Karnataka HC to pass interim order in a batch of pleas challenging the induction of three Members of the State Legislative Council (MLCs) - R Shankar, AH Vishwanath, and N Nagaraj - into the Council of Ministers.
Bench is now summarising the arguments raised by all parties.
Bench: Apex Court held that the Hon Speaker has no jurisdiction to disqualify the respondents till the end of the Legislative Assembly Term.
Bench: We are concerned with Articles 164 (1) (B) and 361 (B).
The question is whether the three resp have incurred disqualified under Art 164 (1) (b) and under Art 361 (B), Bench
Bench: As can be seen from the order of the Hon'ble Governor, A H Vishwanath is nominated. He is not elected to any of the two houses.
Court: Admittedly the term of the post of MLC from which he is disqualified has not expired yet. It will expire in May, 2021.
HC: We are not granting specific injunction as prayed for as Hon Governor is appointing authority of Hon Minister, is bound to take into consideration the disqualification.
With regard to the other two respondents, the question before us is whether their disqualification under Art 164 and 361 has come to an end on the ground that they have been elected as members of the State Legislative council: Bench.
Prima facie, we are of the view that Articles 164 (1) (b) and 361 (B) will have to he construed strictly: HC
Conclusions:
It is not even prima facie established that R Shankar and N Nagaraj have been disqualified under Art 164 and 361.
We hold that A H Vishwanath ex facie attracts disqualification under Art 164 (1) (b) and Art 361 (B).
Thus, ex facie, disqualification of AH Vishwanath will continue till the expiry of the term of Legislative Assembly: Bench
Bench: No interim order can be passed for N Nagaraj and R Shankar.
We have held that one nominated member has incurred disqualification, the other two have not incurred disqualification, prima facie observations: Bench.
Bench clarifies that, at this stage it cannot record any finding whether AS Vishwanath is eligible to be nominated or not.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
The Kerala High Court will shortly hear a bail application moved by former Kerala bureaucrat M. Sivasankar in connection to his alleged role and arrest in the #keralagoldsmugglingcase
He moved the Kerala High Court on November 20 seeking regular bail.
He had earlier moved the Kerala High Court seeking pre-arrest bail apprehending arrest in investigations conducted by the Customs Department and the ED. @dir_ed barandbench.com/news/litigatio…
Within an hour of the Kerala High Court dismissing his pre-arrest bail plea, he was arrested by the ED and taken into custody.
His subsequent bail plea before an Ernakulam PMLA Court was junked.
CJI: not possible for us to accept a compensation in merely arithmetical terms especially when there is no statement forthcoming from Uttar Pradesh or PWD as to nature of trees that is to say they are classified as shrubs or large trees
CJI: Moreover there is no information available regarding age of the trees since its obvious that there cannot be compensatory reforestation if 100 year old tree is cut down. Ms Bhati, ASG for UP did not make a statement as to which forest dept intends to evaluate trees in Q
Dr AM Singhvi for Vedanta- wastage of national resource can be stopped by allowing short 3 month run of the plant. I'm not arguing on merits
There is a preconceived decision to not allow the plant to run
Justice Nariman- you've had this plea for short runs for 2 years.
@DrAMSinghvi- the short run would allow us to identify any issues still remaining. The plant started in 1997. Provides direct employment to 4000 people, indirect employment to about 20,000.
Singhvi: Trickle down dependants are more than 2 lakh. Supplying 36% of the country's copper needs. Now India is becoming dependant on Copper imports.
NEERI had made environment impact report and gave 30 recommendations. Compliance of 29 out of 30
#MadrasHighCourt takes up for final hearing petitions challenging privilege committee proceedings issued against MK Stalin and other DMK MLAs for bringing gutka packets to Legislative Assembly in 2017. In Sept, the Court had stayed the proceedings.
The matter is before Justice Pushpa Sathyanarayana.
Senior Advocate Shanmugasundaram is making arguments for @mkstalin
Shanmugasundaram recounts that privilege committee proceedings were initiated against 19 persons citing:
- display of prohibited gutkha without permission of Speaker
- the disturbance caused to assembly proceedings,
- setting a bad precedent, and
- causing disorder, disrepute
Supreme Court bench led by Justice AM Khanwilkar to resume hearing a petition seeking guidelines for courts to not impose bail conditions objectifyig women especially through bail orders in sexual violence cases.
Attorney General was issued notice in the case. AG KK Venugopal has informed #SupremeCourt that gender sensitisation training for judges and more women judges in judiciary could be a solution.