Supreme Court.1. North East Affected Area Development Society and Anr. v. Union of India and Ors.[Item 46 in court 1] – CAD 25000/2015.Bench: Chief Justice HL Dattu, Amitava Roy J. .A fresh petition..Today in Court: This petition challenged a judgment passed by the National Green Tribunal in a Review Petition. The stance of the Petitioner was that the order in the Review Petition was passed by the Tribunal (after being reserved) without any notification on the NGT website or any kind of intimation to the Petitioners, which caused them great prejudice..The Bench today passed an order that the said decision of the NGT shall not serve as ‘a precedent in any case’ as it was not in ‘consonance with the settled principles’..It was further held by the Bench that the question of law raised in this particular civil appeal was to be kept open so as to be agitated in a separate case..2. Ajay Dubey v. Union of India and Ors..[Item 60 in court 1] – Writ Petition (Crl) 151/2015.Bench: Chief Justice HL Dattu, Amitava Roy J. .A fresh public interest litigation petition..Today in Court: Since the petition arose out of the Vyapam scam, the Bench directed for it to be tagged with other similar matters regarding the same issue.The matters will now be heard on September 11..3. High Court of Hyderabad for the State of Telangana and State of Andhra Pradesh, thr. its Registrar General and Anr, etc. v. P Murali Mohana Reddy and Ors.etc.[Item 28 in court 1] – SLP CC NO. 15074-15075/2015.Bench: Chief Justice HL Dattu, Amitava Roy J. .A fresh Special Leave Petition..Today in Court: The Court issued notice in the matter..4. Ankur Sharma v. State of Jammu and Kashmir and Ors..Item 63 in court 1 – Writ Petition (Civil) 540/2015.Bench: Chief Justice HL Dattu, Amitava Roy J. .A fresh public interest litigation petition..Today in Court: This petition was dismissed with an observation by the Bench that when there was an available remedy to the Petitioner under Article 226, the Supreme Court needn’t interfere in the matter..The Bench directed for the Petitioner to approach the High Court of Jammu & Kashmir with this PIL, that questioned the mining excesses taking place in the State.
Supreme Court.1. North East Affected Area Development Society and Anr. v. Union of India and Ors.[Item 46 in court 1] – CAD 25000/2015.Bench: Chief Justice HL Dattu, Amitava Roy J. .A fresh petition..Today in Court: This petition challenged a judgment passed by the National Green Tribunal in a Review Petition. The stance of the Petitioner was that the order in the Review Petition was passed by the Tribunal (after being reserved) without any notification on the NGT website or any kind of intimation to the Petitioners, which caused them great prejudice..The Bench today passed an order that the said decision of the NGT shall not serve as ‘a precedent in any case’ as it was not in ‘consonance with the settled principles’..It was further held by the Bench that the question of law raised in this particular civil appeal was to be kept open so as to be agitated in a separate case..2. Ajay Dubey v. Union of India and Ors..[Item 60 in court 1] – Writ Petition (Crl) 151/2015.Bench: Chief Justice HL Dattu, Amitava Roy J. .A fresh public interest litigation petition..Today in Court: Since the petition arose out of the Vyapam scam, the Bench directed for it to be tagged with other similar matters regarding the same issue.The matters will now be heard on September 11..3. High Court of Hyderabad for the State of Telangana and State of Andhra Pradesh, thr. its Registrar General and Anr, etc. v. P Murali Mohana Reddy and Ors.etc.[Item 28 in court 1] – SLP CC NO. 15074-15075/2015.Bench: Chief Justice HL Dattu, Amitava Roy J. .A fresh Special Leave Petition..Today in Court: The Court issued notice in the matter..4. Ankur Sharma v. State of Jammu and Kashmir and Ors..Item 63 in court 1 – Writ Petition (Civil) 540/2015.Bench: Chief Justice HL Dattu, Amitava Roy J. .A fresh public interest litigation petition..Today in Court: This petition was dismissed with an observation by the Bench that when there was an available remedy to the Petitioner under Article 226, the Supreme Court needn’t interfere in the matter..The Bench directed for the Petitioner to approach the High Court of Jammu & Kashmir with this PIL, that questioned the mining excesses taking place in the State.
