- Apprentice Lawyer
- Legal Jobs
Supreme Court of India
1. Parivartan & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors.
[Item 102 in court 2 – Writ Petition Civil (93)/2004]
Bench: TS Thakur J., Kurian Joseph J.
Petition pertaining to protection for whistleblowers. The Centre had sought an adjournment at the last hearing. The court is now hearing arguments on the working of the Central Vigilance Commission and how it can be made more transparent.
Today in court: This case was not taken up today.
Delhi High Court
1. Sugandhi Snuff King Pvt Ltd & Anr v. Commissioner (Food Safety) Govt of NCT of Delhi (Lead matter in a batch of 4 connected matters)
[Item 23, Court 9- WP (C) 3362/2015]
Bench: Rajiv Sahai Endlaw J.
The blanket ban on the manufacture and sale of all forms of chewable tobacco for one year in Delhi. A Single Bench of the Delhi High Court had stayed the notification in April and further directed the Delhi Government to not take ‘coercive action’ till the next date of hearing.
On May 20th, the Delhi Govt approached the HC for vacation of stay with Senior Advocate Indira Jaising arguing that, ‘the ban had been imposed for reasons of public health and interest.’ However, no interim relief was granted.
On the last hearing, senior counsel Abhishek Manu Singhvi appeared for the Petitioners and argued that tobacco under all its forms (manufacturing, packaging, distributing etc) was covered under the Cigarettes & Other Tobacco Products Act (COTPA) which was a Central Act and therefore, the notification of the Delhi Govt banning tobacco in the capital was ‘ultra-vires’ and done without ‘non-application of mind.’
Today in Court: The matter was adjourned to October 8.
2. Union of India through the Secretary, Ministry of Law & Justice Vs Subhash Chandra Aggarwal
[Item 4, Court 1- LPA 168/2015]
Bench: Chief Justice, Jayant Nath J.
An appeal against a Single Bench order that had brought the office of the Attorney General under the scope of RTI Act. Solicitor General Ranjit Kumar appeared for the Government at the admission stage and argued that the single judge’s order ought to be examined by a larger Bench.
The Single Bench order was stayed by the Division Bench headed by Chief Justice G Rohini.
3. Ms. Ruby Vs Chief Election Officer, Delhi University Students Union & Ors
[Item 29, Court 13- WP (C) 8593/2015]
Bench: VP Vaish J.
A petition filed by a law student seeking disqualification of candidates contesting in the DUSU elections, who were indulging in corrupt practices and illegal activities. Bribing and intimidating voters, holding propaganda meetings outside the University are some of the allegations made by the Petitioner.
The matter was mentioned on Friday before a Division Bench of Justices BD Ahmed and Sanjeev Sachdeva.
Today in Court: The Bench directed the Grievance Cell of DUSU to hear the complaint and pass appropriate orders expeditiously as the DUSU elections are to be held in two days, on September 11.