Lawgic Simplified

Justice Rohit Deo, a judge of the Bombay High Court, Nagpur Bench, announced his resignation on personal grounds during a courtroom session in Nagpur.  The matters scheduled before him for the day were discharged following the announcement. Appointed to the Bombay High Court in June 2017, he was originally set to retire in December 2025. Justice Deo apologized to those present in the court, stating that he scolded them in an effort to encourage improvement. He expressed his resignation, mentioning that he cannot work against his self-respect. He later confirmed to reporters that he has submitted his resignation letter to the President of India due to personal reasons. Notably, in 2022, Justice Deo had acquitted a former Delhi University professor in a case involving alleged Maoist links. However, the Supreme Court stayed the order and instructed the Nagpur bench to rehear the case. Justice Deo had also recently stayed the implementation of a Maharashtra Government Resolution relate...

By - Sameeksha Negi* The Bombay High Court has observed that “If Counsel has not urged a point, the fact that there were written submissions is immaterial if those written submissions were never in fact argued.” The Bench also added that “Counsel’s failure to argue written submissions is not a ground of review or, I dare say, even appeal. It is no ground to assail any order of any judge of any court.”   The bench was hearing a review petition filed for seeking reinstatement of original arbitration petition on grounds some of which were never argued and others never pleaded and the said petition was filed after the original arbitration petition was fully argued, and then decided by pronouncement in open court. Also Read - The Pension Scheme for freedom fighters cannot be construed in a manner that the requirements prescribed are rendered a dead letter: Bombay HC According to Justice GS Patel allowing parties to take grounds in review pleas or in appeals that were not argued initi...

By - Pavni Dada* The petitioner, Smt. Rukhminbai submitted that her husband, Asaram Daulatrao Kale (deceased), who died on April 5, 2017, was entitled to pension payments. On November 24, 1994, Asaram Daulatrao was alleged to have submitted a request for provision of pension under the Swatantra Sainik Samman Pension Scheme 1980 (“Scheme”) to the district collector of Aurangabad with the documented evidence needed. According to the petitioner, her husband had learned for the first time in January 2014 that on May 12, 1999, his pension claim was dismissed under the scheme.  The Aurangabad bench of Bombay High Court observed that “...the petitioner herein has no locus standi to lay a claim to pension under the Scheme once her deceased husband’s claim to the same was rejected by the concerned Authority.” Also Read - Rent Act would not come to the aid of a "tenant­-in-sufferance" vis -à-­vis SARFAESI Act due to the operation of Section 13(2) r/w Section 13(13) of the SARFAESI A...

By - Sameeksha Negi* The Bombay High Court has recently directed a stay of operation of sub-rules 1 and 3 of rule 9 of the new Information Technology Rules, 2021 which pertain to adherence to the Code of Ethics. The High court has prima facie observed that these provisions of the new IT rules infringe the fundamental right to freedom of speech and expression under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution of India and are also against the substantive provisions of the Information Technology Act 2002.   Sub-rule 1 of rule 9 requires the publishers to observe the Code of Ethics laid down under the Appendix to the IT rules. Sub-rule 3 of rule 9 provides a three-tier mechanism involving, self-regulation by the publishers, self-regulation by self-regulating bodies of the publishers, and oversight mechanism by the Centre for ensuring observance and adherence to the Code of Ethics and for addressing grievances made in relation to the publishers.  Also Read - NALSA is requested to con...

By - Pavni Dada* A 30-year-old widow lady whose husband worked as a peon at the Sant Dyaneshwar Vidyalaya in Parbhani initiated the plea. Her husband died in an accident on June 8, 2017, after working for 19 years in the company. On a compassionate basis, she was appointed as a peon in her husband's company.   The approval for the act was awaited, but it was later denied vide order dated 14.03.1018, stating that the problem of sanctioning the staffing pattern for the non-teaching role is still under consideration by the government and the petitioner's appointment on compassionate grounds cannot be taken into account.  It is also said in the affidavit that unless the Government sanctioned the staffing pattern of non-teaching employees and there is no policy decision on the same, a fresh appointment on a non-teaching post cannot be approved. Also Read - Clear and specific legal framework needed for cases involving 'sex on false promise of marriage': Allahabad High Court....

The PIL filed by one Shashank Posture was heard by a Bench headed by Chief Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice GS Kulkarni on Wednesday. “We have heard the petitioner for some time and we are of the opinion that a notice is required to be issued to respondents,” the bench said. The bench issued notices to National Payment Corporation of India (NPCI), Central and the State Government giving them three weeks to file reply. It was contented by the petitioner that the Truecaller app collects data of all users. It shares such data without the users' consent with its partners and dumps the liability on the users. He added that the user is left with no choice in this manipulative setup and Truecaller also registers users for UPI service without their consent. Google India, Bharati Airtel, and ICICI Bank are some of the companies which are allegedly getting benefitted from data sharing done by Truecaller. The petitioner also added that the government authorities had approved Truecaller app ...

Yesterday, the Bombay HC was hearing a suo motu PIL which was initiated in September 2020 because of the collapse of a building in Thane’s Bhiwandi which had claimed 40 lives. The bench also took cognizance of the recent building collapses due to “rampant” illegal constructions in the Mumbai Metropolitan Region (MMR), including the Malwani incident. The division bench comprising Chief Justice Dipankar Dutta and Justice Girish S Kulkarni pulled up the Maharashtra government and the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC) for allowing illegal constructions to be built "blatantly" without following existing laws. The Advocate General for Government of Maharashtra submitted that that structures of slum dwellers holding valid photo passes were protected Maharashtra government’s slum rehabilitation policies granting statutory protection against the demolition of structures constructed before January 1, 2000, and not higher than 14 feet, hence could not be demolished. “…it seems li...

  On Saturday, the Bombay High Court ruled that even homeless people and beggars must work for the country since they cannot expect the state to provide everything for them. This was stated by a division bench comprising of Chief Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice G S Kulkarni while dealing with a public interest litigation (PIL) filed by one Brijesh Aarya, requesting the court for directing the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC) to provide nutritious meals thrice a day, potable water, shelter and clean public toilets for beggars, homeless persons, and poor people in the city. According to the submissions made by the BMC before the court, the BMC with the help of NGOs, has been distributing food packets to such people all over Mumbai, and women from this section of the society were being provided sanitary napkins. The bench while accepting this submission of BMC observed that, "They (homeless persons) should also work for the country. Everyone is working. Everything cannot b...

It has been decided by the Bombay High Court that lawyers cannot travel by local trains at least until the end of July as the Maharashtra State COVID-19 Task Force has apprehended a third wave of the pandemic. Public transport is currently limited to only the officials of the state government and public administration. While hearing a petition filed by the Bar Council of Maharashtra and Goa against the exclusion of lawyers from travelling in local trains in Mumbai, a division bench of Chief Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice G S Kulkarni ruled that, through a judicial order, the court cannot override the medical experts' opinion. "At least till the end of July, it may not be possible (to allow lawyers to commute by trains). The State COVID Task Force feels that the third wave may start if trains are opened to all. You (lawyers) will have to wait for one more month," the court said. It was noted by the bench that the task force officials had informed the bench in an admini...