The B&B Causelist #20: July 24, 2015 (Evening Updates)

Bar & Bench

Supreme Court

1. Digvijaya Singh v. State of MP & Ors.

[Item 62 in court 1 – Writ Petition (Civil) 417/2015]

This is a public interest litigation seeking CBI probe into Vyapam scam. The court had allowed this prayer and transferred the investigation to CBI. During the last hearing CBI had prayed that the Special Task Force which was earlier carrying out the investigation should carry on the same till the CBI takes over. The Court had allowed this and pronounced an interim order to that effect that the STF shall continue investigation “in accordance with law” till the CBI takes over.

Today, the Court will hear a plea by AAP leader Kumar Vishwas who is seeking a direction that the CBI be provide with adequate facilities and man power to probe the scam.

Today in court: The Supreme Court sought CBI’s reply on the following: (i) How long will it take for the CBI to take over all the cases from the Special Task Force of Madhya Pradesh. (ii) When will a lawyer be appointed by the CBI to conduct its cases in the Vyapam scam?

The CBI has been asked to respond by July 31 which has been fixed as the next date of hearing. The Court also said that it will consider other petitions relating to Vyapam after it passes appropriate orders in the main matter.

2. Indira Jaising v. Supreme Court of India v. Secretary General & Ors.

[Item 10 in court 2 – Writ Petition (Civil) 454/2015]

This PIL, filed by Senior Advocate Indira Jaising, challenges the current mode of designation of Senior Advocates by voting by judges. It prays for constituting a Permanent Selection Committee for designating Senior Advocates.

Today in court: Read the full report here.

3. Indian Hotel & Restaurant Association & Anr. v. State of Maharashtra & Anr.

[Item 5 in court 5 – Writ Petition (C) No. 793 of 2014]

A petition challenging the Constitutional validity of the Maharashtra Police (second amendment) Act which bans dance performances at bars and hotels in Maharashtra. The association has submitted that the Act violates the fundamental right guaranteed under Article 19(1)(g).

A Division Bench of Justices SJ Mukhopadhaya and PC Pant had issued notice to Maharashtra government on September 12, 2014. When the matter was last heard, the Court had granted the parties time to file counter affidavit and rejoinder affidavit.

Today in court: This case could not be tracked. Any lead/ information would be appreciated.

4. BS Sidhu v. National Green Tribunal Bar Association & Ors.

[Item 11 in court 1 – Civil Appeal No. 5370/2015]

Watch evening updates to know more about this case.

Today in court: This case could not be tracked. Any lead/ information would be appreciated.

5. Sameer Singh Thakur v. Union of India

[Item 63 in court 1 – Writ Petition (Civil) 465/2015]

A fresh public interest litigation.

Today in court: This case, which sought for a ban on the use of images of Gods and Goddesses on business products and goods, was dismissed.

6. Students Islamic Organisation of India v. Central Board of Secondary Education & Anr.

[Item no. 72 in court 1 – (Civil) 486/2015]

A fresh public interest litigation.

Today in court: This PIL challenged the CBSE decision to disallow head scarfs for candidates appearing for the AIPMT exam. The Petitioner’s contention was that it interfered with their right to practise the religion of their choice. The Court, however, refused to interfere in the matter and allowed the petitioner to withdraw the petition. Chief Justice Dattu remarked that,

“If you go to the exam for one day without a scarf, your faith will not disappear.” 

7. Shri. Dilip K Basu v. State of West Bengal & Ors.

[Item 1F in court 2 – Judgment]

Watch evening updates to know more about this judgment.

8. Star India Limited v. Idea Cellular Limited

[Item 3 in court 2 – IA 2/2015 in SLP(C) No. 29633/2013]

This case pertains to the property right claimed by Star India over cricket scores and its dissemination by way of SMS. The Court had allowed limited injunction in favour of Star and held that the respondent who was making money by sending sms alerts to its customers will have to deposit Rs. 10 lakh with the High Court before every such cricket match. They were also asked to submit monthly accounts of receipts from such SMS alerts. Today, an application for modifying this interim arrangement with respect to filing monthly accounts will be heard by the Court.

Today in court: The Court allowed the prayer and modified its earlier interim order. The respondents will now have to file accounts of receipts from SMS alerts only twice a year and not every month.

Delhi High Court

1. Digital Radio Broadcasting Ltd. (Mumbai) & Anr v. Union of India and Digital Radio Broadcasting Ltd. (Delhi) & Anr. Vs Union of India

[Item 32 & 33, Court 2- Writ Petition (Civil) 6891/2015 & 6892/2015]

A petition filed by Digital Radio Broadcasting challenging prohibition on its radio channel, Red FM from participating in the third phase of FM radio auctions.

On Wednesday, the Bench had granted interim relief to Red FM and allowed the channel to participate in the mock auction scheduled to be held on July 23 and 24.

Today in Court: Due to the urgency in the matter (auctions are to begin on Monday) and no hearing happening for the past three days in Delhi HC due to the DHCBA strike, the Bench decided to hear the matter tomorrow i.e. Saturday, July 25.

It further stated that regardless of the strike situation, an order will be pronounced tomorrow; either after hearing arguments if the lawyers from both sides are present or based on the written submissions of the parties if the strike continues and lawyers abstain from appearing in Court.

2. Devansh Mehta Vs Delhi University & Ors

[Item 16, Court 9- WP (C) 3762/2015]

A petition filed by a student of St. Stephen’s college, Devansh Mehta against the college for not issuing him a character certificate. The plea stated that Mehta had secured admission in USA for further studies and required the certificate on an urgent basis. His grievance is that his provisional certificate of graduation did not certify his character, as has been issued to other students.

Interestingly, Mehta had been granted relief previously by the HC in another petition filed by him. He had challenged his suspension from college by Principal Valson Thampu over the content of an e-magazine (e-zine). Thampu had been criticized by the Court and directed to “take back” the suspension of Mehta.

Today in Court: A Single Judge Bench of Justice RS Endlaw adjourned the matter to July 27.

Bar and Bench - Indian Legal news