Search This Blog

Wednesday, August 31, 2016

All advocates enrolled after 2010 to submit declaration.. Says Bar Council

The Bar Council of India has issued a circular notifying all State Bar Councils to ask for submission of Declaration forms from the advocates enrolled after July 2010.The notification entails submission of necessary information in a prescribed format required for preparation of electoral rolls for elections to the State Bar Councils and also to update the existing ones.

The State Bar Councils are advised to take up the matter with prompt attention and circulate the format to all Bar Associations. The Declaration form is to be received in the office of the State Bar Council on or before 30th October 2016.
Courtesy Live Law

Case against whatsapp in Delhi High Court

വാട്ട്സാപ്പ് -സ്വകാര്യത ഇല്ലാതാക്കുന്ന നയത്തിനെതിരെ ഡൽഹി  ഹൈക്കോടതിയിൽ  പൊതുതാൽപ്പര്യ ഹർജി

മുമ്പ് വാഗ്ദാനം ചെയ്തിരുന്ന സ്വകാര്യത പിൻവലിക്കാൻ വാട്ട്സാപ്പ് മുതിരുന്നതിനെതിരെ ഡൽഹി ഹൈക്കോടതിയിൽ നൽകിയ ഹർജിയിൽ ടെലകോം വകുപ്പിനും ടെലികോം റെഗുലേറ്ററി അതോറിറ്റിക്കും നോട്ടീസ്. പരസ്യത്തിലൂടെയുള്ള ലാഭം മുന്നിൽ കണ്ട്   ഫെയിസ് ബുക്ക്, തുടങ്ങിയ മറ്റ് സംവിധാനങ്ങളിലേക്ക് വാട്ട്സാപ്പ് വിവരങ്ങൾ കൈമാറുന്നതിനെതിരെയാണ് ഹർജി. 2012 ജൂലൈ 7 ന് പുറത്തിറക്കിയിരുന്ന
നയത്തിൽ നിന്ന് വാട്ട്സാപ്പ് ഏകപക്ഷീയമായി പിൻമാറുന്നവെന്നാണ് ആരോപണം. ഇൻസ്റ്റന്റ് മെസേജിംഗ് നിരോധിക്കണമെന്നാവശ്യപ്പെട്ട് 2016 ജൂൺ മാസം നൽകിയ ഒരു പൊതുതാൽപ്പര്യ ഹർജിയിൽ കോടതി ഇടപെട്ടിരുന്നില്ല.

niyamadarsi 2016(11)

Tuesday, August 30, 2016

Child Rights Commission intervened to stop TV show KUTTIPPATTALAM

....കുട്ടിപ്പട്ടാളം പെട്ടിയിലായി....
ബാലവാകാശ കമ്മിഷന്‍ ഇടപെടലിനെത്തുടര്‍ന്ന് പ്രമുഖമലയാളം ചാനലിലെ പരിപാടിയായ കുട്ടിപ്പട്ടാളം അവസാനിപ്പിച്ചു. കുട്ടികളില്‍ അധാര്‍മ്മികതയും മൂല്യചുതിയും ഉണ്ടാക്കുന്നതിനു ഈപരിപാടി കാരണമാകുന്നു എന്ന് പരാതി ഉണ്ടായിരുന്നു. വ്യങ്ങാര്‍ത്ഥം ഉള്ള ചോദ്യങ്ങള്‍ കുട്ടികളോട് ചോദിച്ചു അവര്‍ നല്‍കുന്ന നിഷ്കളങ്കമായ മറുപടികളില്‍ അശ്ലീലതയും മദ്യപാനവും ഗാര്‍ഹിക സംഘര്‍ഷങ്ങളും കണ്ടെത്തി സദസ്സില്‍ വലിയ ചിരിയുണ്ടാക്കാന്‍ ഈ പരിപാടിക്ക് കഴിഞ്ഞിരുന്നു. പരാതി പരിഹരിക്കാന്‍ കുട്ടികളുടെ മനശാസ്ത്രത്തില്‍ വൈദഗ്ദ്യം ഉള്ളവരെ വിളിച്ചു വരുത്തി കമ്മിഷന്‍ തെളിവെടുപ്പ് നടത്തി. അവരുടെ വിസ്താരത്തിലും ഇത്തരം പരിപാടികള്‍ കുട്ടികളുടെ സ്വഭാവ രൂപീകരണത്തെ പ്രതികൂലമായി ബാധിക്കും എന്ന നിഗമനത്തെ തുടര്‍ന്ന് പരിപാടി അവസാനിപ്പിക്കുകയാണ് എന്ന് ചാനലുകള്‍ സത്യവാങ്ങ്മൂലം നല്‍കുകയായിരുന്നു. 
Order No. 2560/10/LA2/2015/KeSCPCR
niyamadarsi 2016(10)

Thursday, August 25, 2016

If the educational institutions fail to comply the terms in brochure or prospectus, they have to face force of law

The High Court of Punjab and Haryana recently reiterated the principle that an admission brochure or prospectus has a force of law and needs to be strictly adhered to.

“Accordingly, respondents cannot be held liable for any deficiency in service and the petitioner was not entitled for refund in terms of the above Clause of Prospectus. It has time and again been held by six Full Bench decisions of this Court that admission brochure or the prospectus has a force of law which is to be strictly followed,” Justice G.S. Sandhawalia observed.

The Court was hearing a petition filed by Mr. Ankit Sharma, seeking quashing of a May, 2005 order passed by the Punjab State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Chandigarh, whereby he was denied refund of Rs. 10,000. The amount had been forfeited by the Punjab Technical University, after the petitioner had failed to report to the college despite having been admitted in the first round of counseling.

The claim was dismissed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Ludhiana, relying on a specific clause in the Prospectus. The Court upheld the Forum’s decision and observed, “Accordingly, respondents cannot be held liable for any deficiency in service and the petitioner was not entitled for refund in terms of the above Clause of Prospectus.”
Courtesy LIVE LAW

Legality of compulsory retirement.. Supreme Court

Principles relating to Compulsory retirement ....
Excerpts from the judgement of Supreme Court in
Baikuntha Nath Das & Anr. Vs. Chief District Medical Officer, Baripada & Anr.
[ AIR 1992 SC 1020]

(i) An order of compulsory retirement is not a punishment. It implies no stigma nor any suggestion of misbehavior.

(ii) The order has to be passed by the Government on forming the opinion that it is in the public interest to retire a Government servant compulsorily. The order is passed on the subjective satisfaction of the Government.

(iii) Principles of natural justice have no place in the context of an order of compulsory retirement. This does not mean that judicial scrutiny is excluded altogether. While the High Court or the Court would not examine the matter as an appellate Court, they may interfere if they are satisfied that the order is passed (a) mala fide or (b) that it is based on no evidence or (c) that it is arbitrary- in the sense that no reasonable person would form the requisite opinion on the given material: in short, if it is found to be a perverse order.

(iv) The Government (or the Review Committee, as the case may be) shall have to consider the entire record of service before taking a decision in the matter- of course attaching more importance to record of and performance during the later years. The record to be so considered would naturally include the entries in the confidential records/character rolls, both favourable and adverse. If a Government servant is promoted to a higher post notwithstanding the adverse remarks, such remarks loose their sting, more so, if the promotion is based upon merit (selection) and not upon seniority.

(v) An order of compulsory retirement is not liable to be quashed by a Court merely on the showing that while passing it uncommunicated adverse remarks were also taken into consideration. That circumstance by itself cannot be a basis for interference".
Courtesy Live Law

Care for mental health

The Mental Healthcare Bill, 2016 was passed by Rajya Sabha last week, and is expected to be discussed in Lok Sabha during next session. The Bill repeals the existing Mental Health Act, 1987, which is vastly different in letter and spirit. The Act of 1987 had been widely criticised for proving to be inadequate to protect the rights of mentally ill persons. Here are certain things you need to know about the new Bill:

1. Mental Healthcare Bill seeks to decriminalise the Attempt to Commit Suicide.

The most important feature of this Bill is that a person attempting suicide shall be presumed, though rebuttable, to be suffering from severe stress (the words ‘mental illness’ in the old Bill substituted with ‘severe stress’) and hence, exempt from trial and punishment. The Bill also seeks to impose on the government a duty to rehabilitate such person to ensure that there is no recurrence of attempt to suicide.

2. Seeks to fulfil India’s international obligation pursuant to the Convention on Rights of Persons with Disabilities and its Optional Protocol

India signed and ratified the Convention on 1st October 2007. The Bill adopts a more nuanced understanding of “mental illness” than the Act of 1987. However the Bill varies from the social model of disability incorporated in the Convention. The social model of disability focuses on how disability hampers a person’s full and effective participation of the society. The Bill, on the other hand, adopts a narrow approach to see mental illness as hampering recognition of reality or ability to meet the ordinary demands of life and also as conditions associated with drug and alcohol abuse.

3. Seeks to empower persons suffering from mental-illness, marking a departure from the Act of 1987.

Whereas the Act of 1987 did not recognise the agency and capacity of a person suffering from mental illness, the Bill adopts a radically different approach empowering the individual to make decisions concerning her mental healthcare or treatment. This is in line with the objective of the Convention to uphold the inherent dignity of the persons with disabilities. The capacity to take such decisions is recognised if the individual can understand relevant information, appreciate foreseeable consequences of such decisions and also can communicate them. The Bill also lays down certain parameters for determination of mental illness, seeking to use nationally and internationally accepted medical standards, especially the standards adopted by World Health Organisation. The provision also seeks to preclude irrelevant factors in the determination of mental illness.

The Bill provides every person, except a minor, with a right to make an Advance Directive specifying the way the person wishes to be cared for and treated for a mental illness and also to appoint a nominated representative, who is entrusted with the task of protecting the interests of the person suffering from mental illness. It is mandatory for every medical officer and psychiatrist to provide treatment to an individual as per the Advance Directive except when the Mental Health Review Board finds that the directive can be altered on considerations like lack of free will, information or capacity; or illegality of the content; or circumstances differing from those anticipated by the person making the directive.

4. Adopts a rights-based approach, which is a first in the mental health law of India.

The Bill creates a rights-based framework for mentally ill persons. This is a remarkable difference from the Act of 1987. Whereas the Act of 1987 provided only general protections against indignant or cruel treatment, Chapter V of the Bill operates as a charter of rights for persons with mental illness consolidating and safeguarding the basic human rights of these individuals. The Bill guarantees every person the right to access mental health care and treatment from mental health services run or funded by government. This right is meant to ensure mental health services of affordable cost, of good quality, of sufficient quantity, are geographically accessible and are provided without discrimination.

The Bill also recognises the right to community living; right to live with dignity; protection from cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment; treatment equal to persons with physical illness; right to relevant information concerning treatment other rights and recourses; right to confidentiality; right to access their basic medical records; right to personal contacts and communication; right to legal aid; recourse against deficiencies in provision of care, treatment and services. Every insurer is bound to make provision for medical insurance for treatment of mental illness on the same basis as is available for treatment of physical illness.

5. Provisions for registration of institutions and regulation of the sector

The Bill provides for the creation of Central and State Mental Health Authorities in order to ensure registration and supervision of mental health establishments; to develop quality and service norms for these establishments; to ensure registration of psychologists, mental health nurses, psychiatric social workers; to train law enforcement officials and mental health professionals about implementation of the Bill; and to advise government on mental health related issues. Registration of mental health establishments is made mandatory by providing for stringent penalty for violation. The registration is contingent on the establishment complying with the regulations issued by relevant Authority.

The Bill also provides for the creation of Mental Health Review Boards that has adjudicatory powers over the various rights and protections guaranteed by the Bill. Further, an appeal is allowed to the High Court against the order of the Authority or the Board, while there is a bar on jurisdiction of civil courts to entertain any suit or proceeding in respect of any matter which the Authority or the Board is empowered to decide. These provisions have been critically viewed for creating dependency of mental health practitioners on the government.

6. The Bill allows only restricted use of Electro-convulsive therapy.

The Bill completely prohibits Electro-compulsive therapy (“ECT”) as a measure of emergency treatment. It also prohibits ECT without muscle relaxants and anaesthesia. ECT is completely prohibited for minors except with informed consent of the guardian and prior permission of the concerned Board.

7. Property Management

Unlike the Act of 1987, the Bill does not provide for management of property of mentally ill persons. This is a serious cause of concern as mentally ill persons could easily be exploited and their property taken away from them, leaving such individuals in a perpetual state of dependency. The series of rights recognised by the Bill do not account for property management of mentally ill persons. The Standing Committee report took note of this discrepancy and recommended that the central government implement necessary transitory schemes.

8. Responsibilities of certain other Agencies

The Bill imposes a duty on the police officer in the charge of a police station to take under protection any person found wandering at large within the limits of the police station; such person will be subject to examination by a medical officer and based on such examination will be either admitted to a mental health establishment or be taken to her residence or to an establishment for homeless persons. Further, a police officer in charge of a police station shall report to the Magistrate if he has reason to believe that a mentally ill person is being ill-treated or neglected. Upon this report, the Magistrate may pass an order to cause the person to be produced before him to be subsequently examined by a medical officer or a mental health professional or be provisionally admitted to a mental health establishment. The Bill also provides that whenever during a judicial process, a proof of mental illness is produced and the same is challenged, the court shall refer it to the concerned Board and the Board shall submit its opinion to the court.

9. Funds

The Bill guarantees a right of affordable, accessible and quality mental health care and treatment from mental health services run or funded by Central and State governments. The Bill also makes provision for a range of services to be provided by the appropriate government. However, the estimate of expenditure required to meet the obligations under the law is not available. It is also not clear how the funds will be allocated between the Central and the State governments. The Standing Committee report recommended allocation of funds to states noting that without such allocation, states facing financial constraints will not be able to implement the bill.

10. The Bill seeks to tackle stigma attached to mental illness

By addressing mental illness from a holistic perspective and by empowering mentally ill persons, the Bill seeks to remove the stigma attached to mental illness. It makes effort to secure equal treatment for persons with mental illness and those with physical illness. However, some critics believe that the Bill, especially the expansive definition of “mental illness”, will only hurt a large number of victims of even minor mental illnesses and their families, because of the wide prevalence of stigma, while not really tackling the issue of stigma.
Courtesy Live Law

Teachers Eligibility Test not mandatory for minority educational institutions .. Says Madras High Court

The Madras High Court has ruled against the order of the governments of Tamil Nadu and Puducherry, which made it mandatory for aspirants to clear Teachers Eligibility Test (TET) before appointment will not be applicable to minority institutions, either aided or unaided.

The writ appeals were filed by the two governments and over 300 writ petitions challenging the governments of the two states making passing TET mandatory for teacher’s appointment in schools. The writ petitioners and the contesting respondents in the plethora of appeals are working as Teachers in the minority schools, appointed as against the sanctioned posts. Some appointments were approved and are receiving salary, some of the appointments are pending approval, without any order of rejection, whereas some are receiving salary after obtaining an order of interim direction directing to pay salary to them and to qualify themselves with TET within five years.

A division bench of Justices Huluvadi G Ramesh and M V Muralidaran relied on  Article 30 of the Constitution which confers right to religious minorities to establish and administer educational institutions.Under Article 30(1) of the Constitution, all minorities, whether based on religion or language, shall have the right to establish and administer educational institutions of their choice.

Further, the Apex Court's decision in Pramati Educational and Cultural Trust case that kept minority institutions outside the purview of RTE Act was cited by the bench in support of its decision. The Court had clearly held in this case that RTE Act, 2009 is not applicable to the minority institutions. Hence, the right conferred under Article 30(1) of the Constitution cannot be repealed.
Courtesy Live Law

Non availability of counsel due to illness not a valid ground to recall witness under section 311 of crpc

The Supreme Court in State of Haryana vs. Ram Mehar & Others has held that, recalling of witnesses as envisaged under Section 311 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on the grounds that accused persons are in custody, the prosecution was allowed to recall some of its witnesses earlier, the counsel was ill and magnanimity commands fairness should be shown, is not acceptable.

Apex Court Bench comprising of Justices Dipak Misra and U.U. Lalit set aside a Judgment of High Court which had allowed the accused to recall the witnesses on the aforementioned grounds.

Crl Appeal No. 805,806.2016
Supreme Court of India
Courtesy Live Law

Wednesday, August 24, 2016

Religious education cannot be made compulsory in schools.. Allahabad High Court

ഹിന്ദുമത  പഠനം നിർബന്ധിത  പാഠ്യവിഷയമാക്കാൻ നൽകിയ പൊതു താൽപ്പര്യ ഹർജി തള്ളി

ഹിന്ദുമത  പഠനം നിർബന്ധിത  പാഠ്യവിഷയമാക്കണം എന്നാവശ്യപ്പെട്ട്  ഹിന്ദു ഫ്രണ്ട്  ഫോർ ജസ്റ്റീസ് നൽകിയ പൊതു താൽപ്പര്യ ഹർജി അലഹബാദ് ഹൈക്കോടതി തള്ളി.  ഇസ്ലാം  മതത്തിന്റെ ആവിർഭാവവും ആശയങ്ങളും ഒന്നാം ക്ലാസ് മുതൽ പി ജി വരെ നിർബന്ധിത പാഠ്യവിഷയം ആക്കിയാൽ മതങ്ങൾ തമ്മിലുള്ള ബന്ധം സുദൃഡം ആകുമെന്ന് കോടതി നിരീക്ഷിച്ചുവെങ്കിലും അക്കാര്യങ്ങളാൻ ഉത്തരവ് നൽകാൻ കോടതകൾക്കാവില്ല എന്ന് പറഞ്ഞു. പാർലമെൻറും സംസ്ഥാന നിയമസഭകളുമാണ് അക്കാര്യത്തിൽ തീരുമാനം എടുക്കേണ്ടത്.
അരുണ റോയ് vs യൂണിയൻ ഓഫ് ഇന്ത്യ കേസിൽ സുപ്രീം കോടതി ഇക്കാര്യങ്ങളിൽ കോടതികൾക്കുള്ള അധികാര  അതിർ രേഖ സൂച്ചിപ്പിച്ചിരുന്ന കാര്യം കോടതി എടുത്ത കാട്ടി. ഇന്ത്യൻ ഭരണഘടനയിലെ മേതരത്വം, സോഷ്യലിസം എന്നിവ എടുത്ത് കളയണം എന്നാവശ്യപ്പെട്ട് ഇതേ സംഘടന മുമ്പ് നൽകിയ കേസ് കോടതി തള്ളിയിരുന്നതാണ്. (Case No. Misc 18098.2016) 

niyamadarsi 2016(8)

Friday, August 19, 2016


As per the as per Kerala Municipal Act, 1994 (Section 254) it is mandatory for all employees who are drawing a half yearly salary of more than Rs. 12,000/- to pay profession tax. This tax is to be paid to the respective corporation/ municipality in which the company is situated. The tax slab is as mentioned in the below table.
Sl.NoHalf Yearly IncomeHalf Yearly Tax
1Rs 12,000 to Rs 17,999.Rs 120
2Rs 18,000 to Rs 29,999Rs 180
3Rs 30,000 to Rs 44,999Rs 300
4Rs 45,000 to Rs 59,999Rs 450
5Rs 60,000 to Rs 74,999Rs 600
6Rs 75,000 to Rs 99,999Rs 750
7Rs 1,00,000 to Rs 1,24,999Rs 1,000
8Rs 1,25,000 and aboveRs 1,250
The Profession Tax for the first half year (April – September) should be paid on or before August 31 and for the second half year (October – March) should be paid on or before February end. Normally the Secretary, Corporation/Municipality will issue a notice to the Managing Director/ Owner of the company to intimate the payment of profession tax for the corresponding period.
The delayed payment will attract a penalty at the rate of 1% per month. Also the penalty for not paying the profession tax will charge a fine of Rs. 5000/-.
For the submission of profession tax, it is mandatory that the below details are furnished.
Sl.NoNameDesignationMonthly SalarySalary x 6 monthsProfession Tax
For the calculation of salary, Basic, Special Allowance, Dearness Allowance, Bonus, Extra Income (arrears, leave surrender etc if any) to be added. Again a declaration by authorized authority that we have included all the employees for the payment of profession tax, company seal, authorized signatory are also essential. The photocopy/ original of the profession tax payed for the previous period (if available) is to be submitted while submitting the tax. On submission of tax, the company will be issued with a receipt by Secretary, Corporation/ Municipality.

Thursday, August 18, 2016

The proposed Motor Vehicles bill 2016 introduced in Lok Sabha on 9.8.16 - nut shell

The Motor Vehicles(Amendment) Bill 2016, introduced in the Lok Sabha by the Union Minister of Road Transport and Highways, Sri. Nitin Gadkari, on 09.08.2016, seeks to bring about comprehensive changes in the present Motor Vehicles Act. 
The salient features of the Bill are as follows :-
 Limits on insurer’s liability
 The proposed amendment seeks to put a cap on the liability to be borne by insurance companies in respect of third party claims. As per the present Act, the liability of the insurer for indemnifying the owner for compensation claims in respect of death or bodily injury arising out of use of motor vehicle is unlimited. In other words, as per present Act, the insurer has to cover the liability incurred in respect of any accident to the extent of actual amount of liability incurred.(See Section 147(2)(a) of present Act). However, the proposed Bill seeks to replace the said provision with an altogether new provision, which puts an upper limit of liability of insurer to an extent of Rs.10 lakh in respect of death and Rs. 5 lakhs in respect of bodily injury arising out of motor vehicle accident. As per the new provision, the Central Government, by rule-making, is empowered to fix the premium and corresponding liability of the insurer, in consultation with the Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority. The proviso to the proposed new Section 147(2) states that such liability fixed by the Central Government shall not exceed Rs. 10 lakhs in respect of death, and Rs.5 lakhs in respect of bodily injury. This means that the liability fixed on the insurer can be even lesser than Rs.10 lakhs and Rs.5 lakhs in case of death or bodily injury, as the case may be. The consequence of this section would be that in compensation claims, the victims will not be able to realize more than Rs.10 lakhs in case of death, and Rs.5 lakhs in case of bodily injury from the insurer under third party claim, and will have to realize the excess amount from the owner or driver. This provision will certainly frustrate the social welfare intent of compulsory third party insurance. 

Enabling insurer to seek exoneration from liability for non-receipt of premium 
The Bill seeks to make non-receipt of premium one of the specified conditions, which would enable the insurer to seek exoneration from the liability. As per the present law, non-receipt of premium would not amount to breach of a statutory condition. Hence, even if the cheque drawn towards premium was subsequently dishonoured, the insurer was held liable to satisfy the liability towards third party victims( See New India Assurance Co.Ltd. v. Rula AIR 2000 SC 1082 : (2000) 3 SCC 195)). The settled law on the point was that once an insurance certificate is issued, then the insurer will have to meet third party claims, notwithstanding the fact that it was entitled to avoid or cancel the policy; although it can later recover the amount from the insured. However, the proposed amendment enables the insurer to avoid the policy on the ground of non-receipt of premium, by virtue of new section as Secton 149 2(c) 

Survival of claim to the estate of claimant after his death  
As per the present law, a claim for personal injury would abate on the death of the claimant, and would not survive to his estate, due to the operation of Section 306 of the Indian Succession Act.( Except in Kerala where due to the operation of Kerala Torts(Miscellaneous) Provisions Act, which enables legal heirs to continue action for personal injury even after expiry of original claimant). The claim would survive to the estate only if death had nexus with the injuries, and only in such cases the legal heirs would be entitled to come on record and continue with the prosecution of the claim. The proposed Bill seeks to remedy that situation, bv incorporation of a new sub-section, Section 166(5), with a non-obstante clause which says that the right of a person to claim compensation for injury in an accident shall, upon the death of the person injured, survive to his legal representatives, irrespective of whether the cause of death is relatable to or had any nexus with the injury or not.. 

Hit and Run Scheme
 The compensation payable for victims in ‘hit and run’ out of the scheme fund under Section 161 has been enhanced to Rs. 2 lakhs in case of death, and Rs. 50,000/- in case of bodily injury, from Rs.25,000/- and Rs.12,500/- respectively. 

Motor Vehicle Accident Fund 
The Bill seeks to introduce a Motor Vehicle Accident Fund under Section 164B, which is to be augmented by a special tax or cess. The Fund is to be utilized for giving immediate relief to victims of motor accidents, and also hit and run cases. The compensation paid out of the fund shall be deductible from the compensation which the victim may get in future from the Tribunal. Stringent Penalties for Road Traffic Violations 

Courtesy - Manu Sebastian

Mother Theresa Documentary

Thursday, August 11, 2016

Date of birth in passport can be corrected.. Held Rajasthan High Court

Rajasthan High Court on 10th August 2016 affirmatively ruled in favour of avoiding duplicity of approvals in dealing with a minor and bonafide error and re-issuance of Passport thereby. While allowing the writ petition filed in M/S Shilpi vs. Union of India, the High Court directed the Passport Authorities to carry out the desired changes within the stipulated time without insisting the requirement of declaratory order of the First Class Judicial magistrate.

The petitioner claimed that her actual date of birth being 24.01.96 was erroneously mentioned as 10.04.96 on the passport issued in 2006. Despite submitting the requisite documents which hold legal validity such as Licence, Secondary School Examination, Pan Card etc , fresh passport has been denied pending a declaratory order by First Class Judicial magistrate after due enquiry.

The court observed the validity of the case and ruled in favour of the claimant and noted that the case stands covered by order dated 31.10.11 passed by this court in "Piyush Chopra vs. Union of India" wherein the court observed , “after having heard the learned counsel for the parties and after having perused the material placed on record, this Court is clearly of the view that in the present case, the respondents have chosen to proceed in a rather perfunctory manner and have put forward the unnecessary demand of the so-called declaratory order regarding date of birth while ignoring all other material on record.”

In the referred case the court had expressly stated, “it would rather be a travesty of justice if the respondents are permitted to avoid issuance of passport to the petitioner even when he has stated the date of birth in conformity with what has been mentioned in his academic career and in all the   related documents including the Secondary School Certificate.”

Based on the orders issued in the previous case and also taking into account of the nature of changes sought the court stated as follows:

“In considered opinion of this court, the correction sought for by the petitioner is very minor correction and it appears to be a bona fide error that her date of birth was wrongly mentioned when she applied for the passport and therefore, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the respondents are not justified in refusing the correction in the date of birth, as prayed for.”

The authorities were directed to carry out the necessary changes based on the date of birth in the Secondary School Examination Certificate without insisting on a magisterial Approval. The court also stated that the authorities may carry out the requisites and reissue the passport within two months of the issued order.

Courtesy Live Law

Union Approves amendment bill .. Maternity Benefit Act

പ്രസവാനുകൂല്യ നിയമ ഭേദഗതി ബില്ലിന് കേന്ദ്ര മന്ത്രാലയം അനുമതി നൽകി

The maternity benefit Act 1961 protects the employment of women during the time of her maternity and entitles her of a 'maternity benefit' - i.e. full paid absence from work - to take care for her child. The act is applicable to all establishments employing 10 or more persons. The amendments will help 1.8 million (approx.) women workforce in organised sector.

The amendments to Maternity Benefit Act, 1961 are as follows:

Increase Maternity Benefit from 12 weeks to 26 weeks for two surviving children and 12 weeks for more than two children.
12 weeks Maternity Benefit to a 'Commissioning mother' and 'Adopting mother'.
Facilitate 'Work from home'. • Mandatory provision of Creche in respect of establishment having 50 or more employees.
The 44th, 45th and 46th Indian Labour Conference had recommended enhancement of Maternity Benefits to 24 weeks.

Sunday, August 7, 2016

What would be caste is child in a mixed marriage ?

What would be the caste of a child, whose father belonged to a Forward Community and mother from a Scheduled Caste Community? Normal presumption is that his/her caste would be that of her father. The question whether such a child can have caste of her mother, and whether such a certificate issued by Revenue authority is legal, has been answered by a Division Bench of Andhra Pradesh High Court in the affirmative.
The Division Bench comprising of Justices V. Ramasubramanian and Anis referring to Apex Court decision in Rameshbhai Dabhai Naika Vs. State of Gujarat observed: “It is clear that the Supreme Court did not say that a child born to a couple, who married transgressing the barriers of Caste, would take the community of his or her father and not that of his or her mother. On the contrary, the Supreme Court categorically pointed out that the answer to the question would depend upon the circumstances in which the child was brought up and that the same was primarily one of facts.”
Courtesy to Live Law

Friday, August 5, 2016

Financial reservation struck down by Gujarat High Court August 2016

സാമ്പത്തിക സംവരണം ഗുജറാത്ത് ഹൈക്കോടതി സ്റ്റേ ചെയ്തു ....
ഗുജറാത്തിൽ വിദ്യാഭ്യാസ സ്ഥാപനങ്ങളിൽ പ്രവേശനത്തിനും സർക്കാർ നിയമനങ്ങളിലും 10 ശതമാനം സംവരണം സാമ്പത്തികമായി പിന്നോക്കം നിൽക്കുന്നവർക്കായി മാറ്റി വയ്ക്കുന്ന ഓർഡിനൻസ് സംസ്ഥാനം കൊണ്ടു വന്നിരുന്നു. എന്നാൽ അത് ഭരണഘടനാവിരുദ്ധം ആണെന്നും പoനങ്ങൾ നടത്താതെയാണെന്നും കണ്ട് ഗുജറാത്ത് ഹൈക്കോടതി സ്റ്റേ ചെയ്തു
In a big blow to Gujarat Government, High Court of Gujarat has quashed Gujarat Ordinance No.1 of 2016, which provides for the reservation of seats in the educational institutions in the State and of appointments and posts in the services under the State in favour of the Economically Weaker Sections of unreserved categories

There was a long-standing demand from Patidar and other communities for providing reservation in the government jobs and higher education. There was also agitation/movement as these demands were not considered for reservation.

The Gujarat government, on 1 May, promulgated an ordinance giving a 10% quota for economically weaker sections (EWS) in government jobs and colleges. This was to extend to those who were in the general category but with an annual income of less than Rs.6 lakh.

The government’s 10% reservation for EWS was in addition to the 49.5% for scheduled castes and tribes, and other backward classes.

There were several petitions filed in the high court against the ordinance as it exceeded the rule that only a maximum of 50% could be reserved.