#writ Archives - Page 3 of 7

1 Nov

The Karnataka High Court has affirmed that unaided educational institutions managed by linguistic minority bodies are eligible to receive funding under Section 98 of the Karnataka Education Act.

Prime Legal

Uncategorized # Writ Petition, #appeal, #Karnataka High Court, #writ, #writpetition

Title: Rajarajeshwari Dental College and Hospital and Dr Sanjay Murgod

Decided on: 12^th, OCTOBER 2023

Writ C No. – 580 OF 2023 (S-RES)

CORAM: The Hon’ble Mr Prasanna B. Varale, Chief Justice and The Hon’ble Mr Justice Krishna S Dixit

INTRODUCTION

A legal dispute concerning the applicability of Section 98 of the Karnataka Education Act to unaided educational institutions run by linguistic minority organizations was brought before the Karnataka High Court in Bengaluru. The court’s ruling on this issue and its consequences for these institutions is outlined in its judgment, which was released on October 12, 2023.

FACTS OF THE CASE

A disagreement exists in this case between Dr. Sanjay Murgod and Rajarajeshwari Dental College. A single judge ruled that Dr. Murgod’s termination notice was invalid and ordered his reinstatement with back pay. In its appeal, Rajarajeshwari Dental College claimed that unaided educational institutions managed by linguistic minority bodies were exempt from Section 98 of the Karnataka Education Act. The court dismissed the appeal after ruling that Section 98 applied to these kinds of institutions.

COURTS ANALYSIS AND DECISION

According to the Karnataka High Court, unaided educational institutions managed by linguistic minority organizations are subject to Section 98 of the Karnataka Education Act. The Rajarajeshwari Dental College’s appeal was denied by the court, which upheld the section’s application to all employees of educational institutions in order to safeguard their employment security and working conditions. The significance of defending workers’ interests in the education sector is emphasized by this ruling.

“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. “

Written by- Kusuma R

Karnataka Hc 1

31 Oct

The Meghalaya High Court has clarified that Section 23 of the POCSO Act holds individuals responsible for revealing a minor’s identity when reporting or contributing to news.

Prime Legal

Uncategorized # Supreme Court, #primelegal, #writ, #writpetition, bail

Title: Shri Eric Ranee & 2 Ors. Vs. State of Meghalaya & Anr

Decided on: 06.10.2023

Writ C No. – 79 of 2023

CORAM: Hon’ble Mr. B. Bhattacharjee, Judge.

INTRODUCTION

Three petitioners contested their participation as co-accused in a case involving the disclosure of a child victim’s identity in violation of the POCSO Act in the Meghalaya High Court’s case Crl. Petn. No. 79 of 2023. They contended that they were exempt from liability under Section 23(3) of the POCSO Act because they were social workers and media correspondents.

After weighing their arguments, the court maintained their criminal liability, ruling that news reporters and contributors are covered by Section 23 of the POCSO Act. The case pertained to the construal and implementation of child protection statutes concerning the revelation of victims’ identities in the press.

FACTS OF THE CASE

The Meghalaya High Court decided in Crl. Petn. No. 79 of 2023 that three petitioners might face criminal charges under the POCSO Act for their roles in revealing a child victim’s identity to the media. Their claim that they were exempt from liability because they weren’t employed by the relevant newspapers was denied by the court. The case made clear how crucial it is to shield child abuse victims’ identities from the public eye.

COURTS ANALYSIS AND DECISION

The court stressed how crucial it is to preserve the identity of minors who have been sexually abused by interpreting Section 23 of the POCSO Act to include news reporters and contributors. The need to protect the identities of child victims and the legal and moral obligations of news reporters are highlighted by this case.

Written by- Kusuma R

Meghalaya Hc (4)

31 Oct

In an NDPS case, the High Court has granted bail owing to a 10-gram discrepancy in the inventory of seized charas: Bombay High Court

Prime Legal

Uncategorized # Justice N.ANAND VENKATESH, # Writ Petition, #appeal, #dismissed, #writ, Prime Legal

Title: Sunil Shishupal Nayak v. State of Maharashtra

Decided on: OCTOBER 23, 2023

Writ C No. – Bail Application NO. 1450 OF 2023

CORAM: M. S. Karnik, J

INTRODUCTION

Sunil Shishupal Nayak requested bail in this case in order to face charges under sections 8(c), 20(c), and 29 of the NDPS Act. There was a discrepancy in Charas possession in this case. The applicant claimed that drying caused a weight change after being arrested with one kilogram and ten grams of Charas. The NDPS Act’s provisions and the significance of the weight disparity were the deciding factors in the court’s decision regarding the bail application.

FACTS OF THE CASE

In a case filed on April 16, 2022, Sunil Shishupal Nayak was charged under the NDPS Act for having a large quantity of “Charas.” A weight disparity surfaced during the legal proceedings; at first, Nayak was discovered in possession of 1 kg and 10 grams of Charas, which were deemed to be commercial quantities; however, the recorded weight was only 1 kg following a 59-day drying period. The charges and penalties in the case were contingent upon Charas’s legal classification. Nayak requested bail, which would have affected his freedom to stand trial.

COURTS ANALYSIS AND DECISION

The court granted bail to Sunil Shishupal Nayak, who was charged under the NDPS Act in connection with a “Charas” possession case involving a weight discrepancy, was granted bail by the court. The court declined to make any pretrial rulings, emphasizing that matters pertaining to the weight of the contraband should be resolved during the trial. The results of the investigation, Nayak’s prolonged detention, and his lack of previous criminal history all played a role in the decision. Conditions attached to bail were put in place to make sure he cooperated with the court system.

Written by- Kusuma R

Bombay Hc

27 Oct

The Calcutta High Court has emphasized that maritime claims require supporting evidence and should not be characterized by harsh or oppressive measures.

Prime Legal

blog, Blog # Writ Petition, #dismissed, #primelegal, #writ, #writpetition

Title: Hindustan Aegis LPG Ltd. vs. Owners of Vessel MT TSM Pollux.

Decided on: 19th October, 2023.

Writ C No. – 9266889

CORAM: Hon’ble Justice Moushumi Bhattacharya.

INTRODUCTION

Alleged carelessness and damage to marine loading arms at Haldia Oil Jetty Port I give rise to an admiralty jurisdiction dispute in the case of Hindustan Aegis LPG Ltd. vs. Owners of Vessel MT TSM Pollux. The plaintiff requests compensation, but the court challenges the claim’s validity and emphasizes the need for supporting documentation and just compensation. The case brings to light the intricacies of admiralty law, and an order is made for a joint survey to evaluate the harm.

FACTS OF THE CASE

In this instance, an incident happened in September 2023 at Haldia Oil Jetty Port I, where the ship MT TSM Pollux harmed Hindustan Aegis LPG Ltd.’s marine loading and unloading arms.

The plaintiff filed a claim under Section 73 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872, alleging the owners of the vessel were negligent. As long as the loss is predictable and a direct result of the breach, Section 73 provides compensation for losses resulting from contract violations.

The plaintiff’s claim was examined by the court, which emphasized the need for supporting documentation and just compensation.

To evaluate the damage, a cooperative survey was mandated. This case serves as a reminder of the intricacies involved in admiralty law and how Section 73 is applied to determine compensation.

COURTS ANALYSIS AND DECISIONThe court acknowledges the plaintiff’s claim for damages caused to marine equipment by the vessel MT TSM POLLUX. Due to the urgency of the matter, the court orders the arrest of the vessel to secure the plaintiff’s claims. The document specifies the conditions for the arrest order, including a deadline for the plaintiff to pay court fees and the possibility of the order being vacated if the defendant deposits a specified amount as security. Various authorities are instructed to assist in implementing the arrest order, and the document sets a returnable date for the application. It also warns that failure to pay the court fees will result in the dismissal of the suit.

Written by- Kusuma R

Calcutta Hc

26 Oct

The Paddy Land Act prohibits digging wells on paddy land for commercial purposes. The Kerala High Court.

Prime Legal

blog, Blog # Supreme Court, # Writ Petition, #keralahighcourt, #law, #writ

Title: Hema Anil v State of Kerala.

Decided on: 18th, October 2023

Writ C No. – 23660 Of 2023

CORAM: The Honorable Mr. Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas.

INTRODUCTION

The Kerala High Court is considering a case concerning the commercial use of paddy land, specifically the drilling of wells for a packaged drinking water manufacturing facility. Hema Anil, the petitioner, requested authorization to drill a well for this business venture. The Panchayat and the Ground Water Department, however, expressed worries regarding the legality and ecological effects of such actions. This case emphasizes the value of protecting wetlands and paddy fields in Kerala, India, as well as the interpretation of pertinent laws and regulations.

FACTS OF THE CASE

Hema Anil requested permission to drill a well on paddy land in this case before the Kerala High Court in order to pursue a business venture that would involve the production of packaged drinking water. The property’s suitability for well construction was verified by the Ground Water Department. Nonetheless, the Panchayat and the authorities brought up legal and ecological issues. The main question in the case is whether drilling wells on paddy land for profit complies with Kerala’s applicable laws and regulations. In the end, the court denied the writ petition, highlighting the need to protect wetlands and paddy fields for their ecological value.

COURTS ANALYSIS AND DECISION

The Kerala High Court emphasized the ecological significance of protecting these areas by outlawing well-digging on paddy land for profit. It rejected the petition, highlighting the fact that commercial operations on such lands run counter to the goals of the law.

Written by- Kusuma R

Kerala Hc

1 2 3 4 5 … 7