Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News
“The only aim or intention of the petitioner was to get a compassionate appointment for her son in one way or the other, i.e., without disclosing the true and correct facts regarding the financial condition of her family.”
“There is no fundamental right of a person to have a live-in relationship with a woman legally married to another man and, more particularly, when the woman appears to be his own sister.”
“The appellant being an evaluator/examiner, was required to keep his hands off once the evaluation sheet was submitted by him and was not required to indulge in any kind of head-on-collision with the University.”
The Court found that insofar as Section 406, IPC was concerned, no cognizable offence was visible on the face of the record. Furthermore, charges under S. 6 of Dowry Prohibition Act were not made out either, against the appellants
,
The formation of opinion under Section 20(2) of the Right to Information Act, 2005 is in the exercise of supervisory powers of Central Information Commission and not in the exercise of the adjudicatory powers.
The Delhi High Court said that the directions sought were not only beyond but also contrary to the law laid down by the Supreme Court.
The Court found that the respondents could not establish locus standi to seek any injunction against the impugned communications vis-a-vis content moderation by social media to suppress misleading information especially related to Covid-19 and 2020 Presidential Elections.
Several pro-life medical associations and doctors challenged the FDA regulations issued in 2016 and 2021 that ensured easy access of mifepristone for termination of pregnancy and sought a preliminary injunction for the FDA to rescind these regulatory actions.
Madras High Court also closed the impleading application filed by AIADMK former Member of Parliament J. Jayavardhan, as it would be a futile exercise to allow the application when the appeals had been withdrawn.
“A perusal of syllabus of the Madarsa Board shows that the education provided therein is only of languages and Islam as a religion with a little touch of maths etc. The modern subjects including science are only optional and entire school education can be completed without studying modern subjects.”
Calcutta High Court held that the appellant lacked locus standi of collective bodies to bring proceedings as the appellants don’t have legal personality or individual rights.
Calcutta High Court rejected the idea of directing a specific allocation but highlighted the duty of the government to formulate a policy.
The Calcutta High Court affirmed the petitioner’s locus standi, i.e., right to challenge the election process based on the infringement of rights as a registered medical practitioner.
The FIR was lodged under Sections 11(1) and 11(1)(d) of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960 because 19 buffaloes were found being transported in a truck in a cruel manner.
Allahabad High Court noted that there does not appear to be any material to show that accused persons had used any undue influence or allurement to the villagers for mass conversion.
Allahabad High Court said that the detenue is living with her parents, thus, it cannot be said that she is in illegal detention.
Supreme Court said that the petitioner has no locus to file the petition to sought inauguration of new Parliament building by the President and not the Prime Minister of India and that he should be grateful that the Court is not imposing any costs on him.
The NCLAT held that there is no law which allows a third party or shareholders to settle the claims of Financial Creditor on behalf of the Corporate Debtor, M/s McDowell Holdings Limited.
The recruitment process to any public post should be conducted in a fair and transparent manner. If the candidates are selected by any criterion other than merit and efficiency, the public authority will suffer for all the times to come. It is in the public interest that the process of selection and appointment should be transparent to make it foolproof from corrupt practices.
The petitioners have told the Court that though they are not directly affected by Rajasthan High Court’s order, they had approached the Court as the State, which is the Guardian of the interests of the persons living in the State, has chosen not to appeal and if the accused teacher will go unpunished in this case, not only him but other teachers may also commit similar offences with girls in future.