informed a division bench of Justices A S Gadkari and P D Naik that it had filed its reply opposing Navlakha’s bail plea.
The bench said it would hear arguments on the application on February 27.
The NIA in its affidavit claimed that Navlakha had visited the United States thrice to speak at the Kashmiri American Council Conference organised by Ghulam Nabi Fai with whom Navlakha was in touch regularly.
“Ghulam Nabi Fai was arrested by the (US agency) FBI in July 2011 for accepting funds from the ISI and Pakistan government….Navlakha had written a letter to the judge of the US court trying Ghulam Nabi Fai’s case for clemency,” the NIA said.
“Gautam Navlakha was introduced to a Pakistani ISI General for his recruitment by Ghulam Nabi Fai on the direction of the ISI, showing his nexus and complicity with Ghulam Nabi Fai and Pakistani ISI,” the agency further claimed.
Navlakha is presently under house arrest, instead of being in jail, as permitted by the Supreme Court on health grounds.

The agency also stated that Navlakha has “deep links with CPI (Maoist) and he espouses Maoist ideology and anti-government utterances through his various lectures and videos.”
The objective of these activities was to overthrow the government, it said.
Navlakha was assigned tasks such as uniting intellectuals against government forces and recruitment of cadres for “guerrilla activities of CPI (Maoist)”, the NIA alleged.
He was not merely supporting a banned terror organisation but “had an active role in furthering CPI (Maoist) activities,” it claimed.
The Elgar case relates to alleged inflammatory speeches made at the Elgar Parishad conclave held in Pune on December 31, 2017, which the police claimed triggered violence the next day near the Koregaon-Bhima war memorial in Pune district.
Police had also claimed the conclave was backed by Maoists. Later the probe in the case, where more than a dozen activists and academicians have been named as accused, was transferred to the NIA.
[ad_2]
#NIA #accuses #Navlakha #links #ISI #agent #opposes #bail #plea
( With inputs from www.siasat.com )

February 21, 2023
SC agrees to examine Uddhav Thackeray plea against EC decision on Wednesday

[ad_1]
New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Tuesday agreed to hear on Wednesday a plea by Uddhav Thackeray against the Election Commission of India (ECI) decision recognising the Eknath Shinde faction as the official Shiv Sena.
Senior advocate Kapil Sibal, representing Thackeray, submitted before a bench headed by Chief Justice of India D.Y. Chandrachud that if the ECI order is not stayed then they will take over everything, bank accounts, etc. Sibal said, “My only request is, take up the matter tomorrow morning with the constitution bench matters.”
The bench, also comprising Justice P.S. Narasimha, said they don’t want to disrupt the constitution bench as there are three judges waiting and added, “we will finish the constitution bench and get up a little early and then take it up tomorrow”. Sibal requested the bench to take up the matter Tuesday only.
The Chief Justice said, “We have not read it yet…tomorrow.” The bench decided to take up the matter at 3.30 p.m. on Wednesday.
Thackeray, in the plea filed through advocate Amit Anand Tiwari, said the ECI has failed to appreciate that the petitioner enjoys overwhelming support in the rank and file of the party. “The petitioner has an overwhelming majority in the Pratinidhi Sabha, which is the apex representative body, representing the wishes of the primary members and other stakeholders of the party. The Pratinidhi Sabha is the apex body recognised under Article VIII of the Party Constitution. The petitioner enjoys the support of 160 members out of approximately 200 odd members in the Pratinidhi Sabha”, it added.
The plea contended that the ECI has failed to discharge its duties as a neutral arbiter of disputes under para 15 of the symbols order and has acted in a manner undermining its constitutional status.
On February 17, the Election Commission allotted the Shiv Sena party name and the bow and arrow symbol to the faction led by Eknath Shinde.
“The ECI has disregarded the party Constitution of 2018 (which was admitted even by the respondent No.1 to be the Constitution governing the parties) on the ground that such a constitution is undemocratic and that it was not communicated to the Commission. These observations are totally erroneous as the amendments in the Constitution were categorically communicated to the Commission in 2018 itself and the petitioner will place clear evidence in this regard,” said the plea, seeking interim stay on the ECI order passed on February 17.

[ad_2]
#agrees #examine #Uddhav #Thackeray #plea #decision #Wednesday
( With inputs from www.siasat.com )

February 21, 2023
To what extent can court intervene, asks SC on plea for uniform laws

[ad_1]
New Delhi: The Supreme Court, hearing a batch of pleas, which included PILs seeking a direction to the Centre to make religion and gender-neutral uniform laws governing subjects like marriage, alimony, divorce, and inheritance, on Monday observed that the question is to what extent can the court intervene.
A bench, headed by Chief Justice of India D.Y. Chandrachud observed: “The question is to what extent the court can intervene in these matters as the issues fall under the legislative domain.”
Senior advocate Kapil Sibal, representing a petitioner, said he has a preliminary objection to the PILs filed by advocate Ashwini Upadhyay.
On the other hand, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta submitted: “In principle… as I am concerned, there cannot be any objection to gender-neutral uniform laws applicable to all equally…”
He added that it is for the apex court to examine what can be done on the judicial side.
Sibal asked the bench, also comprising Justices P.S. Narasimha and J.B. Pardiwala, to see the prayers made in the petition before the court and added that he can understand if these issues were taken up individually. He stressed that it is for the government to decide if they are willing to make gender and religion-neutral uniform laws and the court should not issue even “a prima facie order” in the matter.
Senior advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan, representing Upadhyay, contested Sibal’s submissions and said there is an individual petition, where a Muslim woman said she wanted the personal laws governing her, to be gender neutral.
At this, Sibal said: “These are for the government to decide… If the government wants to take it up, we have no problem.”

After hearing arguments, the top court asked the lawyers to prepare a list of prayers made in the petitions and agreed to take them up after four weeks and decide whether it can hear the pleas.
A total of 17 petitions have been filed, which include several PILs and some of the petitions sought a direction for enacting uniform religion and gender-neutral laws on a wide variety of issues.
Upadhyay has filed five separate petitions seeking direction to the Central government to frame religion and gender-neutral uniform laws for divorce, adoption, guardianship, succession, inheritance, maintenance, marriage age, and alimony.
[ad_2]
#extent #court #intervene #asks #plea #uniform #laws
( With inputs from www.siasat.com )

February 20, 2023
‘Not here to please any section of polity’, SC refuses plea for uniform marriage age

[ad_1]
New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Monday refused to entertain a plea seeking direction to ensure uniform age of marriage for men and women, saying it can’t issue mandamus to the Parliament to legislate.
Chief Justice of India D.Y. Chandrachud also pulled up petitioner-advocate Ashwini Upadhyay, saying: “We are not here to please you or any section of the polity. Don’t you give me gratuitous comments. This is not a political forum…”.
During the hearing in the matter, a bench headed by the Chief Justice noted that the court must defer to ultimate wisdom of Parliament and “we must not perceive ourselves as exclusive custodian of law. Parliament is also custodian of law”.
Upadhyay submitted that the matter involves a question connected with gender equality and the court as custodian of law must intervene to remove the anomaly to prescribe minimum age of marriage as 21 years for both men and women.
The bench, also comprising Justices P.S. Narasimha and J.B. Pardiwala, told Upadhyay though he seeks to have 21 years as the age of marriage for both men and women, the prayer in the plea was for striking down the provision prescribing minimum age of marriage altogether.
The Chief Justice told Upadhyay that striking down the provision will lead to a situation with no minimum age of marriage for women.
The bench stressed it is trite law that under Article 32, it cannot issue mandamus to Parliament to legislate nor can it legislate.
Upadhyay pressed that since a law has been moved in Parliament to make the minimum age of marriage at 21 years for both men and women and has been referred to the standing committee, a response should be called from the Central government. However, his submissions could not convince the bench.

At the conclusion of the hearing, the bench got irked by some submissions made by Upadhyay. After the top court made it clear that it will not issue orders to legislate, Upadhyay said it would have been better to let the Delhi High Court examine the matter.
At this, the Chief Justice told him: “We are not here to hear your opinions. Fortunately, our legitimacy doesn’t depend on what you feel about us. We don’t want your gratuitous comments on what you feel about us.”
“We’re here to do our constitutional duty, not here to please you. Nor are we here to please any polity. So don’t you give us your gratuitous comments on how you feel for us. You’re a member of the bar, argue before us. This is not a political forum.”
The court also declined to entertain a submission by Upadhyay to grant him liberty to move the Law Commission in the matter.
[ad_2]
#section #polity #refuses #plea #uniform #marriage #age
( With inputs from www.siasat.com )

February 20, 2023