In this set of cases, petitioners raised voice against destruction of Mangrove forests in Kakinada which have been protecting the city from the onslaught of sea currents/waves. The following are various orders issued by AP High Court.
On 23 April 2020,
On 04 May 2020,
On 11 May 2020,
A complete indexed and mess-wise segregated collection of reprimands received by this incumbent State Government of YSRC Party are here.
Allahabad High Court has held that,
From Para 39,
39. Therefore, we are of the considered opinion that Azan can be recited by Muezzin from minarets of the Mosques by human voice without using any amplifying device and the administration is directed not to cause hindrance in the same on the pretext of the Guidelines to contain the pandemic Covid19, unless such guidelines are being violated.
From Para 40,
40. Therefore, it is held that Azan may be an essential and integral part of Islam but recitation of Azan through loudspeakers or other sound amplifying devices cannot be said to be an integral part of the religion, warranting protection of the fundamental right enshrined under Article 25 of the Constitution of India, which is even otherwise subject to public order, morality or health and to other provisions of part III of the Constitution of India. Thus, under no circumstances sound amplifying devices can be permitted to be used between 10.00 p.m. to 6.00 a.m. by the district administrations. Further, the petitioners have failed to bring on record or even plead that they sought any such permission for the use of sound amplifying devices, for recital of Azan from their respective mosques and, therefore, their use without such permission would be illegal and cannot be accorded approval by this Court. However, in case any such application is filed before the concerned authorities, that may be dealt with in accordance with law including Noise Pollution Rules. Furthermore, as already discussed in detail hereinabove, Azan can be recited by Muezzin from minarets of the Mosques by human voice without using any amplifying device and such recitation cannot be hindered with under the pretext of violation of the Guidelines issued by the State, to contain the pandemic Covid19.
Citations: [2020 SCC ONLINE ALL 592]
Other Source links:
https://indiankanoon.org/doc/46976882/
https://www.casemine.com/judgement/in/5ecdf3b59fca191563b4b510
Justice Rohinton F Nariman has passed the following directions, sitting in a division bench along with Justice S. Ravindra Bhat,
From Para 4,
4. We have also noted that the political parties offer no explanation as to why candidates with pending criminal cases are selected as candidates in the first place. We therefore issue the following directions in exercise of our constitutional powers under Articles 129 and 142 of the Constitution of India:
1) It shall be mandatory for political parties [at the Central and State election level] to upload on their website detailed information regarding individuals with pending criminal cases (including the nature of the offences, and relevant particulars such as whether charges have been framed, the concerned Court, the case number etc.) who have been selected as candidates, along with the reasons for such selection, as also as to why other individuals without criminal antecedents could not be selected as candidates.
2) The reasons as to selection shall be with reference to the qualifications, achievements and merit of the candidate concerned, and not mere “winnability” at the polls.
3) This information shall also be published in:
(a) One local vernacular newspaper and one national newspaper;
(b) On the official social media platforms of the political party, including Facebook & Twitter.
4) These details shall be published within 48 hours of the selection of the candidate or not less than two weeks before the first date for filing of nominations, whichever is earlier.
5) The political party concerned shall then submit a report of compliance with these directions with the Election Commission within 72 hours of the selection of the said candidate.
6) If a political party fails to submit such compliance report with the Election Commission, the Election Commission shall bring such non-compliance by the political party concerned to the notice of the Supreme Court as being in contempt of this Court’s orders/directions.
Citations: [2020 SCC OnLine SC 178]
Other Source links: https://indiankanoon.org/doc/178919210/ or https://www.scconline.com/blog/post/2020/02/13/sc-directs-political-parties-to-publish-criminal-antecedents-of-candidates-give-reasons-for-their-selection/ or https://www.indianemployees.com/judgments/details/rambabu-singh-thakur-versus-sunil-arora-ors
The original Judgment is here.
Issue of collecting parking fee from the vehicles in Multiplex Malls and other commercial complexes is resolved.
Citations: [
Other Source links:
For Internal Communications of Registry with Court
… and…
For all communications between Registry, Court, Advocates and litigants
Three law students write to CJI, want legal size paper ditched for A4.
Link here.
Supreme Court was not interested to direct other Constitutional Courts and Tribunals to shift to A4 paper usage.
Link here.
The following High Courts also followed the Supreme Court in this regard.
Allahabad HC
The news is here and Order passed in the Writ filed in this regard is below.
…
The Registry had taken a decision on this. The Rulebooks are to be revised basis this decision soon.
…
The Rules of the High Court are amended to incorporate the new paper size. The news is here.
Andhra Pradesh HC
The news is here and Notice is below
Bombay HC
The news is here and Notice is below (only applicable to all High Court benches; not to sub-ordinate courts in the State)
Calcutta HC
The news is here and Notice is below
Delhi HC
The PIL news is here. Actual news is here.
Here is the revised Practice direction…
Gauhati HC
The news is here and the Notification is below
Gujarat HC
The news is here
Himachal Pradesh HC
The direction is below
Jharkhand HC
The news is here
Karnataka HC
The news is here. Here is the Judgment from CJ Karnataka
Kerala HC
The news is here and Notification is below.
…and…
later news is here and the notification is below.
Madhya Pradesh HC
The news is here
Madras HC
The news is here.
Manipur HC
The Notification is below.
Orissa HC
The said Order is below.
The High Court Notification is below.
Next HC
The news is here
Rajasthan HC
The news is here. Notice got issued to Registrar, HC
Tripura HC
The news is here and Order is below.
Telangana HC
The news is here and Circular is below.
Uttarakhand HC
The news is here.
The Notification of HC Rules 2020 below.
MASTER SITEMAP here.
In this landmark decision from Supreme Court, seed for the following Police Reforms in India were sown by the Ex-DGP Uttar Pradesh Shri Prakash Singh ji.
Citations: [2006 JT 12 225], [2006 SCR SUPP 6 473], [2006 SCC CRI 3 417], [2006 SCALE 9 444], [2006 AIOL 639], [2006 SUPREME 8 470], [2006 SCC 8 1], [2011 SCC CRI 1 1023], [2006 KERLT 4 482], [2006 KLT 4 482]
Other Source links:
https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1090328/
https://www.casemine.com/judgement/in/5609ae2de4b0149711413181
Let’s begin with the foremost judgment that raised curtain for Public Interest Litigations (PILs) in India, delivered by none other than the Super Judge, Shri Krishnaiyer, V.R.
The first public interest litigation case in India.
Citation : 1980 AIR 1622, 1981 SCR (1) 97
Indiankanoon.org link : https://indiankanoon.org/doc/440471/
[related_posts_by_tax title=”5 Recently Updated Posts, Similar or Related To Above Post” orderby=”post_modified” posts_per_page=”5″ show_date=”true”]
Just documenting Frivolous PILs and consequences thereof.
http://www.ptinews.com/news/10245952_SC-dismisses-CJAR-s-curative-plea.html
Bad Behavior has blocked 496 access attempts in the last 7 days.
