- Centre
ordered to furnish details of detention centres in Assam
– The Supreme Court while hearing a petition highlighting inhuman treatment of
immigrants in detention centres in Assam, ordered the Central Government to
furnish details of such centres. Further, the Centre has to report as to how
many of the detainees have been declared as foreigners and deported
accordingly. While the State of Assam said that the persons in the detention
centres are such persons who have been decidedly found to be foreigners and
detention on mere suspicion not been ordered, the Petitioners argued that the
persons who have been declared as foreigners after serving their term cannot be
detained just because the state machinery cannot arrange for them to be
deported. [Harsh Mander v Union of India, Writ Petition (Civil) No.
1045/2018, date of order: 28.01.2019]
- Insurance
companies prohibited from unilaterally changing terms of policy
– The Supreme Court held that an insurance company, especially one which is
state-owned, cannot act arbitrarily and change terms of an insurance policy
unilaterally. The petitioner in the case was a sports event management company.
The policy issued to it insured it against matches cancelled due to rains,
floods etc. The petitioner claimed on the basis of this clause once in 2010.
But then unilaterally the insurer removed this clause and did not grant the
claim of the petitioner when another match got cancelled in the same year,
citing such deletion. The Court held that the insurer had violated the
fundamental right of the petitioner by doing so and had acted arbitrarily in
changing the terms in such a manner. The company has been ordered to process
the claim for the latter match. [M/s Twenty First Century Media Private
Limited v New India Assurance, Civil Appeal No. 1128 of 2019, date of
order: 25.01.2019]
- Notice
issued in A.K. Bassi’s petition against illegal transfer–
The Supreme Court sought a reply from CBI in the plea filed by DSP Ajay Kumar
Bassi against his transfer to Port Blair, which had been ordered by Nageshwar
Rao. The transfer order had been revoked by Alok Verma when he had been
reappointed because of the Supreme Court quashing his removal, the order was
renewed by Nageshwar Rao when Verma was unceremoniously removed on the very day
of re-appointment. [Ajay Kumar Bassi v Central Bureau of Investigation,
Writ Petition (Civil) No.90 of 2019, date of order: 01.02.2019]
- Scheduled
Tribe status to continue even after conversion to Christianity
– The Supreme Court has held that the status of a Scheduled Tribe is maintained
even after conversion to Christianity. The election of one Amit Ajit Jogi was
challenged by the losing candidate claiming that he no longer belonged to a
Scheduled Tribe as he had converted to Christianity and so could not contest on
a reserved seat. But the court pointed out that the family still believed in
the tribal religion and observed the rituals and so the conversion would not
affect his status as a tribal. The Court specifically placed reliance on the
difference in language in the SC Order 1950 and the ST Order 1950. The former is
restricted to those belonging to Hinduism, Sikhism or Buddhism but the same is
not the case with the latter and so the tribal status would not be dependent on
the religion of the person. [Sameera Paikara v Amit Ajit Jogi Amit Aishwarya
Jogi, Election Petition No. 3 of 2014, date of judgment: 30.01.2019]
- 26
weeks pregnant woman denied abortion even though foetus could have down
syndrome – The Calcutta High Court has denied
a 26 weeks pregnant lady abortion despite baby having a high risk of Down
Syndrome, and problems in the oesophagus, heart and abdomen. The medical board
constituted to examine the woman held that there was risk of morbidity or
mortality and so did not allow the abortion. So she claimed the ground of
mental agony for giving birth to the child. The Court held that the life of the
foetus was more important than preventing the mental trauma to the mother. The
State had also argued that the woman had been aware of the condition for the
past 8 weeks and yet did not approach the court in time. The court did not side
with the State but held that the case did not fall within the exception clause
under Section 5 of the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, since the life of
the mother was not in danger if she continued with the pregnancy.[Suparna
Debnath v State of West Bengal, A.S.T. No. 3 of 2019, dated 29.01.2019]
- Medical
leave can be included within “extension of leave”-
The Delhi High Court has upheld the right of a woman to take an extension,
despite her taking an extension in the form of her maternity leave. The Court
held that the provisions of the Maternity Benefit Act would be applicable to
such a student. The provisions though provide for the provision to be
applicable to an ‘employee’, but the Court explained that the Act is a social
welfare legislation and should be read in the light of that. The petitioner had
not been allowed to take her examination of Doctor of Medicine because of her
leave. The Court felt that the petitioner could not have been put to a
disadvantage because of her pregnancy. She had asked AIIMS to include the
medical leave in her “extension of leave” but had been denied by AIIMS. The
Memorandum governing her course did not cover the situation and so it would be
unreasonable to not include it. [Dr. Ankita Baidya v Union of India,
W.P.(C) 8748/2018, dated 01.02.2019]
- Priya
Ramani summoned in defamation case filed by M J Akbar
– The Delhi High Court has summoned Priya Ramani in the defamation case by
former minister M J Akbar in light of the allegations made against him during
the #MeToo movement. The case has been filed under Section 500, IPC. The Court
mentioned Akbar has argued that the statements were false and lowered his
reputation. [Mobashar Jawed Akbar v Priya Ramani, Complaint Case Number
15164 of 2018, dated 29.01.2019]
Other
legal developments –
- Instructions
issued for implementing EWS quota – The
Department of Personnel and Training have issued a set of instructions for
implementing the 103rd constitutional amendment granting a 10%
reservation to the economically backward sections of the society. The quota
will be applicable for all vacancies advertised for from 1st
February onwards. The posts classified as “scientific and technical” will be exempt
from any such quota. Thos whose family income is less than 8 Lakh will be
covered under this quota. The benefit of reservation can only be availed upon
production of an Income and Asset Certificate issued by a Competent Authority.
If suitable persons to fill the reserved posts are not found, then the posts
will not be carried forward. The Ministries and Departments have to prepare
fortnightly and annual reports on EWS representation.
Prepared
by Amritananda Chakravorty ([email protected]) and Mihir Samson ([email protected]), Delhi based practicing Advocates.
The post Weekly Round-Up of Major Decisions of the Courts in India as also Legal Policy Developments appeared first on Newspack by India Press Agency.
