Daily Legal News
- Supreme Court hears the cases regarding non-payment of AGR dues.
The apex court set aside a PIL urging the court to grant “immediate arrangement” recovery of the AGR (Adjusted Gross Revenue) dues citing the reason that the court is currently hearing them from telecom companies due to non-payment of the dues. A three judge bench headed by Justice Arun Mishra asserted R-Com resolution, Reliance Jio and government to produce necessary papers and records in order to ascertain who is liable for the dues in Adjusted Gross Revenue of RCom. The bench further questioned that “when the sovereign right is transferred for using spectrum, can dues arising be subservient to dues claimed by secured creditors Dues arising out of the use of natural, public resources cannot be merely operational dues, a matter of public money.”
In the case of Bharti Airtel, out of the total amount which can be summed up to Rs. 43,980 crore only Rs. 18,004 crore has been paid by the telco. Telco is seeking an extension in the timeline for 15-years to cover the rest of the amount. In the case of Vodafone Idea, the total amount accounts to Rs. 58,254 crore out of which only Rs. 7,854 crore is cleared. The AGR due of Tata Teleservices’ accounts to Rs. 16,798 crore out of which only Rs. 4197 crore is cleared.
- Lawyers voice apprehension over the verdict of the SC in the Prashant Bhushan’s case.
The lawyers citing the position of Prashant Bhushan in the society, stated that “his tweets do not say anything out of the ordinary, other than what is routinely expressed about the court’s working in recent years by many on public fora and on social media.” The decision of the court to hold Prashant Bhushan guilty of contempt of the court also brought together the attention of various retired judges who raised their concerns over this verdict by stating, “This judgment does not restore the authority of the court in the eyes of the public. Rather, it will discourage lawyers from being outspoken… A bar silenced under the threat of contempt, will undermine the independence and ultimately the strength of the Court. A silenced bar, cannot lead to a strong court.”, consequently, all the lawyers have appealed the court to not give effect to the verdict given on August 14, stating “We are of the firm view that the judgment must not be given effect to, until a larger bench, sitting in open court after the pandemic has the opportunity to review the standards of criminal contempt.”
- Refusal of the Petition Seeking FIR against Priyanka Gandhi, Rana Kapoor, Milind Deora:
In the case of Akhil Bhartiya Shanti Pratishthan vs CBI & Ors, Delhi High Court refused the plea seeking an FIR against Priyanka Gandhi, Rana Kapoor, Milind Deora for allerged extortion, money laundering, cheating, misrepresentation and fraud in case of the sale of the paint.
The petition was dismissed by the Justice Vibhu Bakhru and referred the petitioner to move the appropriate court of the code of criminal procedure.
- Refusal of Supreme Court to Postpone the NEET and JEE Examination:
Eleven students from 11 different states of India had filed a petition for conduct of the examination after the pandemic situation. The supreme court of India dismissed the plea of the postponement of the NEET and JEE examination, 2020. And the Supreme Court also held that the NEET and the JEE examination will be as per the given schedule. All the safety measures and care will be taken for the protection and safety of the students.
- Extension of moratorium period for all students in the state amid COVID – 19
Many students in our country are unable to complete their studies or any kind of higher education is due to lack financial support. In 2009, central government came up with a new scheme Central Sector Interest Subsidy Scheme (CSIS) to ensure that no person should be denied of higher education due to lack of funds. The Karnataka HC issued notice in a PIL seeking extension of moratorium period to all students of weaker sections for repayment of loans due to this pandemic as it had affected the economic growth of the country. The court the adjourned the next hearing on September 4.
- SC collegium appoints judges of HCs for Allahabad, Gujarat and Kerala
The SC collegium, which appoints and elevates the lawyers and judges to SC and transfer of judges to high courts and apex courts. The SC collegium on August 14, 2020 issued notice of appointment of judges for Allahabad, Gujarat and Kerala HC.
The collegium recommended the following judicial officers as HC judges of:
- Allahabad HC
- sanjay kumar pachori
- Subhash chandra sharma
- subhash chand
- saroj yadav
- Gujarat HC
- Vaibhavi Devang Nanavati
- Nirzarkumar Sushilkumar Desai
- Nikhil Sreedharan Kariel
- Kerala HC appointed two judicial officers and two advocates
- Karunakaran Babu
- Kauser Eddappagath
- Ziyad Rehman AA
- Murali Purushothaman
- “Review petition will be filed”- Advocate Prashant Bhushan on his Conviction.
Last week Advocate Prashant Bhushan was convicted guilty of Contempt of Court on the grounds of making a public tweet which was found to be of a criticising nature against the Chief Justice of India S.A. Bobde.
The Apex Court on 14th August passed a judgement wherein Adv. Prashant Bhushan was convicted guilty for contempt of court and the sentence term was left to be decided for the next hearing on August 20. In this Case two tweets made by Bhushan were found to be criticising wherein one was Bhushan commenting on the picture of CJI on his bike and the other was explaining the role of court played in last few years according to Bhushan. The Apex Court on this took a suo motto action and filed a case against Bhushan.
Today, in a similar Contempt hearing case against Bhushan, which was a case filed in the year 2009 where Bhushan had expressed his views against judicial corruption to Tehelka Magazine; a three- judge bench of Justice Arun Mishra, Justice B.R.Gavai and Justice Krishna Murari wherein Bhushan was presented by Senior Counsel Rajeev Dhavan mentioned that Bhushan will file a review plea against the conviction order passed on August 14 stating that the Judgement has many Imbalances.
Many famous personalities have also expressed their disappointment on the judgement of conviction. So, Adv. Prashant Bhushan has mentioned to the 3 judge bench that he will be filing a review petition against the conviction order.
- Physical Examinations to commence from 14th September, PWD Students data ordered to be accumulated properly – Delhi HC to Delhi University.
Delhi HC is hearing the matter in case of examinations of final year students of DU. The court orders for physical exams to commence from September 14 and aslo ordered DU to properly accumulate the data of the PWD Students who would be appearing for the physical exams.
On grounds of limited attendance of students for Online OBE and various mishaps on part of the Grievance Redressal Committee, the court permitted to conduct physical exams expressing that Conduction of exams after 20 September would be unreasonable and ordered Du to conduct exams from 8 September which was then requested by DU for an additional week’ time and finally court order the exams to be conducted from 14 September.
The HC also mentioned certain points wherein the PWD students’ data appearing for exams would be properly collected by the University, Mark sheets of 5th semester law students would be digitally mailed to them, University shall make a record of the answer sheets received by them through mails and few more. Thus the court permitted the conduction of physical exams along with above-mentioned points.