LEGAL NEWS 12.11.2008

Dixit says Commonwealth Games preparation is in full swing
http://www.newspostonline.com/features/dixit-says-commonwealth-games-preparation-is-in-full-swing-2008111213665
admin November 12th, 2008 Features
New Delhi, Nov.12 (ANI): Delhi Chief Minister Sheila Dixit on Wednesday said that the preparations for the Commonwealth Games is in full swing and promised that facilities for the games would be ready well before the event gets underway in 2010.
Reacting to a statement made by Austin Sealy, the chairman of the Commonwealth Games Federation (CGF) Co-ordination Committee that New Delhi could lose the right to host the 2010 Commonwealth Games if organisers are forced to shift the athletes” village from its present location, she said: “All I can say is that the Commonwealth Games will take place and the preparation is on in full swing. Now, somebody has filed a PIL (Public Interest Litigation) that the village should not be made there. We have all the answers to the PIL. The work had begun after getting all clearances. Also,NDA (National Democratic Alliance) had given the permission for the village during its regime. Presently, the work is in progress.”
The games village is being built on the banks of the River Yamuna, and is the subject of a legal case after a petition raised environmental concerns over the project.
The Delhi High Court on Monday gave directions for a committee, headed by noted environmentalist RK Pachauri, to oversee all construction activities for the Commonwealth Games 2010.
The court asked the five-member committee to oversee the ecological impact of the construction of the Commonwealth Games Village and submit a report on whether the village, to house around 8,500 athletes and officials, should be allowed at the spot.
Following the Court’’s observation the CGF coordination commission held a meeting on Tuesday (November 11) in national capital New Delhi to review the games preparations and its chairman Austin Sealy said that it would urge the organising committee to try to have the matter resolved urgently.
“There is an issue affecting the location of the New Delhi games village for the 2010 games. This is the matter which in our part of the world we say is sub-judicate that is before the law court and therefore we would not like to be seen to be commenting on the issue at this stage which would be most inappropriate to do so. But what we would note, however, is that at this stage if there is to be any rearrangements to the games village accommodation it would seriously jeopardize India’’s hosting of the Games. We would therefore urge the organising committee to try to have the matter resolved as a matterof urgency,” Sealy said.
The panel also raised concerns over the delay in starting the velodrome construction and urged the organising committee chiefs to intensify their overall efforts.
Construction delays have already forced next year’’s World Badminton Championships to be shifted to Hyderabad. (ANI)
http://www.newspostonline.com/features/dixit-says-commonwealth-games-preparation-is-in-full-swing-2008111213665

PIL dismissed on Madurai Corporation by-election
http://aggregator.in/uncategorized/pil-dismissed-on-madurai-corporation-by-election/
11.12.2008 by Oneindia - News –
Madurai, Nov 12: The Madras High Court Bench dismissed two public interest litigation (PIL) petitions and termed it as pesonal enemity. The petitioners had claimed that the September 12 by-poll was marred by violence unleashed by Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam cadres.
http://aggregator.in/uncategorized/pil-dismissed-on-madurai-corporation-by-election/



CWGF concerned over PIL on Games Village
http://theadda.com/cricket/2008/11/11/cwgf-concerned-over-pil-on-games-village/
11 November, 2008 (22:21) Sports By: Administrator
New Delhi
, Nov 11 (IANS) The Commonwealth Games Federation (CWGF) Tuesday said that India&#39s hosting of the 2010 Games would be &#39seriously jeopardised&#39 if there is a last-minute change in the site of the controversial Games Village.
The coordination commission of the CWGF, which reviewed the progress of the work for the 2010 Games, also expressed concern over Cycling velodrome the construction of which is still to begin.
The Commonwealth Games Village site on the Yamuna riverbed is embroiled in a legal tangle in Delhi High Court after a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) was filed citing damage the Village would cause to the environment. The PIL said it would affect the groundwater recharge and environment regeneration.
Commission Chairman Austin Sealy urged the 2010 Organising Committee (OC) to &#39try and resolve it as a matter of urgency&#39
&#39CWGF is aware that the issue is presently before the court and therefore considers it inappropriate to comment on the matter other than to note that any change, at this late stage, to the Games village arrangement would seriously jeopardise India&#39s hosting of the Games,&#39 Sealy told reporters.
On the construction of the cycling venue, Sealy noted: &#39Work has still not commenced with the Games barely two years away. The OC and Sports Authority of India is committed to provide the Cycling&#39s world body with a top class facility.&#39
&#39There is no more time to be lost in this area and the Commission is concerned at how the facility will come up at such a short time.&#39
Sealy said India can put up a temporary facility instead of constructing a stadium for cycling.
The Indian Olympic Association President Suresh Kalmadi, however, said tenders for the cycling venue have been floated and it will be finalised by December 15. &#39Work will begin shortly after that.&#39
Kalmadi also said construction at the Games village is on as there is no stay from the court.
Sealy said that they were satisfied with the other preparations.
&#39The Commission saw the construction progress across all venues and overall impressions are positive. We are satisfied with quality of the venues coming up. All steps are going in right direction.
&#39India has the manpower and it can come up with facilities at a faster pace,&#39 he said
The Committee&#39s next meeting will be in March and it looks forward to to seeing considerable progress.
&#39The operational progress is linked to resource allocation and it is imperative that the budget approvals are given with urgency to the organising committee&#39s by the sports ministry,&#39 Sealy said.
http://theadda.com/cricket/2008/11/11/cwgf-concerned-over-pil-on-games-village/



Jharkhand case: MNS relies on SC judgment
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Mumbai/Jharkhand_case_MNS_relies_on_SC_judgment/articleshow/3701424.cms
12 Nov 2008, 0001 hrs IST, Somit Sen, TNN
MUMBAI: The MNS is hopeful that a Supreme Court judgment may just ensure that party chief Raj Thackeray doesnt have to go to Jamshedpur in connection with a private complaint filed against him in Jharkhand. The case against Raj pertains to remarks made by him about Chhat puja in January. Hamid Raza, a lawyer from Jamshedpur, alleged that Thackeray had hurt religious sentiments. The Jamshedpur court issued a non-bailable warrant against Raj on September 30, against which the MNS chief moved the Jharkhand high court, which would hear the matter on November 14. Party spokesperson Nitin Sardesai said they would rely on an SC order, which said that if any complaint was pending against a person with the local police, then the offence should be tried locally where the action had occurred__Mumbai, in Raj's case.
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Mumbai/Jharkhand_case_MNS_relies_on_SC_judgment/articleshow/3701424.cms




LDA scam: UP moves SC for action against Amar
http://www.expressindia.com/latest-news/lda-scam-up-moves-sc-for-action-against-amar/384078/
Express News Service
Posted: Nov 11, 2008 at 0940 hrs IST
Lucknow, November 10: The Mayawati government has moved the Supreme Court seeking permission to take action against Samajwadi Party general secretary Amar Singh. The basis of the plea is an inquiry report by state’s Principal Secretary, Urban Development, on the alleged illegal allotment of plots in Gomti Nagar, Lucknow. The report holds Singh guilty of misusing his power during the Mulayam Singh Yadav regime.
The state government had filed an application on November 8 seeking permission to take action against Singh. “It is prayed that the court permit the government to proceed in accordance with law and to take necessary action on the basis of the report,” the state government had said in its application.
The Lucknow Development Authority (LDA) had allotted Singh a plot in 1994 that was meant for the Economically Weaker Sections, according to the report.
The state government’s move comes in the wake of the Allahabad High Court restraining it from initiating action against Singh. However, the Lucknow Bench of the Allahabad High Court, on June 13, gave liberty to the state government to approach the apex court for proceeding against Singh.
A petition filed by advocate Vishwanath Chaturvedi seeking a high-level probe into the allotments worth Rs 2.80 crore made in Vipul Khand, Gomti Nagar, has been pending in the apex court, which on September 12, 2005 by an interim order had restrained transfer of the plots until further orders.
The UP government’s application said that on November 2, 2007, the apex court had issued notices to Yadav and Singh, among others, to initiate criminal prosecutions against them as they were beneficiaries of the alleged illegal allotment of plots.
The report said two plots were illegally allotted to the politician, out of which one was meant for EWS.
“It is clear on examination of the record that in this case Amar Singh was allotted (one) plot directly from EWS category which is completely against the rules,” the report said.
In another case, two plots were illegally allotted to one Aaliya Khatoon by the LDA, out of which one plot was purchased by Singh.
http://www.expressindia.com/latest-news/lda-scam-up-moves-sc-for-action-against-amar/384078/



Is RIL free to price gas? HC asks
http://sify.com/finance/fullstory.php?id=14795593
Sreejiraj Eluvangal / DNA MONEY Wednesday, 12 November , 2008, 08:36
Mumbai: The over-two-year-old legal battle between the Ambani brothers over gas pricing looks to be moving towards some conclusion.
Reliance not to transfer stake in gas block to subsidiary
The Bombay High Court on Tuesday asked the central government to give a clear ‘yes’ or ‘no’ on whether the Mukesh Ambani-promoted Reliance Industries (RIL) has the freedom to price its gas as it wants.
“Can you tell RIL that you cannot supply the gas [at prices other than as fixed by the government]?” a division bench of justice J N Patel and justice K K Tated asked.
HC asks Ambanis for Reliance demerger MoU
The judges remarked that if the government has the authority under its contract with RIL to set the price at which the gas from the Krishna Godavari basin is to be sold, the question of the Anil Ambani group getting it at a cheaper rate does not arise.
RIL had been arguing that it does not have the freedom to sell the gas from its D6 block in Krishna Godavari basin without first getting the price approved by the government.
ArcelorMittal, RIL in WSJ's respected companies list
The Anil Ambani-promoted Reliance Natural Resources (RNRL), on the other hand, has been arguing that under the terms of engagement between the government and RIL, the latter has the freedom to determine the price at which it will sell the gas.
RIL had entered into a deal with RNRL in 2006 to supply gas at relatively cheap rates as part compensation for Anil Ambani relinquishing his rights in RIL.
Reliance Industries sets up overseas units
The counsel for the central government, retired justice T S Doabia, refused to take a stand on the issue and asked for time till Friday to file a reply.
When the judges asked him if it was true that RIL has the right to sell the gas at any price “as long as you [the government] get your share,” he replied, “That is not true.”
Reliance Industries dips below Rs 2,000 level
The bench said the issue can be settled if the government comes forward and says that RIL has no right to sell the gas in violation of the government policies in this regard.
“Can you tell the contractor [RIL] not to supply any gas [to RNRL] because, according to the gas allocation policy, RNRL is nowhere in the priority list?,” the bench asked, pointing to the gas allocation policy announced by the government in June.
According to it, the top priority for supply of natural gas is for the fertiliser sector, followed by existing gas-based power plants and city gas distribution projects.
According to the policy, which was announced “without prejudice” to the matter sub judice, RNRL, which has does not have an existing power plant, will not qualify as a buyer of natural gas under the present circumstances.
The judges pointed out that if, under the terms of engagement, the government had the right to dictate prices to RIL, it need not have approached the court in the case of RIL not supplying gas to NTPC.
Both NTPC and RNRL are fighting Mukesh Ambani’s RIL to get gas at cheaper rates. RIL, however, wants to sell the gas from its D6 field at market price or the relatively higher price arrived at by a group of ministers last year.
The government counsel did not have a clear answer when the judges asked if the priced arrived at by the group of ministers was a sale price or only meant for calculating the government’s profit-share from gas sales.
“Once the contractor gets the contract, is he free to sell it any price as long as you get your share?” the bench asked the government counsel.
More India business stories
Doabia said he will ask a senior government official to remain present before the court on Friday and requested for time till then to file a reply.
Another government lawyer said they will present the production sharing contract, which lays out the powers and responsibilities of RIL and the government with regard to the gas field and production, before the court on Friday.
Under license from www.3dsyndication.com
http://sify.com/finance/fullstory.php?id=14795593




Fresh DGP selection process gets HC nod
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Mumbai/Fresh_DGP_selection_process_gets_HC_nod/articleshow/3701406.cms
12 Nov 2008, 0339 hrs IST, Shibu Thomas, TNN
MUMBAI: The Bombay high court on Tuesday extended by a week its reprieve for Maharashtra director-general of police A N Roy from the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) order quashing his appointment last month. Hearing appeals filed by the state and Roy, a division bench of Chief Justice Swatanter Kumar and Justice Sharad Bobde, however, remarked that the government could go ahead with a fresh selection process for the post. "The post of DGP is very important,'' said the judges, adding that if they upheld the tribunal's order, then Roy would have to go immediately and the converse would hold good too. The CAT, on October 8, while quashing Roy's appointment had said the state government was wrong in selecting the officer as DGP superseding three IPS officers S Virk, S Chakravarty and J D Virkar. The tribunal had based its order on a judgment by the Supreme Court, which ruled that the state must select a DGP from among the panel of three senior-most IPS officers and the tenure of the selected candidate would be of a minimum of two years, irrespective of the date of superannuation of the said officer. In its appeal, the state government said that Virk was not considered for the post as at the time of the selection he was under suspension following allegations by the Punjab government of amassing wealth disproportionate to the source of income. On Tuesday, Virk's lawyers Mahesh Jethmalani and Sandeep Marne moved an application seeking to intervene in the case before the high court. Virk's case is that as per the apex court judgment all the three senior most officer have to be included in the "zone of consideration'', irrespective of the fact whether they are under suspension. The court said that it would decide on whether to allow Virk's application on the next date of hearing. Roy, in his petition, said that the post of the DGP was a sensitive one, could be held only by an incumbent in whom the state government had the highest confidence and that it could not go by seniority alone. The state too supported this saying that Roy was the most competent officer to hold the post of DGP. The case is scheduled for further hearing on November 18.
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Mumbai/Fresh_DGP_selection_process_gets_HC_nod/articleshow/3701406.cms





HC grants bail to Chhota Rajan's brother
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Mumbai/HC_grants_bail_to_Chhota_Rajans_brother/articleshow/3701380.cms
12 Nov 2008, 0422 hrs IST, Shibu Thomas, TNN
MUMBAI: The Bombay high court on Tuesday granted bail to Prakash Nikhalje, brother of gangster Chhota Rajan, in an extortion case.
The police had booked Prakash, Rajan's wife Sujata and other associates under the stringent Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act (MCOCA) for allegedly threatening a city builder for ransom.
A special court had last year granted bail to Sujata on the grounds that prime facie no case was made out against her under MCOCA.
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Mumbai/HC_grants_bail_to_Chhota_Rajans_brother/articleshow/3701380.cms




HC relief for businessman in duty evasion case
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Mumbai/HC_relief_for_businessman_in_duty_evasion_case/articleshow/3701394.cms
11 Nov 2008, 2348 hrs IST, Prafulla Marpakwar, TNN
MUMBAI: In a landmark order, the Bombay high court has held that neither the directorate of revenue intelligence (DRI) nor the directorate of enforcement (ED) have the power to seize a passport as it is not a document. "In view of the clear pronouncement by the apex court holding the Passports Act to be a complete code in dealing with impounding of the passport, we have no doubt that the act of DRI and ED of impounding the petitioner's passport is without authority of law....we can't accept the submission that the passport could be impounded by having recourse to general provisions under the Income Tax Act,'' the court observed while allowing a criminal writ petition filed by Pune-based businessman Avinash Bhosale. Bhosale had filed a criminal writ petition challenging the decision of the DRI and later of the ED to seize his passport. A bench comprising chief justice Swatanter Kumar and justice A P Deshpande had on September 17, 2008 reserved the order and it was pronounced on October 8, 2008. Senior counsel Vinod Bobade, appearing for Bhosale, had argued that the authority carrying out investigation under the Foreign Exchange Management Act (FEMA) and under the Income Tax Act, had no authority in law, to impound the passport. The passport can only be impounded by having recourse to the provisions of the Passport Act by the authority vested with the power under the relevant act. According to the provisions of the FEMA, it merely confers powers by making reference as per the provisions of the I-T Act and that power to search and seize documents, which is available under the I-T act, does not extend to seizure of the passport. "The term `documents' cannot be construed to mean and include a passport, for dealing with which a separate enactment__ the Passport Act exists,'' Bobade told the court. In addition, Bobade also submitted the observations of the apex court in the Suresh Nanda case. The apex court had observed that the Passports Act is a complete code in relating to impounding of the passport and even a court exercising powers under the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) has no authority, power or jurisdiction to impound a passport. Further, it was observed that the Passports Act is a special legislation dealing with a specific subject and hence for impounding the passport, one has to have recourse to the provisions of the Passports Act. While interpreting the term documents appearing in the CrPC, the apex court held that the term documents can't be so widely read to include passports. Gopal Subramanian, appearing on behalf of the Centre submitted that provisions of FEMA and other enactments, relating to foreigners and foreign exchange are in addition to and not in derogation of the provisions of the Passports Act. As such the term documents, which finds place under the I-T Act, includes passport. The passport officer's authority to impound the passport is not exhaustive and there are other statutes enabling the exercise of similar or analogous powers relating to the impounding or retention of the passport. Those powers would also be available to the authorities for impounding the passport. Allowing the criminal writ petition, the high court asked the DRI and ED to return the passport to Bhosale without further delay, but after submitting comprehensive information about his foreign accounts to the DRI and ED.
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Mumbai/HC_relief_for_businessman_in_duty_evasion_case/articleshow/3701394.cms





Boy goes missing from minister's house, HC orders CBI probe
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/India/Boy_goes_missing_from_ministers_house_HC_orders_CBI_probe/articleshow/3702002.cms
12 Nov 2008, 0339 hrs IST, TNN
JABALPUR: The Madhya Pradesh high court here on Tuesday ordered the CBI to probe into the disappearance of a youth from the residence of state revenue minister Kamal Patel under mysterious circumstances. The verdict came in response to a habeas corpus petition moved before the court by the missing boy's father, who also sought a CBI probe into the matter as the minister's son was among those involved in the case. According to petitioner Ramvilas Jat, his college-going son Durgesh Jat has been missing since March 5. Quoting his son's friend, he said Durgesh was last seen in the minister's official residence from where he was taken to some undisclosed destination in the presence of the Harda superintendent of police. The state police, he submitted, even after several complaints and requests, failed to act and, therefore, he wanted CBI to probe the disappearance of his son. Jat said he had learnt that his son had suffered a gunshot wound at Patel's residence, where he had accompanied Sandeep Patel, the minister's son, and some other boys. As his son was injured, he was taken away on a four wheeler in the presence of the Harda SP from the minister's residence and since then, there was no news about him. Whenever he approached the minister's residence, he was assured that Durgesh was undergoing treatment and would return soon, but he never showed up. Taking a serious view of the matter, the Bench of Chief Justice A K Patnaik and Justice Ajit Singh ordered a CBI probe and directed the state government to provide maximum co-operation to the Central investigating agency, even after the contention of the state government that a CID probe was on in the matter.
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/India/Boy_goes_missing_from_ministers_house_HC_orders_CBI_probe/articleshow/3702002.cms





HC asks CBI to probe police firing on Etawah students
http://www.expressindia.com/latest-news/hc-asks-cbi-to-probe-police-firing-on-etawah-students/384597/
Vijay Pratap Singh
Posted: Nov 12, 2008 at 0158 hrs IST
Allahabad, November 11 The Allahabad High Court has directed the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) to investigate the police firing on students at the Chaudhary Charan Singh PG College in Saifai on January 9.
A student, Mukesh Yadav, was killed and two others sustained serious injuries when the students and Samajwadi Party (SP) supporters resorted to violence during a protest at the college.
They were protesting against the manhandling of SP leaders Shivpal Singh Yadav and Akhilesh Yadav by the police.
A Division Bench of the Allahabad High Court, comprising Justices Imtiaz Murtaza and R M Chauhan, has directed the CBI to submit its report within three months. It will hear the case in the first week of December.
In its order, the judges directed the police officers named in the FIR be transferred immediately from Etawah.
The order was passed after the court heard a writ petition filed by Ram Gopal, an employee of the college, who had moved the court seeking inquiry by an independent agency.
The petitioner had alleged that though the firing had taken place on June 9, the police had registered an FIR only when an order was passed by the magistrate after a few days.
The police in its final report had also tried to protect high-level police officers, he added.
The FIR was lodged against Etawah SSP Siyaram Saran Aditya, ASP Ram Pal Gautam and others.
The court in its order observed: “We are of the view that in order to ensure justice, it is necessary to entrust the matter for investigation to the agency other than the local police which did not appear to have conducted the investigation fairly and properly. In the circumstances, the investigation was ordered to be entrusted to the CBI.”
http://www.expressindia.com/latest-news/hc-asks-cbi-to-probe-police-firing-on-etawah-students/384597/



Petition filed in HC over killing of fishermen
http://www.ptinews.com/pti/ptisite.nsf/0/2462766076D34316652574FE005CD879?OpenDocument
Chennai, Nov 11 (PTI) A city-based advocate today filed a petition in the Madras High Court seeking a direction to the Centre and Tamil Nadu government to prosecute the people responsible for the alleged killing of the state's fishermen in the Palk straits and pay compensation to their families.In the PIL, P Pugalenthi, who is also joint secretary of Thamizhaga Makkal Urimal Kazhagam (Tamil Nadu Peoples' Right Forum), also sought a direction to the Union and state governments to take concrete steps to protect the lives of fishermen. Non-payment of adequate compensation would violate Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution, he contended.He charged the Centre and state government with "grossly" failing in their public duty to protect the human and constitutional rights of hundreds of fishermen, who were solely dependent on the sea for their livelihood.Referring to the assurances given in the October 26 last Indo-Sri Lanka joint statement that the fundamental rights of fishermen would be protected, he contended that within a few days of the joint statement reports appeared in a section of the press that some more attacks allegedly by the Sri Lankan Navy, had taken place.He claimed that according to information provided by state DGP the number of fishermen killed rose from 10 in 1986 to 22 in 1997 while the number of fishermen injured increased from eight in 1992 to 39 in 1996. PTI
http://www.ptinews.com/pti/ptisite.nsf/0/2462766076D34316652574FE005CD879?OpenDocument




Delhi HC: Uphaar tragedy: Life lmprisonment sought for Ansal's
http://www.indlawnews.com/newsdisplay.aspx?f1e907ea-b62c-48ab-8436-a1e4397a1166
11/11/2008
The Delhi High Court was told by the counsel for the families of the victims that the Ansal brothers, owners of the Uphaar Cinema, are guilty for the deaths of 59 people in the fire tragedy 11 years ago as they had wrongfully ordered extra seats in the hall. Mr K T S Tusi, who appeared on behalf of Association of Uphaar Tragedy Victims(AUTV), said the Ansal’s were directly responsible for the deaths as they had altered the seating arrangement of the hall.Sushil and Gopal Ansal are at present in Tihar jail and facing two-year imprisonment handed by a sessions court. They have filed an appeal against the order in the Delhi High Court.Blaming the former DCP(Licencing) Amod Kant, Mr Tulsi said Mr Kant at the behest of the accused had overlooked the norms and permitted additional seats, which was in gross violation of the Cinematography Rules.Due to the extra seats, which were permitted by the DCP, the balcony gate was removed closing the exit. Smoke, which bellowed from the generator placed in the basement of the hall, wafted straight into the hall, Mr Tulsi said. People seated in the basement could not leave the hall as there was no suitable emergency or exit door there and suffocated to death.The HC is hearing the appeal of the Ansal’s against the trial court order which sentenced them to two-year imprisonment. In the day-to-day hearing going on in the court, the CBI has argued that the owners of the hall had committed omissions deliberately having full knowledge of the danger posed to the viewers sitting in the balcony. Since there were some illegal acts and illegal omissions by the Ansal’s which resulted in the tragedy, two-year imprisonment is less for them which should be converted to life imprisonment, the CBI implored.UNI
http://www.indlawnews.com/newsdisplay.aspx?f1e907ea-b62c-48ab-8436-a1e4397a1166



Law ministry not serious about setting up more courts: CJI
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/India/Law_ministry_not_serious_about_setting_up_more_courts_CJI/articleshow/3701986.cms
12 Nov 2008, 0315 hrs IST, Dhananjay Mahapatra , TNN
NEW DELHI: Returning fire to the constant criticism of long vacations enjoyed by judges despite huge backlog of cases, Chief Justice of India K G Balakrishnan said Indian judiciary was the most overworked in the world and it was the government which was not serious about setting up more courts. "We need more family courts, courts to deal with cheque bouncing cases under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act and special judges to try offences investigated by CBI. But the law ministry does not take seriously the need for more courts," Justice Balakrishnan told TOI. It was not that the government was constrained financially to deal with the situation emerging from huge backlog of cases, especially in the trial courts, he said. "The setting up of fast track courts was a brilliant idea. So many cases got decided in a quick-paced procedure adopted by these courts. So, if the government wants to solve the problem, it can do it," the CJI said, stressing the non-seriousness of the government towards constant demand from the judiciary for more courts at the district level. A total of 1,734 fast track courts were set up by the NDA government which implemented the concept in the year 2000. The fast track court scheme was renewed by the UPA government in 2005 after a little prodding from the apex court but the numbers were reduced to 1,562. At present, 1,380 fast track courts are functioning. Of a total 26.73 lakh cases referred to it, these courts have decided 19.43 lakh cases. The CJI said, whatever additional courts were being set up, as in Delhi and Maharashtra at present, was purely at the initiative of the respective chief justices. After making his point on the need for more courts, the CJI went on to deal with the loud criticism of long vacations enjoyed by Supreme Court and High Court judges, which many people believe to be an unnecessary colonial legacy practised too long after independence. "It is a misnomer that the vacation in Indian courts started because the English judges wanted to visit their homes. Do American, Canadian and Australian judges too need to go home as they enjoy three month holiday every year," he asked. "Has anyone ever bothered to check how many cases a judge in the SC or HC decides in a year? It runs into tens of thousands. In comparison, the US Supreme Court gets around 4,000 cases every year which get circulated among the judges. If four of them agree on open court hearing of a petition, only that petition is taken up by the court for adjudication," the CJI said, attempting to contrast the workload of an Indian judge with his counterparts abroad. The Supreme Court in India gets around 50,000 fresh petitions every year and disposes almost an equal number of pending cases. Yet, the pendency is still around 50,000. A litigation free village in CJI's home state TNN NEW DELHI: It is a first that any Chief Justice of India would be happy about given the penchant for litigation among the people — as seen in a whopping 3 crore cases pending in the three tiers of judiciary. So, when CJI K G Balakrishnan was asked to preside over a function to declare Cheriyanadu village in Alleppey district in his home state Kerala as "litigation free", he was more than happy to consent. On Saturday, in the presence of chief minister V S Achuthanandan, the CJI gladly declared that the villagers had no case pending against each other in any court. "There were about 326 pending cases involving the villagers. All cases got settled at the initiative taken by the panchayat judges. And the villagers have taken a decision not to resort to the costly court system to settle their disputes any more but to approach panchayat judges to resolve their differences," the CJI said. Though the CJI was happy that similar instances would considerably bring down the pendency and save people from spending hard-earned money as litigational expenses, it is doubtful whether the lawyers would welcome it.
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/India/Law_ministry_not_serious_about_setting_up_more_courts_CJI/articleshow/3701986.cms




No parallel inquiry into PF scam: CJI
http://www.adtan.com/mobilereviews/no-parallel-inquiry-into-pf-scam-cji/
November 11th, 2008 ·
Chief Justice of India K.G. Balakrishnan today clarified that no parallel in-house inquiry was being conducted into the Rs 23-crore Ghaziabad PF scam, which the CBI was probing.
“No, no. It is wrong reporting. This case is being investigated by the CBI. I don’t think a parallel in-house procedure would be proper,” the CJI told reporters on the sidelines of a farewell function for a retiring judge.
The reporters sought his clarification about a news report, which quoted him as saying that two Judges of the Allahabad High Court, allegedly involved in the scam, would be dealt with differently.
The Chief Justice also denied that he had withdrawn judicial work from the judges involved in the scam. The Chief Justice, however, refused to take further questions on the issue.
While justice A.K.Singh, whose position on the Bench will not be confirmed, is expected to be out of the judiciary for the next 10 days, there are two more judges believed to be under scanner in connection with the scam.
But since they are permanent judges their removal could be cumbersome because of the impeachment process, sources said.
http://www.adtan.com/mobilereviews/no-parallel-inquiry-into-pf-scam-cji/


The Judicial Standoff
http://thesocialblog.wordpress.com/2008/11/11/the-judicial-standoff/
Posted in india by Aditya on November 11th, 2008
I must confess and state that I am strongly against judicial activism and the prevalent attitude of the Court to frame law and make people and institutions subject to it. Protecting the rights of the individual and seeking to enforce them under writs of mandamus and ‘public interests litigations’ is one thing; but to totally transcend Constitutional dictats and attain a degree of superiority over the other two branches in non-fundamental rights areas is totally another. In the latter, I talk with specific reference to the ‘Judges cases’ and the practice of the Supreme Court and High Courts to elect its own judges.
Under the Constitution, the President is to appoint the judge on the recommendation of the Chief Justice of India. The Constitution also mentions the qualifications required to be a Supreme Court and a judge of the High Court. However in a series of decisions starting from SP Gupta v. President of India in 1982 till the Judges Reference case in 1998 the Supreme Court has taken upon itself the power to appoint the judges making the sanction given by the President and the Executive a mere ministerial act. The procedure now; nowhere mentioned in the Constitution; is that a collegium of judges is to be formed and the Chief Justice, upon their recommendation sends the names of the suitable judges to the President. The President now sits as a puppet and is bound to approve of the Chief Justice’s choice unless there is some extraordinary reason.
This is by far the single most important act of activism by the Courts that is nowhere mandated by the Constitution but for the Article guaranteeing the independence of the judiciary (Article 94). No other democracy in the world seeks to put forth and approve of this view of the Court appointing its own judges
A few days ago the Chief Justice forwarded the names of 3 judges of various High Courts to be appointed as judges of the Supreme Court to the Prime Minister’s Office. The PMO upon noting that few senior judges had been superceeded by this recommendation has sent the list back to the Chief Justice. This is a bold move by the executive considering that by the decisions of the cases mentioned above, the executive is bound to follow the CJI’s recommendations. In fact, this is one of the first instances where the executive has put its foot down and decided not to succumb to the ridiculous will and mandate of the judiciary. The Constitution mandates that the executive and legislature aid the judiciary in the enforcement of its decisions and that not doing so would lead to a contempt of Court. The only known instance where the Court tried to make use of this power was when the Speaker of Manipur Ibobi Singh decided not to follow a Court order cancelling disqualification of certain MLA stating it was not in the jurisdiction of the COurt to do so. The Supreme Court had then initiated contempt proceedings which were later withdrawn. This instance then gives a chance for the Court again to debate on its jurisdiction and powers and rethink certain ridiculous decisions that it had made earlier.
In what was once reckoned to be the ‘least dangerous branch’ by Alexander Hamilton the Court in India is seen to transcend constitutional limitations to give itself great powers. Chandrachud J. had described such a phenomenon in In re Special Courts Bill in 1979 as the ‘great usurpation of power’ and cautioned the judiciary against it. Alas! I don’t think such a sentiment has echoed within the judiciary over the past two decades.
http://thesocialblog.wordpress.com/2008/11/11/the-judicial-standoff/


HC clears hurdles for coach factory in Sonia's Rae Bareli
http://www.ptinews.com/pti/ptisite.nsf/0/E9EFE56D8C287177652574FE005BB3B4?OpenDocument
Lucknow, Nov 11 (PTI) The Lucknow bench of the Allahabad High Court today granted permission to start construction work of a Rail Coach Factory (RCF) in Congress chief Sonia Gandhi's Rae Bareli constituency after completing formalities of getting the land on lease.Passing orders on a writ petition filed by the Union of India, through the Ministry of Railways, the court allowed construction work after completing necessary formalities of getting the land on lease within two weeks, as decided by the state government.A division bench comprising Justices Pradeep Kant and Sabeehul Hasnain passed the order, while amending its earlier order for maintaining status-quo on the 189.253 hectares of land.Earlier on October 11, the state government had cancelled the allotment of land to Union of India/Railways, an issue that had kicked off confrontations between the Congress and the ruling BSP.The decision of the Uttar Pradesh Government was challenged in the high court through the writ petition.Later, the state government had decided to provide the land on a lease basis.The court posted further hearing of the case to November 26. PTI
http://www.ptinews.com/pti/ptisite.nsf/0/E9EFE56D8C287177652574FE005BB3B4?OpenDocument



Swamy appeals against single judge order
http://www.expressbuzz.com/edition/story.aspx?Title=Swamy+appeals+against+single+judge+order&artid=%7CzfTpgSVGlc=&SectionID=vBlkz7JCFvA=&MainSectionID=fyV9T2jIa4A=&SectionName=EL7znOtxBM3qzgMyXZKtxw==&SEO=
Express News Service
First Published : 11 Nov 2008 03:19:00 AM IST
Last Updated : 11 Nov 2008 11:42:20 AM IST
CHENNAI: Janata Party president Dr Subramanian Swamy here on Monday filed an appeal in the Madras High Court challenging a single judge order directing the State Government to consider the application seeking premature release of Nalini, a life convict in the Rajiv Gandhi assassination case.
The First Bench comprising Chief Justice A K Ganguly and Justice Ibrahim Kalifullaph allowed Swamy to file the appeal petition against the order of Justice S Nagamuthu dated September 24, 2008, which had entertained the writ petition of the State Government seeking the early release of Nalini.
In his appeal petition, Swamy submitted that the judge having held that the first respondent Nalini had no vested right for release either under Article 161 of the Constitution of India or under Section 433-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure ought not have allowed the writ petition directing the State Government to reconsider the matter.
He also submitted that the judge need not have exercised any discretion in favour of Nalini considering the gravity of offences committed by her and the case falling under the rarest of the rare cases.
He further observed that the State Government in the instant case lacked power to act under Section 433-A of the Cr PC inasmuch as the case was not one of commutation of sentence under Section 433 of the code only in which case the power under Section 433-A could be exercised.
``The view of the learned judge that there is no fetter on the power of the Governor under Article 161 of the Constitution from reexercising his power to give one more remission is not correct in law’’, he said.
http://www.expressbuzz.com/edition/story.aspx?Title=Swamy+appeals+against+single+judge+order&artid=%7CzfTpgSVGlc=&SectionID=vBlkz7JCFvA=&MainSectionID=fyV9T2jIa4A=&SectionName=EL7znOtxBM3qzgMyXZKtxw==&SEO=