Gujarat High Court reserves orders in a petition by Gujarat University challenging direction to furnish copies of Prime Minister Narendra Modi's degree certificate to Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta for the University argued before bench of Justice Biren Vaishnav.
SG: There is nothing to hide as the degree is there in public domain, on social media etc. But we cannot be compelled to disclose the information. @PMOIndia
SG: We cannot be asked to furnish the information to satisfy someone's childish and irresponsible curiousity. Also, it should be noted that the info sought has nothing to do with his (Narendra Modi's) role as a public figure. @PMOIndia@ArvindKejriwal
SG: In a democracy, there won't be a difference if a person holding the office is a doctorate or an illiterate. Also, there is no public interest involved in this issue. Even his privacy is affected
SG: For instance, if one seeks information under RTI as to what is the height, bank balance etc of the President of India. Would this be logical? Does it has any public interest?
Kavina: I fail to understand why Gujarat University has challenged this order, especially when its own rights aren't being affected. The Public Information Officer (PIO) of the PMO should have had questioned the order not the varsity.
Kavina: My friend SG Mehta has said that the degree is available on the internet. That is incorrect. An interview of him (Modi) with one Rajiv Shukla is available on the net and not the degree. Thus, we sought copy of the degree. @PMOIndia
Kavina: If you see the nomination form (filed during elections) mentions his educational qualifications. Thus, we are asking for a degree certificate and not his marksheet.
SG Mehta responds to the submissions.
SG: When the respondent (Kejriwal) was asked to furnish his degree he said he would but the applicant there too should disclose. This isn't some school game that if I do you will also have to do.
SG: The provisions of RTI states that information sought must be related to the public activity.
For instance, they cannot ask what breakfast I had but yes what amount was spent for the breakfast.
Rishab Shetty and Vijay Kiragandur, the director and producer respectively of Kannada movie Kantara move #SupremenCourt challenging anticipatory bail condition imposed by Kerala HC where production before IO on Sundays was mandated
The petitioners were booked for copyright infringement over the song Varaha Roopam
Sr Adv Ranjit Kumar appears for petitioners
CJI DY Chandrachud: We will take this up before we rise for today #SupremeCourt
CJI: you are using this music in Kantara?
Singh: yes they are saying it is from Vara Roopam
Justice PS Narasimha: But this is movie is there for a year #Kantara
Constitution bench of the #SupremeCourt Constitution Bench to deliver verdict on the petitions challenging the validity of the All India Bar Exam #AIBE
The three main issues which the judgment will answer are:
Can the Bar Council of India (BCI) prescribe a pre-enrolment exam as a condition precedent for enrolment?
Can BCI prescribe pre-enrolment training in terms of its training rules issued in 1995?
The last issue for consideration was: If a pre-enrolment exam is not permitted, can BCI prescribe a post-enrolment exam in alignment with Section 49 (1) (ah) of Advocates Act, 1961?
#SupremeCourt Constitution Bench of Justices Kaul, Khanna, Abhay S Oka, Vikram Nath and JK Maheshwari will deliver judgment on whether the #Bohra community has the right to excommunicate dissidents in exercise of its fundamental rights under Article 25 and 26 of the Constitution
The top court will lay down the law regarding the correctness of its 1962 judgment in Sardar Syedna Taher Saifuddin v. The State Of Bombay, in which it had protected the rights of the Bohra community to excommunicate members #SupremeCourt#Bohra
Court: Decision of constitution bench requires reconsideration. We have recorded reasons. There are two grounds.
TMC MP @jawharsircar on Law Ministry stating that differences of opinion between executive and judiciary are mutually reconciled: So am I to understand that all differences are mutually reconciled?...
...And in the same sentence you have used the words, "Only the appropriate person is appointed as a judge". Do you consider Victoria Gowri's appointment to really (be of) an appropriate person? One who has been accused in public of casteist remarks, of remarks against minorities?
#BombayHighCourt to shortly hear a PIL seeking action against Vice President Jagdeep Dhankhar and Union Law Minister Kiren Rijiju for their public statements against the Collegium, judiciary and the Supreme Court.
Abdi: There is article 51A which imposes fundamental duties on all citizens, whosoever it may be.
Then there is criminal contempt which is against maligning image of court and every citizen is obliged to follow it.