Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News
“Person who does not do equity with others and even to the life companion, cannot approach the Court to seek approval of his relation under the umbrella of Article 21 of the Constitution of India.”
Even if a single individual may be benefitted from the construction of revenue ‘rasta’ at the instance of the Revenue Collector, it is not sufficient and well-informed reason for the Panchayat to resist compliance with orders of the Collector.
The petitioner was engaged to undertake the cleaning and sweeping of the Government office premises for almost 26 years and was being paid much less than even the minimum wages paid to manual labourers. The Bombay High Court said that it t is a fit case where the State should compensate the Petitioner for violating her rights under Articles 14, 21 and 23 of the Constitution of India.
The rights of a child to education have to be balanced with the rights of the school under the DSER, 1973. If the petitioner is unable to pay the fees of the school, the petitioner certainly does not have a right to continue education in the school in question. However, the petitioner cannot be tormented in this manner in the middle of the academic session.
Punjab and Haryana High Court held that even if the lease has expired the electricity cannot be cut off to the petitioner while he is in possession of the suit property.
Supreme Court observed that the Patna High Court ought to have called upon the Bihar State Pharmacy Council to file the status report on the allegations of fake pharmacist and/or on how many Governments’ hospitals/hospitals in the State are running without registered pharmacist.
“The enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of health is one of the fundamental rights of every human being without distinction of race, religion, political belief, economic or social condition”
Of all the things a system should fear, Complacency heads the list. The case in hand gave us a wake-up call and made us question ourselves as to whether we have become complacent and conditioned while dealing with preventive detention cases. Having got that call from within, we decided to shake up and wriggle out of the complacency and do a reality check.
Bombay High Court: In a petition filed by petitioner-wife praying for quashing and setting aside the impugned communication dated 18-03-2019
“The human life has its charm and there is no reason why the life should not be enjoyed along with all permissible pleasures. Anyone who wishes to live in peace, comfort and quiet within his house has a right to prevent the noise as pollutant reaching him. No one can claim a right to create noise even in his own premises which would travel beyond his precincts and cause nuisance to neighbours or others. Any noise which has the effect of materially interfering with the ordinary comforts of life judged by the standard of a reasonable man is nuisance.”
Supreme Court: The bench of Surya Kant and JB Pardiwala, JJ has, in a relief to politician and lawyer Nupur Sharma, has
Supreme Court: After politician and lawyer Nupur Sharma approached the Court claiming that there is an imminent necessity for the Court to
Karnataka High Court (Dharwad Bench): Suraj Govindaraj, J. while deciding a matter regarding handcuffing of an accused during arrest, held that “handcuffing
Punjab and Haryana High Court: A writ petition was filed seeking the relief of protection of life and liberty at the hands
“Life inside a human embryo remains frozen, awaiting its opportunity to be born as a child to its parents”
United Nation’s Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) No.6 explicitly recognises sanitation rights. Delay in providing sanitation facilities, in particular reference to women impedes in achieving SDG No.5 that talks about gender equality, and thereof pulling back all other associated goals.
Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court: Apprehension of harassment and violence at the hands of their relatives, led a young couple
Supreme Court of Canada: A full bench comprising, Wagner C.J. and Moldaver, Karakatsanis, Côté, Brown, Rowe, Martin, Kasirer and Jamal JJ unanimously
Karnataka High Court: S.G Pandit, J. disposed of the petition leaving respondent-Railway authorities at liberty to take action against the catering services
“…basic protection of human decency and dignity extends to sex workers and their children, who, bearing the brunt of social stigma attached to their work, are removed to the fringes of the society, deprived of their right to live with dignity and opportunities to provide the same to their children.”