{"id":236759,"date":"2020-10-05T14:37:34","date_gmt":"2020-10-05T09:07:34","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=236759"},"modified":"2020-10-09T11:02:55","modified_gmt":"2020-10-09T05:32:55","slug":"ker-hc-no-writ-of-mandamus-can-be-issued-to-direct-the-legislature-to-enact-any-law-court-upholds-validity-of-state-commission-for-sc-st-act","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/10\/05\/ker-hc-no-writ-of-mandamus-can-be-issued-to-direct-the-legislature-to-enact-any-law-court-upholds-validity-of-state-commission-for-sc-st-act\/","title":{"rendered":"Ker HC | No writ of mandamus can be issued to direct the legislature to enact any law; Court upholds validity of State Commission for SC\/ST Act"},"content":{"rendered":"

Kerala High Court: <\/strong>A Division Bench of S. Manikumar and Shaji P. Chaly, JJ., while deciding the Constitutional validity of the Kerala State Commission for the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes Act, 2007, dismissed the writ petition making significant observations.<\/p>\n

Brief Facts<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

Aggrieved by the inaction on the part of the respondents in honouring a claim made by the petitioner for reimbursement of travel allowances which he had to incur in connection with the hearings before the State Scheduled Castes\/Scheduled Tribes Commission at Thiruvananthapuram, instant writ petition for the issuance of mandamus has been filed against the State Government, Kerala. Further, the petitioner seeks to issue a similar relief against the Subordinate Courts so to implement speedy trial provided under Section 14 of the Atrocities Act by taking up the Atrocity cases and related matters immediately after the custody and bail cases. Furthermore, the writ petition seeks to declare the Kerala State Commission for the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes Act, 2007 and the rules framed thereunder as unconstitutional on the ground of inconsistency and repugnancy with the Central Act.\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n

Issue<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

    \n
  1. Whether the State Government can form rules departing from central rules and thereby, deny rights conferred by the Central Government?<\/li>\n
  2. Whether the State Government can disobey the rules framed by the Central Government for the benefit of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes and decline to make provisions in the budgets thereby causing hardship to the poor people?<\/li>\n
  3. Whether the subordinate courts can violate the law to the disadvantage of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes by denying speedy trial though provided in Section 14 of the Act?<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

    Contentions<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

    The counsel for the petitioners<\/em><\/strong> made a submission on the following grounds;<\/p>\n

      \n
    1. That the Central Act and the rules framed thereunder are binding on the State Government and it is, therefore, obligatory for them to act in consonance of the same.<\/li>\n
    2. That the rules framed by the State Government do not fall under Rule 11, 12 or 15 of the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Rules, 1995, as prescribed by the Central Government.<\/li>\n
    3. That the State Government has failed to comply with the directive laid down under Rule 14, which mandates the State to allocate a certain sum in the Annual State budget for the SC\/ST community.<\/li>\n
    4. That the State is incompetent to make any law or enumerate any rule on the said subject, following which, the Kerala State SC\/ST Commission Act, 2007 and the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Rules, 1995 are liable to be declared as unconstitutional. The petitioners further cited, Barai v. Henry,<\/em> (1983) 1 SCC 177<\/a> and Thirumuruga Hirupananda Variar v. State of Tamil Nadu,<\/em> (1996) 3 SCC 15<\/a>.<\/li>\n
    5. That the District Magistrates and other similar officers callously neglected the duties prescribed for providing facilities and for making payments under the Schedule and the rules.<\/li>\n
    6. That the lower courts do not implement speedy trials, as provided under Section 14 of the SC\/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, thereby causing hardship to the victims and witnesses, etc.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

      The counsel for the respondents<\/em><\/strong> submitted as follows;<\/p>\n

        \n
      1. That the petitioner has filed complaints before the Kerala State SC\/ST Commission seeking Travel Allowance(TA)\/Dearance Allowance(DA) claims, including hotel bill, room rent, etc. for payment.<\/li>\n
      2. That as per the Kerala State Commission for the Scheduled Castes and scheduled tribes Act, 2007 and the rules framed thereunder, there is no provision for paying TA or DA to the victims and witnesses who appear before the Commission, for the purpose of enquiry into the complaints. The Commission has no such fund to consider the claim.<\/li>\n
      3. That the Commission is empowered to conduct an enquiry into cases where there are allegations of a miscarriage of justice during investigation and hence, the SC\/ST complainants, who register complaints\/petition before the State Commission, are not entitled to get TA\/DA, when they appear before the Commission under any of the provisions of the Kerala State Commission for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Act, 2007 and the rules framed thereunder.<\/li>\n
      4. Cases under sections 3(1) and 3(2) of Prevention of Atrocities Act are registered in Police Stations and Special Cells are constituted for that purpose. Further, as mentioned in the SC\/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Rules, 1995, the District Magistrate, Sub Divisional Magistrate or other Executive Magistrate is the authority, liable for payment of such allowances to the victims of atrocity\/dependent in the matter of investigation and trial.<\/li>\n
      5. That even though the Kerala State Commission for Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes has the powers of a civil court, with regard to its function under Section 9, Rule 11 of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Rules, 1995, is not applicable to the Commission.<\/li>\n
      6. That Four Special Courts for the trial of offences under the SC\/ST (POA) Act cases, have been established at Manjeri, Mananthavady (Kalpetta), Kottarakkara (Kollam) and Mannarkkad (Palakkad). The work turn-out in the four Special Courts for the trial of offences under SC\/ST(POA) Act cases are being monitored on a monthly basis by the Judges holding the administrative charges of the respective districts and necessary directions and guidelines are being issued for the speedy trial and disposal of those cases.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

        Observations<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

        The bench made significant observations with respect to State\u2019s competency to legislate in presence of a central law on the same subject, separation of powers and mutual interaction between the three organs in a democratic setup and instances where the Commission is obligated to make reimbursements. It cited several case laws and observations with respect to the above enumerated hereby;<\/p>\n

        1. Bhim Singh v. Union of India,<\/em> (2010) 5 SCC 538<\/a>;<\/p>\n

        \u201cWhile observing that the Constitution does not strictly prohibit overlapping of functions as this is inevitable in the modern parliamentary democracy, the Constitution prohibits exercise of functions of another branch which results in wresting away of the regime of constitutional accountability. Only when accountability is preserved, there will be no violation of principle of separation of powers. Constitution not only requires and mandates that there should be right decisions that govern us, but equal care has to be taken that the right decisions are made by the right body and the institution. This is what gives legitimacy, be it legislation, a policy decision or a court adjudication.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n

        2.\u00a0 V.<\/em>K. Naswa v. Home Secretary, Union of India, <\/em>(2012) 11 SCC 42<\/a>; <\/strong><\/p>\n

        \u201cIt is outside the power of judicial review to issue directions to the legislature to enact a law in a particular manner, for the Constitution does not permit the courts to direct and advice the executive in matters of policy. Parliament, as the legislature, exercises this power to enact a law and no outside authority can issue a particular piece of legislation. It is only in exceptional cases where there is a vacuum and non-existing position that the judiciary, in exercise of its constitutional power, steps in and provides a solution till the legislature comes forward to perform its role.\u201d\u00a0 [Also refer; Manoj Narula v. UOI, <\/em>(2014) 9 SCC 1<\/a> and Supreme Court Employee Welfare Assn. v. UOI, <\/em>(1989) 4 SCC 187<\/a>]<\/em><\/p>\n

        \u00a03. <\/em>Regina (Countryside Alliance) v. Attorney General, <\/em>(2008) 1 AC 719;<\/p>\n

        \u00a0<\/em>\u201c\u2026The democratic process is liable to be subverted if, on a question of moral and political judgment, opponents of the Act achieve through the courts what they could not achieve in Parliament.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n

        4.State of Himachal Pradesh v. Satpal Saini, <\/em>(2017) 11 SCC 42<\/a>;<\/p>\n

        \u201cReference was made to Supreme Court Employees’ Welfare Association, <\/em>(1989) 4 SCC 187<\/a>, that no writ of mandamus can be issued to the legislature to enact a particular legislation nor can such direction be issued to the executive which exercises the powers to make Rules in the nature of subordinate legislation.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n

        With respect to instances where the State Government is liable to reimburse the expenses incurred by the complainant, the Court highlighted the following points;<\/p>\n

          \n
        1. Every victim of atrocity or his\/her dependent and witnesses shall be paid expense from his place of residence to the place of investigation or trial of offence under the Act.<\/li>\n
        2. The District Magistrate or any other Executive Magistrate shall make necessary arrangements for providing transport facilities or reimbursement of full payment to the victims of atrocity and witnesses for visiting the investigating officer, Superintendent of Police\/Deputy Superintendent of Police, District Magistrate or any other Executive Magistrate.<\/li>\n
        3. Every woman witness, the victim of atrocity or her dependent being a woman or a minor, a person more than sixty years of age and a person having 40 % or more disability shall be entitled to be accompanied by an attendant of her\/his choice. The attendant shall also be paid traveling and maintenance expenses as applicable to the witness or the victim of atrocity when called upon during hearing, investigation and trial of an offence under the Act.<\/li>\n
        4. The witness, the victim of atrocity or his\/her dependent and the attendant shall be paid daily maintenance for the days he\/she is away from the place of his\/her residence or stay during investigation, hearing and trial of an offence, at such rates but not less than the minimum wages, as may be fixed by the State Government for the agricultural labourers.<\/li>\n
        5. In addition to daily maintenance expenses, the witness, the victim of atrocity (or his\/her dependent), and the attendant shall also be paid diet expenses at such rates, as may be fixed by the State Government from time to time.<\/li>\n
        6. The payment of traveling allowance, daily allowance, maintenance expenses and reimbursement of transport facilities shall be made immediately or not later than three days by the District Magistrate or the Sub-Divisional Magistrate or any other Executive Magistrate to the victims, their dependents\/attendant and witnesses for the days they visit the investigating officer or in-charge police station or hospital authorities or Superintendent of Police, Deputy Superintendent of Police or District Magistrate or any other officer concerned or the Special Court.<\/li>\n
        7. When an offence has been committed under Section 3 of the Act, the District Magistrate or the Sub-Divisional Magistrate or any other Executive Magistrate shall reimburse the payment of medicines, special medical consultation, blood transfusion, replacement of essential clothing, meals and fruits provided to the victim of atrocity.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

          \u00a0<\/strong>Decision<\/strong><\/p>\n

          While upholding the Constitutional validity of the State Act, the bench observed: \u201cneither the Commission nor the State Government, is obligated to create a specific fund for reimbursement of the expenses, incurred by the complainant\/witnesses for their appearance, in relation to inquiry and examination of a complaint by the Commission constituted under Section 3 of the Kerala State Commission for the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes Act, 2007, and such fund is required to be created by the State Government, only in the case of investigation or trial.\u201d <\/em><\/p>\n

          It was further said that, the submissions made by the petitioner are not sustainable and cannot be countenanced, as there is no derogation or inconsistency between the Central and the State Rules. [M.P. Chothy v. State of Kerala, 2020 SCC OnLine Ker 4254<\/b><\/a>, decided on 29-09-2020]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

          Kerala High Court: A Division Bench of S. Manikumar and Shaji P. Chaly, JJ., while deciding the Constitutional validity of the Kerala <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":67011,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,10],"tags":[8731,11851,29912,29863,14591],"class_list":["post-236759","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-highcourts","tag-constitutional-validity","tag-legislature","tag-sc-st-act","tag-state-commission","tag-writ-of-mandamus"],"yoast_head":"\nKer HC | No writ of mandamus can be issued to direct the legislature to enact any law; Court upholds validity of State Commission for SC\/ST Act | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/10\/05\/ker-hc-no-writ-of-mandamus-can-be-issued-to-direct-the-legislature-to-enact-any-law-court-upholds-validity-of-state-commission-for-sc-st-act\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Ker HC | No writ of mandamus can be issued to direct the legislature to enact any law; Court upholds validity of State Commission for SC\/ST Act\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Kerala High Court: A Division Bench of S. Manikumar and Shaji P. Chaly, JJ., while deciding the Constitutional validity of the Kerala\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/10\/05\/ker-hc-no-writ-of-mandamus-can-be-issued-to-direct-the-legislature-to-enact-any-law-court-upholds-validity-of-state-commission-for-sc-st-act\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2020-10-05T09:07:34+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2020-10-09T05:32:55+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/03\/KeralaHC-e1521442636157.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1330\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"887\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Editor\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Editor\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"9 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/10\/05\/ker-hc-no-writ-of-mandamus-can-be-issued-to-direct-the-legislature-to-enact-any-law-court-upholds-validity-of-state-commission-for-sc-st-act\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/10\/05\/ker-hc-no-writ-of-mandamus-can-be-issued-to-direct-the-legislature-to-enact-any-law-court-upholds-validity-of-state-commission-for-sc-st-act\/\",\"name\":\"Ker HC | No writ of mandamus can be issued to direct the legislature to enact any law; Court upholds validity of State Commission for SC\/ST Act | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2020-10-05T09:07:34+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2020-10-09T05:32:55+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe\"},\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/10\/05\/ker-hc-no-writ-of-mandamus-can-be-issued-to-direct-the-legislature-to-enact-any-law-court-upholds-validity-of-state-commission-for-sc-st-act\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/10\/05\/ker-hc-no-writ-of-mandamus-can-be-issued-to-direct-the-legislature-to-enact-any-law-court-upholds-validity-of-state-commission-for-sc-st-act\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/10\/05\/ker-hc-no-writ-of-mandamus-can-be-issued-to-direct-the-legislature-to-enact-any-law-court-upholds-validity-of-state-commission-for-sc-st-act\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Ker HC | No writ of mandamus can be issued to direct the legislature to enact any law; Court upholds validity of State Commission for SC\/ST Act\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe\",\"name\":\"Editor\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Editor\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_4\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Ker HC | No writ of mandamus can be issued to direct the legislature to enact any law; Court upholds validity of State Commission for SC\/ST Act | SCC Times","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/10\/05\/ker-hc-no-writ-of-mandamus-can-be-issued-to-direct-the-legislature-to-enact-any-law-court-upholds-validity-of-state-commission-for-sc-st-act\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Ker HC | No writ of mandamus can be issued to direct the legislature to enact any law; Court upholds validity of State Commission for SC\/ST Act","og_description":"Kerala High Court: A Division Bench of S. Manikumar and Shaji P. Chaly, JJ., while deciding the Constitutional validity of the Kerala","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/10\/05\/ker-hc-no-writ-of-mandamus-can-be-issued-to-direct-the-legislature-to-enact-any-law-court-upholds-validity-of-state-commission-for-sc-st-act\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2020-10-05T09:07:34+00:00","article_modified_time":"2020-10-09T05:32:55+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1330,"height":887,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/03\/KeralaHC-e1521442636157.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Editor","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Editor","Est. reading time":"9 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/10\/05\/ker-hc-no-writ-of-mandamus-can-be-issued-to-direct-the-legislature-to-enact-any-law-court-upholds-validity-of-state-commission-for-sc-st-act\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/10\/05\/ker-hc-no-writ-of-mandamus-can-be-issued-to-direct-the-legislature-to-enact-any-law-court-upholds-validity-of-state-commission-for-sc-st-act\/","name":"Ker HC | No writ of mandamus can be issued to direct the legislature to enact any law; Court upholds validity of State Commission for SC\/ST Act | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"datePublished":"2020-10-05T09:07:34+00:00","dateModified":"2020-10-09T05:32:55+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe"},"breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/10\/05\/ker-hc-no-writ-of-mandamus-can-be-issued-to-direct-the-legislature-to-enact-any-law-court-upholds-validity-of-state-commission-for-sc-st-act\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/10\/05\/ker-hc-no-writ-of-mandamus-can-be-issued-to-direct-the-legislature-to-enact-any-law-court-upholds-validity-of-state-commission-for-sc-st-act\/"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/10\/05\/ker-hc-no-writ-of-mandamus-can-be-issued-to-direct-the-legislature-to-enact-any-law-court-upholds-validity-of-state-commission-for-sc-st-act\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Ker HC | No writ of mandamus can be issued to direct the legislature to enact any law; Court upholds validity of State Commission for SC\/ST Act"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe","name":"Editor","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Editor"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_4\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":223873,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/01\/06\/kar-hc-challenge-to-the-constitutional-validity-of-the-amendment-in-karnataka-transparency-in-public-procurements-act-making-concessions-in-favour-of-sc-st-rejected\/","url_meta":{"origin":236759,"position":0},"title":"Kar HC | Challenge to constitutional validity of amendment in Karnataka Transparency in Public Procurements Act making concessions in favour of SC\/ST rejected","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"January 6, 2020","format":false,"excerpt":"Karnataka High Court: B. Veerappa, J. dismissed the writ petition filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India,\u00a0 by a Public Works Department Contractor. In this petition Section 6 of the Karnataka Transparency in Public Procurements (KTTP) Act, 1999, was upheld by this Court. It enabled to\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":6452,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2014\/11\/12\/courts-cannot-interfere-with-policy-decision-by-adding-something-to-the-policy-by-way-of-mandamus\/","url_meta":{"origin":236759,"position":1},"title":"Courts cannot interfere with policy decision by adding something to the policy by way of mandamus","author":"Sucheta","date":"November 12, 2014","format":false,"excerpt":"Supreme Court: Holding the decision of the Madras High Court where the authorities were directed to take measures to conduct caste-wise census in the country, the 3-judge bench of Dipak Misra, R.F. Nariman and U.U. Lalit held that the said direction was irrefragably against the power conferred on the court\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Supreme Court"","block_context":{"text":"Supreme Court","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/supremecourt\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/scc-blog_Page_9.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/scc-blog_Page_9.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/scc-blog_Page_9.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/scc-blog_Page_9.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/scc-blog_Page_9.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":172504,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2017\/11\/30\/cognizance-offences-committed-sc-st-prevention-atrocities-act-can-taken-special-court\/","url_meta":{"origin":236759,"position":2},"title":"Cognizance of offences committed under SC & ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act can only be taken by a Special Court","author":"Saba","date":"November 30, 2017","format":false,"excerpt":"High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi: The Court recently addressed a petition which had been filed for quashing a previous order given by the Chief Judicial Magistrate wherein the CJM took cognizance of offences under certain sections of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":234002,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/08\/17\/ker-hc-no-writ-of-mandamus-lie-against-public-authority-for-performance-of-an-act-unless-enjoined-by-law-govt-order-or-precedent\/","url_meta":{"origin":236759,"position":3},"title":"Ker HC | No writ of mandamus lie against public authority for performance of an act unless enjoined by law, Govt. order or precedent","author":"Editor","date":"August 17, 2020","format":false,"excerpt":"Kerala High Court: T.V. Anilkumar, J. dismissed the writ petition with all interlocutory applications declared closed. In the present case, the petitioner filed a writ petition requesting the Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus against the respondent authority to ban the respondent broadcasting from telecasting the TV serial \u201cKoodathai:\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":340359,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/02\/03\/halba-halbi-different-scheduled-tribes-consider-pre-constitutional-documents-for-validity-certificate-bomhc\/","url_meta":{"origin":236759,"position":4},"title":"\u2018\u2018Halba\u2019 and \u2018Halbi\u2019 are different Scheduled Tribes\u2019; Bombay HC directs Committee to issue validity certificate considering pre-constitutional documents","author":"Simranjeet","date":"February 3, 2025","format":false,"excerpt":"By the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Orders (Amendment) Act, 1976, the Schedule\u2014IX is amended by deleting the original Entry at S.No.13 as \u2018Halba or Halbi\u2019 and inserting Entry at S.No.19 as \u2018Halba, Halbi\u2019 for the State of Maharashtra, pursuant to the States Reorganization Act, 1956.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Bombay High Court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Bombay-High-Court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Bombay-High-Court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Bombay-High-Court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Bombay-High-Court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":215850,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/06\/18\/guj-hc-knowledge-of-the-caste-enough-to-invoke-ss-32v-and-v-a-of-the-sc-st-act\/","url_meta":{"origin":236759,"position":5},"title":"Guj HC | Knowledge of the caste enough to invoke Ss. 3(2)(v) and (v-a) of the SC\/ST Act","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"June 18, 2019","format":false,"excerpt":"Gujarat High Court: Umesh A. Trivedi, J. dismissed the present writ petition preferred under Section 14-A of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for short \u2018Atrocities Act\u2019). This appeal challenged the order passed by Additional Sessions Judge (Special Court for Atrocities), Dhoraji. Counsel for the\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/12\/1200px-Gujarat-High-Court-1.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/12\/1200px-Gujarat-High-Court-1.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/12\/1200px-Gujarat-High-Court-1.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/12\/1200px-Gujarat-High-Court-1.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/12\/1200px-Gujarat-High-Court-1.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/236759","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/67011"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=236759"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/236759\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=236759"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=236759"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=236759"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}