Bar&Bench News Network
The Supreme Court has come down heavily on the Uttar Pradesh government regarding the construction of the statutes of Mayawati and Kanshi Ram on government sites. The Mayawati government on Tuesday undertook to immediately stop all construction of public memorials in Lucknow. The Supreme Court has directed that this undertaking also apply in respect of the petitions pending before the Allahabad High Court.
The petition was originally filed before the Allahabad High Court in October 2007. The High Court stayed the demolition of public buildings, and the matter went on appeal to the Supreme Court. In May 2008, the Supreme Court vacated the stay, but later re-imposed the order on demolition of all existing buildings after February 27, 2009.
When it was pointed out by the petitioner that there had been a rash of demolitions just before the 2009 stay was passed, the Court gave a dressing down to the UP government, and threatened to initiate contempt proceedings against the government.
The Mayawati government was represented by Senior Counsel, Satish Chandra Mishra, who is an aide and close personal friend of Mayawati. Senior Counsel Abhishek Manu Singhvi appeared on behalf of the applicants, NGO Gomti Nagar Jan Kalyan Maha Samiti. Abhishek Manu Singhvi is also the spokesperson for the Congress Government at the Centre. The estimated cost of the memorial-building project is a whopping Rs. 2,600 crores, in a state that has a GDP of 2%, as the court pointed out.
|
- 1. "The estimated cost of the memorial-building project is a whopping Rs. 2,600 crores, in a state that has a GDP of 2%, as the Supreme Court pointed out and hence it has come down heavily on the Uttar Pradesh government regarding the construction of the statutes of Mayawati and Kanshi Ram on government sites are mutually reciprocative. Initially though this Court stayed yet after thorough observation re-imposed the order on demolition of all existing buildings after February 27, 2009. Installation of monument of one's ownself particularly of a party leader, a celebrity or elite of any field or organisation by no stretch of the imagination is an offence under any provision of law. But the implicit reason and object of propagating one's personality or implanting the cult of hero worship among one's camp followers on public property and investing public fund are not permitted by law.Keeping in view that memorials or statues are not the sufficient medium to present and perpetuate one's personage the profligate use of public property within political tenure ought to be put an end to.". Pradeepta Mishra, HC Of Orissa, Cuttack
- 2. "may i requested sir/madamplease required the job Typist.". Sonia Khadai, New Delhi (khyala)
Related Stories
- 'Office of profit' amendment is constitutional, says Supreme Court
- Supreme Court adds 5 to strength
- Cipla scores victory in the Supreme Court
- Karanjawala represents Jaswant Singh in the Supreme Court
- Delhi MMS Clip: Luthra & Luthra, Harish Salve, Sidharth Luthra represent Avnish Bajaj; obtain stay in Supreme Court
- Supreme Court says no beard rule is absurd
- Good news for India as Legal Outsourcing gets formal support from Ohio Supreme Court
Other News
- Significant amendments proposed to Consumer Protection Act; Online filing to be made permissible, fines for non-compliance enhanced
- ALMT Legal gets four new partners; Total partner strength increases to 18
- Clasis Law gets third new partner in as many months; Maritime law expert Harsh Pratap roped in to head Shipping practice
- Foreign Law Firms Case: Arguments concluded; Judgment reserved
- Conversation with Kartikeya Tanna: “What Vineet Narain and Justice Singhvi have done, Justice Ganguly has undone”
- NALSAR hit by another scandal; Committee finds NALSAR authorities guilty of gross abuse of power (Updated)
- AIBE Update: Results withheld due to Cal High Court injunction; BCI to approach Supreme Court
The Viewpoint - Market Structure and Competitive Bidding
Jan 31, 2012 | Bar & Bench brings to you the seventh article on 'The Viewpoint' series with its Knowledge Partner J. Sagar Associates. JSA Partners Amit Kapur and Vishnu Sudarsan analyse the recent judgment of Appellate Tribunal for Electricity in the Essar Power case which has clarified the position re. competitive procurement of power. comments (0)










