KCC LAW OFFICES

10/11/2016

Bombay High Court has turned down plea of two advocates, who had appealed to it to suo moto take up issue of inconvenience citizens are facing after demonetisation of 500 and 1,000 rupee currency notes.
-------------------
Supreme Court has questioned Centre's "contradictory" stands on bovines, asking how it could permit Jallikattu where bulls are subjected to rough treatment and used for entertainment when Constitution has provisions to protect cows.
-------------------
Supreme Court has asked CBI to examine whether it could investigate all 76 FIRs lodged against Nirmal Singh Bhangoo-headed Pearl group of Companies in different States in connection with a Rs 45,000 crore land development scam.
-------------------
Supreme Court has given two weeks' time to Gujarat to file its response to Social Activist Teesta Setalvad's petition challenging State Police's order to freeze her personal and NGO's accounts.
-------------------
Supreme Court has stepped up efforts to punish sex-determination of fetuses under PNDT Act and said India could ill-afford a socially explosive situation caused by dropping sex-ratio.
-------------------
Delhi High Court has slammed South Delhi Municipal Corporation (SDMC) while refusing to rely on its affidavit regarding unauthorized constructions in upscale Sainik Farms.
-------------------
Delhi High Court, while hearing a plea over non-cleaning of rubble from construction site of Barapullah flyover above Kushak Nallah by Public Works Department, has remarked "Don't turn Delhi into a dumping ground".
-------------------
Madhya Pradesh High Court has dismissed a petition seeking to transfer probe into RSS Man Assault Case to CBI for ensuring free and fair investigation.
-------------------
Punjab & Haryana High Court has asked UT Administration to look into feasibility of increasing water level of Sukhna Lake by two feet, taking up a petition to save water body.
-------------------
Punjab & Haryana High Court has upheld appointment of Justice (Retd) Naval Kishore Aggarwal as Haryana Lokayukta.
-------------------
Madras High Court has directed Tamil Nadu Social Welfare Department to look into allegations that funds under various welfare schemes were sanctioned to 26 ineligible beneficiaries and take steps to recover amount.
-------------------
Madras High Court has issued notice to State Government on plea seeking to quash Government order prohibiting fishing by Mechanized Vessels, Motorized Country Craft and those using mechanized techniques in a radius of five nautical miles around potential nesting and breeding sites of sea turtles.
-------------------
Madhya Pradesh High Court has annulled admission cancellation order of 37 MBBS candidates who were given admission in private colleges exceeding intake capacity (150) due to human error.
-------------------
National Green Tribunal (NGT) has proposed constitution of a Central Committee of chief secretaries from five states - Delhi, Haryana, Punjab, Rajasthan and Uttar Pradesh - to prepare an emergency action plan to combat air pollution.

***

10/11/2016

Two petitions have been filed in the Supreme Court of India challenging the decision of the Central government to de-monetize 500 and 1000 notes.

Both the petitioners are practising lawyers – one is an Advocate-on-Record at the Supreme Court, Vivek Narayan Sharma and the other is advocate Sangam Lal Pandey.

Sharma’s petition runs to thirty-nine pages and he has questioned the manner of implementation of the scheme which he has alleged has “failed to follow constitutional rule of law, principles of natural justice and provide sufficient time to citizens of India to prepare for such phasing out of specified bank notes.”

He has contended that the “constitutional ‘Right to Life’ & ‘Right to Trade’ of all the citizens of India is being infringed by the Centre due to unreasonable, unmethodical and dictatorial manner of implementing the said Scheme”

The petition states that,

“…phasing out of specified bank notes on 9.11.2016 was announced by the Hon’ble Prime Minister between 8.00pm – 9.20pm on 8.11.2016 and thereafter that Notification dated 8.11.2016 was issued around 11.00pm by Respondent. It is submitted that Hon’ble Prime Minister also announced that new bank notes of denominations of Rs.500/- and Rs.2000/- are going to replace the existing specified bank notes of Rs.500/- and Rs.1000/-. Therefore, giving no time to people in possession of Rs. 500 & Rs. 1000/- to exchange from banks and other government utilities..”

Sharma has alleged violation of Section 26(2) of the Reserve Bank India Act, 1934 which, according to him, mandates that,

“reasonable time be given to people to make alternate financial arrangements to avoid large scale mayhem and chaos.”

He has submitted that the manner of implementation of the scheme has created panic amongst the people and “emergency like situation” in India and that the next few weeks or months could be a nightmare for public since,

“..almost all citizens of India are going to face grave harassment in almost every small day to day affair and elementary services like hospitals payments, schools fees payments, toll fees payments, out-station hotel payments, labor payments, local transport payments, buying of essential items like grocery, clothes, pollutions masks, air cleaner, winter clothes, kids care items, old-age care items etc.”

Sharma has prayed for quashing the notification which de-monetizes 500 and 1000 notes or alternatively direct the Centre to provide methodological and reasonable time frame to the people for exchanging the specified bank notes to legitimate notes.

Sangam Lal Pandey has also pointed out various practical difficulties faced by the public due to the sudden discontinuation of the notes.

He has submitted that various private hospitals are refusing to accept notes of denomination 500 and 1000. Besides that, other grounds like initiation of marriage ceremonies, difficulties in travelling by public transport etc. have been raised by Pandey.

Calling it a ‘Tughlaki Farman’, Pandey has prayed that the notification be quashed.

Pandey’s petition will be mentioned in Supreme Court tomorrow.

07/11/2016

: New Delhi Municipal Council begins to sprinkle water using Jet pressure pump technique to control air pollution.

07/11/2016

NDTV challenges 1-day ban on Hindi channel in Supreme Court https://t.co/eZMbvVkDiC https://t.co/KTskmKtOPY

NDTV has challenged the government's one-day ban of its Hindi channel in the Supreme Court today. NDTV India has been ordered off-air on Wednesday with the government accusing it of broadcasting sensitive details of January's terror attack on the air force base in Pathankot.

07/11/2016

Ara Trust hiring Legal Protection Officer (0 – 2 yrs PQE) in Delhi
Apply here https://t.co/YMDChJ95OH

The Ara Trust (Ara) was set up in 2013 by former United Nations (UN) legal officers with the mission of facilitating access to asylum and expanding the protection space for refugees despite the legal vacuum in India. It is India’s first and only centre for refugee law and forced migration studies. I...

06/11/2016

Toggle Home News Updates No Age Limit For LLB Course This Academic Year: Andhra Pradesh HC By: Ashok KM | November 5, 2016 Share10 In a huge reprieve for ‘over-aged’ LLB aspirants of Andhra Pradesh, the High Court Hyderabad has made it clear that the age limits prescribed by the Bar Council of India for admission to Law courses would not be applicable for admissions made for this academic year. According to a report by The Hindu, a bench comprising Acting Chief Justice Ramesh Ranganathan and Justice A Shankara Narayana passed this interim order in cases filed by Bhima Rao and another. They contended that the new notification by the BCI was issued after the LAWCET announcement. The interim order is yet to be accessed. Last week, the High Court of Kerala has, in an interim order issued in a batch of petitions challenging the age limit, directed the authorities to permit candidates to participate in the selection process, irrespective of upper age limit. Read the order and Live Law report here. As per a recent circular, the Bar Council of India has revived the rule stipulating the maximum age limit for law courses across the country. As per this clause, the upper age limit for admission in LL.B three-year course is 30 years and for LL.B five- year course is 20 years.Read more at: http://www.livelaw.in/no-age-limit-llb-course-academic-year-andhra-pradesh-hc/

In a huge reprieve for ‘over-aged’ LLB aspirants of Andhra Pradesh, the High Court Hyderabad has made it clear that the age limits prescribed by the Bar Council of India for admission to Law courses would not be applicable for admissions made for this academic year. According to a report by The Hind...