Category Archives: Blog

Facts of the Case: To provide a better comprehension, it is essential to present the case’s facts in depth at the start. Initially, the alleged horrific gang rape of a woman in a hamlet in the Indian state of Rajasthan served as the immediate impetus for this campaign for gender justice. A social worker named Bhanwari Devi was gang-raped in exchange for her selfless efforts to stop child marriage. Regrettably, this criminal case was dropped [1] due to inadequate evidence supporting the offense. Yet, this event attracted support from a number of NGOs and social activists, reinforcing the need for particular laws for workplace sexual harassment of women in light of gender equality.

Judgment: The Court established the rules and standards to be followed at all workplaces until legislation is passed under Article 32 of the Constitution to implement the Fundamental Rights, taking into account the lack of domestic law governing gender equality and protection against sexual harassment at work. Additionally, according to the court, this falls under the purview of Article 141 of the Constitution.

“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”

Facts of the Case: According to Article 32 of the Indian Constitution, the petitioner filed a writ case in the public interest asking the Supreme Court of India to declare Sections 66A, 69A, and 79 of the Information Technology Act ultra-vires to the Indian Constitution. The language of these rules is broad and unclear, it was argued in the petition. The petitioner also stated that these laws’ intent is to abuse it carelessly and that they are therefore in violation of Articles 14, 19(1)(a), and 21 of the Indian Constitution. Terminologies like frightening, annoying, irritating, inconvenient, blocking, dangerous, and insult are not defined in any statute. It becomes more vulnerable to unwanted mistreatment as a result. In addition to that, the distinction between nation residents and internet users was criticized as being arbitrary and in violation of the right to free expression guaranteed by Article 19(1)(a) of the Indian Constitution. It was claimed that the distinction gave police officers the right to detain online users for comments that regular residents of the nation may likewise make. The basic right to equality outlined in Article 14 of the Indian Constitution is thus violated by this categorisation.

Judgment: Due to its violation of Article 19(1)(a) of the Indian Constitution and failure to fall within its protection, Section 66 of the IT Act was completely repealed (2). Information Technology (Procedure and Safeguards for Interception, Monitoring, and Decryption of Information) Regulations, 2009 and Section 69A were found to be intra-vires to the Indian Constitution. Under the condition that Section 79(3)(b) of the IT Act be read down, Section 79 was confirmed to be lawful. The Supreme Court of India also invalidated Section 118(d) of the Kerala Police Act.

“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”

The High Court of Kerala passed a judgment on  1 February, 2023 which stated that the introduction of price software appears to have created a certain amount of dilemma among officials as well as contractors. It was stated in the case of  Raghunadh K T K vs The State Of Kerala (WA NO. 124 OF 2023) which was passed by the division judge bench comprising of  JUSTICE A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE and JUSTICE SHOBA ANNAMMA EAPEN

 

 

FACTS OF THE CASE:

Muhamed Mustaque, J The unsuccessful contractor, who bid a lowest amount in a tender issued for the work “Rebuild-RKI-Onchiyam GP-Madappally Underpass Vellikulangara Crash Road” was in appeal. The issue relates to giving preferential treatment to Labour Contract Co-operative Society. As per the Government Order, the Labour Contract Society has a preferential treatment in the matter of award of contract work. The dilemma had arisen in the context of introduction of PRICE Software The considerable amount of confusion arose consequent upon the introduction of PRICE software.

 

JUDGEMENT OF THE CASE

In this case, the labour society is having a manual registration and they can compete with other individual contractors who registered online, based on the second part of the above Government Order. Therefore, they are entitled for the preferential treatment. The difference in the bid was less than 10 per cent of the lowest tender. So, they are entitled for preferential treatment as per the Government Order . As the learned Single Judge rightly turned down the challenge, the appeal failed and was  hence dismissed.

PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”

JUDGEMENT REVIEWED BY ROSHNI SABU, KERALA LAW ACADEMY LAW COLLEGE.

 

Click here to view judgment.

 

 

The High Court of Kerala passed a judgement on 14 February, 2023 which stated that a temporary employee shall not be replaced by another temporary employee and that he shall be replaced only by a regular employee, is a principle consistently followed by the apex court and various high courts it was stated in the case of  Cochin University Of Science And Technology Vs Suja M.S (Writ Appeal Nos.1441, 1446 & 1449 of 2021) which was passed by the single judge bench comprising of Justice P.B.Suresh Kumar And Justice Sophy Thomas

 

FACTS OF THE CASE:

 The petitioners in the writ petitions were persons included in the ranked list published by the Cochin University of Science and Technology (the University) on 28.12.2018 for appointment to the post of Sweeper-cum- Cleaner. As the ranks secured by the petitioners were not sufficient to secure regular appointments having regard to the number of vacancies, they were not appointed. Nevertheless, the petitioners were later engaged by the University as Sweeper-cum-Cleaner on daily wage basis in a few temporary posts. In terms of an order, a person cannot be engaged on daily wage basis for a term exceeding 240 days. When steps were taken to disengage the petitioners on completing their term, they approached this Court in a writ petition claiming permanency, and the said writ petition was disposed of by this Court directing the University to consider their representation. Pursuant to the direction aforesaid, the University issued another order rejecting the representation submitted by the petitioners taking the stand that they cannot be permitted to continue beyond 240 days. The order was under challenge in the writ petitions. Among others, the petitioners sought in the writ petitions, a declaration that they are entitled to be engaged on daily wage basis till regular appointments are made by the University.

JUDGEMENT OF THE CASE

In the said circumstances that the learned Single Judge chose to direct the University to permit them to continue until the temporary posts exist. It is a direction issued in exercise of the discretionary and equitable jurisdiction vested in this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution. Such discretionary orders are not interfered with in appeal under normal circumstances, especially when interference would result in inequitable results.The writ appeals, in the circumstances, are devoid of merits and was dismissed.

 

PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”

JUDGEMENT REVIEWED BY ROSHNI SABU, KERALA LAW ACADEMY LAW COLLEGE.

 

Click here to view judgment.