Divan: If the fund is not State under Art.12 it should be restrained from using the prefix "PM", and the centre should not extend secretarial support to the fund.
Divan: Using the PM's name in the fund itself makes it a government fund, let me get to that. The PM himself is the settler in this Trust and a "Deed of Trust" has been executed by the PM in "public interest".
Divan: This institution building is of a "permanent character."
Pointing out that the amount collected in the fund can also be used for schemes by the Prime Minister for calamities, natural disasters, Divan says a public purpose of the "widest objective".
Divan: I don't think even the courts can set up a Trust like this and say that look the 5-senior most judges will be the ex-officio members but the Trust won't be "State".
Divan reads out clause which says that @PMOIndia will provide secretarial support to the Trust.
Divan: The moment you use the words ex-officio it means that they will be dominant - 4 are ex-officio, including the Prime Minister.
Divan: In light of a Constitutional Bench judgment there is no way that this can not come under the definition of State.
Divan: Cl.14 says the Trustees are bound to maintain documents, regulations, accounts of books. Audits are done by someone appointed by the Trustee, if it is a state the audits have to be done in a different manner.
Divan: The use of the emblem with the #PMCares Fund is very important because it gives the fund an official sanction and faith is placed on the emblem.
Delhi High Court is hearing a plea pointing out the poor condition of the LNJP Hospital, New Delhi stating that dead bodies are lying in the same ward for 5, 10, 20 hours and they are not releasing them.
Petitioner's counsel: There are 3 people on the same bed.
"It is high time that your hospitals gear up", Delhi High Court tells @AamAadmiParty led Delhi Govt.
HC: Who are you?
Petitioner: My Lords, I was being treated at the hospital.
HC: And are you treated?
Petitioner: Yes, my Lords.
HC: Mr. Aggarwal (for Delhi Govt) is smiling. You've been treated by LNJP, hope you're thankful for that.
[Cordelia Cruise Drugs Case] Delhi High Court Delhi based event organizer Arjun Jain who has moved court aggrieved by media reports from @IndiaToday over his alleged involvement in the case despite no summons having been issued to him by the @narcoticsbureau
Adv Nisha Bhambhani appears for respondents, begins addressing the Court.
Adv Adit S Pujari appearing for Arjun Jain, interjects.
HC: Mr. Pujari you have to learn some.. she's not arguing the case.
Court tells the parties that if anything is to be filed they may do so in the next half an hour so the court can hear the matter after lunch.
#SupremeCourt to hear over the issue of sentence in a matter where Rajeev Dahiya had been held guilty of Contempt of Court in a plea for non-payment of cost of Rs. 25 Lakh in PIL filed by Suraz India Trust who was later banned from filing PILs for life.
Rajiv Daiya appearing in person submitted that Milords I have submitted another unconditional apology.
Justice Kaul- Earlier also we said that there is no necessity.
Daiya: I had no other intention.
Justice Kaul said, it's your way of raising issue then you make alligations.
Daiya- Milords, This is my true Apology.
Court said, How many times this will occur it is not pleasure of ours to convict somebody.
SupremeCourt to hear plea challenging the amended reservation(s) policy by the Government of India to provide 27% reservation for OBCs and 10% reservation for (EWS) in AIQ scheme for undergraduate and postgraduate medical/dental courses from current academic year 2021-22 onwards.
Natraj, ASG preliminary objection: All the issues are a subject matter of petitions pending before a larger bench. There is also a misjoinder of parties like States, they are not before the court since its AIQ seats
Natraj: DOPT and Social justice department are not made parties.
#SupremeCourt to continue hearing Jarnail Singh, a matter it had decided in 2018, wherein a constitution bench held that the issue relating to reservation in promotion has already been decided in Nagraj’s matter and needs no reconsideration. #Reservation #JarnailSingh
Court said, Mr Sankaranarayanan, AG Argued in the Jarnail Singh reservation on the basis of population, then what can we do, we cannot go against Jarnail Singh.
Sankaranarayanan- Milords on the basis of representation in the houses reservation of Anglo's has been done away with and the SC/ST continues.
That is why 334 provided a timeline. There has to be some sort of timeline with reference to reservation also.