0

Application for grant of NOC should to be dealt with according to the rules in force at the date of disposal of the application: Kerala High Court

Case Title: A.H. Sheriff v. State of Kerala & Ors. 

Case No: WP(C) No. 33324 of 2023

Decided on:  3rd January, 2024

CORAM: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN 

Facts of the Case

The petitioner submitted Ext.P1 application dated 28.05.2019 before the District Collector for more than four years for grant of No Objection Certificate (NOC) for quarrying granite from revenue puramboke land. Ext.P5 Government Order bringing comprehensive guidelines for grant of NOC for mining of minerals from Government land was issued on 28.01.2021. The application of the petitioner was rejected by Ext.P4 order dated 21.09.2023, much after the issuance of guidelines in Ext.P5.

The case of the petitioner is that his application has to be considered on the basis of the law prevailing at the time of submission of the application and Ext.P5 order issued subsequently cannot be relied upon to reject the application. The learned Senior Government Pleader would contend that the petitioner has no vested right to have his application considered applying any particular provision and that he has not approached this Court before issuance of Ext P5 order, seeking a direction to consider his application for NOC.

Issues

  1. Whether the application for grant of NOC has to be dealt according to the law prevailing at the time of submission of the application or rules in force at the date of disposal of the application?
  2. Whether the applicant of NOC has a vested right to have an application for grant of NOC to be dealt with in a particular way, by applying particular provisions?

Court’s analysis and decision

The Hon’ble High Court of Kerala has relied on State of Tamil Nadu v. M/s. Hind Stone and Others [(1981) 2 SCC 205: AIR 1981 SC 711] while dealing with this writ petition. In Hind Stone case, the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that the action of the Government in keeping applications for lease pending for long and later, rejecting them by applying a rule made subsequently, is not open to challenge. The Court observed that no one has a vested right to the grant of lease and none can claim a vested right to have an application for grant of lease to be dealt with in a particular way, by applying particular provisions and that in the absence of any vested right, the application has necessarily to be dealt with according to the rules in force as on the date of disposal of the application despite the fact that there is long delay since the making of the application.

Though there is inordinate delay on the part of the District Collector in considering Ext.P1 application for grant of NOC for mining of minerals from Government land, since during the pendency of the application Ext.P5 Government Order has been issued providing comprehensive guidelines for grant of NOC, the application of the petitioner has to be considered in the light of Ext.P5. Ext.P5 Government Order is not under challenge in this writ petition. There is no direction sought for and obtained by the petitioner from this Court for an early consideration of Ext.P1 application before issuance of Ext.P5 Government Order. As held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, the petitioner has no vested right to seek Ext.P1 application to be considered by applying the procedure as applicable before the issuance of Ext.P5.

The writ petition fails and is, accordingly, 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.”

Written by- Afshan Ahmad

Click to read the judgement

0

Teachers cannot take the fall for the mistake of management during appointment of vacancy – Bombay HC

TITLE : Sandeep Chudaman Shinde v The State of Maharashtra

CORAM : Hon’ble justice Ravindra V. Ghuge and Hon’ble Justice Y.G Khobragade

DATE : 8th December, 2023

CITATION : W.P No 7740 of 2021

FACTS

The petitioners were Education Officers and were granted a pay scale of Rs.9300-34800 and were regularly receiving their salaries. A complaint was filed by a stranger addressing the Deputy Director of Education, alleging that the Petitioners were illegally appointed as Educational Officers. The salaries of the petitioners were continuously withheld despite being in the service of shikshan Sevak for 3 years and having an ID.

After certain investigations, it was found that the petitioners were not appointed by following the provisions of the Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Service) Regulation Act, 1977. The petitioners got appointed for seats which was not vacant and the approval for ID was not submitted to the concerned office in appropriate time.

LAWS INVOLVED

Section 5 of the M.E.P.S Act, 1977 gives certain obligation for management of private schools.

It states that :

  • The management shall appoint for permanent vacancy as soon as they find a qualified person. The vacancy can be filled through an act of promotion as well.
  • The person appointed shall be in a probation period for 2 years except for Assistant teacher(probationary)
  • Assistant teacher(probationary) will be a teacher after 3 years of probation period
  • If the management decides the work of the teacher is not up to the mark during the probation period, they may terminate them with one month notice period. If he/she is reappointed, the previous probation period will be considered.
  • The management shall also fill temporary vacancies by appointing qualified persons.

ISSUES

  1. Whether the appointment of petitioners when there was no vacancy valid?

JUDGEMENT

The court held that the when the petitioners have been working for so long, the approval of appointment cannot be rejected by the Education Department unless theres any fraudulent or illegality turns out from the employment. The fault of the management should not be at the burden of the employees. The court stated that both the Petitioners are qualified and have the requisite qualifications for being selected and appointed as Shikshan Sevak and to be confirmed in employment as Assistant Teachers and if the Management was responsible for certain irregularities, the Petitioners could not be faulted.

The court also directed the Education Department to not entertain complaints from strangers and unconnected persons.

“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- Sanjana Ravichandran

Click here to view judgement

0

In presence of an alternative remedy to appeal, a Writ petition won’t suffice in the court of law : Bombay HC

TITLE : Rahibai Laxman Lokhande & Ors. V State of Maharashtra

CITATION : W.P No 7400 of 2023

CORAM : Hon’ble justice Madhav J. Jamdar

DATE:  5th December, 2023

INTRODUCTION :

The challenge in the present Writ Petition is to the legality and validity of the order dated 18th April 2023 passed by the District Superintendent of Land Records in Appeal.

FACTS :

The contesting Respondents that the Writ Petition be not entertained in view of the availability of the alternate remedy. He submitted that there is Appeal provided under Section 247 of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966.

Section 247 provides that, an appeal shall lie from any decision or order passed by a revenue or survey office specified in column 1 of the Schedule E under this Code or any other law for the time being in force to the officer specified in column 2 of that Schedule whether or not such decision or order may itself have been passed on appeal from the decision of order of the officer specified in column 1 of the said Schedule: Provided that, in no case the number of appeals shall exceed two.

The Petitioners contend that the impugned order itself has been passed in Appeal and therefore, the Second Appeal is not competent under Section 247 of the said Code.

COURT’S ANALYSIS

The court held that Section 247 of the said Code very clearly specifies that two Appeals are competent and the Appellate Authorities are described in Schedule E.

Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed in view of availability of the alternate remedy of statutory Appeal under Section 247 of the said Code, with no order as to costs. It is clarified that the Petitioners can file the Appeal as contemplated under Section 247 of the said Code challenging the impugned order.   

“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- Sanjana Ravichandran

Click here to view judgement

0

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.

Title: Rajarajeshwari Dental College and Hospital and Dr Sanjay Murgod

Decided on: 12th, 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

0

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.

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.

“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

Meghalaya Hc (4)

1 2 3 7